 |
Summary and review. Comparative work in crime and criminology. Comparative research in practice. Comparative work ‘post’-globalization
|
|
|
|
SUMMARY AND REVIEW
Comparative work in the field of criminology has developed markedly in recent years although it is still underutilized. In many cases, work can purport to be com- parative whereas in fact it presents more of a ‘side-by-side’ discussion of two jurisdictions and their responses to criminal justice problems. We have seen above that going beyond this is challenging and requires careful thought given to the social, cultural, political and legal contexts in which two (or more) jurisdictions operate: the subtleties of which can be extremely difficult for the outsider to fully appreciate, let alone compare. This of course reflects much wider concessions made in the methodological literature across the social sciences that genuine ‘objectivity’ in any research may be impossible to achieve given the inevitable impact of a researcher’s training, background and cultural assumptions. We have noted above several proposed methods for addressing these concerns in comparative work, whilst also acknowledging that none of these ‘solutions’ are without their own limitations. Nevertheless, we have also seen how, when approached with care and due regard to the potential hurdles, comparative work has produced some extremely detailed and important insights into fundamental questions of interest to criminolo- gists and victimologists, including the extent of crime, the impact of policing strategies and the position of victims of crime in the criminal justice system. Comparative work is therefore reaching a level of maturity where it is beginning to show its real value, a value which, I have argued, will persevere – and perhaps in some sense only increase – even in the context of generally anti-global sentiments in the political and social spheres.
 | |||
 | |||
(Continued)
Comparative work in crime and criminology
1. What are the key advantages and disadvantages of comparative work?
2. What practical pitfalls exist in attempting to carry out such work and how can researchers attempt to minimize these?
3. In what sense might comparative researchers achieve a genuinely ‘objective’ view of either their home jurisdiction or those with which they are attempting to draw comparisons?
Comparative research in practice
1. What other areas of criminal justice study can you think of that might benefit from comparative study? How would such study add to existing knowledge in this area?
2. Consider the Chu and Song (2015) piece discussed above again. In what ways might the researchers’ position, based in the USA, have influenced their approach and their interpretation of the data?
3. What steps can be taken to try and harmonize crime statistics in a way that makes them genuinely comparable between different countries?
Comparative work ‘post’-globalization
1. What extra challenges to comparative work may surface as a result of any slow- down in globalization?
|
|
|
2. How can we adapt comparative methodologies and strategies to combat such potential problems?
3. 
Does the use of comparative data rely on globalization?
REFERENCES
Atkinson, M. and Coleman, W. (1992) ‘Policy networks, policy communities and the prob- lems of governance’, Governance, 5(2): 154–80.
Bayley, D. (1985) Patterns of Policing: A Comparative International Analysis. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
Beerkens, E. (2004) Global Opportunities and Institutional Embeddedness: Higher Education Consortia in Europe and Southeast Asia. Enschede: CHEPS.
Bennett, R. (2009) ‘Comparative criminological and criminal justice research and the data that drive’, International Journal of Comparative and Applied Criminal Justice, 33(2): 171–92.
Bottoms, A. (1995) ‘The philosophy and politics of punishment and sentencing’, in C. Clark and R. Morgan (eds), The Politics of Sentencing Reform. Oxford: Clarendon Press, pp. 17–50.
Boutellier, H. (2000) Crime and Morality: The Significance of Criminal Justice in Post- Modern Culture. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Brants, C. and Field, S. (2000) ‘Legal culture, political cultures and procedural traditions: towards a comparative interpretation of covert and proactive policing in England and Wales and the Netherlands’, in D. Nelken (ed. ), Contrasting Criminal Justice. Aldershot: Dartmouth, pp. 77–116.
Brienen, M. and Hoegen, H. (2000) Victims of Crime in 22 European Criminal Justice Systems: The Implementation of Recommendation (85) 11 of the Council of Europe on the Position of the Victim in the Framework of Criminal Law and Procedure. Niemegen: Wolf Legal Productions.
Brown, B. (2007) ‘Community policing in post-September 11 America: a comment on the concept of community-oriented counterterrorism’, Police Practice and Research, 8: 239–51.
Cavadino, M. and Dignan, J. (2007) The Penal System: An Introduction. London: Sage.
Chu, D. and Song, J. (2015) ‘A comparison of Chinese immigrants’ perceptions of the police in New York City and Toronto’, Crime and Delinquency, 61(3): 402–27.
Davis, R., Ortiz, C., Gilinskiy, Y., Ylesseva, I. and Briller, V. (2004) ‘A crossnational com- parison of the police in New York City and St Petersburg, Russia’, Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies and Management, 27: 22–36.
Ellison, L. (2001) The Adversarial Process and the Vulnerable Witness. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Garland, D. (2001) The Culture of Control: Crime and Social Order in Contemporary Society. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Giddens, A. (1990) The Consequences of Modernity. Cambridge: Polity.
Goyer, K. (2001) ‘A price worth paying? The cost of South Africa’s private prisons’,
Nedbank ISS Crime Index, 5(6): 1–2.
Graves, R. (1997) ‘“Dear friends”: culture and genre in American and Canadian direct mar- keting letters’, Journal of Business Communication, 34(1): 235–52.
Grout, P. (1997) ‘The economics of the private finance initiative’, Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 13(4): 53–66.
Hall, M. (2010) Victims and Policy Making: A Comparative Perspective. Cullompton: Willan. Hirst, P. and Thompson, G. (2002) ‘The future of globalization’, Cooperation and Conflict,
|
|
|
37(3): 247–65.
Human Rights Watch (1998) Shielded from Justice: Police Brutality and Accountability in the United States. New York: Human Rights Watch.
Jones, T. and Newburn, T. (2006) ‘Understanding plural policing’, in T. Jones and
T. Newburn (eds), Plural Policing: A Comparative Perspective. New York: Routledge, pp. 1–12.
Lee, M. (2007) Human Trafficking. Cullompton: Willan.
Loader, I. and Sparks, R. (2007) ‘Contemporary landscapes of crime, order and control: gov- ernance, risk and globalization’, in M. Maguire, R. Morgan and R. Reiner (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Criminology, 3rd edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 78–101.
Mawby, R. (1998) ‘Victims’ perceptions of police services in east and west Europe’, in
V. Ruggiero, N. South and I. Taylor (eds), The New European Criminology: Crime and Social Order in Europe. New York: Routledge, pp. 180–200.
Mosher, C. (1996) ‘Racism and criminal justice’, Canadian Journal of Criminology, 38: 413–38.
Muncie, J. (2005) ‘The globalization of crime control: the case of youth and juvenile justice – neo-liberalism, policy convergence and international conventions’, Theoretical Criminology, 9(1): 35–64.
Nagorcka, F., Stanton, M. and Wilson, M. (2005) ‘Stranded between partisanship and the truth: a comparative analysis of legal ethics in the adversarial and inquisitorial systems of justice’, Melbourne University Law Review, 29(2): 448–77.
Nelken, D. (1997) ‘The globalization of crime and criminal justice: prospects and problems’,
Current Legal Problems, 50: 251–77.
Nelken, D. (2007) ‘Comparing criminal justice’, in M. Maguire, R. Morgan and R. Reiner (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Criminology, 4th edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 139–58.
Nelken, D. (2010) Comparative Criminal Justice: Making Sense of Difference. London: Sage.
O’Connor, C. (2008) ‘Citizen attitudes toward the police in Canada’, Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies and Management, 31: 578–95.
Ravenhill, J. (2017) Global Political Economy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Reichel, P. (2004) Comparative Criminal Justice Systems: A Topical Approach. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Reinicke, W. (1997) ‘Global public policy’, Foreign Affairs, 76: 127–51.
Roux, N. (2002) ‘Public policy-making and policy analysis in South Africa amidst transfor- mation, change and globalisation: views on participants and role players in the policy analytic procedure’, Journal of Public Administration, 37: 418–37.
Rugman, A. (2012) The End of Globalization. New York: Random House. Scholte, J. (2000) Globalization: A Critical Introduction. London: Macmillan.
Taylor, R., Fritsch, E. and Liederbach, J. (2014) Digital Crime and Digital Terrorism. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Tsui, C. -K. (2016) Clinton, New Terrorism and the Origins of the War on Terror. London: Routledge.
van Dijk, J., van Kesteren, J. and Smit, P. (2007) Criminal Victimisation in International Perspective: Key Findings from the 2004–2005 ICVS and EU ICS. The Hague Haag: Boom Legal Publishers.
Wallerstein, I. (2000) ‘From sociology to historical social science: prospects and obstacles’,
British Journal of Sociology, 51: 25–35.
|
|
|
