This report sets out the findings of research to understand the potential of the Good Lives Model (GLM) to interpret trajectories into and out of violent extremism and considers the implications for policy and practice.

The Good Lives Model (GLM) is a well-developed manifestation of a strength-based approach to rehabilitation. The model argues that focusing on developing strengths and enhancing protections, rather than solely managing and controlling risk factors, offers a more fruitful route to preventing (re)offending. The GLM has become an increasingly prominent part of efforts to rehabilitate criminal offenders, however its potential with respect to the violent extremist population has not been fully exploited.

This report is informed by a review of research on protective factors set out in an earlier report: Conceptualising Protective Factors: Strength-Based Approaches (Marsden and Lee, 2022) that established the theoretical foundation for the empirical research set out here

The Good Lives Model ("GLM") is a strength-based approach to rehabilitation that can help explain (rather than describe) trajectories in and out of extremist groups. The GLM assumes that we seek to pursue eleven primary goods (life, knowledge, excellence in work, excellence in play, excellence in agency, inner peace, relatedness, community, pleasure, and creativity), and engaging in extremist subcultures is understood as a way of fulfilling desired goods that are otherwise difficult to achieve due to barriers. Obstacles to obtaining primary goods include use of inappropriate means to achieve the goods, lack of coherence in the way goods relate to on another, a lack of scope, where particular goods dominate one's view while others are neglected, and capacity, when an individual's internal or external conditions make it difficult to achieve primary goods normatively.

The report finds that extremism is often pursued as a way of achieving the goods of healthy living, relatedness, and agency (as well as others, but these were the most commonly featured and helped facilitate access to other goods). Individuals often pursued extremist groups due to feelings that they had few meaningful relationships, and lacked opportunities to express their agency. Goods are interrelated in ways that can change over time. Obstacles, particularly internal and external barriers to achieving goods, can help explain pathways into and out of extremism.