« Previous | Contents | Next »
Listen
SEXUAL ORIENTATION RESEARCH PHASE 2:
THE FUTURE OF LGBT RESEARCH - PERSPECTIVES OF COMMUNITY ORGANISATIONS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1. INTRODUCTION
The Scottish Executive recognises the importance of having appropriate information on different equality groups to support, inform and monitor progress towards the equality objectives set out in the Equality Strategy. The provision of disaggregated statistics and targeted qualitative research is already underway for many equality groups, such as those concerned with gender and ethnicity. However, it has been recognised within the Executive that existing data sources do not provide adequate information on sexual orientation per se, or on the characteristics, needs and circumstances of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) communities more broadly. Moreover, there is a lack of clarity within the Executive, and elsewhere, about what data needs exist in the Scottish Executive and which methods would be most effective in providing data on LGBT communities. For this reason, the Executive has commissioned this, and related studies, which aim to explore the need for, and possible approaches to, researching LGBT communities.
This document reports on qualitative research carried out with representatives of LGBT organisations in Scotland. Nine group discussions were held with a variety of LGBT organisations by the
National Centre for Social Research (NatCen) in November and December 2001
. The discussions were held in Glasgow, Edinburgh, Dundee, Aberdeen and Inverness - but drew people from a much broader set of locations both within and outwith the central belt. 41 of the approximately 80 LGBT organisations extant in Scotland attended.
The discussions focused on three main objectives - to identify policy areas where LGBT research is considered lacking, to understand the types of research needed on these topics and to elucidate the barriers to research on LGBT issues in Scotland, as well as their solutions. A companion review of data sources and research on LGBT issues has also been conducted by
NatCen on behalf of the Executive and this is published on the Social Research website (
www.scotland.gov.uk/socialresearch ).
2. THE DEVELOPMENT OF POLICY ON LGBT ISSUES
Since its inception, the Executive has made considerable headway into thinking about how policy needs to be more inclusive of LGBT people. Documents like the Equality Strategy, and events such as the thematic seminars on LGBT issues, where Ministers and civil servants have listened attentively to community concerns exemplify this. In addition, National LGBT organisations have clearly been involved in lobbying and briefing the Executive and the Scottish Parliament about LGBT matters. This consultation with LGBT organisations adds a further level of depth to those issues already known to the Executive and, hopefully, has unearthed other concerns that have not been voiced before in any previous forum.
The organisational representatives have echoed and applauded the Executive's commitment to equality and inclusion set down in the Equality Strategy. In carrying this forward, discussions with community organisations have generated a plethora of specific concerns - across a wide range of policy areas. Issues such as homophobic bullying (in schools or in the workplace), the education of children on prejudice and discrimination and the importance of partnership rights to LGBT people - in addition to many others - call for policy change in specific areas of government. However, the study has also highlighted a set of broader policy issues, responsibility for which lies in no single area. These include the introduction of full equality in all aspects of law; the extension of social inclusion measures to address the concerns of LGBT people and the reform of public services to take full account of the needs and requirements of LGBT people. Other broader fundamental issues have also been put on the map - the importance of support for rural LGBT individuals and communities, and increased funding for LGBT community infrastructure throughout Scotland. These issues demonstrate LGBT people's wish for more fundamental change in the way that policy is made.
3. CREATING A RESEARCH AGENDA
This consultation with LGBT organisations has generated a broad and detailed research agenda that relates to the many domains of public policy, including education, health, criminal justice and employment. The topics suggested clearly underpin the broader aspiration for policy change in these areas, however, some notable policy issues are absent from the research agenda. These concern matters where, it was felt, that policy change was more important than research. They relate to issues deemed central to the civil rights of LGBT people in Scotland: the right to be free from discrimination; safety from harassment and violence; and the ability to form partnerships and families - and to enjoy their concomitant benefits. However, there is also a view that some research may be needed on such issues to inform and facilitate change.
The research agenda generated communicates an overriding thirst for knowledge about LGBT life, experiences and circumstances. This is not merely to advance intellectual learning but is rooted in a need for validation of LGBT existence. Organisational representatives have emphasised that, while there are some uncharted areas of LGBT life, there is also considerable knowledge of LGBT existence in Scotland. However, research is seen as an important way of providing irrefutable evidence or proof to convince policy makers, funders and service providers why change is needed and how it should happen. Other values of research were also underscored - its role in community development, for example, and its contribution to the activities of support organisations. In this sense, the involvement of community organisations in the creation of a research agenda for LGBT issues was clearly valued by organisations and crucial to creating a more grounded and all encompassing programme of work.
4. RESEARCH METHODS
The discussion of research methodologies with organisational representatives highlights the value of a pluralist approach. While quantitative data was seen as having greater legitimacy in the eyes of funders and policy makers, there was also a strong belief in the ability of qualitative approaches to tell the story of LGBT experience and circumstance more effectively. There was also concern voiced about the quality and competence of existing research (seen in part to arise from the limited resources to carry out robust enquiries and difficulties in reaching a representative sample of LGBT people). Consequently, there was considerable emphasis placed on the need for validity and reliability in any future research enquiries.
The issue of who was best placed to conduct research on LGBT issues was a source of much discussion. Despite opposing views about whether researchers should be indigenous to the communities or from outwith, there was consensus on the qualities required of a researcher or research organisation. In this sense, the importance of independence, objectivity and sensitivity were emphasised. Such issues are similar to those raised by other equality groups - such as disabled people and minority ethnic populations - and there has been in the past twenty years a greater acknowledgement within policy research of the centrality of the community researcher. Future researchers clearly need to understand that in the same manner as it is important to meet the language or access needs of a respondent, it is important for any researchers on LGBT issues to have a keen grasp of LGBT culture and to adapt their research methodologies in response to this.
Enhancing the participation of LGBT people in research was also seen to be an issue of key importance. A number of barriers were highlighted by representatives - perhaps the most important being the difficulty in accessing all LGBT people in Scotland and developing representative survey samples. Here, it was argued that homophobia/transphobia and a legacy of exclusion - matters at the core of any policy development on LGBT issues - were significant challenges to research that might inform such policy development. Thus, the difficulty of capturing the entire LGBT experience was seen as jeopardising the conduct of robust research. Representatives did signpost a number of strategies for overcoming this, including the need for more effective communication of the confidentiality, guaranteeing anonymity in any future research and providing better evidence that research can and does influence policy.
5. CO-ORDINATING RESEARCH
Organisational representatives pinpointed the need for better co-ordination of existing and future LGBT research in Scotland. This was emphasised in two ways. First the commissioning of research is one area that was felt could benefit from a more harmonised approach. There was great emphasis placed on the Executive as the body best placed to take on this position. There was, too, seen to be a key role for LGBT organisations in informing this role, developing research priorities and being involved in both advising and conducting LGBT research. However, representatives were not oblivious to the challenges that any body commissioning research on LGBT issues would encounter - which were seen to have their base in prejudice, homophobia, invisibility and limited political support.
The second area of co-ordination envisaged concerned the dissemination of research on LGBT issues. There was felt to be insufficient access to research on LGBT issues, even to the paucity of Scottish research currently in existence. The importance of having a central point of contact for community organisations, service providers, funders, and policy makers was recurrently underscored. It was hoped that better dissemination of research findings would lead to more enlightened policy and practice and a more informed general public, which ultimately - it was hoped - could challenge stereotypes and change public attitudes. There was no clear conclusion as to who should take on this dissemination role. While some felt that the Executive was best placed, others favoured the location of such a body within the LGBT community.
« Previous | Contents | Next »