Artigos de revistas sobre o tema "Social sciences -> criminal justice -> criminology"

While research on Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) has been conducted on issues ranging from quality, process, and effectiveness, gaps remain. Social science researchers have raised issues regarding decisions by IRBs applied to the social sciences based on biomedical research. To date, little is known about the experience of social scientists in criminology and criminal justice with IRBs and this research seeks to fill this gap. An online survey, including open- and closed-ended questions drawn from the validated IRB-Researcher Assessment Tool, was administered to members of the Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences and the American Society of Criminology about their experiences with IRBs. Results revealed that researchers report experiencing challenges with their IRBs including timeline delays of their research, bias against their research, and decisions that protect legal liability rather than human subjects ethics. Recommendations for improving IRB reviews of protocols and challenges unique to criminology and criminal justice are discussed.

AbstractThis article by Adrian Howe is based on a presentation given at the ‘Sources and Methods in Criminology and Criminal Justice Conference’ in November 2015, jointly sponsored by the Institute of Advanced Education and the Socio-Legal Studies Association. She begins by querying whether there are indeed distinct feminist methods in the social sciences. She outlines the impact of what she calls the ‘methodical revolution’ on the criminology discipline, Foucault's contribution and Foucauldian methodologies deployed in criminological and criminal justice research.

Contemporary social sciences are rooted in Isaac Newton's ontology. This interdisciplinary article advocates an engagement with the new sciences, particularly quantum theory and quantum holography. It focuses particularly on the field of criminology, which amongst the social sciences stands as the most obstinate in a time when new thinking to deal with the crime problem is most compelling. It offers possible changes in our methodological approaches. It advocates a transformative justice as a replacement to "criminal justice" and "restorative justice".

Criminologists around the globe are writing about the disproportionate criminalization of minority groups and – in the US in particular – about racial disproportionality in all aspects of the criminal justice system. This wealth of knowledge in progressive criminology rarely animates reform efforts: it has had little impact on formal policymaking, and has failed to animate the work of grassroots activists engaged in the fight for justice system reform. Yet given the increased criminalization of young people in poor communities – and the possibilities for change at this very moment – progressive criminological ideas have never been more important. We need to think about ways to make them public. Toward this end, this paper discusses possible partnerships between progressive criminology and social justice organizations struggling to transform the criminal justice system. While describing nine such groups, we detail a set of recommendations for bridging the gap between progressive criminology and social justice organizations.

This article, by framing criminology and criminal law together, suggests that in the early years of the South African state both bodies of discourse served to evade reality and to construct a sense of self and other as a part of the development of the administration of South African criminal law. It considers the derivation of South African criminology from contemporary metropolitan formulations. South African legal doctrine and practice likewise depended on extra-South African sources. These imported discourses provided lenses through which a descriptive confrontation with the realities of the processes of criminalization, and the administration of criminal justice could be avoided precisely by hose “expert” in these fields. Instead, science and law, far from being pragmatic disciplines, provided the means by which to fantasize about the nature of white justice and black criminality.

Although numerous studies recently have appeared that identify the most-cited scholars and works in the general criminology and criminal justice literature and in several specialty areas, no previous citation study has specifically examined the corrections literature. Through an analysis of 209 articles and research notes appearing from 1992 to 1996 in the area of corrections, the authors list the 50 most-cited scholars and the 25 most-cited works. The lists of the most-cited scholars and works in corrections are compared to general lists taken from leading criminology and criminal justice journals and introductory textbooks. The authors' analysis uncovers certain citation trends relating to pivotal controversies in correctional research.

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to elaborate on some of the ways in which I sought to engage in public criminology in this controlled climate. Design/methodology/approach In what follows, I introduce some of the work that I supervised and draw out some principles that might be helpful to others, grouped under the headings of teaching, coordination and supervision. Originality/value In contributing to the critical pedagogy of the Master of Social Sciences in the Criminology programme “which has for thirty years sought to cultivate critical, independent scholarship among criminal justice practitioners in Hong Kong”, I had the opportunity to contribute, in a small way, to the growth of a grounded Hong Kong criminology.

Carlo Morselli’s research inspired numerous scholars around the world to integrate criminal achievement indicators and social network data into their research programs. As a professor of criminology for over 20 years at the Université de Montréal, Morselli was part of a generation of scholars who acted as brokers between Canada’s two official languages. This volume of the Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice brings together research inspired by his legacy. Morselli’s interests were diverse; we selected manuscripts revolving around two major themes in his career: the development of criminal achievement as a conceptual and empirical framework, and the innovative use of social network data in new contexts of criminological interest, such as the role of social networks in individuals’ relative optimism towards desistance, or in future victimization.

Feminist scholars teaching criminology, criminal justice, and law actively address issues of gendered and intersectional importance as crucial additions to degree programmes. Their inclusive acts illustrate a critical pedagogic approach to representing a diverse range of identities and experiences which is necessary to affect the kind of transformational learning that may resonate and impact upon graduate justice practitioners. However, the personal and professional impacts involved in seeking to effect positive developments in social and criminal justice often go unnoticed. This article presents empirical research findings exploring criminal justice tutors’ experiences of undertaking transformative teaching using feminist pedagogies. It provides insight into the lived experiences shared by scholars which highlights the affective nature of this work and offers recommendations for others navigating the neoliberal academy.

The origins of criminology as a separate and independent field of scientific research are usually linked to the emergence of the so called positive school of criminology in the second half of the nineteenth century and with the name of its leading representative Cesare Lombroso. Undoubtedly since that time criminological thought went through a long and substantial evolution which produced a variety of new concepts and theories. As a result of this one could assume that contemporary criminology has very little in common with the ideas of its founders. Despite this, there is growing conviction in the literature that the heritage of Lombroso and Italian positivism still influences significantly contemporary criminological theory. Of course, the essence of this influence lies not in the details of Lombroso’s anthropological ideas which were proven wrong long ago, but in certain quetions asked by him and his school and methods adopted to answer them. Those questions and methods were strictly connected with and resulted from the particular ideas about human society and social world, as well as with the ideas regarding the role, functions and methods of scientific research which prevailed in the social sciences in the second half of the previous century which are commonly referred to as positivism. It justifies the designation as positivist criminology of almost all criminological thought and research since the times of Lombroso up to the late 1950’s. Positivist criminology is ditinguished first of all by its naturalism, e.g. an assumption that all methodological principles developed in sciences apply equally to social sciences which do not possess any substantial methodical peculiarities. It means also that the main task of scientific research is to discover and formulate causal laws and the assumption of objectivity and value neutrality of science and the scientist. The basic question of such criminology based on the deterministic concept of social world and human behaviour was an etiological one: why do certain people commit crimes while others don’t? It means that the main task of positivist criminology is the search for the causes of crime. Another important feature of positivist criminology is the consensual model of the social order it usually assumes. Such a model implies that the entire social order and the very existence of human society result from the sharing of certain values and norms by the large majority of the members of such society. According to this view, also, criminal law represents an example of such consensus and its norms are subject to widespread acceptance. Criminals represent some unique category of misfits or outsiders somehow different from all other „normal” people, a category which refuses to submit to social consensus. A final result of this way of thinking leads to the conclusion that the explanation of a crime and finding its causes requires concentration on the individual who behaves criminally. Because of this, positivist criminology is a science having as its subject the criminal and his behaviour. Pure accumulation of knowledge was never the sole purpose of criminological research. Positivist criminology tried always to be also an applied science, providing scientific grounds for lawmaking and law enforcement. Results of criminological research, data about the criminal and his behaviour should help to change him: rehabilitate, resocialize, correct or heal. In other words, the main purpose of positivist criminology was to provide scientific methods of bringing known misfits and outsiders back the social consensus they left. This feature of positivist criminology is usually referred to in literature as correctionalism. The above reconstruction of the main features of positivist criminology probably corresponds better to European criminology, which was in fact for many years dominated by the ,,lombrosian myth”. One can doubt however whether American criminology may also be described in such terms. The problem is that, because of its clear sociological orientation, American criminology is regarded rather as a heritage of A. Quetelet, A. Guerry or E. Durkheim and not of Lombroso. Usually it perceived crime as a social phenomenon and not as an individual pathology. But it is equally true that such classical American theories of crime causation as the differential association theory or anomie theory focus their attention on the individual criminal as well. What distinguishes those theories from the European tradition is the conviction that the criminal and his special features are products of an environment. However, in both cases criminals are treated as somehow a different kind of people. All this has important practical implications. The individual approach to crime casuation implies that the proper aim of any correctional influences is the criminal himself. The sociological approach claims that there is also no sense in correcting or changing the criminal unless we do something about the environment which produced him. The natural consequence of such an approach is the preference for social reform and social policy over criminal law as instruments of fighting the crime problem. The former is assigned only a secondary role. This is probably one of the main reasons for a certain uneasiness and mistrust towards the sociological approach which may be observed criminologists with a legal background; it is considered too abstract and detached from the everyday problems of the criminal justice system as well as too difficult and complicated to implement. Two new criminological currents emerged during last thirty years which remain in opposition towards positivism. The first one, called antinaturalistic criminology, was born during the sixties. It rejected the positivist concept of social science, asked new and different questions and tried to answer them using different methods. The decisive role in launching this new approach was played by the labelling approach, Its main contribution constituted rejection of the old etiological question and its substitution with the „reactive” one, a question regarding origins and development of the societal reaction to criminal or dewiant behaviour. This meant also an abandonment of positivist methodology of searching for casual laws and a turn towards the methods of humanistic sociology, including understanding, empathy and other similar qualitative methods. According to this trend the main task of the criminological enterprise is to create a sociology law and other forms of social control. Antinaturalistic criminology also adopted an unequivocally pluralistic model of society. Crime and deviance ceased to be perceived as something necessarily pathological. Instead, an attempt was undertaken to treat those phenomena as the result of natural diversity of human beings. To support this stance the labelling approach provided a variety of research on deviant subcultures conducted from what may be called ,,ethnographic positions”, which also denounced the negative effects of punitive social control. The final result was growing scepticism towards the agencies of official social control and such ideas as for example radical nonintervention. The next development can be attributed to radical and critical criminology. These trends assume that social conflict is the main feature of social order and try to understand criminal law and the criminal justice system as the result and manifestation of such conflict. This means that criminalisation processes, e.g. lawmaking and law enforcement, should be explained primarily in terms of political and economic power. Certain groups, because of their access to power, are able to enforce their own values and norms against the will of other groups which may not share them. All this means an unequivocally negative evaluation of the mechanism of social control in contemporary societies which are considered oppressive and unjust. An alternative vision of the society is proposed, a society where facts of human diversity are not subject to the power to criminalize. The way such vision should be implemented are very different and may be placed on the broad continuum from the orthodox Marxism-Leninism and belief in ideal socialism to the humanistic utopias of contemporary abolitionists. Such visions are accompanied by very strong opposition to traditional, mainstream criminology which is accused of being totally and uncritically apologetic and subservient towards the state and institutions of power. According to this view, positivist criminology under the disguise of scientific neutrality and objectivity, in fact legitimizes the existing political and moral order and serves the interests of the privileged groups in society. As a result a new attitude of moral and political commitment is proposed. Science, according to these postulates should be definitely partisan. Such an attitude should break the monopoly of positivist criminology in creating social consciousness about crime and deviance and show the broad audience that alternative are possible. In sum, one can say that the main subject of interest for traditional, positivist criminology constituted always the criminal and that the main problem was to root out his criminal propensities. For antinaturalistic criminology the main problem is the system of social control which requires fundamental change. During the seventies another criminological current emerged, known as neoclassicism, which criticized traditional, positivist criminology from quite different angles. This current, which remains primarily an American phenomenon, constitutes, first of all, opposition against the traditional, in the United States, domination of the sociological approach to the crime problem. Representatives of neoclassical criminology are troubled first of all by the above mentioned unclear practical implications of these theories for the criminal justice system. They are, namely, very difficult to translate into the language of policy actions. Moreover, proposed remedies against crime usually remain beyond the reach of traditional measures which the criminal justice system has at its disposal. As a result the turn towards the tradition of the European classical school of criminal law is proposed and enriched by recent achievements of behavioristic psychology and the economic theory of bohaviour. The essence of this approach constitutes the concept of free will and the assumption that criminals are quite normal human individuals making only false decisions. The fact that human behaviour is always guided by the desire to maximize gains and minimize loses makes this behaviour susceptible to external manipulation. The easiest way to influence human decisions is to create a high enough barrier of costs which should eliminate undesired decisions. Criminal law should play a key role in creating such a barrier and preventing criminal behaviour. Moreover, the barrier of costs provided by criminal law constitutes practically the only factor easily accessible to manipulation by any democratic and liberal government. Other ways of influencing crime rates are usually too costly or too difficult to implement. The basic task of criminology is to provide the necessary empirical data on the functioning of criminal law and the criminal justice system, which should be than used to formulate the most effective policies. All three criminological currents discussed above were usually treated as mutually exclusive and competitive paradigms. Today, when the heat of the discussions of the sixties and seventies diminished, there is a good chance to have a less emotional analysis of recent developments in criminology. Probably it will be possible now to come to the conclusion that the emergence during last 150 years of the three distinct paradigms in theoretical criminology may be comprehended not only in terms of consecutive scientific revolutions. Probably it may be also interpreted as the evolutionary process of the cumulation of knowledge about crime. During this process points of view and focuses’ changed as every paradigm considered different aspects of criminal phenomena as being most important and worth of researching. But all three may be considered, at least to a certain extent, complementary ones.

Issues in the application of sociological theory to practice in the control, prevention, and treatment of criminal and delinquent behavior are reviewed. The validity of the distinction between applied and pure sociology in the case of criminology is questioned. Application of theory occurs not only in the formal criminal justice system but also in the informal system of private and public practice directed toward criminal and deviant behavior. Moral and ethical values are necessarily implicated in any policy or practice, as illustrated in a hypothetical program for segregation and insulation of youth for delinquency prevention. An outline, with some examples, of what would be involved in reviewing the application of theory to the control, prevention, and treatment of criminal or delinquent behavior and the implications of practice for theory is given.

Based on the author's personal experience, he proposes consideration of the theoretical choices offered Montreal criminologists over the past 25 years. At first, the sole object of criminology was the etiology and social treatment of crime. At the end of the 60's and for the following ten years or so, there were many expressions of doubt both at the socio-political level as well as concerning the social sciences and criminology as such. The movements for the defence of minority rights and new theoretical orientations led the author to question the production of norms and attribution of the «quatity» of deviant rather than the factors of delinquency. He explains here how from a criminology of acting out he eventually arrived at a criminology of social control. More in-depth analyses of punishment and penal justice led the author to question the very existence of the entire criminal justice system and, like L. Hulsman, to take an abolitionist position. He then describes how he conceives the role of the clinician in this perspective.

Intersectionality is the study of overlapping social identities and related systems of oppression, discrimination and domination. From an intersectional perspective, aspects of a person’s identity, for example race, class and gender are understood to be enmeshed. To understand how systemic injustice operates and is produced, a multi-dimensional framework which captures how forms of oppression intersect and are shaped by one another, is necessary. Although the merits of an intersectional approach in criminology have been widely shown and discussed in US scholarship, within British criminology, there have been few analyses that have implemented an intersectional lens – either explicitly or implicitly. Correspondingly, close examination of the social construction of race within the criminal justice system has been largely absent in British criminology. In the following paper, I suggest that these two developments are co-constitutive – that British criminology’s unwillingness to engage with race has resulted in the reticence towards an intersectional approach and vice versa. This is both problematic and a missed opportunity. At a time when much criminological research convenes around the intersection of race, class, religion and gender, the absence of intersectional approaches and the lack of discussion about the racializing consequences of the criminal justice system serve to stymie meaningful debate and advancement of the field.

Ecocentrism refers to valuing nature for its own sake. This ecophilosophical orientation requires that all social practices incorporate ecological sensitivities and heightened awareness of the intrinsic value of non-human entities. This article explores what ecocentrism means for criminal justice and how the core principles of an ecocentric worldview translate into concrete application. Trends within criminal justice that are broadly supportive or reflective of ecocentrism are summarized. The article also considers the limitations of ecocentrism, particularly in the context of criminal law and in regards to the prosecution of human subjects for environmental offences. A basic premise of the article is that for those interested in eco-justice and green criminology, it is vitally important to describe what an eco-just future might look like, and this includes recognition of and support for already existing ecocentric initiatives evident in some policies and practices across criminal justice institutions.

There is growing recognition in criminology and social work of the importance of Indigenous knowledges and methodologies. Yet to date there have been limited attempts (particularly in criminology and criminal justice social work) to consider the theoretical and practice implications of Indigenous understandings and approaches to these disciplines. Both disciplines have also been slow to recognise the importance of understanding the way in which colonial effects are perpetuated through knowledge control, particularly in the operation of criminal justice systems. Our paper thus begins by examining the historical and institutional factors that have contributed to the continuing subjugation of Indigenous knowledges and methodologies. A discussion of the connections between the hegemony of Western science, the construction of race, and the colonial project follows. While herein Western and Indigenous approaches are conceptualised broadly, the dangers of over-simplifying these categories is also acknowledged. The paper proceeds by examining the distinctive character of each approach through a consideration of their ontological, epistemological, axiological, and methodological differences. Whilst acknowledging the considerable challenges which arise in any attempt to develop connections between these differing worldviews, a pathway forward for understanding both theoretically and methodologically the relationship between Western and Indigenous approaches is proposed.

Abstract A great deal has been written about the changing nature and direction of criminology over the past two decades, including claims that we are moving into a “new penology.” Many of these claims are suggestive rather than authoritative. In contrast to most commentaries on the subject, this article provides longer historical overview and attempts to sketch out how the central structures or “pillars” of the criminal justice system have become weakened and eroded over the last 200 years and how the emergence of body of “new crimes” and their regulation is challenging what might be called the “old criminology.” The emergence of new relations between victims and offenders, criminal justice and social justice, as well as the development of innovative modes of regulation are, it is argued, changing the social and criminological landscape. This raises issues of theory and practice that challenge traditional conceptualisations of crime and punishment.

Society has undergone an entire evolution in the field of criminal penalties, as people want to avoid, or ideally to extinguish, crime and consequent victimization. However, the human nature would hardly allow such utopian society to prevail. Hence, as individuals, we do have codes and bylaws that govern our society. The number of male prisoners is considerably higher in comparison to female prisoners. The aim of the present research is to analyze the sex inequality in the Portuguese criminal justice system, as well as to discuss the following questions: (i) Are men suffering from unjustifiable discrimination by the criminal system? Or, (ii) are there any physical and psychological differences between both sexes? A quantitative and qualitative approach was used. A legal framework was created regarding penalty enforcement, followed by a review of the literature approaching themes of criminology, victimization, and sex inequality. To enrich and empirically support this research, the statistics provided by the Directorate-General for Justice Policy of the Ministry of Portuguese Justice are presented, and a descriptive analysis on the evolution of the number of inmates in Portuguese prisons and juveniles detained in educational centers, between 2010 and 2019 was performed. Implications of this study are is discussed to highlight mediation in criminal cases as a neutral future.

Stability of delinquency phenomenon refers to the continuance of an anti-social behavior. The recognition criteria of this phenomenon can be analyzed based on the dominant social frameworks. Analyzing the personality of delinquents and adapting it to specific techniques of delinquency prevention also promoting the compatibility of delinquents with the environment is a process that requires biopsychosocial studies. Personality record consists of the results of psychological, medical, and social studies and experiments regarding the personality of defendants and delinquents. Personality record plays an important role in criminal justice management. The criminal procedure law has been presented in Articles 203 and 286 of the criminal law of Iran. Personality record is one of the achievements of clinical criminology. Criminal criminology analyzes the corrigibility of delinquents using other related sciences. It also identifies the deviation rate and possible dangers of dangerous individuals. Then it becomes possible to take measures to treat the particular disorders of delinquents. Considering these matters, the recent research aims at answering the question regarding the effect of young individuals’ personality on the stability of delinquency. The main objective of this research is analyzing the role of personality record and techniques of preventing stability of delinquency among young individuals. The results of the recent research indicate that criminal procedure law has emphasized on the role of personality record in identifying penalties. However, according to the criminal procedure law, the process of analyzing the personality of delinquents has been limited to preliminary investigations.

This paper offers critical analytical tools to progress the development of a critical green southern criminology. Using Argentina as a case study, the article develops the notion of criminal selectivity to expose the biased functioning of the criminal justice system. The article explores how crime control is used to the detriment of Indigenous peoples, despite the fact that their protests do not produce significant social harm and are framed within constitutional rights. Conversely, the study exposes how the criminal justice system is not used to prosecute green harms perpetrated by corporations or the unlawful use of force against native peoples by law enforcement agencies, despite the harm of those behaviours on the environment and communities. The article exposes how the Argentinean criminal justice system targets the most vulnerable peoples while failing to provide environmental protections, and is an indicator of the bias within criminal justice systems in the Global South.

The voices of women subject to the criminal justice system are often ignored and unheard. This article considers the effectiveness of photovoice, a form of participatory photography research, as a visual method of enabling and communicating marginalised women’s experiences in criminological research. By utilising the potentially empowering technique of photovoice in two research projects, the narratives of women who inject drugs in Hungary and women who have experienced supervision in England are conveyed through their own participant-generated photographs. These images convey the pains and aspirations of the participants' lives and show how photovoice is a useful method for visual criminological research and exposes the shared problems faced by two vulnerable populations across two countries in Europe.

This paper reports on a process of collaborative reflection undertaken by the authors in their capacity as academic staff delivering employability-focussed modules to undergraduate criminology students on large courses in a post-92 higher education institution (HEI) in the United Kingdom (UK). First, the broad context of higher education policy and the criminal justice sector is explored. The setting of the reflection is outlined, including the format of the modules which form the basis of the reflection and the underpinning methodological approach taken by the authors. Three key thematic areas emerged from the reflexive process: engagement and relationship development with the external sector, student readiness, and the role of academic staff. Each and these will be analysed in the context of extant literature. Finally, the authors make recommendations for stakeholders and a model for embedding employability activity will be provided, aimed at an interdisciplinary audience.

With Discipline and Punish, Michel Foucault offered the social sciences a theory of power, and conceptual tools that radically transformed law reform studies. In criminology, for example, the social constructionist tradition, by drawing on Foucault's notion of power, increasingly inscribed law reform studies in a narrative of the dispersal of social control. Attempts to reform the criminal justice system are understood in terms of the increased penetration and expansion of social control into the whole of the social body ; thus, "nothing works !" In this article, I intend to challenge this conventional wisdom on law reform and the dispersion of social control, by demonstrating that it is founded on an essential-ist notion of power that we cannot attribute to Foucault. In light of his work on sexuality, and governmentality, I will examine how Foucault's productive notion of power is better understood in terms of "mechanisms for life", strategies that both constrain — through objectifying techniques — and enable — through subjectifying techniques — agency. The implications of Foucault's productive notion of power for law reform are examined in terms of methodological considerations.

Ecological disorganization stemming from conspicuous consumption practices is understudied in the social sciences. In this analysis, we study conspicuous consumption and its implications for environmental sociology, ecological footprint analysis, and green criminology. We examine the issue of conspicuous consumption through the study of items that increase the ecological footprint considerably, that is, through the consumption of “luxury commodities.” Specifically, we draw attention to assessing aspects of ecological footprints of super yachts, super homes, luxury vehicles, and private jets. Taken together, the construction and use of these items in the United States alone is likely to create a CO2 footprint that exceeds those from entire nations. These results are not necessarily surprising but suggest that excessive consumption practices of the wealthy may need to be reinterpreted as criminal when they disrupt the normal regeneration and reproduction of ecosystems by generating excessive ecological disorganization.

Criminology and criminal-psychology are sciences dealing mostly with the personality of the criminals as well as the interconnections of crime and deviance. The other player of the crimes – the victim - has recently come into focus posing the question why and how somebody is becoming a victim, and what effect can the victim have when the crime is being committed. The first international publications appeared at the beginning of the third millennium on so-called victims who are convinced to suffer from material, moral or other damages and, accordingly, who would pursue “justice” at any rate. They often appeal against decisions. Considering these facts the procedures are rather thorough and circumspect. A significant part of the law-enforcement staff is heavily involved for long periods. On the other side there is the person considered criminal being actually the real victim. These people are getting alienated from the society because of their reckoned deeds and, because of the distorting influence of the media they are condemned morally. The present study describes the syndromes of fake-victim, their occurrence as well as psychiatric considerations, social appearance and impact. Authors are drawing attention to the medical-legal existence of the problem as well as its existence. Orv. Hetil., 2011, 152, 559–568..

The governance of crime and security has undergone major transformations in recent decades. Several important shifts in the rationale and logic of crime control have led to a growth in regulatory practices and an expansion of regulatory provisions. As a result, the scope of actors who regulate behaviors have widened as have the types of tools to facilitate the governance of crime and security also expanded. We argue that the expansion of the boundaries of crime control is facilitated through a wide variety of criminal justice and non-criminal-justice regulatory tools to tackle both social problems and crime. We suggest that the time has come for criminologists to look beyond criminology’s traditional narrow focus on criminal law and the criminal justice apparatus utilized for crime control and engage in the broader discourse of regulation and governance of crime and security.

Situational crime prevention theory suggests the need for innovative, non-criminal-justice polices to control crime, but that approach has not been widely employed by criminologists addressing the control of environmental crime. Numerous examples of innovative environmental social control practices can be found outside of the criminological literature; but within criminology, such studies have most often been undertaken by conservation criminologists, while green criminologists have undertaken empirical studies illustrating the ineffectiveness of traditional, punitive responses to environmental crime. Here, we briefly review the use of situational crime prevention theory and research by conservation criminologists and provide examples of environmental social control policies used by various nations that are consistent with situational crime prevention arguments. We also note that research and theory in other disciplines suggest that crime is produced by larger structural economic forces, indicating that situational crime prevention alone is likely not sufficient to control environmental crime.

The versatility/specialization debate in criminology has important theoretical, research, and juvenile/criminal justice ramifications. Although offenders are mostly versatile, there is important evidence of specialization, but much of this evidence is derived from highly technical statistical approaches. Drawing on data from a cohort of serious delinquents committed to the California Youth Authority, logistic regression models revealed robust evidence for criminal specialization net the effects of behavioral and demographic controls. Prior homicide was associated with a 1,467% increased likelihood of being currently adjudicated for a homicide offense. Similar prior–current involvement in robbery (294% increased likelihood), aggravated assault (200%), burglary (148%), and drug sales (736%) was found. Logistic regression with odds ratios provides intuitive, valuable estimates of specialization in offending whereby prior involvement in a specific form of delinquency dramatically increases the likelihood of current involvement in the same form of crime.

Real-time crime hot spot forecasting presents challenges to policing. There is a high volume of hot spot misclassifications and a lack of theoretical support for forecasting algorithms, especially in disciplines outside the fields of criminology and criminal justice. Transparency is particularly important as most hot spot forecasting models do not provide their underlying mechanisms. To address these challenges, we operationalize two different theories in our algorithm to forecast crime hot spots over Portland and Cincinnati. First, we use a population heterogeneity framework to find places that are consistent hot spots. Second, we use a state dependence model of the number of crimes in the time periods prior to the predicted month. This algorithm is implemented in Excel, making it extremely simple to apply and completely transparent. Our forecasting models show high accuracy and high efficiency in hot spot forecasting in both Portland and Cincinnati context. We suggest previously developed hot spot forecasting models need to be reconsidered.

Introduction: the article considers the goals of punishment, their essence, evolution, and modern legal and doctrinal interpretation; these issues are among fundamental problems of penitentiary science. Aim: to study the legal nature, social conditionality, and achievability of the goals of punishment so as to identify their compliance with the modern criminal policy of Russia. Methods: the research is based on a dialectical approach to the study of social processes and phenomena. We use methods such as analysis, synthesis, comparative legal, retrospective, formal legal, logical, comparative methods; all of them are commonly used by the sciences of criminal law and criminology. We also apply private scientific methods such as the legal-dogmatic method and the method of interpretation of legal norms. Results: we conclude that the time has come to change the conceptual foundations on which the institution of the goals of punishment is based. We believe it is necessary to prevent crimes by combining criminal responsibility with education and prevention. The level of recidivism, the empirical non-verifiability of reformation, and the scientific inconsistency of the phrase “restoration of social justice” (how can we restore what should be an unshakable axiological guideline?) indicate that Russian penology should radically revise the existing punitive paradigm. The paper substantiates the thesis that no goal of punishment in the current form is fully achievable. It is known that general prevention is based on fear. However, according to criminological studies, those who are inclined to commit crimes, as a rule, are not afraid of punishment (their contempt for punishment, law and society as a whole is obviously cultivated by the criminal subculture). And law-abiding people do not commit crimes because of their inner beliefs, upbringing and culture. Thus, general prevention as a goal is ineffective. Reformation and special prevention are too formalized and do not assume scientifically verifiable (at least, legally enacted) criteria for their achieving, that is, the state of reformation itself. With regard to the restoration of social justice, this formulation seems absurd due to a misunderstanding of justice as such. In our opinion, it is an objectively established axiological system, which essentially cannot be violated by a crime, but represents a standard and a measure of evaluation. It is for a reason that it is legally defined as a requirement for a court sentence in the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation. The goal of punishment ultimately consists in the punishment itself and in the implementation of its functions (punishment, retribution, public condemnation of the crime, protection of society from criminal encroachments). Conclusions: the present research has substantiated the necessity to carry out a legislative reform of the concept of the goals of punishment. We find this problem quite relevant, because the effectiveness of judicial and penal enforcement activities and the fate of meaningless financial costs for achieving unattainable goals depend on finding a solution to it. Keywords: punishment; goal; efficiency; restoration of social justice; crime prevention; general and special prevention; reformation of convicted persons; criminal policy; conceptual foundations

Over the past two decades, rates of violence in the workplace have grown significantly. Such growth has been more prevalent in some fields than others, however. Research shows that rates of violence against healthcare workers are continuously among the highest of any career field. Within the healthcare field, the overwhelming majority of victims of workplace violence are hospital employees, with those working in emergency departments (EDs) experiencing the lion’s share of violent victimization. Though this fact is well-known by medical researchers and practitioners, it has received relatively little attention from criminal justice researchers or practitioners. Unfortunately, this oversight has severely limited the use of effective crime prevention techniques in hospital EDs. The goal of this analysis is to utilize techniques of situational crime prevention to develop an effective and easily applicable crime prevention strategy for hospital EDs.

Abstract SYNTHESIS OF THE FIRST INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM FOR RESEARCH IN COMPARATIVE CRIMINOLOGY Introduction At the beginning of the development of the social sciences there was a considerable vogue for comparative research. A long period of empirical studies and almost total preoccupation with methodological problems followed. Once again, however, psychology, political science, sociology, and above all anthropology, have taken up the thread of this tradition, and the bibliography in these fields is becoming ever more abundant. The study of deviance, of various manifestations of criminality, and of social reaction against crime are, however, noticeably missing in the picture, even though there is nothing in the nature of criminology which precludes the development of comparative research. To many research workers in criminology, the time seemed ripe to take up the comparative tradition once again. Two imperatives were considered : the generalization of norms of deviance which are tied to the standard of living set by industrial civilization, thus putting the problem of criminality in a global light ; and, second, the development and standardization of methods of studying these phenomena, drawing on the experience of allied disciplines. The response of the participants in this Symposium and the results of their discussions were not unexpected. A consensus was arrived as to the problems it was thought important to study, and agreement was reached about the strategies of research to be undertaken. Priorities, however, were not established since too much depends on the availability of research teams, funds, etc. But the broad, overall look at the main problems in comparative criminology will, hopefully, open a new chapter in the history of crimino-logical research and in our continuing search for knowledge of man and society. The brief resume which follows should give the reader an idea of the extent of the problems tackled. The detailed proceedings of the Symposium will be published at a later date, in mimeographed form. Sectors of research proposed In a sense, this Symposium was prepared by all the participants. The organizers had requested that each person invited prepare a memorandum setting out the problems in comparative criminology which he considered to be most important. The compilation of their replies, reported to the plenary session at the opening of the Symposium, produced the following results : Summary of suggestions for research activities Note : In all that follows, it should be understood that all of these topics should be studied in a cross-cultural or international context. 1) Definitions and concepts : a) Social vs legal concept of deviance ; b) Distinction between political and criminal crimes ; c) The law : a moral imperative or a simple norm ; d) The concepts used in penal law : how adequate ? e.g. personality of criminal ; e) Who are the sinners in different cultures and at different times. 2) Procedures : a) Working concepts of criminal law and procedure ; b) Differentiating between factors relating to the liability-finding process and the sentencing process ; c) Behavioural manifestations of the administration of criminal justice ; d) Judicial decisions as related to the personality of the judges and of the accused ; e) Sentencing in the cross-national context (2 proposals) ; f) In developing countries, the gap between development of the legal apparatus and social behaviour ; g) Determination of liability ; h) The problem of definition and handling of dangerous offenders ; i) Decision-making by the sentencing judges, etc. (2 proposals) ; ;) Medical vs penal committals ; k) Law-enforcement, policing. 3) Personnel : a) Professionalization in career patterns ; b) Criteria for personnel selection ; c) Greater use of female personnel. 4) Causation. Situations related to criminality : a) How international relations and other external factors affect crime ; 6) Hierarchy of causes of crime ; c) Migrants. Minorities in general ; d) Relation to socio-economic development in different countries ; e) A biological approach to criminal subcultures, constitutional types, twin studies, etc. ; f) Cultural and social approach : norms of moral judgment, ideals presented to the young, etc. ; g) Effect of social change : crime in developing countries, etc. (6 proposals) ; h) Effects of mass media, rapid dissemination of patterns of deviant behaviour (2 proposals). 5) Varieties of crime and criminals : a) Traffic in drugs ; b) Prison riots ; c) Violence particularly in youth (7 proposals) ; d) Dangerousness ; e) Relation to the rights of man (including rights of deviants); f) Female crime (2 proposals) ; g) Prostitution ; i) The mentally ill offender ; ;) Cultural variations in types of crime ; k) Organized crime ; /) Use of firearms ; m) Gambling ; n) Victims and victimology. 6) Treatment : evaluation : a) Social re-adaptation of offenders ; b) Statistical research on corrections, with possible computerization of data ; c) Comparisons between prisons and other closed environments ; d) Extra-legal consequences of deprivation of liberty ; e) Rehabilitation in developing countries ; f ) Criteria for evaluation of programs of correction ; g) Biochemical treatment (2 proposals) ; i) Differential treatment of different types of offense. Evaluation ; /) Prisons as agencies of treatment ; k) Effects of different degrees of restriction of liberty ; /) Environments of correctional institutions ; m) Study of prison societies ; n) Crime as related to the total social system. 7) Research methodology : a) Publication of what is known regarding methodology ; b) Methods of research ; c) Culturally-comparable vs culturally-contrasting situations ; d) Development of a new clearer terminology to facilitate communication ; e) Actual social validity of the penal law. 8) Statistics : epidemiology : a) Need for comparable international statistics ; standardized criteria (3 proposals) ; b) Difficulties. Criminologists must collect the data themselves. 9) Training of research workers : Recruiting and training of « com-paratists ». 10) Machinery : Committee of co-ordination. Discussions The discussions at the Symposium were based on these suggestions, the main concentration falling on problems of manifestations of violence in the world today, the phenomenon of student contestation, and on human rights and the corresponding responsibilities attached thereto. Although the participants did not come to definite conclusions as to the respective merits of the problems submitted for consideration, they did discuss the conditions under which comparative studies of these problems should be approached, the techniques appropriate to obtaining valid results, and the limitations on this type or work. Four workshops were established and studied the various problems. The first tackled the problems of the definition of the criteria of « danger » represented by different type of criminals ; the problem of discovering whether the value system which underlies the Human Rights Declaration corresponds to the value system of today's youth; the problem of the treatment of criminals ; of female criminality ; and, finally, of violence in the form of individual and group manifestations. The second workshop devoted its main consideration to the revolt of youth and to organized crime, also proposing that an international instrument bank of documentation and information be established. The third workshop considered problems of theory : how the police and the public view the criminal ; the opportunity of making trans-cultural comparisons on such subjects as arrest, prison, etc. ; and the role of the media of information in the construction of value systems. The fourth workshop blazed a trail in the matter of methodology appropriate to research in comparative criminology. The period of discussions which followed the report of the four workshops gave rise to a confrontation between two schools of thought within the group of specialists. The question arose as to whether the problem of student contestation falls within the scope of the science of criminology. Several experts expressed the opinion that criminologists ought not to concern themselves with a question which really belongs in the realm of political science. On the other hand, the majority of the participants appeared to feel that the phenomenon of student contestation did indeed belong in the framework of criminological research. One of the experts in particular took it upon himself to be the spokesman of this school of thought. There are those, he said, who feel that criminology should confine itself and its research to known criminality, to hold-ups, rape, etc. However, one should not forget that penal law rests on political foundations, the legality of power, a certain moral consensus of the population. Today, it is exactly this « legitimate » authority that is being contested. Is it not to be expected, therefore, that criminology should show interest in all sociological phenomena which have legal and criminal implications ? Contestation and violence have consequences for the political foundations of penal law, and therefore are fit subjects for the research of the criminologist. International Centre {or Comparative Criminology The First International Symposium for Research in Comparative Criminology situated itself and its discussions within the framework and in the perspectives opened by the founding of the International Centre for Comparative Criminology. The Centre is sponsored jointly by the University of Montreal and the International Society for Criminology, with headquarters at the University of Montreal. As one of the participants emphasized, criminologists need a place to retreat from the daily struggle, to meditate, to seek out and propose instruments of research valid for the study of problems common to several societies. Viewing the facts as scientists, we are looking for operational concepts. Theoreticians and research workers will rough out the material and, hopefully, this will inspire conferences and symposiums of practitioners, jurists, sociologists, penologists, and other specialists. Above all, it will give common access to international experience, something which is lacking at present both at the level of documentation and of action. A bank of instruments of method- ology in the field of comparative criminology does not exist at the present time. The Centre will undertake to compile and analyse research methods used in scientific surveys, and it will establish such an instrument bank. It will also gather and analyse information pertaining to legislative reforms now in progress or being contemplated in the field of criminal justice. Through the use of computers, the Centre will be able to put these two projects into effect and make the results easily accessible to research workers, and to all those concerned in this field. The participants at the Symposium were given a view of the extent of the problems envisaged for research by the future Centre. It is hoped that this initiative will be of concrete use to research workers, private organizations, public services and governments at many levels, and in many countries.

The article examines the genesis of criminal protection of the rights of minors in Ukraine. It is pointed out that for a long time most issues were decided by the church. Given that children were not yet considered full members of society, a person who committed a criminal offense against them was subject to ecclesiastical punishment, not criminal. That is, in the days of Kievan Rus, the legislator already recognized minors as full-fledged subjects of social relations, and also allowed them to be considered victims of socially dangerous acts, but full protection of rights and freedoms was not provided. Attention is drawn to the fact that the first years of the twentieth century can be called stagnant for juvenile justice. The attention of the legislator regularly changed depending on the direction of state policy development. Revolutions, wars, the search for new ways to build the country by leaders with a partially totalitarian nature of government led to the establishment of a single value - property, the interests of the state in the representation of its ruling elite. That is why the attitude towards juvenile victims has changed regularly. It is concluded that the XXI century has defined man, his rights and freedoms as the highest value, which should be protected, first of all, from those acts that have increased social danger. Criminal law, evolving over the centuries, due to its multicomponent nature has become the basis for the development of criminology, which distinguished itself from victimology. This thesis suggests that criminal law and, consequently, criminal law, gives impetus to the development of auxiliary sciences necessary for the successful implementation of its tasks: prevention (both deterrence of offenders and deterrence of victims of victim behavior) and punishment in order to re-educate the offender and protect the state and society in the person of the victim from subsequent possible socially dangerous encroachments). Thus, to date, criminal law is not only "about and for" the criminal offender, but also for the victim.

Despite the global and pervasive reality of human mobility, many western nations are framing migration as a security risk requiring a criminal justice response. Drawing on developments in the criminology of mobility, the social construction of difference, critical citizenship studies, and social movement theory, we develop an alternative theoretical framing of migration. We examine ways that the contemporary formation of citizenship and irregularity do bordering via the multiplication of citizenship categories that operate relationally and performatively to border subjectivities and construct differences. Drawing on illustrative examples from the United States and Spain, we then analyze the potential of local citizenship performances to undo borders and bridge the divide between irregularity and citizenship, with national and global implications for substantive and juridical rights. Reframing migration as a social movement and conceptualizing citizenship as a performance that reflects political struggle acknowledges the power of ordinary people to challenge borders from below.

This paper explores the lives of convict women transported to Van Diemen’s Land (Tasmania) in the 1800’s, with the aim to better understand the process of desistance and reintegration for contemporary female offenders. Through an analysis of the penal systems which operated during the era of transportation, this research draws on historiography to highlight the importance of understanding the past in order to inform the future. This critical reflection on the history-criminology nexus reveals the impact that societal attitudes and social context have on criminal justice practice and policy, and ultimately an ex-offender’s chances of becoming a valued member of their community. Select transcripts of the lives of 1800’s convicts are used to humanise the statistics; statistics which suggest shared experiences of trauma across both cohorts of women despite 175 years of separation between them.

Abstract The centennial of Social Forces provides an opportunity to examine change and stability in crime research in one of sociology’s oldest journals. Since the first issue of Social Forces in 1922, crime and punishment have transitioned from marginal topics subsumed under the umbrella of deviance studies to a central research area. This essay traces the intellectual development of crime research as captured in Social Forces’ pages and contrasts it with the growing independence of criminology as an academic field. To do so, I employ two analyses. First, I examine the topical classifications provided by Moody, Edelmann and Light (2022). Second, I expand upon these classifications by using structural topic models (STM) to detect clusters of crime research activity in Social Forces’ abstracts and group them into “eras” of crime research. The analysis reveals a circular development of crime research in Social Forces that reflects broader trends in the sociology of crime. 1 Themes of power, stratification, and punishment oriented early studies on crime. Research attention focused on inequality within the justice system, the effects of juvenile justice contact on criminal labeling and recidivism, and inequalities resulting from justice system contact. However, as crime rates rose throughout the Western world, Social Forces articles sought to explain the causes of crime and evaluate policies designed to cull the crime wave. In recent decades, persistent crime declines combined with growing concern with an oversized prison system have refocused attention on incarceration and its collateral consequences, especially for adolescent well-being and racial and class inequalities. In this way, crime research in Social Forces has returned to core themes of power and stratification that motivated early work in the sociology of crime. It has also distanced itself from individual etiology and policy studies that once dominated the journal’s pages and that continue to appear in specialist outlets.