Interviewees (from CSOs and public authorities) will be encouraged to tell the story of their work on hate crime, describing their involvement in a ‘journey’ to improve understandings and responses. They will be encouraged to describe ‘pivotal moments’ that moved the agenda forward and, in some cases, backwards.

All quotes will be checked before publication.

Certain topics will be specifically explored:

  • Question about their current role and remit
  • ‘Please can you tell me about two or three of your most significant – in terms of positive and/or negative impact – experiences of working to tackle hate crime with CSOs and public authorities’.
  • What are the challenges in securing effective and equal engagement and cooperation between CSOs and public authorities on hate crime?
  • What, would you like to highlight about the national social, political and cultural context that can help or hinder actions to improve hate crime recording.
  • What kind of model do successful change makers work with in different institutional settings? Skills? Techniques? Diplomacy?
  • What are the similarities and differences between the recording models used by the state and those used by CSOs? What are the reasons for these differences? What are the consequences?
  • Share your experience of the practicalities, positive and negative, of identifying and involving ‘appropriate’ CSOs in:

– Hate crime monitoring tt Sharing of data

– Membership of national, cross government strategic groups on hate crime tt Input into police, prosecutor, hate crime recording guidelines

– Training development and delivery

  • Are there differences across CSOs working with different targeted groups? What does this mean for engagement?
  • How do you think the expectations of the range of NGOs working in the area can be best met and managed?
  • What further improvements do you want to see in responses to hate crime?
  • How can ‘hate crime’ be best ‘translated’ in various contexts; is there an understanding of the phenomenon and concept at the national level? Among public authorities? CSOs? the general public?
  • What has been the nature of change over time? What has caused or contributed to this change?

Connecting on hate crime recording and data collection in Europe

  • Can you describe a ‘change making incident’? what was the difference that it caused?
  • Could the change in your context be described as ‘micro’- such as water dropping on rocks producing slow change that supported the right things to be in place to respond to a particular incident?
  • Think of an action initiative to improve data/ responses to hate crime. what worked?, what are the challenges?, what would you like to see changed?

«PREVIOUS BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS NEXT»