Evidence with a Voice: Research at APLE
Evidence gives this work credibility. Survivor voice gives it legitimacy. APLE treats both as essential, not optional.
Our Objective
By 2030, APLE will generate and facilitate evidence on CSEA patterns and effective responses — including emerging threats — and position survivors as co-creators who meaningfully shape services, policy, and the wider sector’s knowledge base, contributing Cambodia-led learning to regional and global communities of practice.
Treating survivors as co-creators, rather than beneficiaries, ensures the responses APLE builds reflect children’s actual realities — not assumptions made on their behalf.
Evidence Generation
Generating and brokering evidence on CSEA patterns, institutional gaps, and emerging threats to inform policy and practice.
Survivor Co-Creation
Positioning survivors as co-creators through a formal, standing Youth Advisory and Survivor Advisory mechanism.
Justice Quality Measurement
Measuring child-friendly justice quality through survivor co-designed feedback tools.
Regional Knowledge Exchange
Contributing Cambodia-led learning to regional and global communities of practice, including ECPAT's network.
What This Program Does
Two decades of frontline casework generate insight that, left uncaptured, benefits no one beyond the case it came from. This pillar turns that experience into evidence — and hands survivors a real seat in shaping what comes next.
A formal, standing Youth Advisory and Survivor Advisory mechanism informs project design, implementation, and review. Structured feedback shapes service-quality improvement cycles, with survivor input documented in the policy briefs and advocacy positions that follow — alongside safe forums for survivor families to voice concerns and access redress.
Research and evidence briefs on CSEA patterns, institutional gaps, and emerging threats — drawing on APLE case data, the Disrupting Harm study, and survivor perspectives — inform legal and policy reform. Learning briefs are disseminated for sector-wide knowledge sharing, including Cambodia-led contributions to ECPAT’s regional community of practice.
Frequently Asked Questions
It means a survivor’s input directly shapes a service or policy — not as a one-time consultation, but through a standing advisory mechanism with real influence over what APLE builds and how.
Case data, the Disrupting Harm study, and survivor perspectives are synthesised into evidence briefs shared directly with government decision-makers and regional networks like ECPAT.
The Youth and Survivor Advisory mechanism is a formal, safeguarded structure with clear ethics protocols. Reach out through Work With APLE to learn how it operates and how to get involved.
Research studies and learning briefs are published on our Research & Reports page as they are released.
Help Turn Experience Into Change
Every piece of evidence APLE publishes exists because a survivor was heard.