The ‘action/inaction conundrum’ in early interventions to prevent extremism

Abstract This article conceptualizes the existence of an ‘action/inaction conundrum’ for practitioners delivering early interventions to prevent the onset of extremism among young people. At a time of heightened trepidation that government programmes are not performing well, as well as concerns that extremism itself has evolved and broadened, there is an allure to earlier intervention. Yet, practitioners refer to unintended consequences, such as labelling and stigmatization, that could result from this work, meaning they must balance the risks of both intervention (action) and non-intervention (inaction). Informed by a combination of observations (70 hours) and 28 semi-structured interviews, this article explores the tensions of navigating this ‘conundrum’ and its impacts on practice.