Religious-based radicalism has intensified globally, threatening social cohesion and exploiting doctrinal ambiguities across diverse faith traditions. Although faith-based institutions (FBI's) are increasingly recognized as important actors in preventing and countering violent extremism (P/CVE), existing studies remain fragmented and context-specific, limiting cross-regional and comparative understanding of their institutional roles and mechanisms. Results reveal that six major domains employed by FBIs, moderation-oriented education, interfaith engagement, social and humanitarian services, internal institutional regulation, policy advocacy, and media-based counter-narratives. However, their effectiveness varies depending on institutional legitimacy, organizational capacity, partnership dynamics, and broader sociopolitical contexts. FBIs play a vital and multifaceted role in preventing religious radicalism across diverse contexts.
Violent extremism remains one of the biggest security challenges in northern Nigeria. This study takes a grassroots approach, particularly investigating how religious leaders address the socio-economic factors that render people vulnerable to violent radicalisation in that region. Data for the study were generated from ten qualitative interviews with Christian and Muslim leaders across five locations in the region. Thematic analysis was then applied to identify and interpret key themes within the perspectives and experiences shared by the participants. It pioneers the application of the faith-based humanitarianism (FBH) concept to the study of violent radicalisation prevention and argues that religious leaders are more than just theological authorities; they are also practical socio-economic agents of prevent. It finds that they use their influence and network to facilitate individual and communal resilience, critical thinking, and social and economic empowerment in vulnerable communities. It concludes by suggesting that their contributions may play an important role in the prevention of violent radicalisation, especially in Nigeria’s northern region, where issues of poverty, unemployment, and lack of education increase radicalisation risks.
Although research on the tertiary prevention of violent extremism has increased over the past decade, clear benchmarks for best practices remain scarce. Existing studies often suffer from methodological and ethical limitations and seldom incorporate the perspectives of those most directly affected—namely, the individuals targeted by these programs. Nevertheless, a growing body of literature highlights the promise of social rehabilitation approaches, such as mentoring programs. This article examines a mentoring program developed by a Quebec-based clinical team specializing in the prevention of extremism and violent radicalization. It explores the program’s impact from the perspectives of mentees, mentors, and clinicians. Based on a qualitative analysis of 15 individual semi-structured interviews and 2 focus groups, the study identifies the program’s strengths and limitations. Overall, participants viewed the mentoring program positively. Among the positive effects was the creation of a secure relational space that enabled some mentees to break out of isolation through meaningful interpersonal engagement. However, the mentoring relationship also presented challenges, including the potential for mentees to reproduce or reinforce past negative relational experiences. Robust clinical support is therefore essential to mitigate these risks and to safeguard the well-being of both mentees and mentors.
This article investigates community perceptions of violent and hateful extremism (VHE) in three municipalities near Marawi City in the Bangsamoro Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (BARMM), and their proposed solutions for peace. Data from 41 focus group discussions highlight local understandings of and concerns about extremism, and grassroots peacebuilding strategies in a region with a complex conflict history. The discussions reveal insights into how socio-economic disparities, historical grievances, and cultural dynamics including rido (clan feuds), shape local experiences and perceptions of VHE. Participant remarks regarding inclusion and tolerance show an interest in increasing gender awareness and integration of marginalised groups. At the same time, however, programs expressly described in terms of preventing violent extremism tend to trigger anxious responses. Findings emphasise the importance of culturally sensitive, inclusive, and community-driven approaches to effectively address the underlying causes of extremism and promote sustainable peace, with a focus on livelihoods and incomes, and educational programs. Legitimate concerns about the risks involved in explicitly seeking to counter VHE reinforce the importance of extremely careful approaches, to avoid exacerbating very real threats. The study enriches understanding of community resilience in a conflict setting and provides important insights into how best to support peace efforts in BARMM’s ongoing reconstruction and reconciliation processes.
Collaboration between civil society and state authorities in preventing radicalization has often been met with scepticism in academic debates, particularly due to concerns about power asymmetries, structural inequalities, and the risk of co-optation. While existing literature offers critical insights into national institutional frameworks and their implications for civil society, it frequently overlooks the local dynamics that shape prevention practices on the ground. The paper addresses this gap by examining cooperation between municipal officials and civil society organizations (CSOs) in local preventive efforts, focusing on the relatively understudied case of Germany. Specifically, this pilot study centres on the perspectives of municipal actors rather than directly capturing CSO voices. Drawing on 14 semi-structured interviews with municipal officers in Germany, it explores how collaboration is influenced not only by their formal mandates, but also by individual professional trajectories and locally embedded networks. The findings show that local cooperation in the prevention field is more contingent and negotiated than commonly acknowledged. Enabling factors and persistent challenges - such as lack of trust, divergent expectations, and the limited capacities of smaller CSOs - affect the quality and sustainability of these partnerships. By foregrounding lived experience and first-person perspectives of municipal officials, the paper advances a more grounded and relational understanding of state-civil society collaboration, one that accounts for the hybrid arrangements and interpersonal dynamics through which preventive efforts unfold at the local level.
