This paper presents the latest developments made by the European Commission's Erasmus+ project ASTRAPI (2022). This project aims to formulate a comprehensive intervention strategy and a training programme that effectively addresses sexual harassment (SH) issues in very diverse European organisations. ASTRAPI Project comprises universities, NGOs, foundations, and trade unions from six European countries (Cyprus, Denmark, Belgium, Bulgaria, Greece, and Spain). First, this paper presents some of the main elements of the Astrapi Survey Tool (AST), an evidence-based tool developed for SH risk assessment in European organisations. Secondly, we provide the main results obtained from the piloting of the AST in several Spanish universities. 

SH is the most prevalent form of violence against girls and women in the European Union (Fundamental Rights Agency, 2014). Between 83 and 102 million women (around 45% and 55% of European women) have experienced at least one form of SH since 15 (Latcheva, 2017). This type of gender-based violence has devastating consequences both for the health and well-being of victims and bystanders and for the culture and climate of organisations (Fitzgerald et al., 1997; ILO, 2016; UN Women, 2019). In the face of this global issue, the "MeToo" movement (with diverse local denominations) has raised awareness. It has encouraged women worldwide to join virtually to denounce SH (UN Women, 2019). Despite these significant advances, critical challenges remain in the fight against SH. For example, its presence in educational settings and organisations (Damous & Guillopé, 2021).

A large body of research, mainly from the United States, has identified how different forms of gender-based violence are common in universities (Fisher, et al., 2010). Among them, SH can be openly manifested in various forms of sexism that are present, from physical aggression to academic curricula or in class discussions and debates, among others (Dziech & Weiner, 1990). Women's resistance to accepting patriarchal structures or subordination to men in universities has also triggered adverse reactions. SH in universities has been shown to generate devastating effects, especially for victims, including the need to modify or even abandon previous academic and professional choices, change colleges or universities, or change residences (Fisher et al., 2010; Fitzgerald et al., 1988). 

The piloting reported in this paper focuses on the Spanish university context. It should be noted that, unlike in other contexts, until 2005, no research on violence against women had explicitly addressed violence against women in Spanish universities (Puigvert, et al., 2017; Valls, et al., 2016). Studies such as the one conducted by Valls, et al. (2016) highlight four leading causes of violence against women, which are specifically relevant in Spanish universities: "the existence of power structures placing men over women, the presence of hostility toward victims, the naturalisation and tolerance of violence, and the presence of sexist stereotypes" (p. 1552).

European policies and guidelines point to the need to establish comprehensive prevention programmes and strategies to face SH global problem (Milczarek, 2010). These include risk assessment systems to prevent, identify and adequately manage situations of SH in organisations. However, few risk assessment tools are available to European educational organisations to prevent SH. This paper aims to provide knowledge to help address such challenges. Thus, the main contribution of this paper is twofold. Firstly, we present the AST, an evidence-based tool developed for the risk assessment of SH in the workplace. Secondly, we provide the main results obtained from the piloting of the AST in various university contexts where the tool is currently being tested.

The research follows the communicative methodology (CM) (Padrós, 2014). CM aims to go beyond the diagnosis of social problems. Specifically, it considers the need to identify those elements capable of reducing inequalities. From this perspective, knowledge is built through an egalitarian dialogue between researchers and a wide diversity of social agents. To this end, CM contemplates co-creation strategies to include the voices of the people affected by social problems throughout the research development. This methodology has been widely used in previous research on gender-based violence and SH. Moreover, it has been recognised by the European Commission for its suitability when working with vulnerable groups. Specifically, in our study, we have used a mixed methodology. Firstly, we designed the AST through reviewing scientific literature and recommendations issued by prominent international organisations (e.g., UN Women and the ILO). In addition, based on the guidance provided by the communication methodology, the AST was designed through a co-creation process, which involved a wide range of stakeholders: SH survivors, gender-violence experts, NGOs, foundations, and trade unions from seven countries (Cyprus, Greece, Spain, Bulgaria, Denmark, Belgium, and the UK). We held dialogues with various social agents through communicative focus groups (N=3) and interviews (N=5). Secondly, a statistical analysis of the quantitative data obtained from the piloting of the AST, which is in progress at the time of submission of this paper, will be carried out. We have considered European regulations in collecting personal data. Some of the measures adopted include signing informed consent by the research participants. In addition, it is worth noting that our study involved the participation of SH victims and survivors. Therefore, the researchers have considered strategies identified in previous research with communicative and feminist orientations (Melgar, et al., 2021). For example, we have considered the importance of establishing an egalitarian climate and dialogue or making relevant information and resources available to participants to address the issues.

The results provided contribute to the achievement of the overall objective of the ASTRAPI Project, which focuses on the formulation of a comprehensive intervention strategy to enable European organisations to combat SH. These results will also provide European universities and educational organisations with rigorous tools to prevent and monitor SH risk. Furthermore, it is essential to address the low reporting rates that accompany SH's stigmatisation, re-victimisation, and normalisation (ILO, 2016; UN Women, 2019). This paper presents the evidence-based AST, a tool developed for SH risk assessment in diverse organisations. The AST improves SH data collection in the European context as it will move towards greater comparability and standardisation of data from different countries (ILO, 2016). Currently, surveys are often conducted ad hoc, and only a few countries systematically collect statistical data. Therefore, systematised data collection on SH will facilitate the development of evidence-based strategies and policies. Secondly, the piloting of the AST in the university context will identify areas for improvement that we will later be introduced into the tool to increase its usability and accuracy. In addition, the AST will provide valuable data concerning the prevention and incidence of SH in the university context, which will contribute to creating educational contexts free of any violence.

ASTRAPI. (2022). ASTRAPI EU Project. https://astrapi-project.eu/ Damous, L. B., & Guillopé, C. (2021). Gender-based violence in higher education and research: a European perspective. Journal of Macromolecular Science, Part A:Pure and Applied Chemistry, 93(8), 899–905. https://doi.org/10.1515/pac-2021-0401 Dziech, B., & Weiner, L. (1990). The lecherous professor: Sexual harassment on campus. Urbana: University of Illinois Press. European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights. (2014). Violence against women: an EU-wide survey. Main results report. European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights. Fisher, B. S., Daigle, L. E., & Cullen, F. T. (2010). Unsafe in the ivory tower: The sexual victimization of college women. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Fitzgerald, L. F., Shullman, S. L., Bailey, N., Richards, M., Swecker, J., Gold, Y., Ormerod, M., & Weitzman, L. (1988). The incidence and dimensions of sexual harassment in academia and the workplace. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 32(2), 152–175. https://doi.org/10.1016/0001-8791(88)90012-7 Fitzgerald, L. F., Swan, S., & Magley, V. J. (1997). But was it really sexual harassment?: Legal, behavioral, and psychological definitions of the workplace victimization of women. In W. O’Donohue (Ed.), Sexual harassment: Theory, research, and treatment (Vol. 315, pp. 5–28). Allyn & Bacon. International Labour Organization. (2016). Final Report, Meeting of Experts on Violence against Women and Men in the World of Work (3-6 October 2016). Conditions of Work and Equality Department. ILO. Latcheva, R. (2017). Sexual Harassment in the European Union: A Pervasive but Still Hidden Form of Gender-Based Violence. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 32(12), 1821–1852. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260517698948 Melgar Alcantud, P., Puigvert, L., Rios, O., & Duque, E. (2021). Language of Desire: A Methodological Contribution to Overcoming Gender Violence. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 20, 16094069211034597. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069211034597 Milczarek, M. (2010). Workplace Violence and Harassment: a European Picture. European Agency for Safety and Health at Work. Padrós, M. (2014). A Transformative Approach to Prevent Peer Violence in Schools: Contributions From Communicative Research Methods. Qualitative Inquiry, 20(7), 916–922. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800414537217 Puigvert, L., Valls, R., Garcia Yeste, C., Aguilar, C., & Merrill, B. (2019). Resistance to and transformations of gender-based violence in Spanish universities: A communicative evaluation of social impact. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 13(3), 361–380. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689817731170 Sen, P. (2019). What will it take? Promoting cultural change to end sexual harassment. UN Women. Valls-Carol, R. (2014). Contributions for Eradicating Gender Violence: Female Empowerment and Egalitarian Dialogue in the Methodological Foundations of FACEPA Women’s Group. Qualitative Inquiry, 20(7), 909–915. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800414537216