Anchored in Relationship: Understanding Pathways to Building Neighborhood Cohesion to Prevent Intimate Partner Violence and Mental Health in Informal Settlement Areas in Kenya

Background

Growing research evidence has underscored the link between neighborhood characteristics, intimate partner violence (IPV), and the mental health of residents of informal settlement areas. Proponents of the Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) hypothesis, including social disorganization and collective efficacy theories, emphasize the lack of strong bonds and mutual trust (neighborhood cohesion) in these areas, which residents perceive as disordered neighborhoods, hindering the activation of informal social control and bystander intervention. However, empirical evidence in Kenya has contradicted this deterministic view by demonstrating that neighborhood cohesion can, and often does, emerge even within structurally disadvantaged and informal settlements. There is, however, a dearth of rigorous qualitative research that offers in-depth insight into how residents in informal settlement areas build cohesion among each other in these areas.

Methods

In this narrative qualitative study, we assessed the perspective of 36 IPV survivors, 30 clinic staff, and 24 community health volunteers (CHVs) from two informal settlement areas (Kibera and Mathare) in Nairobi, Kenya. In-depth interviews were conducted using a semi-structured interview guide by sixteen trained community-based researchers in the two informal settlement areas. Data from interviews were translated from Swahili to English and transcribed verbatim. The research team systematically analyzed the interview data using the NVivo 15 software. The initial coding of the interview transcripts was analyzed line-by-line by two members of the research team. Similar codes were merged into themes following the Braun and Clarke (2006) methodological framework.

Results

Findings from the study revealed that residents of informal settlement areas build neighborhood cohesion through embedded accountability structures through the influence of traditional and informal leaders, such as chiefs, chairpersons, and area 'mothers,' who act as trusted intermediaries in dispute resolution and violence prevention. Religious institutions, particularly churches, also emerged as critical sites of psychosocial triage and referral with religious heads, such as pastors engaging in informal screening and counseling for victims of violence. Participants also revealed the role of grassroots support systems and communal fundraising as ways to build cohesion and protect victims exposed to violence in their homes.

Conclusion

The findings point to the weakening of communal oversight as a barrier to building social cohesion, where perpetrators are sometimes shielded from facing the consequences of their actions due to the fear of reprisal and apathy from the collective, increasing the fear and security of residents in these communities. Findings highlight the need for programs that include authoritative figures in neighborhoods, including the teaching of religious heads and chiefs to foster cohesion among residents in these neighborhoods. Additionally, intervention should focus on improving public spaces and infrastructure that will encourage community participation increasing the bond between residents in order to create environments where community members actively support one another and take shared responsibility.