 So, thank you very much for the opportunity to present this research. Thank you very much, Pavey, for leading this panel. Around 50 to 80% of armed conflicts in a given year include sexual violence by armed actors. So that means that, for instance, members of the Army, of rebel groups, of militias will use sexual violence against civilians. That includes rape, that includes sexual slavery against women, against girls, but also against men and boys. And in this paper, Richard Traunmühler, so this is joint work funded among others by the German Research Foundation, we want to know how sexual violence exposure affects social and political behavior and attitudes. We think this is a really important but understudied question, actually. So there has been a lot of work, of course, on the more direct consequences of sexual violence in armed conflicts, focusing on PTSD, on depression, anxiety, stigma, of course. But relatively limited evidence and research that falls perhaps a little bit more into the field of political science, where we look into how people, both men and women, respond to such threats over time in conflict. So what is the motivation of this research? If you think about sexual violence in wars, maybe images like this come up, right? So it's often advocacy campaigns, charities requesting donations. It's news reports that will focus on a kind of victimized stereotype of women, but also of men, right? Much more rarely about men, of course, but among others. And I would try to term this the more proximate psychological effects. And there has been a lot of research on that, right? Some of you may also associate sexual violence with her. So that's Nadja Muriot, who has been a sex slave by the Islamic State, received the Nobel Peace Prize and has become a political activist, right? Of course, she's a very, very prominent example, maybe an exception, but also on a more local level, we also see that there is quite a lot of social and political response by women, among others, but also of men. So for instance, here is a demonstration, a protest march against the impunity of sexual violence perpetrators in the Congolese army in Bukaw and South Kiwis in Eastern Congo. And I would term these more distant, perhaps downstream, social and political mobilization effects, right? The question that we are concerned here with is to understand whether these mobilization effects are part of a more general pattern or whether they are more exceptions, right? So that's what we focus on in this paper here. So the research question, the main driving research question for this project is, does wartime sexual violence have some social and political implications? And related to that, if we look at that at an individual level, what are ways how we can measure sexual violence within service in both a way that allows us to get accurate reflection of sexual violence exposure, but also a way that provides respondents anonymity, right? So just very briefly on prior research, I won't keep along with that, but just to acknowledge, there has been, of course, a lot of research on the adverse psychological consequences of sexual violence, PTSD, domestic violence, social stigmatization. I'm just mentioning here that the quantitative micro-level research has, of course, a lot more qualitative micro-level research, all basically pointing into the same direction, right? Some recent research shows that there are some conditionalities depending on, for instance, the prevalence of victim-blaming norms within communities. The second line of research that we build on and want to contribute to is very small and emerging, but has shown that sexual violence in civil wars can contribute to social mobilization and political engagement in a few cases, building on survey evidence. And then there is this large literature that emerged during the last 15 years that shows by and large that people that get exposed to violence, so, for instance, experiencing death of relatives, of family members, or getting injured will basically, it will change their pro-social traits, right? So it may contribute to social trust towards your in-group, so, for instance, within your communities, and contribute to social behavior. So, a brief preview of the results. What we find is, so what we do is we use individual level surveys and what we use two different measures to collect data on sexual violence exposure. So one is a more direct question that is commonly used in psychological surveys. And then another one is an extremely indirect way where you don't have to openly disclose whether you have been exposed to sexual violence or not. We see that there are really large reporting differences and the prevalence of sexual violence basically at least doubles depending on the country context. We observe that across Liberia, Deer Congo, and Sri Lanka, exposure to sexual violence increases local civic engagement, controlling for a lot of other factors, as well as trying to reduce the risk of omitted variable bias. And what we also find is this is more speculative that this effect of local political and social mobilization appears to be driven by respondents who would not report to direct questions only to the indirect questions. So how can we conceptualize this? I think it's very useful to differentiate between proximate psychological effects and more downstream mobilization effects. As I mentioned before, the literature on these adverse psychological effects is robust and I think there's not that much to contribute to. If we would make predictions about social and political interest and mobilization based on that literature, we would basically assume that people who get stigmatized and perhaps socially excluded would have lower levels of social and political engagement. There are, however, and this draws more on some other literatures in sociology and also social psychology, other mechanisms that could be at work. So for instance, threat mobilization. If we draw on Charles Tilley's work, sexual violence is, of course, something that is deeply threatening for both women but also for men, for whole communities. So we could potentially imagine that communities and individuals that experience sexual violence want to avoid that in the future and organize and mobilize within their local communities. Other mechanisms at work could be social mobilization or social compensation. So there is a line in the social psychology literature that suggests that people who experience stigmatization would try even harder to remain part of their community by investing with pro-social behavior, by donating by altruistic behavior and so on. So based on that other lines of literature, we could imagine that people who get exposed to wartime sexual violence may display more social and political engagement. So what we do here is, and I'm running through the empirical set up very quickly because I think I wanna focus more on the results. We use three original surveys that Richard or I, together with some other people, collected in DRC, Liberia and Sri Lanka. So these are not publicly available surveys because we included a lot of measures that we think are really important in moving this literature to advance this literature. So one of the things that we think is important is to really differentiate between, to not assume that people will respond to you completely truly if you ask them if someone has been a victim of violence, especially sexual violence, right? It's a very sensitive subject and some people may not want to report that. So what you would end up with with such direct questions is by a sample, you would basically have some people who respond yes to that question and other people who would respond no, even though they have been exposed and there are very good reasons to do that. So what we propose here is to include something called a list experiment and I can go into more detail in the Q and A for those who are interested. What it basically does actually, you don't, it has been applied to a lot of different circumstances as well like substance abuse or racist behavior for instance. What it does, it allows you to share your opinion without specifying it completely. So it grants anonymity to the respondents. And what we then do is we estimate the effect of these two different types of measures on different outcome variables. Here I focus on civic participation, what we measure as active membership in local associations. Okay, the first results, thank you, that I want to share is that it really matters how you measure sexual violence within surveys. So basically what we see across all the different service is that the prevalence of sexual violence at least doubles. In some cases it triples in Liberia and in Sri Lanka, it's 12 times high. So that's associated, assuming with stigmatization, that people just don't want to report that to some survey enumerator that they don't know. It's quite plausible, right? In the next step, and I'm gonna run through that here, I wanna share with you the results. So what do we find if we basically estimate the effect of sexual violence exposure on local civic participation? What we find is that between survivors of sexual violence, so both male and female, are 16 to 31% more likely to be active members in local community-based association. So that's kind of a proxy for civic engagement at the local level. The direct question has no effect. We see no gender differences here, so the effect is the same for men and for women. And we do some robustness checks because there is, of course, an argument to be made that this could reflect also reverse causality. The takeaway message that I want to emphasize here is free-fold. The first one is, so there is suggestive evidence. I'm really careful about the use of evidence because I think we need to be, there are some caveats here, and it's such a sensitive topic that we need to be very careful how we frame this. There is suggestive evidence for mobilization effects so that victims and survivors of sexual violence become more socially active, especially in the local communities. Accounting for how we measure sexual violence matters a lot, and the conclusion that we can draw from that. And third, this effect of mobilization is quite consistent across all free post-conflict contexts. Implications, so these adverse implications, the psychological PTSD experiences of anxiety, depression, they remain, right? So this is just a disclaimer here. Nevertheless, there is some optimistic evidence if we think about the long-term implications for community-based peace-building reconciliation with other ethnic groups that might have been perpetrators of violence. There are, I'm very honest here, a lot of limitations which require further research, so we're not really sure what our results reflect. So what is the underpinning mechanism here? Is it real agency, which would be, of course, the most favorable, that those people who got exposed to sexual violence would really change the situation and circumstances on the ground, like community-based norms? Is it conformity pressure, or is it just sheer necessity when you live in a context where the state does not, or is not willing to provide security and basic services? And there is also, we are still kind of not entirely sure what kind of support and assistance might be the most effective for both victims and communities, given that you don't wanna crowd out organic mobilization by providing external benefits or resources to communities, something that I think is something that where external actors need to be very careful about as well. Thank you.