Strengths and Gaps in the Current Scholarship

2.1 Research Methods

2.1.1 Sampling Methods

Because the context of Palestine is fraught with instability and uncertainty, accessing children as participants for research must be conducted carefully, perhaps even more so than with children’s research in other contexts.

Nevertheless, within the current literature, few studies used random or even quasi-random sampling methods to obtain their samples. One exception comes from Arafat and Boothby (2003) who obtained a representative, stratified, random sample of children for their research on the psychosocial status of Palestinian children. Children were selected randomly by school counselors, who would enter a village, camp, or city, divide it into quarters, and go to every tenth home to determine if there was a willing child participant present who met the inclusion criteria. However, in accessing their sample, Arafat and Boothby highlight a challenge that children’s geographies have acknowledged, specifically the difficul­ties in accessing children while also working with the gatekeepers who exert influence over the research process (van Blerk et al. 2009). Many studies use local organizations and institutions to recruit their sample, as this may be the only way to gain access to the population of interest. For example, many studies derive their samples directly from schools (see, e.g., Palosaari et al. 2013), which have the potential of homogeneity in terms of age and even socioeconomic status.

Albeit rare, the use of comparison groups is a strength in the current body of research. However, because of the nature of the political violence at the time the research may be conducted, there are some issues to consider. For example, Thabet et al.

Inclusion of a control group (e.g., children who have never experienced political violence) is a difficult task in Palestinian research, because the occupation and political violence have affected almost every corner of Palestinian society from village to city to refugee camp. In his commentary, Haj-Yahia (2007) suggests that comparison groups be drawn from samples of Palestinian children living in Israel or Arab countries that have not been directly exposed to political violence. However, Haj-Yahia also acknowledges that these children may still have been exposed to other forms of violence and trauma, such as displacement, discrimination, and/or racism. Drawing attention to the work of Barber (1999, 2001), Haj-Yahia (2007) suggests that the larger the sample size, the more likely there will be a subgroup (albeit small) of children who have experienced different forms of political violence at varying degrees of frequency and severity or perhaps even children who have not experience political violence at all.

Many studies rely solely on child report data, giving only one perspective (see, e. g., Lavi and Solomon 2005; Thabet et al. 2002, 2009). On the other hand, gathering data from only adult sources should also be treated with caution, as parents' own experiences may affect their ability to assess their children's well-being. Further­more, this promotes an adultist view of children's experiences, which children's geographies try to avoid. There are several studies that gather data from multiple sources, which strengthens the research by providing corroborating evidence and shedding additional light on a theme or perspective.

2.1.2 MethodologicalApproaches

There are methodological lessons to be learned from reviewing the current schol­arship on Palestinian children. The state of research still includes a heavy reliance on quantitative research designs and, less often, the use of qualitative design. There is also a heavy reliance on cross-sectional surveys, primarily assessing both expo­sure to political violence and outcomes at the same point in time. Of course, there are exceptions, with a few studies utilizing a longitudinal research design (see, e.g., Punamaki et al. 2001). Although quantitative studies certainly add to the field's understanding of the experiences of children affected by political violence, quali­tative methods can provide additional explanations beyond just prediction. And the field of children's geographies has certainly played a role in developing diverse research methods. Rather than relying on positivistic data gathered solely through quantitative methods, the holistic and process-oriented nature of qualitative research can enhance understandings of socio-spatial phenomena from the every­day experiences of Palestinian children and families (Haj-Yahia 2007).

Of course, qualitative studies present their own limitations. Over the past decade, human geography has faced a “crisis of representation,” triggered by traditional qualitative research methods that, like much quantitative research, only convey a limited and partial insight into research participants’ experiences (van Blerk et al. 2009). Nevertheless, van Blerk et al. note that the field of children’s geography has “started with a different agenda,” namely, a focus on advancing children’s participation in the research process, which offers “new ways to probe the human experience” (p.

Multiple and mixed method approaches are becoming more common in research with Palestinian children, especially within children’s geographies. This reflects the acknowledgment that knowledge is not simply transmitted from the participant to the researcher, but rather “contexts are constructed in which researcher(s) and respondent(s) actively engage in the co-production of knowledge” (van Blerk et al. 2009, p. 3). There are a few notable examples of this. In her research with Palestinian children regarding their impressions of the separation wall, Shalhoub- Kevorkian (2006) used focus group discussions, participant observation, as well as photos and written compositions from children themselves. In his research with children living in a refugee camp in the West Bank, Marshall (2013) used a combination of guided tours, photo diaries, participatory video, mental mapping, drawing, and focus groups. Akesson (2014) conducted collaborative interviews with families in their homes, using narrative, drawing, and mapmaking, as well as global positioning system (GPS) tracked walks through neighborhood communities.

2.2 Unit of Analysis

2.2.1 Age Range: Where Are the Young Children?

In their review of the achievements and challenges of children’s geographies, Holloway and Pimlott-Wilson (2011) question “whether geographies of children, youth and families focuses on too narrow a section of the age spectrum” (p. 16). And this review indicates that children in Palestine tend to be defined rather narrowly, most commonly representing school-aged children, between the ages of 12 and 16 years. For example, Shalhoub-Kevorkian’s (2006) study included school­aged children in 10th and 11th grades. And Veronese et al. (2012) conducted research with children aged 7-14 years old. Young Palestinian children (under the age of 8) tend to be underrepresented in the research. In general, and with a few exceptions, the body of research on Palestinian children is not consistently concerned with identifying age- or stage-related differences in how children expe­rience political violence.

According to Akesson (2011), there are several reasons why young children have not been prioritized as an important age group for research, especially in the Palestinian context. First, many believe that young children are not affected by political violence. Second, young children’s abilities may be underestimated, and research methods do not adequately address the skills that younger children may have. And third, research designs tend to consider young children inaccessible, because they cannot be theoretically separated from their parents. Methodologically, young children may not be included as often in research because of a reliance on certain methods, such as cross-sectional surveys, which may be easier to administer at school age.

2.2.2 A Focus on the Parent-Child Dyad

Another common unit of analysis in the research on Palestinian children is the parent-child dyad, often the mother. This has been a useful unit of analysis in research, because of the historical reliance on attachment theory as a means by which to explain child developmental outcomes, as well as the reciprocal influences that the parent and child engage in and as a mediator in violent contexts.

It is known that parenting in the context of political violence is associated with children’s well-being and that the parent-child relationship can serve as a mediat­ing mechanism. For example, in a multi-sample study, punitive parenting practices were also found to be associated with childhood aggression, whereas nonpunitive parenting moderates aggressive behaviors related to political violence (Qouta et al. 2008). Similarly, Thabet et al. (2009) found that supportive parenting prac­tices were associated with lower levels of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in children. Qouta et al. (2003) concluded that Palestinian youth most vulnerable to avoidance and intrusion symptomatology were those whose mothers showed high levels of PTSD. On the other hand, Barber (1999) found that there was no associ­ation between youth functioning and parental support, parental monitoring, and parent-adolescent conflict among Palestinian male youth affected by political violence.

Past research shows that Palestinian parents model coping skills for their chil­dren during political violence, with children mirroring their parent’s reactions to stress (Chemienti and Abu Nasr 1993). According to Punamaki et al. (2001), children’s experience is dependent upon parents’ reactions, a finding that has been confirmed in research with other populations affected by political violence. For example, studies show that a mother’s level of anxiety and depression is the most important predictor of her child’s mental health (Qouta et al. 2005). Similarly, Barber’s (2001) research with Palestinian youth found that a nurturing parenting style protected children’s developmental and emotional well-being in the context of political violence. In Punamaki et al.’s (2001) study of Palestinian children, chil­dren who had loving and non-rejecting parents were more creative and efficient in problem-solving, ultimately protecting their children’s mental health despite expo­sure to political violence. And in Garbarino and Kostelny’s (1996) research with Palestinian children and mothers, political violence was found to pose a “manage­able” threat when children faced danger in the context of healthy functioning and parental well-being; however, it was a critical developmental risk in the context of family dysfunction and violence.

All of the above studies focus on the role of the parent-child relationship and parenting styles in affecting child well-being within the context of political vio­lence. However, there are still gaps in our understanding of how the occupation and political violence affect quality of life in the Palestinian family, the structure of the Palestinian family, and the multiple processes and dynamics of Palestinian family practices.

2.2.3 Family: The Importance of a'ila and hamula

Research with children cannot be disengaged from the family system. For family is integral to an understanding of children’s lives and experience, especially within the field of children’s geographies. Yet, despite the importance of the family in Palestine, in place-related studies of Palestine, such as those that rest under the umbrella of children’s geographies, there are few studies that look at the immediate family (the a’ila) and the wider network of aunts, uncles, and cousins (the hamula) (for exceptions, see (Harker 2010). This gap is notable considering that children’s well-being in the face of political violence is associated with the response of their families.

There has been a recent emphasis on multiple perspectives, especially diverse family relationships across multiple generations. For example, in his research with Palestinian children in Jordan, Hart (2002) asserted that children define themselves as a generation in fundamentally different ways than adults. Because of Palestinians’ strong sense of place identity related to geographic location (i.e., historic Palestine), which is passed down through the generations, children are drawing from multiple sources (e.g., self, caregivers, siblings, community) to develop their own sense of place. In this way, family and community spaces are given form, function, and significance by the people in and around them. Therefore, the family acts as a place for activity between the older and the younger generation. Through family practices (Harker 2010), the older generation provides solidarity and social cohesion for the younger generation, who continue to deal with ongoing crises of occupation, displacement, and violence (Ghabra 1988). Yet, the geogra­phies of intergenerational relationships continue to be under-researched.

The gap identified in this section is not unique to the scholarship on Palestinian children. Holt (2011) and Punch (2006) both suggest that this is one of the existing strands of critique in the broader field of children’s geographies as well. Within the field of children’s geographies, there is a rich body of literature that examines parenting, dealing with issues such as adults raising families (Holloway and Pimlott-Wilson 2011). But with a few exceptions including Holt’s (2011) recent edited collection, sparse consideration has been given to family relationships beyond the individual child or the mother-child dyad.

With this in mind, research on Palestinian children’s geographies should move beyond a focus on either children’s or parents’ experiences. Echoing Harker (2012), research with Palestinian children should include a geographical approach to family, which considers “multiple, contingent relations between family spacings, politics, and ethics” (p. 850). Given that family is a vital component of children’s environments, future research would be well served to focus on the family as an important element in children’s socio-spatial experience. All family members can be included in the research process, with narratives intertwined and told in concert, so as to uncover children and family understandings of political violence how family experiences are co-constructed.

2.3 Topical Focus

2.3.1 Trauma and Resilience: Different Sides of the Same Coin?

There is a considerable body of research that addresses the impact of war and other types of traumatic events on child development and well-being. Political violence certainly influences children emotionally, psychologically, and physiologically. Clearly mental health is an important topic for research on Palestinian children, with many researchers aiming to prove that indeed Palestinian children are suffer­ing under occupation and political violence. And there are a number of studies that have assessed the negative consequences of political violence on children in Palestine.

Research examining the effects of political violence on children has traditionally centered on trauma and exposure (Barber and Schluterman 2008). The obvious pattern across most empirical studies of Palestinian children is focused on some form of negative functioning. Many studies that examine the effects of political violence in Palestinian children include one or more measures of problematic functioning such as externalizing behaviors (i.e., aggression, antisocial behavior, delinquency, hyperactivity) (see, e.g., Palosaari et al. 2013; Qouta et al. 2008) and internalizing behavior (i.e., anxiety, depression, disordered eating, sleep problems, withdrawal) (see, e.g., Palosaari et al. 2013). Many studies focus only on negative functioning, with a few looking at both positive and negative outcomes (for an exception, see Lavi and Solomon 2005).

A majority of studies report that children exposed to political violence experi­ence some kind of negative effect as a result. Many studies report that children exposed to chronic stress as a result of political violence reported higher levels of psychological issues. PTSD is a common negative outcome measure, with several studies including PTSD on a list of negative psychopathology or measuring this outcome explicitly (see, e.g., Qouta et al. 2003; Thabet et al. 2009).

Of course, these studies were conducted with the best of intentions: to learn more about the state of Palestinian children under occupation and to provide the inter­national community with evidence of the negative effects of Israeli occupation and political violence on Palestinian children. However, the prevalent focus on trauma and resulting negative psychopathology does not provide a comprehensive picture of Palestinian children’s experiences. A focus on trauma follows the traditional focus on a Western, deficit-based medical model, where the pattern is reliance upon negative psychopathology. Palestinian children are commonly thought of as being traumatized, and a focus on trauma creates the impression that Palestinian children exposed to political violence are “mentally ill” and in need of treatment (Rabaia et al. 2014). As Marshall (2014) notes, entire populations are deemed traumatized by violence, which eclipses other aspects of children’s experience. There may be little emphasis on variations in interpreting these experiences such as level and layering of exposure in different locations, socio-spatial mediators, and positive outcome measures. How Palestinian children have managed to persevere through­out a long history of displacement and through episodes of varying levels of violence has received markedly less interest in the scholarship. Therefore, there is a need for research to understand the diverse experiences of children and families, rather than to generalize about their traumatization.

Research on children affected by political violence indicates that under the right circumstances, a child's cognitive and affective processes can serve as a source of strength, resilience, and perseverance amidst the negative and potentially traumatic effects of political violence (see, e.g., the edited collection by Fernando and Ferrari 2013). This is especially true when the child can count on continuous support from family, friends, and/or community members. Nevertheless, there is little research that focuses on how Palestinian children persevere in adverse circumstances (for an exception, see Nguyen-Gillham et al. 2008).

Resilience has become a recent focus in research on children affected by political violence (Fernando and Ferrari 2013; Thabet et al. 2009). Yet, in the context of Palestine, there have been a few studies that have specifically examined elements of resilience in children. One notable exception is the work of Nguyen- Gillham et al. (2008) which highlighted the resilience of young people exposed to traumatic experiences. Resilience is an important topic in the field of children's geographies, for research shows that resilience is intrinsically tied to the social environment. For example, Punamaki (1997) found that parental love and proper discipline increased Palestinian children's resilience by increasing their creativity and cognitive capacity. And, even though it was not an explicit goal of the research, Shalhoub-Kevorkian's (2006) study addresses resilience in her findings, countering traditional views of children as passive victims of political violence and moving toward children as agents of change and mobilization. Yet with the exception of these few studies, resilience is yet to be fully explored in the context of Palestinian children. As Veronese et al. (2012) noted: “To unravel its complexity, in depth­understanding of the environmental factors contributing to children's wellbeing at both social and cultural levels in required; such understanding may best be attained by working within an ecological framework” (p. 225), a framework suited to the field of children's geographies.

2.3.2 War Is Not the Only Trauma: Other Forms of Adversity Affecting Palestinian Children

Harker (2011) suggests that studies, which focus one dimensionally on trauma and on Palestine as a land of occupation and political violence, “work at a collective level to produce - albeit unintentionally and unknowingly - a stereotypical repre­sentation of place” (p. 2). Such a conceptualization leaves out an understanding of the everyday geographies of children in Palestine, a place where babies are born, children attend school, families eat together, and parents earn a living. All of these everyday activities are important to children's understandings of and interactions with their socio-spatial contexts. In fact, political violence is not necessarily the most pressing form of adversity for children in these settings. Rather the greatest hardships may be societal and contextual factors - poverty, separation from family, loss of loved ones, weakened community and family structures, insufficient social services, and loss of control over personal space and movement - which all may be worsened by the occupation and its related violence. Several factors determine how children are able to cope with political violence, including the type, degree, and duration of stressful life events, the child's subjective understanding of these events, and the child's stage of developmental growth (Arafat and Boothby 2003). However, the current body of literature on Palestinian children does not fully explore these elements, oversimplifying the impact of different forms of violence and the changing nature of violence.

As the previous section shows, research with Palestinian children tends to focus on the mental and physical harm to children as a result of war-related violence. Therefore, different forms of family violence - child neglect, child sexual and physical abuse, and corporal punishment - may be overlooked as elements of children's everyday geographies. Nevertheless, family violence is a serious issue in any context, but especially within the context of political violence where multiple forms of violence may accumulate (Garbarino and Kostelny 1996). Indeed, there is a link between political violence and family violence. For example, Pain (2014) connects everyday domestic violence to violence in the international arena. And Jewkes (2002) notes, when violence is an established practice in a society, it is more likely to occur at domestic levels. Additionally, Al-Krenawi et al. (2007) found that exposure to political violence is strongly associated with violence within Palestinian families.

There is some research (though little that is recent) that addresses the prevalence and type of violence experiences within Palestinian families, a gap that is reflected broadly within research with Arabic cultures (Johnson and Joseph 2009). In a cross­sectional survey of 1,185 secondary school children in east Jerusalem and the West Bank, Haj-Yahia and Abdo-Kaloti (2003) found high rates of children witnessing and experiencing different forms of family violence including father-to-mother violence (30-36%), mother-to-father violence (11-38%), and parent-to-child vio­lence (32-52%). In a survey of 2,332 students (ages 14-17), Sehwail et al. (2005), more than 43% of respondents had siblings who were beaten by their father and 47.5% by their mother. In a cross-sectional study of 652 Palestinian undergraduate students, Haj-Yahia and Tamish (2001) found that before the age of 12, 5.7% of participants had been sexually abused by a family member, 11.6% by a relative, and 13.2% by a stranger. Clearly political violence is not the only violence facing Palestinian children, as many must also cope with the everyday violence within their homes.

As a place affected by political violence, Palestine is a landscape deeply inscribed with physical, emotional, cultural, and political scars. During her research in the West Bank, Peteet (2005) noted that “the potential for violence is always on display” (p. xi). Yet, this potential for violence is not just related to the occupation. There are also violent aspects of Palestinian society such as child abuse and family violence that are not necessarily directly related to the occupation. Clearly, these factors may be further exacerbated by factors such as unemployment, poverty, and ideology. This acknowledgment of non-occupation-related violence does not intend to diminish the occupation and its effects, but rather paints a more complete picture of Palestine as a complex society with multiple layers of violence affecting children.

2.3.3 The Place of Place: The Role of the Physical Environment

Political violence has important consequences for children’s development and well­being because children’s physical location structures their experience, worldview, and behaviors. Yet with the afore-described emphasis on occupation-related trauma and violence, there is little room to explicitly consider the socio-spatial experiences of these children. With a few recent exceptions (see, e.g., Akesson 2014; Hammad 2011; Marshall 2013), children’s position in the human geography-related literature on Palestine has until this point been overlooked.

Of course, studies exist that refer to aspects of children’s geographies, representing the multidisciplinary nature of the field. There are research studies on Palestinian children at borders, checkpoints, and the separation wall. For exam­ple, Shalhoub-Kevorkian’s (2006) research on Palestinian children’s perceptions, beliefs, and attitudes toward the separation wall’s construction illuminated a feeling of being trapped by the physicality of the wall. At the same time, the children spoke about how they negotiated the wall’s presence, thereby revealing an element of flexibility and resilience in the face of hardship. The physical environment was a theme in a study by Save the Children (2009), which focused on the living conditions of Palestinian families in high-risk areas, including the pressures and impacts associated with forced displacement. And using place-centered methodol­ogy, Hammad’s (2011) research aimed to place meaning and resistance for children and families in the territorial struggle occurring in the West Bank town of Bil’in.

Another aspect that can increase our understanding of Palestinian children’s geographies is conducting research in diverse locations. Attention to physical environment is especially relevant within the Palestinian context. Living conditions for children and families in refugee camps are considered to be very difficult due to overcrowding and lack of adequate water and sanitation services. The infrastructure of these camps has continued to grow throughout the decades, but horizontal expansion has reached its limits and families have begun to develop their homes vertically. Homes in the camps tend to be dark and humid, with mold and other environmental hazards characteristic of overcrowding and poor living conditions. The quality of life for children and families and the state of education, health, and social services are considered to be worse in refugee camps than in urban and rural areas. On the other hand, encampments, such as those where Bedouin families live, face extreme poverty, disintegrating infrastructure, and harsh environmental con­ditions (e.g., extremes of heat in the summer and cold in the winter). Like refugee camps in the West Bank, the Gaza Strip faces high levels of overcrowding, which has implications for the well-being of children and families who live there. How­ever, children’s experiences differ vastly between, for example, the West Bank and Gaza, while rural villages face their own distinct challenges such as the encroaching separation wall, loss of land, and settler violence.

There is clearly much diversity in the physical location where Palestinian children and families live, which differently impacts their experience. Thus far, there is much research that has been conducted among samples of children in refugee camps and cities (see, e.g., Hart 2002; Marshall 2013). There are numerous studies that focus solely on children in the Gaza Strip (Thabet et al. 2009) or children in the West Bank (Garbarino and Kostelny 1996; Marshall 2013; Shalhoub-Kevorkian 2006). Some research, such as that from Arafat and Boothby (2003) and Barber (1999) included children from both the West Bank and Gaza. And Khamis' (2012) study included adolescents from Gaza and Lebanon. Yet samples of participants from other areas of Palestine, notably East Jerusalem and rural areas of the West Bank, are underrepresented.

Despite the impact of the physical environment, there are few examples of research that takes physical location into account. One exception is Arafat and Boothby's (2003) research whose sample was based upon Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics (PCBS) census data taking into account the place of residence (e.g., village, camp, or city), as well as areas of the West Bank and Gaza that had high levels of conflict and those without. By considering the social ecological framework in their study, Arafat and Boothby evaluated the role of school in children's lives, finding that school is an important social forum and a source of support for Palestinian children. However, they also determined that children found it difficult to meet with their peers in recreational, nonformal, and social gathering places. Parents in the study noted that places outside the home were unsafe and threatening to their children, and with the exception of traveling to school, children rarely left their homes. This led to frustration due to lack of mobility and freedom. Similarly, Akesson (2014) sampled families from six different administrative regions of the West Bank (areas A, B, C, H1, and H2) and East Jerusalem. Sampling from multiple sites and in various settings (refugee camp, village, city, and encampment) under a range of territorial controls (Israeli and/or Palestinian) provided diverse examples of how Palestinian children and their families interpret, understand, and navigate their everyday environments in the context of occupation and political violence.

Finally, the construct of place has not been fully explored in research on Palestinian children, representing a gap in the research (for an exception, see Hammad 2011). Any research project should recognize place as well as people as an important factor in the environment that influences a child's life and develop­ment. Understanding the impact of the physical environment (e.g., home, school, play spaces, neighborhood community) as well as the social environment (e.g., parents, siblings, peers, teachers, community leaders) on the child's well-being adds another layer of analysis. By understanding the child's experience from multiple points of view, researchers can comprehensively examine the ways in which children negotiate their daily lives.

3