You need to do both. It needs to be balanced because the on-the-ground community solutions are there now. The purpose of the research is to say what works, what doesn't work, and what our best paths forward are, and that does have to happen because there has not been adequate research on what works in preventing sexual violence. If there had been, we would have stopped it by now.
We need targeted money. There's a really key problem in the SSHRC and CIHR thing because SSHRC is, first, really underfunded, but also it's disciplinary based, and projects that really address sexual violence have to be interdisciplinary. You can't do it from just one perspective or the project doesn't work, but the project is evaluated from one discipline.
If you go to CIHR, which is the health funding budget, it's a very recent thing that anything to do with health in the social sciences goes to CIHR, and most of their committees still don't really value the social sciences. We've seen overwhelming evidence that projects in the social sciences area don't get funded by CIHR, so there needs to be more training in CIHR that these issues are important.
The health sector doesn't really consider sexual violence to be a key problem, and that is a key problem right there, that they don't see it as one, so the federal government can step in there. We can make change at the federal level with regard to funding for research. You can have targeted calls for research.