20. 地方上与国际圣战的联系并不如全球言论所显示的那般紧密。一项又一项研究表明，遭受政府当局虐待和侵权的经历或这方面的印象是决定在多大程度上易受暴力极端主义影响或在多大程度上可以抵御暴力极端主义的因素。此外，从多个角度审视暴力极端主义就会发现，分离主义运动和旷日持久的冲突是有待处理的核心因素。41 鉴于事关重大，决策者未能考虑到数十年来有关地方政治不满、冲突深层动因、长期结构性不稳定以及资源分配引发的政治紧张局势的信息和数据，是不可原谅的。开发署的概念框架着重指出了可能导致暴力极端主义行动的八大驱动因素：(a) 全球政治的影响；(b) 经济排斥以及有限的向上流动机会；(c)政治排斥以及不断缩小的公民空间；(d) 不平等、不公正、腐败和侵犯人权行为；(e) 对社会经济和政治制度的失望；(f) 对社会日益多元化的反对；(g) 薄弱的国家能力和恶化的安全状况；(h) 不断变化的全球文化以及媒体和娱乐中暴力行为的庸俗化。42
20. The link with international jihadism is more tenuous on the ground than the global rhetoric suggests. Study after study reveals that the experience or perception of abuse and violations by government authorities are determining factors that contribute to the level of vulnerability to violent extremism, or resilience thereto. In addition, separatist movements and protracted conflicts are central factors to be addressed when examining violent extremism in multiple contexts. 41 The failure of policymakers to take into account the decades of knowledge and data on local political grievances, underlying drivers of conflict, long-term structural instability and political tensions over resource allocation is unforgivable, given the stakes involved. The UNDP conceptual framework highlights eight drivers that can result in violent extremist action: (a) the impact of global politics; (b) economic exclusion and limited opportunities for upward mobility; (c) political exclusion and shrinking civic space; (d) inequality, injustice, corruption and the violation of human rights; (e) disenchantment with socioeconomic and political systems; (f) rejection of growing diversity in society; (g) weak State capacity and failing security; and (h) a changing global culture and the banalization of violence in the media and entertainment.42