Runnymede gathered evidence through consultation documents and visits to Muslim communities

Evidence

The methods employed for collection of the evidence was twofold. First, the comments and suggestions the Commission received from the consultation process were used and the report frequently quotes directly from them. Second, the report was produced after members of the Commission visited important Muslim communities in Bradford and Tower Hamlets. This gave the Commissioners the opportunity to engage in direct conversations and discussions with young Muslims in the 17-24 age range as well as with community leaders. In addition members of the Commission addressed a variety of meetings and seminars throughout the country, including a large gathering in the London Borough of Waltham Forest. — Runnymede Trust, Islamophobia, 48

Categorization

• XREF: Contrast this consultative, grassroots evidence base with Bleich’s later demand for neutral social-scientific concept formation — the camps differ in epistemology as much as definition. — connects to: Runnymede constructed its evidence through consultation and community visits; The Runnymede report grounded its definition in community consultation and direct visits — Runnymede Trust, Islamophobia: A Challenge for Us All, 48; The Runnymede consultation paper circulated widely across institutions and Muslim organisations — Runnymede Trust, Islamophobia: A Challenge for Us All, 46
• QUESTION: Evidence came largely from Muslim communities themselves and from the consultation paper’s own distribution to Muslim organisations — circularity that the later critical turn might read either as strength (grounding in lived experience) or weakness (self-confirming).

Related

• Runnymede constructed its evidence through consultation and community visits (similarity 0.96)
• The Runnymede report grounded its definition in community consultation and direct visits (similarity 0.95)
• The Runnymede consultation paper circulated widely across institutions and Muslim organisations (similarity 0.89)
• The 1997 consultation paper reached over 3,500 institutions (similarity 0.86)
• Runnymede Trust established the Commission on British Muslims and Islamophobia in 1996 (similarity 0.83)
• The Runnymede Commission deliberately avoided Muslim self-scrutiny (similarity 0.82)
• The Runnymede report yielded sixty recommendations, many later implemented (similarity 0.82)
• The Runnymede report reframed anti-Muslim prejudice as faith-based rather than ethnic. (similarity 0.81)
• The Runnymede report frames Islamophobia as a call to action for everyone (similarity 0.81)
• The Runnymede report introduced Islamophobia as marking Muslim-specific experience beyond shared discrimination. (similarity 0.81)
• Runnymede’s core aim is countering monolith views of Islam (similarity 0.81)
• Runnymede Trust — Islamophobia A Challenge for Us All (similarity 0.80)
• The Runnymede Trust popularized the term Islamophobia in 1997. (similarity 0.80)
• The 1994 Runnymede report first acknowledged Islamophobia in British non-Muslim print. (similarity 0.79)
• The 1997 Runnymede report defined Islamophobia as faith-based discrimination beyond ethnicity (similarity 0.79)