No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the author.
Against Marginality: Arguments for a Public Criminology
Abstract
Despite its accumulated theoretical and empirical heft, the discipline of criminology has had distressingly little impact on the course of public policy toward crime and criminal justice. This article addresses the sources of that troubling marginality, with special emphasis on the powerful disincentives to greater public impact that operate within the discipline itself and the research universities that mainly house it—including the pressure to publish ever more narrow research in peer-reviewed journals at the expense of efforts at synthesis and dissemination that could serve to educate a broader public. Achieving a greater voice in the world outside the discipline will require a concerted move toward a more explicitly public criminology, and seeing to it that the work of such a criminology is more reliably supported and rewarded within the universities and the profession as a whole.
... Recently, scholars have highlighted how the lack of influence of criminologists within policy-making spheres has contributed to such oppression (Uggen & Inderbitzen, 2010). There is a chasm between the rehabilitative approaches advocated by most criminologists and the punitive reality of many Western criminal justice systems (Currie, 2007), including those in the UK. The resultant rise of 'mass imprisonment' (Garland, 2001) has occupied much criminological attention, which has meant the attendant 'mass supervision' (McNeill, 2019) of those subject to 'community sanctions and measures' (CSM) has been relatively underexplored. ...
... And yet, while academic expertise has been 'valued and sought' (Tonry & Green, 2003: 499) regarding the everyday administration of criminal justice in England and Wales, divergence between the purposes of crime-control idealised by most criminologists and the realities of mass imprisonment point, in recent decades, to the increasingly marginal status of criminology (Currie, 2007). Crepault (2017) highlights both internal and external explanations for the ostracisation of criminologists at a policy level. ...
... Internally, the distance between criminologists and policymakers has been exacerbated by the confinement of academic debate to small circles hidden behind the paywalls of journals. Neoliberal universities, particularly those with a research focus, privilege this 'original' research over other forms of engagement (Currie, 2007). A 'hierarchy of credibility' (Morgan, 1999: 330) affords greater epistemic value to 'academic criminology' at the expense of the 'ordinary' knowledge possessed by those with lived experience of the criminal justice system (Dearey et al., 2011). ...
As a subject of study in higher education, criminology has never been more popular; and yet, criminologists occupy an increasingly marginal position within political and media spheres. This marginalisation has arguably been to the detriment of those with lived experience of the criminal justice system, an oppressed class whose number has grown exponentially after several decades of a ‘tough on crime’ consensus on criminality. While much research focuses upon the impacts on imprisonment, an emergent literature has highlighted how individuals experience community sanctions and measures (CSM). This article utilises Paulo Freire's Pedagogy of the Oppressed to accentuate the transformative potential of teaching and learning practises within criminology, and CSM in particular. It applies his writings to the literature on ‘public criminology’, a perspective that aims to render the field more transparent, applied, evidence-based, empowering, and committed to social justice. Drawing from personal reflections as an ‘academic criminologist’ engaged in teaching and research on CSM, the article advocates for a ‘pedagogy of public criminology’ that empowers students, as future criminal justice professionals, with the skills to be public-facing, active, and critical subjects who can make a difference in the lives of individuals subject to CSM.
... 1-2) recognised the existence of criminology, criminal justice, victimology and crime science as evidence of a fragmented discipline. Currie (2007) goes as far as to state that quantitative criminology, closely aligned with experimental criminology, life course criminology and more recently evidence-based policing has no place in the discipline (Currie, 2007). A few years earlier, Walters (2003) claimed that more applied and translational criminology approaches are neither critical nor reflexive, which most people who have worked in the field would reject as false, further suggesting critical criminology has been sidelined by such approaches. ...
... 1-2) recognised the existence of criminology, criminal justice, victimology and crime science as evidence of a fragmented discipline. Currie (2007) goes as far as to state that quantitative criminology, closely aligned with experimental criminology, life course criminology and more recently evidence-based policing has no place in the discipline (Currie, 2007). A few years earlier, Walters (2003) claimed that more applied and translational criminology approaches are neither critical nor reflexive, which most people who have worked in the field would reject as false, further suggesting critical criminology has been sidelined by such approaches. ...
Purpose
Criminology both as a field of study and as a practice draws on a broad range of disciplines from the social, behavioural, human, natural and medical sciences. However, over recent times, the natural and medical sciences have been dismissed, overlooked and even ridiculed, largely since the rise of critical criminology and related contemporary conflict and social harm approaches from the 1960s onwards. This has led to a chasm emerging between the study of criminology and the practice of criminology such as within a policing context. This paper aims to provide a review of an emerging forensic biological method, that of neuroscience, within a criminological context, to illustrate the importance of criminology embracing and reawakening its natural and medical science roots.
Design/methodology/approach
The paper draws on a conceptual design to realign criminology with the full range of disciplines used to inform its theory and application.
Findings
Through illustrating the role of forensic neuroscience, the paper reawakens the scientific method and inquiry of criminology reflecting the importance of the discipline being, and remaining, multi- and trans-disciplinary in nature. The paper, while reflecting on the limitations of scientific method and inquiry, outlines the strengths this approach to criminology engenders, promoting and delivering a scientific-based research agenda that aims to support industry partners in the prevention, disruption and reduction of crime, disorder and threats to public security.
Practical implications
Firstly, it is important for criminology as a field of study to (re)engage with its scientific method and inquiry. Secondly, criminology, by engaging in robust scientific method and inquiry, has a significant contribution to make to professional practice and the work of industry professionals. Thirdly, while there are limitations to such scientific method and inquiry, it should not lead to this component of criminology being discarded. Fourthly, there is a need for contemporary research in the area of scientific method and inquiry and its application to criminological contexts, including that of police practice. Finally, by engaging in scientific method and inquiry that is evidence based, a chasm between the field of study and the practice associated with criminology can be addressed.
Originality/value
This paper addresses the gap between criminology as a field of study and as a practice by reengaging with scientific method and inquiry, illustrating the need and value of criminology being and remaining multi- and trans-disciplinary, ensuring professions underpinned by criminology are supported in their practice.
... CCJ mirrors academia more generally. Othered scholars or those who express othered views are many times relegated to publishing in "niche" academic journals with lower impact factors (Potter et al., 2011), granted only limited funding opportunities (Currie, 2007), or forced to contort their research agendas to be considered for prized tenured positions (Fenelon, 2003). Othered scholars can bring innovation and challenge the status quo in ways that evolve CCJ and develop theory and methodology hitherto unknown (e.g., intersectionality; Crenshaw, 2017). ...
... Understood this way, one sees the intimate relationship between well-established criminological paradigms that seek "application of their research to criminal justice policy and practice" (i.e., translational criminology; Blomberg et al., 2022Blomberg et al., , p. 1102 and "to produce and disseminate knowledge in closer contact with the individuals, communities, and institutions that are the focus of its study" (i.e., public criminology; Uggen & Indergitzin, 2010, p. 726). Other variants exist (e.g., newsmaking criminology; Barak, 2007), though each emphasizes disseminating research beyond academic circles using Op-Eds, blogs, social media, public lectures and interviews, government hearings, press releases, partnership with agencies and/or community-based organizations, trainings or workshops, participatory action research, etcetera (Currie, 2007;Rock, 2013). Institutions must value work that supports policy and practice and should create criteria for evaluating public scholarship and community engagement for tenure. ...
We offer a vision of “inclusive criminology,” integrating criminological inquiry into a cohesive whole premised on societies’ rights to valid and complete knowledge and introduced in “In Their Experience: A Review of Racial and Sexual Minority Experience in Academe and Proposals for Building an Inclusive Criminology,” published in Race & Justice (Blount-Hill et al., 2022). In this essay, we further develop the concept and provide recommendations for CCJ to enhance it
... Zonder uitputtend te zijn in de opsomming van al deze studies, kan verwezen worden naar het onderzoek van de American Bar Association. Deze studie stelde vast dat naarmate het inkomen daalde de kans dat mensen die geconfronteerd werden met juridische problemen, geen juridische initiatieven namen of in beperkte mate justitiële hulp zochten (Cantril, 1994 (Currie, 2007) waar als conclusie gold dat laaggeschoolden minder succesvol waren in het oplossen van hun problemen, zij gaven vlugger op of zij bereikten geen oplossing. ...
... Deze criminologie informeert niet enkel overheden, maar is ook gericht tot het publiek. Er is nood aan ‚an assertive public criminology‛ (Currie 2007), een criminologie die haar wetenschappelijke data en vragen inbrengt in het openbare debat over criminaliteit en veiligheidsbeleid, ook als het daarbij ingaat tegen de politieke en populistische mainstream. Het moet de kwaliteit van het democratische debat helpen optillen boven het niveau van het populistisch repressieve discours. ...
... However, this approach does not always resonate with practitioners who tend to value research that is discussed in a straightforward manner and provides meaningful and practical implications (Bolton & Stolcis, 2003). Failing to address the "so what" question when presenting research findings can limit their impact as audiences may fail to appreciate the value of the results (Currie, 2007). ...
... Junior faculty might feel quite apprehensive at undertaking work that can impact practice, but may dampen their efforts toward obtaining tenure. They might feel the pressure to publish in journals that have a high impact factor rather than practitioner bulletins that are routinely read and valued by individuals working in the field (Austin, 2003;Currie, 2007;Pesta et al., 2019). ...
The importance of researcher-practitioner collaborations is at the core of Edward J. Latessa’s work. He has been at the forefront of this domain by creating and disseminating evidence-based tools and practices throughout his career. His work with agencies has undoubtedly changed the face of correctional practices in America and throughout the world. The current essay outlines the work that Ed did to propagate the “what works” movement by doing translational criminology work, and the lessons learned from him on the road.
... Findings from this study should motivate researchers to promote their scholarship beyond paywalls that often accompany peer-reviewed journals. The field of criminology and its academic institutions have struggled to effectively disseminate and reward research with practitioners and the public to perpetuate evidence-based policies and practices (Austin, 2003;Currie, 2007). Still, policymakers and criminal justice administrators should be consistently apprised of the latest scholarly evidence and base policies and practices on evidence-based approaches (Lum & Koper, 2015). ...
Research summary
This study investigates the impact of scientific research findings on public views of policing topics. Specifically, we conducted an original survey experiment to determine whether research information treatments influence respondents’ views on the effectiveness of the police in reducing crime, defunding and refunding police budgets, and use of body‐worn cameras. Our results indicated that presenting confirmatory research information had a significant positive impact on perceptions of police effectiveness in reducing crime and use of body‐worn cameras compared to comparison groups. Conversely, presenting “negative” research information had a significant negative effect on these perceptions. Interestingly, neither positive nor negative research information treatments related to defunding versus refunding the police had a statistically significant impact on respondents compared to comparison groups, suggesting that research findings have limited effects on more ideologically complex policing topics.
Policy implications
Scientific research can effectively shape public perceptions of police effectiveness in reducing crime and the use of body‐worn cameras, but it has limited effects on politically charged issues, such as defunding and refunding the police. To enhance the impact of evidence‐based policing, we suggest that police administrators collaborate with researchers to evaluate new policies and disseminate these findings widely to the public. Additionally, researchers should strive to make their research more accessible to the general public, beyond academic journals, scientific conferences, and paywalls. We recommend using open‐access platforms, social media, and other media outlets to disseminate unbiased, evidence‐based research on policing that is digestible to the public.
... She attributed this to multiple factors but highlighted that universities with prominent criminology programs continue to judge and reward faculty largely upon research productivity rather than applied research and policy interests. This is similar to discussions highlighted above by other prominent members of the sociological and criminological communities (e.g., Burawoy 2005, Currie 2007, Laub & Frisch 2016, Uggen & Inderbitzin 2010 but accords particular weight to the disjuncture between the type of research that influences criminal justice policy and practice and the type of research that we value as an academic discipline given criminology's applied origins and the pressing nature of the crime problem (see also Petersilia 2008). Importantly, as Petersilia notes, not all criminologists want to pursue applied research, but for those who do, the reward structure should be modified to recognize these practical and policy-related contributions. ...
The relevance of criminology to matters of public policy has been hotly debated throughout the history of the discipline. Yet time and again, we have borne witness to the consequences of harmful criminal justice practices that do little to reduce crime or improve the lives of our most vulnerable populations. Given the urgent need for evidence-informed responses to the problems that face our society, we argue here that criminologists can and should have a voice in the process. Accordingly, this review describes challenges and prospects for evidence-informed policymaking on matters of crime and justice. In terms of challenges, we review discourse on what constitutes evidence, issues with providing guidance under conditions of causal uncertainty, and practical constraints on evidence-informed policymaking. For prospects, we consider the important roles of institutional support, graduate training, and multiple translational strategies for the evidence-informed movement. Finally, we end with several considerations for advancing translational criminology through expanded promotion and tenure criteria, curricula revision, and prioritizing the organization of knowledge. More broadly, our goals are to stimulate disciplinary thinking regarding the ways in which criminology may play a more meaningful role in effectively confronting the ongoing challenges of crime in society.
Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Criminology, Volume 7 is January 2024. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.
... Newsmaking criminology is a way of trying to make the discipline relevant outside of university settings (Barak, 2007). Newsmaking criminologists are one subset of public criminologists who engage in public debate, and the tactics they use to conduct research as well as communicate their findings tend to be more quarrelsome and investigative than conventional approaches to academic research (Currie, 2007). ...
... Wood et al. (2022) add that many contemporary political-economic difficulties and tensions shape public criminological practice and have historical resonances, including disputes on free speech. However, while public criminology's preoccupation with ethics, evidence, and impact within and beyond the discipline has been interpreted as navel-gazing, practitioners such as criminal lawyers, as well as pundits including "shock-jocks", "conspiracy theorists", and "aggressive spin doctors", fill the void (Currie, 2007). ...
This investigation assumes that the media can reduce or spread criminal activities and tendencies based on how the concerned parties apply the policies and community standards that guide these platforms’ use. In total, 254 materials were gathered across several search systems between October 2021 and September 2022. Qualitative data were used from the selected materials to synthesise and summarise the content on the examined 21st-century events and media’s influence on crime.
It is not possible to reject the premise that the media influences opinions on crime and the legal system. Nevertheless, the data reveals that no causal media effect can be directly established. However, the same data uncovers how media portrays an activity affects how people perceive it. Advances in technology, media, and criminology may have affected the analysis of records, including the time and quality of resources.
More accurate and fair media coverage of crime would lead to a more informed and aware population. On the other hand, media houses that promote and reward good behaviour should be applauded. These two steps ensure the media cannot be ignored when assessing crime and how the public perceives it, as it can encourage crime and shift perceptions. Therefore, further research, stricter laws and policies, and community education on crime prevention and media screening are needed. The fact that unfavourable media coverage of crime can ruin a business, either directly or indirectly (consumer behaviour changes due to crime), makes this paper of utmost importance for businessmen, politicians, and local agencies.
... At this point, it is essential to remark that the youth community's high participation, interest, and commitment indicate the high social demand for public health interventions facing the DFSA phenomenon in the youth nightlife context. In this work line, this study adds to the set of experiences according to forensic intelligence can influence policy decisions and social actions on diverse phenomena, inspire political agendas, reshape professional practices, support project allocations, and educate people [15,65,66]. On the other hand, the second reason for opening a new perspective for forensic intelligence emerges from expanding, even more, the conception of forensic intelligence as a continuum informing law enforcement investigations, military intelligence, and prosecution in the criminal justice system [67]. ...
This work explores the potentially broader contribution of forensic science to preventive public health through the proactive view promoted by forensic intelligence. For that purpose, a new working framework is applied as a strategic tool that channelizes forensic intelligence in a more understandable and didactic way for decision-makers, guiding preventive crime processes. Concretely, the implementation of this operational framework focuses on preventing drug-facilitated sexual assaults in the nightlife context. Through a two-stage research scheme, the working framework is used as a study tool for understanding this violent phenomenon and as a strategic thinking and action platform for overcoming it. Forensic intelligence-guided actions significantly enhanced institutional and direct support facing this specific form of sexual violence. Awareness messages targeting potential assailants, witnesses, and victims reached more than half a thousand students from the university and pre-university education through a preventive intervention within the educational system. Moreover, the inter-professional dialogue between forensic science and other health, security, and education disciplines shows the broader proactive role of forensic science beyond the traditional retroactive view limited to courtrooms and intelligence-led policing. This study demonstrates as forensic intelligence becomes applicable for civilians, who participate as decision-makers in intelligence-led preventive processes, anticipating the need for intervention by police and judicial authorities.
... largely from talk radio, television, or politicians, leading Currie (2007) to contend: "we have to educate…outside the classroom" (p. 179). ...
... Desde los inicios de la década de 2000 se ha venido construyendo un debate en el mundo de lengua inglesa en torno a la "criminología pública" (Carrabine, Lee y South, 2000;Chancer y McLaughlin, 2007;Currie, 2007;Uggen y Inderbitzen, 2010;Clear, 2010;Matthews, 2016), que a su vez se hace eco de una discusión más general en las ciencias sociales (Sparks y Loader, 2011a, pp. 38-56). ...
En este trabajo se abordan los modos de compromiso público de los investigadores en el ámbito de la criminología, entendida como un campo de estudios complejo y polivalente, que se encuentra atravesado por diversas tradiciones teóricas y metodológicas que se refieren a un conjunto amplio de problemas de investigación. Las indagaciones producidas en los últimos 20 años sobre este problema han sido construidas sobre un puñado de jurisdicciones del Norte Global. Dialogando críticamente con dicha producción intelectual, este artículo busca presentar una exploración sobre un contexto específico del Sur Global, el caso de Argentina. Se argumenta que la radicación de una buena parte de este campo de estudios en el mundo académico de las Facultades de Derecho en este escenario específico – aunque tal vez esto resulte similar en otros contextos latinoamericanos – trae aparejado ciertos modos de compromiso público de sus participantes que se moldean en relación con los de la figura históricamente precedente, y simultáneamente activa, del penalista. Se identifican estos modos encontrando puntos de contacto con algunos delimitados en los escenarios del mundo de lengua inglesa por Sparks y Loader en una serie de textos recientes, pero se destaca un tipo peculiar de involucramiento que se define como el observador crítico pero realista y reformista. Se definen sus caracteristicas y se ejemplifica con ciertos protagnistas fundamentales del campo criminológico argentino que provienen del mundo del derecho. Finalmente, se señalan ciertas direcciones en que esta indagación debería avanzar en el futuro cercano.
... While there is a push for researchers to engage in knowledge mobilization, existing research identifies a number of institutional barriers that inhibit the public mobilization of academic knowledge, including an enduring institutional reward system prioritizing more "traditional" outputs (Currie, 2007;Sprague & Laube, 2009), problems with articulation and synthesis of research findings among non-academic audiences (Feilzer, 2009;Mopas & Moore, 2012;Uggen & Inderbitzin, 2010;Young, 2012), and a lack of institutional support for KM activities (Barreno, Elliott, Madueke & Sarny, 2013;Sa et al., 2010). As literature indicates, institutional support for KM is vital to successful engagement in KM activities, yet it is lacking across many Canadian universities (Barreno et al., 2013;Phipps & Shapson, 2009). ...
In Canada there are growing discussions concerning the role of publicly funded universities and the impact of academic research. The integration of neoliberal practices and market rationalities place pressure on universities to “go public” in order to demonstrate relevance and accountability. Researchers are encouraged or even required to engage the public through knowledge mobilization activities. Our study provides an empirical analysis of knowledge mobilization in order to understand its perceived impact on public criminology, and more broadly the production and dissemination of criminological research. We argue that the institutional shift toward knowledge mobilization is perceived as a tool of institutional governance to demonstrate organizational accountability that shapes the production and dissemination of criminological knowledge.
... What does it mean to be a politically engaged criminologist today? Over the last two decades scholars from numerous disciplines have insisted that a requisite of political engagement is the facilitation of greater dialogue between criminologists and their publics (Barak 1988(Barak , 2007Burawoy et al. 2010;Carlen 2011;Clawson et al. 2007;Currie 2007;Ericson 2005;Garland and Sparks 2000;Hamilton 2013;Kalekin-Fishman 2011;Mopas 2015;Woolford and Hogeveen 2014). Only quite recently have tensions emerged over what forms of political action are considered to be legitimate and effective (Piché 2016;Ziobina and Vazquez 2018). ...
In this article, we devote ourselves to the task of reconceptualizing agency in the public criminology movement. We develop an imaginative political framework to circumvent the relational tensions currently ensnaring public criminology discourse. Employing the psychoanalytic theory of Slavoj Žižek, we engage the public criminology literature and its agential-activist notion of political engagement to reveal three primary directives dismissive of alternative praxes of resistance: faith in the State and public, hypocrisy eschewal, and legitimacy. By invoking the distinction between these modes of political engagement through the “fictional social realities” depicted in Ken Kesey’s One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest, we provide insights into how public criminologists can overcome concerns occluding other modes of “going public.” With such a move, we believe that public criminology’s capacity to “translate crime scholarship out of the academy” will evolve and become open to the possibility that “doing nothing” is more effective than may first appear.
... There are some steps that one can take to limit this kind of exposure, i.e. asking for your quotes to be read back or emailed to you, but accept that this is a real risk that could have potential consequences when your chair, dean, provost, or president see a quote that you gave that you may not have given in that manner. Second, many university reward systems do not really help reward someone who does PC (Currie, 2007). This is unfortunate, as public universities should be paying special attention and build reward structures for engaging the public (service points, etc.). ...
This Bruce Smith, Sr. Award Address discusses the various types of public criminologies and highlights both advantages and disadavantages associated with public engagement. Two case studies are utilized as examples of public criminology, one focused on early childhood prevention and a second on immigration and crime. The crux of the argument advanced is that public policy can be smart on crime by being smarter on people. The common theme linking these two areas are the vulnerability of children and immigrants.
... While there is a push for researchers to engage in knowledge mobilization, existing research identifies a number of institutional barriers that inhibit the public mobilization of academic knowledge, including an enduring institutional reward system prioritizing more "traditional" outputs (Currie, 2007;Sprague & Laube, 2009), problems with articulation and synthesis of research findings among non-academic audiences (Feilzer, 2009;Mopas & Moore, 2012;Uggen & Inderbitzin, 2010;Young, 2012), and a lack of institutional support for KM activities (Barreno, Elliott, Madueke & Sarny, 2013;Sa et al., 2010). As literature indicates, institutional support for KM is vital to successful engagement in KM activities, yet it is lacking across many Canadian universities (Barreno et al., 2013;Phipps & Shapson, 2009). ...
In Canada there are growing discussions concerning the role of publicly funded universities and the impact of academic research. The integration of neoliberal practices and market rationalities place pressure on universities to “go public” in order to demonstrate relevance and accountability. Researchers are encouraged or even required to engage the public through knowledge mobilization activities. Our study provides an empirical analysis of knowledge mobilization in order to understand its perceived impact on public criminology, and more broadly the production and dissemination of criminological research. We argue that the institutional shift toward knowledge mobilization is perceived as a tool of institutional governance to demonstrate organizational accountability that shapes the production and dissemination of criminological knowledge.In Canada there are growing discussions concerning the role of publicly funded universities and the impact of academic research. The integration of neoliberal practices and market rationalities place pressure on universities to “go public” in order to demonstrate relevance and accountability. Researchers are encouraged or even required to engage the public through knowledge mobilization activities. Our study provides an empirical analysis of knowledge mobilization in order to understand its perceived impact on public criminology, and more broadly the production and dissemination of criminological research. We argue that the institutional shift toward knowledge mobilization is perceived as a tool of institutional governance to demonstrate organizational accountability that shapes the production and dissemination of criminological knowledge.
Resumen
Este artículo pretende poner de relieve la importancia de la criminología en la sociedad actual, dado que la complejidad y celeridad de las transformaciones sociales requiere de una ciencia mejor, y no de soluciones basadas en lo que el público “parece que quiere” o en aquello que “parece mejor”. Con ese fin divido mi trabajo en tres apartados : los dos primeros señalan los caminos que, a mi juicio, debería seguir la criminología para progresar como ciencia capaz de dar respuestas válidas a los problemas del crimen (la investigación y la acción). En un tercer apartado analizo las razones por las que la criminología tiene muchas dificultades para influir sobre la política criminal de los países, y los modos en que podría obtenerse un mayor acceso a la toma de decisiones relevantes en la prevención de la delincuencia. Concluyo señalando las principales funciones que hoy en día puede desempeñar un criminólogo en el servicio que presta a la sociedad.
In this article we sketch a vision that might guide academic and third sector collaboration. We do so by drawing on a project that involved collaboration with a range of stakeholders, in order to stimulate ongoing discussion about how academics and the third sector might work together to seek positive change. Our findings show that there are keenly felt challenges, but also a sense of resilient optimism. A key finding among our stakeholders was a sense that there is an absence of an overarching shared vision, which was experienced by many of our respondents as consequential. Therefore, in the spirit of constructive provocation we set out such a vision, which was collaboratively developed with our respondents: opening a dialogue, rather than providing a conclusive position.
The Association for Applied and Clinical Sociology stresses the importance of translating sociological findings for non-academic audiences and settings and emphasizes the possibility that sociological interventions will lead to improved outcomes. These transformative possibilities of active partnerships, especially between sociologists and a range of communities, and the emphasis on knowledge sharing and transfer, is something that I would characterise as part of a long tradition of ‘public sociology’ that is most recently associated with the 2004 campaign for public sociology by Michael Burawoy (see “For Public Sociology” and his 2021 Polity book, Public Sociology). I have explicitly opted to frame this approach as “public sociology” for reasons that I will outline below. This public sociology is marked by sociological interventions and contributions to public, political and policy debates. However, and as Burawoy concedes, this recent articulation, his included, reflects a degree of American parochialism in its framing and interests. Sociology in Aotearoa has been strongly influenced by these northern hemisphere traditions. However, the history and context of the discipline in Aotearoa provides a very different set of challenges and possibilities. What does engagement or partnering with communities mean in this context? Are there examples of a public sociology that we can point to as representing a New Zealand-inflected and effective public sociology? How do Māori and Pasifika science practices and insights reframe sociological practice—or don’t they? And how have the critiques of decoloniality altered sociology (again, if at all)? This chapter explores the complex and challenging issues of a public sociology that embodies and reflects its New Zealand context.
This chapter reflects how participation in public criminological practice influenced my journey from undergraduate to doctoral study at Swansea University. As Burawo (2008) observes, students are the first public we face. My research has led to a process of self-reflection around notions of participation in the classroom, of shared experiences and a willingness to learn. Hearing young people talk openly about their futures, passions and dreams is powerful. It opens the door to a shared community, one in which Public Criminology offers added value. The chapter concludes by focusing on the dialogical nature of Public Criminology; the potential for the academy to drive social change; how Public Criminology can empower and transform the lives; and, how Criminology as a discipline is about much more than crime or criminal justice—it is about foundational social values and hope for better policy and practice.
This conclusion draws together the discussions and themes from the chapters within this book and provides insight into the common learning and narratives evident across the diversity of public criminology discourse. It is clear that public criminology has considerable breadth, depth and variety and as such is a patch-work quilt of theory and practice ‘sewn together’ with a golden thread of a commitment to and for transformative change and social justice. Indeed, public criminology offers powerful, impactful, purposeful and value-based opportunities to engage groups and communities that are not always engaged as active partners and therefore can and should be viewed as a model of inclusion and social justice in itself. The three pillars of public criminology offered within this chapter reflect the essence of public criminology and why it matters so much, why and how it can empower and educate and how it offers a needed ‘realness’ and authenticity to the discipline of criminology.
Academia has a long-established traditionalism when it comes to disseminating research output, which has historically resulted in much research being held captive in the ivory tower of university libraries in expensive leather-bound books. Continually evolving multi-media forms of communication offer new ways to expand research into the public world and impact wider society. While some academic institutions have been reluctant to see non-traditional forms of research dissemination as real academic work, there are nonetheless opportunities to release research findings to a wider audience, with possibilities for real impact and engagement. This chapter discusses the benefits of a world of open research, and challenges academia to allow itself to see public engagement as having a positive impact for living-breathing social science. This form of social science does not mean the dumbing down of traditional formal texts, but promotes an open approach, with greater engagement with subjects, participants and consumers of our research in new ways.
Through the presentation of case studies, as forms of pedagogy, we question how the role of students can be aligned to Public Criminology within the context of authenticity and engagement. We argue that as educators we can learn from broader engagement with issues and challenges within the public domain through our teaching, in essence, that we should seek to have an influence outwardly to a wider audience, the public. Public Criminology is interpreted in the chapter as a vehicle to embed relevance through active learning, with student-centred dialogues. We apply the Student as Producer model to demonstrate how collaborative education can impact on the publicness of the discipline within and beyond the university campus. Applying Student as Producer to Criminology demonstrates the purpose of pedagogy within the discipline.
Criminology has never been more popular as a subject of study in higher education. However, criminologists occupy an increasingly marginal position within political and media spheres. This marginalisation has arguably been to the detriment of people with offending histories, an oppressed group whose number has grown exponentially after several decades of a tough-on-crime consensus on criminality. The resultant ‘mass imprisonment’ has occupied much criminological attention, which has meant the attendant ‘mass supervision’ of offenders in the community has been relatively underexplored—despite those subject to community sanctions and measures (CSM) far outweighing those imprisoned in many jurisdictions. This chapter utilises Paulo Freire’s Pedagogy of the Oppressed to accentuate the transformative potential of teaching and learning practices within Criminology, and CSM in particular, applying his writings to the literature on Public Criminology. The chapter advocates for a pedagogy of Public Criminology which can counter the marginality of the sub-field.
Public Criminology tends to target the policy elite, overlooking criminology students even though they are an obvious and more amenable public with the potential to reach well beyond the academy and policy administrators. This chapter argues that revitalising the spirit that characterised radical criminology of the 1970s, criminology courses can engender a transformative spirit, whereby students are encouraged to develop critical competencies that result in them challenging injustice and become agents of social change. It will be argued that a partisan criminological education should be pursued as it has the potential for greater impact upon public criminology, insofar as students being emboldened to become critical and insurgent voices, not only of discrimination, oppression, and inequality but also of the institutions and practices of crime control.
Much discourse concerning public education in criminology focuses upon concerns which are essentially adult-orientated and indeed, largely engage with those aged 18 and above. Yet, and as the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989) suggests in General Comments 12 (2009) and 24 (2019), denying the voices and participation of children can be injurious to their education and create potentially negative impacts for society. Reflecting upon the sentiments of the proponents of public education approaches such as Zaha (2021), Freire (1970) and Loader and Sparks (2011), this chapter considers how an approach which optimises children’s participation and deepens partnership working with them can be truly transformative within their lives and that of their local communities. Navigating the development of an education-focused engagement and empowerment process, consideration is afforded what might be meant by ‘public education in criminology’, how meaningful participation can be actualised and the constructive impacts that might flow from such an approach. What is clear is that children can play a powerful role in public education in criminology initiatives. Their role is not though one of a passive recipient, but rather as important citizens and as active co-producers of knowledge.
Despite mass protests, demands to defund the police, and a range of institutional reforms, historic patterns of abuse and violence in US policing persist. This article calls for a renewed and reinvigorated critical policing studies to give leadership in the search for remedy. Fifty years ago, Taylor, Walton, and Young envisioned a “fully social theory of deviance” to guide a new critical criminology. How do our policing studies frameworks—evidence-based policing, democratic policing, police abolitionism—hold up to a “fully social” standard? Here, the article critiques the extant frameworks and also proposes one possible new direction in policing studies that would incorporate insights from the field of labor studies and rank-and-file politics.
Although intervention and campaigning have long been integral to critical criminology, in recent years, criminal justice activism has taken new directions and gathered momentum, especially with the advent of digital technologies and social media. These have made it easier than ever for ordinary citizens and professional journalists alike to comment on perceived injustices and potentially intervene in formal criminal justice processes. The Emerald International Handbook of Activist Criminology examines the history of both recent and more established justice campaigns and interventions. Spanning contributions from activists, activist academics, and practitioners from five continents, chapters address a range of criminological perspectives that engage in questions of effecting change through activism. Contributors also consider prominent international issues including feminist criminology, juvenile justice, migrant rights, corporate and state crime, indigenous rights, green/environmental criminology, sentencing and wrongful conviction, the harms of prisons, corrections and abolitionism, and justice for victim/survivors of harm and crime. Collectively, The Emerald International Handbook of Activist Criminology explores the contemporary terrain around new and emergent issues and forms of activism, and offers cutting edge conceptualizations of the methodological and practical applications of activist engagement, solidarity, and resistance. Enjoy 30% off this book with the code EMERALD30 EMERALD30 on ebooks.com books.emeraldinsight.com
The increasing application of network analysis based in data science to crime and corrupt organizations seeks to answer important criminal justice questions: How and why criminals interrelate with echother and how do they remain connected to acquire power? Who and what roles are played within a network and through which activities do they perform these roles? This article contains an introductory view of the literature on network analysis from the perspective of complexity sciences applied to criminal and corrupt groups, fields where multiple relations and associative activities facilitate the analysis. I introduce the scientific findings and intellectual ideas of selected literature, as well as the academic questions that remain open. Finally, drawing from existing analysis, I discuss the potential use and contribution of network analysis in criminal and corruption studies to intellectual and professional knowledge and practice.
How can we improve the effectiveness of criminal justice reform efforts? Effective reform hinges on shared understandings of what the problem is and shared visions of what success looks like. But consensus is hard to come by, and there has long been a distinction between “policy talk” or how problems are defined and solutions are promoted, and “policy action” or the design and adoption of certain policies. In this essay, we seek to promote productive thinking and talking about, as well as designing of, effective and sustainable criminal justice reforms. To this end, we offer reflections on underlying conceptual and practical considerations relevant for both criminal justice policy talk and action.
When the dominant crime narrative embraced by members of the public runs contrary to evidence or exaggerates the incidence or mischaracterises the nature of crime, and the news media reproduce that narrative, lawmakers and politicians tend to justify punitive crime policy and ‘tough on crime’ rhetoric as the ‘will of the people’ and a necessary measure to restore ‘law and order’. As such, the way in which members of the public and the news media understand crime and what they say about it is important because of the influence such discourse can have on criminal justice policy. But, in this paper I argue that Qualitative Frame Analysis (“QFA”) can be an effective methodological tool in shifting problematic narratives and facilitating social change. Using QFA, researchers, policymakers and advocates can positively shape crime discourse and design evidence-based policy proposals that are not only politically palatable but also criminologically sound. Using the case of Antigua and Barbuda, an Anglophone Caribbean country in the Eastern Caribbean, I argue that QFA can contribute to progressive crime policy in Antigua and Barbuda – policy that is informed by an understanding of crime that does not have at its heart notions of “law and order” or “getting tough.” Additionally, I show the importance of including the experiences of the global south in the extant literature as this case expands the working catalogue of culturally available crime frames beyond those identified in Europe and North America.
Criminology is undergoing a process of innovation and experimentation with the rise of social media. Although police have traditionally been the locus of legal enforcement, ordinary citizens are increasingly afforded opportunities to participate in crowdsourced investigations. In this article, we explore the emerging field of crowdsourcing criminology and its relationship to newsmaking criminology, public criminology, and the reshaping of news as infotainment (popular criminology). Drawing on a case study of a missing person named Emma Fillipoff, and our experience of involvement in the development of a television (TV) documentary dedicated to help finding Emma, we examine the process of crowdsourcing in practice and how it may oscillate between infotainment and public criminology inspired by academic evidence. Crowdsourcing criminology represents both a theoretical and an applied shift in our research focus and paves the way for a host of new projects that strive to reveal the strategies and techniques that define and characterize crowdsourced investigations.
A zemiology of politics is required in the face of disastrous historic, contemporary and future social harms. Focusing on state-led politics, the article charts some politically generated or mediated social harms: military; ecological and economic. These can generate justificatory narratives of zemiogenic deceit and ignorance. In a contemporary political moment of authoritarian populism, nativism and racism, each feature as part of wider processes towards the corruption and destruction of politics. The article then suggests some of the potentials of healthy politics and fundamental principles for a zemiology of politics including: subordination of crime-centric criminology to a historically grounded international zemiology, the incorporation of agnotological perspectives, and an orientation that is public, inclusive, reflexive and non-fundamentalist.
Privatising Criminal Justice explores the social, cultural, and political context of privatisation in the criminal justice sector. In recent years, the criminal justice sector has made various strategic partnerships with the private sector, exemplified by initiatives within the police, the prison system, and offender services. This has seen unprecedented growth in the past thirty years, and a veritable explosion under the tenure of the Coalition government in the United Kingdom.
This book highlights key areas of domestic and global concern and illustrates, with detail, case studies of important developments. It connects the study of criminology and criminal justice to the wider study of public policy, government institutions, and political decision making. In doing so, Privatising Criminal Justice provides a theoretical and practical framework for evaluating collaborative public and private sector response to social problems at the beginning of the twenty-first century.
An accessible and compelling read, this book will appeal to students and scholars of criminology, criminal justice, sociology, politics and all those interested in how privatisation has shaped the contemporary criminal justice system.
The concept of critical criminology – that crime and the present-day processes of criminalization are rooted in the core structures of society – is of more relevance today than it has been at any other time.
Written by an internationally renowned scholar, Contemporary Critical Criminology introduces the most up-to-date empirical, theoretical, and political contributions made by critical criminologists around the world. In its exploration of this material, the book also challenges the erroneous but widely held notion that the critical criminological project is restricted to mechanically applying theories to substantive topics, or to simply calling for radical political, economic, cultural, and social transformations. Now fully updated and expanded in a new edition, this book offers further coverage of new directions in critical criminology, such as green criminology, indigenous criminology, intersectionality, narrative criminology, rural critical criminology, queer criminology, semiology, critical research methods, and contemporary critical criminological policies.
The author compared American criminologists’ stated reasons for death penalty support or opposition with those of the general public as reported by Gallup pollsters. While experts were overwhelmingly more likely to oppose capital punishment, the rationale for opposition or support were largely comparable for both groups, albeit with some potentially informative differences. As is the case with the general public, the most common reasons for experts' opposition are moral beliefs, concerns about system errors, and the unfair application of the death penalty. Similarly, among the small minority of experts who expressed (often qualified) support for the death penalty, the favored rationale is simple retributive justice—exactly as is the case with the general public. The results show that, not only is opposition to the death penalty among experts not absolute, but the underlying rationale of expert dissenters is arguably a partial bridge to greater public-expert symbiosis on this highly contentious and divisive issue. The radical “newsmaking criminology” contribution of these findings and their ramifications is that the entirety of expert perspective is arguably as consistent with disciplined retention of the death penalty as it is with strict abolition. Future research could reveal even more expert sympathy for retributive thinking, and thus greater affinity with public views, than might be assumed.
In this article, we focus on the teaching of criminology in the university classroom. Considering the recent debates on “public criminology,” we examine teaching as a method of reaching more “publics.” As university educators we recognize “students are our first public” (Burawoy, 2008, p. 8) and as criminologists we want to rethink the form of instruction and the means of delivery of a criminological education. Yet this pedagogical picture is not complete without understanding how students interact with content material beyond the formal study of crime, criminals, and criminality – namely, the issues of environmental and “green” harm circulating around illegal and “lawful yet awful” behaviour in society. To further understand these experiences, we reflect upon our teaching of undergraduate and graduate green criminology courses, specifically examining the merits of reorienting criminological teaching to focus upon green issues that brings in students’ experiences and how they make connections with the content and material we provide them. Our article presents an opportunity for criminology and criminal justice instructors to reconsider curriculum reform and conventional criminological education. Criminological curricula ought to contextualize criminology and its green impacts. By drawing upon aspects of green criminology and popular criminology, we argue that educators and students can work together towards a critical ecopedagogy which benefits the teaching and the learning of criminology, as well as advances a more public criminology in the process.
Seeking to support graduate students in engaging in feminist sociological research, we provide guidance on “working the project”—working collaboratively and creatively to foster compassion and solidarity as we bring diverse research projects to fruition. We offer reflections on our everyday experiences and struggles as emerging feminist researchers, including with writing research proposals. We also include four condensed research proposals ‐ on the social organization of care work, sex work, criminal justice, and abortion care ‐ to support fellow students in the process. Spurring collaborative, fun and inclusive ways of working, we speak to feminist scholar‐activists who may require additional support in navigating the social relations of academe, while contributing to collective projects of investigating and remaking the social organization of everyday life.
In this address I make the case for continuing to focus criminological research on gender, sexism, and racism within our lives and within our profession. I also provide a brief case study of a topic many would feel falls well outside our field: reproductive rights. Data are reviewed to reveal the impact of gender on the lives of women—notably the devaluation of work done by women, particularly if the work is deemed feminist. Afterward, recent data on the persistence of both sexism and racism in our field are reviewed. Despite gains made by women (notably in the membership of the field), the highest positions in our professional association are held by men, particularly by White men. Data on the importance of reproductive rights to women are then considered, notably the fact that nearly one third of women will need abortion services by the time they reach middle age. Finally, I review recent efforts by conservatives to recriminalize abortion, specifically through the passage of laws making abortion difficult to arrange, or even outlawing the provision of abortion services. These efforts directly involve the criminal justice system in the criminalization of women's bodies.
In an era of fake news, misguided rhetoric about immigrants and refugees, and efforts to toughen criminal laws, criminologists seeking to engage in public conversations around crime and policy arguably face an uphill battle. This book offers a comprehensive resource that addresses these challenges. It outlines the foundations of and developments in public criminology, underscoring the need to not only understand earlier ideas and debates, but also how scholars pursue public-facing work through a range of different approaches. The first of its kind, this collection captures diverse and critical perspectives on the practices and challenges of actually doing public criminology.
20% Discount Available-enter the code FLR40 at checkout.
While newsmaking is regularly debated within criminology, few studies have examined why criminologists make news media appearances and how often they do so. Drawing on a dataset of 1,211 survey responses and 27 interviews, our study examines these issues, investigating the frequency, predictors, and motivations of newsmaking criminology among scholars in seven countries: the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Ireland, and South Africa. Our findings indicate that gender and career stage are key predictors of criminologists appearing in at least once in news media, along with the desire to publicise research, demonstrate research impact, generate university publicity, and influence policy and legal reform. Our interview data reveal two central logics informing these predictors: an industrial logic responsive to the demands of academic capitalism, and a social logic informing scholars’ beliefs on the public role of criminologists and criminological research. On the one hand, our participants’ newsmaking practices were driven by moral-political motivations to dispel ‘crime news’ myths and promote evidence-based criminal justice policies. On the other, they were often also influenced by the imperatives of academic capitalism to promote tertiary education, measure research impact, and participate in competitive employment markets.
Criminological literature outlines various roles for public criminologists and reflects on both the form and purpose of public criminology. This article reviews this literature and considers institutional and political activist ethnography as methods through which criminologists can address critique, and better combine social justice research and advocacy work. Such methodological considerations demonstrate that, for some, ‘doing’ public criminology means actively engaging in advocacy work alongside research participants and other activists. Examples and reflections from the author's own work with the criminal justice voluntary sector (CJVS) in Canada demonstrate that a public criminology informed by institutional and political activist ethnography is especially important if we want to: (i) better understand the role of the sector in supporting people with criminal records; and (ii) strengthen the relationship between academics, policymakers, advocates, practitioners, and people with lived experience of criminalisation and punishment.
Two Styles of Social Science Research', in Power, Politics, and People: The Collected Essays of C
- C W Mills
Mills, C.W. (1953) 'Two Styles of Social Science Research', in Power, Politics, and People: The Collected Essays of C. Wright Mills, pp. 553–67. New York: Ballantine Books.
ELLIOTT CURRIE is Professor of Criminology, Law and Society at the University of California, Irvine. He is the author of, among others, Confronting Crime: An American Challenge, Crime and Punishment in America and The Road to Whatever: Middle Class Culture and the Crisis of Adolescence
- London
- New
- York
London & New York: Zed Books. ELLIOTT CURRIE is Professor of Criminology, Law and Society at the University of California, Irvine. He is the author of, among others, Confronting Crime: An American Challenge, Crime and Punishment in America and The Road to Whatever: Middle Class Culture and the Crisis of Adolescence. Theoretical Criminology 11(2)