In 2018, the World Bank reported that approximately 50% of women in Bangladesh had at one point been victims of intimate partner violence (IPV), a more precise term for domestic violence (DV). That rate was 25.2% in Vietnam and 18.5% in China. Although these are respectively just a few statistics from South Asia, Southeast Asia, and East Asia, they are representative of a broader trend of differing IPV tendencies across Asian regions. Asian regions vary in multiple facets of life relating to potential indicators of IPV such as educational attainment, wealth, and women’s rights. However, after analyzing the data of multiple Asian countries, we noticed that our expectations did not totally align with our findings. Our research led us to the idea that intranational differences may have more weight than international differences when it comes to predicting the prevalence and indicators of IPV, specifically differences between sexes. More gender inequality within a country or region may mean higher rates of IPV there. There were multiple instances in our data analysis where women’s status in their country was lower than that of their male counterparts. We approximated women’s status by looking at certain indicators in our data pertaining to education, beliefs, employment, and laws from 2000 to 2023.

What the Experts are Saying     

The current literature is in disagreement with what significantly or mainly contributes to IPV. Boyce et al. argues that gender norms “drive behavioral expectations of dominant masculinity and female passivity, creating a social context that reinforces men’s violence against women (2).” Clark et al. finds that their study supports the idea of financial stress or low socioeconomic status positively relating to IPV (168). Heise expands on the potential of personal childhood experiences and mental illnesses affecting one’s likelihood of committing DV, but stresses that violence against women is a multifaceted issue (262-267). The various proclamations of the reasons for IPV would constantly contradict one another without the acceptance of multiple concepts working in tandem. Our team has an additional concept. The concept of a country’s intra-national gender inequality largely contributing to IPV, rather than a country’s internationally  comparative socioeconomic inequality contributing, is not common. 

Why We’re Researching This

We are working on regional disparities in IPV in Asia to find out how various factors, particularly those stemming from gender inequality, influence IPV rates so we can help others understand the underlying causes and consequences of IPV. While existing research often emphasizes the western region and IPV statistics, our analysis explores additional contributing factors in Asia, such as legal frameworks, educational disparities, and gender-role beliefs, which are often not included. This project is important because it addresses a critical issue in an often overlooked part of a Eurocentric world. When tackling complex social problems, it is essential to first research and understand the root causes before proposing solutions. By investigating why and how IPV occurs in different Asian countries, identifying statistical correlations with higher IPV rates, and creating visualizations to illustrate these patterns, our work contributes to a deeper understanding of IPV. This research is particularly important for informing policy interventions in regions where IPV has been a persistent issue, ultimately helping to shape more effective strategies for prevention and support.