CRIMINOLOGY IN EUROPE NEWSLETTER OF THE EUROPEAN SOCIETY OF CRIMINOLOGY VOL. 5 • NO. 3 DECEMBER 2006 ISSN 1729-8164 Continued on page 10 Continued on page 8 It is traditional to get lost at the start of a European Society of Criminology conference. In the past few years participants have struggled with labyrinthine Spanish alleyways, tongue-twisting Finnish street names, the vagaries of Dutch trams, and the distractions of Polish piano accordion players to reach the sanctuary of the registration desk. The entire city of Tübingen, however, seemed a haven of calm after hours in disorderly queues at airport security checks in the wake of the latest terrorist threats. Participants quickly relaxed into Tübingen’s chocolate box charms as they strolled past pointed pastel buildings, café-lined squares, and the lazily meandering river Neckar in search of Eberhard Tübingen 2006: A Very German Conference By Sara Harrop Karls University, venue for the Society’s sixth annual meeting. The modern Kupferbau (Copper Building) buzzed with multi-lingual greetings as people gathered for the opening ceremony. Silence fell as conference organiser and ESC president Hans-Jürgen Kerner congratulated everyone on having braved the world’s airlines and welcomed us all to his city. Richard Blath, counsellor for the German Federal Ministry of Justice; Eberhard Schaich, director of Eberhard Karls University; and Brigitte Russ- Scherer, the mayor of Tübingen, addressed the assembly in excellent English. The many-talented Hans- Jürgen Kerner provided a The sixth annual conference of the European Society of Criminology took place from 26 th August to 29 th August in Tübingen, Germany. It was hosted by the Criminology Division of the Federal Ministry of Justice and the Institute of Criminology, Faculty of Law, Eberhard-Karls-University of Tübingen. The programme committee consisted of Christoph Freudenreich, Hans-Jürgen Kerner, Jörg Kinzig, Kerstin Reich, Elmar G. M. Weitekamp, and Rüdiger Wulf, representing the Institute of Criminology, the Faculty of Law, the Association of Tübingen Criminologists, the regional courts, and the correctional department of the State Ministry of Justice. The conference organiser was Hans-Jürgen Kerner, professor of criminology, juvenile law, corrections, and penal procedure at the Faculty of Law, and director of the Institute of Criminology, University of Tübingen. He is past-president of the ESC. Elmar G. M. Weitekamp, Professor at the Katholieke Universiteit Leuven (Belgium), co-organised the whole programme and directed a large Another Successful ESC Conference By Hans-Jürgen Kerner Nominations and applications are sought for the ESC presidency. Nominations must be received by May 1, 2007. The president is elected for a three-year term, the first as president-elect beginning at the conclusion of the 2007 annual meeting in Bolgna, the second as president in 2008-09, and the third as past president. Nominations will not be regarded as complete without written agreement or confirmation by the Nominee. Nominations should be sent to Professor Marcelo Aebi, ESC Executive Secretary (see page 2). The ESC is soliciting applications to host annual meetings from 2009 onwards. Applications should identify the proposed organising committee and leader, describe the physical facilities that will be available (and how many attendees can be accommodated), set out a proposed budget, describe likely local funding sources, and explain why, in light of the recent distribution of annual meeting sites, the site proposed is appropriate. Applications should be sent to Professor Marcelo Aebi, ESC Executive Secretary (see page 2). NOMINATIONS SOUGHT FOR ESC PRESIDENT SOLICITATION OF ESC ANNUAL MEETING SITES
Transcript
Newsletter of theEUROPEAN SOCIETY OF CRIMINOLOGYNewsletter of theEUROPEAN SOCIETY OF CRIMINOLOGYCRIMINOLOGY IN EUROPE
NEWSLETTER OF THE EUROPEAN SOCIETY OF CRIMINOLOGYVOL. 5 • NO. 3 DECEMBER 2006
ISSN 1729-8164
Continued on page 10
Continued on page 8
It is traditional to get lost at thestart of a European Society ofCriminology conference. In the pastfew years participants havestruggled with labyrinthine Spanishalleyways, tongue-twisting Finnishstreet names, the vagaries of Dutchtrams, and the distractions of Polishpiano accordion players to reach thesanctuary of the registration desk.The entire city of Tübingen,however, seemed a haven of calmafter hours in disorderly queues atairport security checks in the wakeof the latest terrorist threats.Participants quickly relaxed intoTübingen’s chocolate box charms asthey strolled past pointed pastelbuildings, café-lined squares, andthe lazily meandering river Neckar in search of Eberhard
Tübingen 2006: A Very German ConferenceBy Sara Harrop
Karls University, venue for theSociety’s sixth annual meeting.
The modern Kupferbau (CopperBuilding) buzzed with multi-lingualgreetings as people gathered for theopening ceremony. Silence fell asconference organiser and ESCpresident Hans-Jürgen Kernercongratulated everyone on havingbraved the world’s airlines andwelcomed us all to his city. RichardBlath, counsellor for the GermanFederal Ministry of Justice; EberhardSchaich, director of Eberhard KarlsUniversity; and Brigitte Russ-Scherer, the mayor of Tübingen,addressed the assembly in excellentEnglish. The many-talented Hans-Jürgen Kerner provided a
The sixth annual conference of the European Society ofCriminology took place from 26th August to 29th August inTübingen, Germany. It was hosted by the CriminologyDivision of the Federal Ministry of Justice and the Instituteof Criminology, Faculty of Law, Eberhard-Karls-Universityof Tübingen. The programme committee consisted ofChristoph Freudenreich, Hans-Jürgen Kerner, Jörg Kinzig,Kerstin Reich, Elmar G. M. Weitekamp, and Rüdiger Wulf,representing the Institute of Criminology, the Faculty ofLaw, the Association of Tübingen Criminologists, theregional courts, and the correctional department of theState Ministry of Justice.
The conference organiser was Hans-Jürgen Kerner,professor of criminology, juvenile law, corrections, andpenal procedure at the Faculty of Law, and director of theInstitute of Criminology, University of Tübingen. He ispast-president of the ESC. Elmar G. M. Weitekamp,Professor at the Katholieke Universiteit Leuven (Belgium),co-organised the whole programme and directed a large
Another SuccessfulESC Conference
By Hans-Jürgen Kerner
Nominations and applications are sought for the ESCpresidency. Nominations must be received by May 1,2007. The president is elected for a three-year term, thefirst as president-elect beginning at the conclusion ofthe 2007 annual meeting in Bolgna, the second aspresident in 2008-09, and the third as past president.Nominations will not be regarded as complete withoutwritten agreement or confirmation by the Nominee.
Nominations should be sent to Professor MarceloAebi, ESC Executive Secretary (see page 2).
The ESC is soliciting applications to host annualmeetings from 2009 onwards. Applications shouldidentify the proposed organising committee and leader,describe the physical facilities that will be available (andhow many attendees can be accommodated), set out aproposed budget, describe likely local funding sources,and explain why, in light of the recent distribution ofannual meeting sites, the site proposed is appropriate.
Applications should be sent to Professor MarceloAebi, ESC Executive Secretary (see page 2).
NOMINATIONS SOUGHT FOR ESC PRESIDENT
SOLICITATION OF ESC ANNUAL MEETING SITES
EUROPEAN SOCIETY OF CRIMINOLOGYPAGE 2 DECEMBER 2006
VOL. 5, NO. 3DECEMBER 2006
Criminology in Europe ispublished by the EuropeanSociety of Criminology.The editorial office is located atNSCRP.O. Box 7922300 AT LeidenThe NetherlandsTel: 31 71 527 8527Fax: 31 71 527 8537Email: [email protected]
President—Kauko AromaaPresident-Elect—KrzysztofKrajewskiExecutive Secretary—Marcelo AebiJournal Editor—Julian RobertsNewsletter Editor—Michael TonryMember—Catrien BijleveldMember—Mike Levi
Communications should beaddressed as follows:
To the president:Kauko AromaaEuropean Institute for CrimePrevention & Control (HEUNI)Pitkansillanranta 3A, PO Box 444531 HelsinkiFINLANDTel: 35 89 18257850Fax: 35 89 18257865Email: [email protected]
To the business office:Marcelo AebiRico Cejudo 49 -3CE-41005 SevillaSPAINTel./Fax: 34 954 094173Email: [email protected]
Concerning the 2007 meeting:Marzio BarbagliUniversità di BolognaDipartimento di Scienze dell’Educazione ‘Giovanni MariaBertin’Via Filippo Re 6 - 40126 BolognaITALYTel: 39 051 209 6468Fax: 39 051 228 847Email: [email protected]
Continued on page 7
Message from the PresidentBy Kauko Aromaa
Kauko Aromaa
More than seven years havepassed since planning began at the1999 AmericanSociety ofCriminologymeeting for theorganisation of aEuropeanSociety ofCriminology. Theofficialorganisingmeeting tookplace in TheHague in thespring of 2000.Josine Junger-Tas agreed toserve aspresident andMartin Killiasagreed to serveas conference organiser for the firstannual meeting in Lausanne in 2001.Since then, there have been fivemeetings in five countries — Toledo(2002), Helsinki (2003), Amsterdam(2004), Krakow (2005), andTübingen (2006), with Bologna(2007) and Edinburgh (2008)waiting in the wings. The homecountries of the presidents — JosineJunger-Tas (The Netherlands), PaulWiles (UK), Ernesto Savonna (Italy),Hans-Jürgen Kerner (Germany),Kauko Aromaa (Finland), and, nextyear, Krzysztof Krajewski (Poland) —have been as diverse. Board membershave been even more diverse.Pictures of the 2005-2006 and 2006-2007 boards can be found on page 7.
Criminology is a hugely diversefield. Many criminologists, in Europeand elsewhere, do not considerthemselves criminologists at all. Thisis due to the wide-ranging nature ofthe discipline: crime and crime controlcan be approached from manydifferent perspectives, either one at atime or simultaneously. One of myconcerns about “criminology” as itappears from the papers delivered atthe ESC’s annual conferences is thatthe discipline’s inherent diversity is
represented unevenly. I give onecurrent example.
Eastern European colleagues oftenfind it difficult toidentify partnersfrom westernEuropeancountries toparticipate injoint researchprojects. TheESC annualconferencesillustrate whythis is so. Thetopics presentedby researchersfrom the differentregions are verydifferent. Thecurrent easternfocus is
generally on such topics as organizedcrime, corruption, and trafficking inhuman beings. The western focus, byand large, is on the crimes of thepowerless.
The eastern focus may be partlybecause international financialsupport (for example, from theEuropean Union or the World Bank)favours such topics in easternEuropean countries and criminologiststhere are often heavily dependent onsuch funding. The different focusesalso likely reflect a long-standinginertia in western research, howeveradvanced it may appear in its ownterms.
ESC conferences are potentially animportant forum to promote greatermingling of east and west, north andsouth. This has not yet happened to alarge extent. Most work presented inthe conferences continues to be fromsingle authors. Multiple-authorcontributions typically come fromsingle research agencies rather thanbeing multiple-countryaccomplishments.
Is the ESC able to promote changein this respect? As financial supportoften drives priority choices, I amdoubtful this will happen as long as
EUROPEAN SOCIETY OF CRIMINOLOGY DECEMBER 2006 PAGE 3
Continued on page 12
The International Crime Victims Survey (ICVS) is astandardised survey incorporating samples of the generalpopulations of countries. It covers victimisationexperiences of crime by households and individuals. TheICVS was initiated to collect data on levels of crime that canbe used for comparative purposes. It was carried out in2005, for the fifth time, in over thirty countries, includingeighteen member states of the European Union. The EUcomponent was carried out by Gallup-Europe and co-funded by the Directorate General for Research of theEuropean Community. Delays in data collection in somecountries and increasing proportions of mobile-phone-onlyusers in others have weakened standardisation, butadditional checks on data have revealed no majordistortions. At the Tübingen conference of the ESC, someglobal results were presented for the EU states.
The key finding of the fifth sweep is that the volume ofcrime has gone down significantly in almost all Westerncountries since 2000. The United States seems to have
What Goes Up, ComesDown
Explaining Falling Crime RatesBy Jan van Dijk
Continued on page 17
In the Netherlands work has been done to establish thelevel of recidivism in the entire population of prosecutedoffenders. Interested in the scope of this type of research,the WODC — the research bureau of the Dutch Ministryof Justice — sent out a questionnaire to 41 Europeancountries. It turned out that at least fourteen countrieshave or soon will have recidivism data on a national scale.Steps were taken to bring those countries together. Aresearch group has been formed that will explore thepossibilities of making international comparisons ofreconviction rates. The second meeting of this group washeld at the ESC annual meeting in Tübingen. This articlesummarises progress to date.
National Studies on RecidivismAs table 1 shows, fourteen European countries have or
recently have had a national study on recidivism. Mostcountries have standardised data on all offenders, by age,types of crimes committed, and sanctions suffered. In
National ReconvictionRates
Making International ComparisonsBy Bouke Wartna and Laura Nijssen
Ben Goold and I have assumed responsibility for editingthe ESC’s scholarly journal. Our objective is to maintain thehigh standard of scholarship established by the previouseditor, Professor David Smith. The first issue under the neweditorship will contain a clear statement of purpose anddescribe a number of changes to the editorial structure, buta number of points may be of interest to readers of thecurrent newsletter.
In general our goal is to encourage potential authors tosubmit articles that have clear cross-jurisdictionalsignificance, or submissions that draw general lessons fromresearch conducted in a single country. We shall activelyseek contributors from scholars in member states that havenot to this point been the subject of a great deal ofresearch.
These are exciting times both for the Society and theEuropean Journal of Criminology. We hope to expand thenumber of issues published each year from four to five.This will permit us to publish a special “themed” issueevery year as well as four regular issues. In light of thevolume of submissions received the expansion to fiveissues is a clear priority.
We welcome formal proposals for such special issues –or informal suggestions for themed issues that the editorial
European Journal ofCriminology News
By Julian Roberts
Continued on page 15
New ESC WorkingGroupsBy Stan C. Proband
The ESC board recently approved the creation of twonew working groups, the European Developmental andLife-Course working group (EDLC) and the EuropeanHomicide working group (EHR). Both are based at theNetherlands Institute for the Study of Crime and LawEnforcement.
The EDLCDevelopmental and life course criminology is a new and
exciting field that is attracting the attention of researchersaround the globe. Criminologists, developmentalpsychologists, life-course sociologists, and scholars from awide range of other disciplines are unraveling the waysdelinquency and crime evolve within individuals’ lives.
Recognising the importance of this growing field, theESC board has approved the creation of the EuropeanDevelopmental and Life-Course Criminology workinggroup (EDLC). The EDLC aims to promote communicationamong researchers working on European data, facilitateinternational collaboration between research groups, andencourage international dissemination of research results(see: http://www.esc-eurocrim.org/workshops.shtml).
All ESC members involved in longitudinal research areinvited to join the EDLC. The first meeting will be held
Continued on page 15
EUROPEAN SOCIETY OF CRIMINOLOGYPAGE 4 DECEMBER 2006
EUROPEAN SOCIETY OF CRIMINOLOGY
Conference 2006 Tübingen, August 26 - 29
EUROPEAN SOCIETY OF CRIMINOLOGY DECEMBER 2006 PAGE 5
EUROPEAN SOCIETY OF CRIMINOLOGY
Conference 2006 Tübingen, August 26 - 29
EUROPEAN SOCIETY OF CRIMINOLOGYPAGE 6 DECEMBER 2006
EUROPEAN SOCIETY OF CRIMINOLOGY DECEMBER 2006 PAGE 7
the society is unable to provide suchsupport. We can offer a forum, but wehave not found a way to influence theresearch profile.
A scholarly or scientific societyshould indeed be like that. Its membersshould take advantage of theopportunities offered. If boardmembers and conference organizersattempted to foster an agenda ofparadigm change and preferred topicsthey would, at least implicitly, excludethe interests of many ESC members.That would be unacceptable.
But to remain a mere reflection ofthe status quo is not fully satisfactoryeither. What should be done is toapply the working group approach tothis issue. At present, several workinggroups exist under the auspices of theESC. A basic constraint is that they aretotally dependent upon the activeinput of individual members, as theESC is unable to provide financialsupport to the groups. Thus, it alsolacks the capacity to help get newgroups launched.
Message from the President Continued from page 2
L-R: Michael Tonry, Uberto Gatti, Krzysztof Krajewski, Kauko Aromaa, Hans-Jürgen Kerner, Sonja Snacken, Marcelo Aebi, Gorazd Mesko
ESC Board 2005-2006
Back row (L-R): Michael Tonry, Kauko Aromaa, Mike Levi, Catrien BijleveldFront row: Hans-Jürgen Kerner, Julian Roberts, Marcelo Aebi,
Krzysztof Krajewski
ESC Board 2006-2007
Another of my concerns is aboutpolitical power. The marginalization ofcriminological research in relation topolitical power is disquieting. Many
governments are investing more ininvestigative and repressive actionrelated to crime phantoms, theinfluence of criminology in relation toordinary everyday crime is weakening,and political interest in classical crimecontrol dilemmas is diminishing.
Government-driven crimeprevention programmes participate inthe competition with similarconsequences. Nonetheless,accepting the desirability ofknowledge-based criminal justicepolicy, criminology and decision-making should work more closelytogether.
Wealthy nations should be able tokeep up the good old traditions whileinvesting heavily in emergingconcerns. Poorer countries havedifficulty doing so. Theircriminologists may wind up neglectingthe most burning problems of old-fashioned repressive criminal justicepolicy with regard to the everydaycrimes that fill the prisons becausemore financial support is available forwork on fashionable topics.
As the ESC is primarily a forumcomprised of its members, not aresearch centre or a partner inresearch, we are unlikely to solvethese issues, but we should not losesight of them.
EUROPEAN SOCIETY OF CRIMINOLOGYPAGE 8 DECEMBER 2006
PROCEEDINGS OF ESC GENERAL ASSEMBLYgroup of volunteer helpers. Theorganisational issues were handled bya conference secretariat and theinstitute secretariat.
For the entire preparatory periodand during the conference the clericalwork was carefully and very efficientlyheaded by Ms Maria Pessiu, who wasjoined later by Ms Ursula Haug-Lénertand Ms Monika Lieb. Two othersdeserve special mention: Ms JasminLöffler for her assistance with pre-filtering submitted abstracts,communicating with participants,arranging hundreds of papers intomeaningful panels, round-tables, andworkshops, and assisting the ESC-Executive Secretary Marcelo Aebiduring the conference; and MsKatharina Stelzel for her assistancewith double-checking participants´names, addresses, and other co-ordinates, creating lists, and proof-reading brochures and numerousdocuments. Finally, many membersand collaborators of the Institute ofCriminology and many volunteers,mostly students of law, psychology,social work, pedagogy, and sociologyof the University of Tübingen,efficiently helped with preparationsimmediately preceding the conference,arrangements throughout (inparticular the registration desk), andclear-up work afterwards. Logisticssuch as hotel reservations,professional excursions, and thesocial programme were dealt with bythe conference secretariat, theAssociation of German, Swiss, andAustrian Criminologists (NKG), theAssociation of TübingenCriminologists (WVTK), the TübingenTourist Office, and two professionalcatering firms, Hotel Krone Cateringand Rosenau Catering.
All conference events took place inTübingen University buildings at theedge of the town centre. The CopperBuilding was the central location forthe opening and closing ceremonies,plenary meetings, book exhibits,workshops, round-table sessions, theposter session, the ice-cream, wineand cheese social and, not least, themany informal gatherings duringbreaks and at other times. The bulk of
the panels took place in the New Aula,the Theologicum, and other buildingsnear the Copper Building.
Tübingen attracted some 514registered participants, a similarnumber to Krakow. Together withofficial guests, local collaborators, andvolunteers, the conference attracted
about 550 people. As the table shows,they represented 44 differentcountries. Germany was the mostrepresented country (more than 80participants). This was followed bythe United Kingdom (more than 70participants), the United States andBelgium (more than 30 participants),and the Netherlands (27 participants).Represented with 20 or moreparticipants were Sweden, Canada,and Italy. More than 10 participantseach came from Spain, France,Switzerland, Austria, Finland, Israel,Slovenia, the Czech Republic, Poland,and Taiwan. Up to10 participants camefrom Australia, Denmark, Russia,Greece, and Hungary. Up to 5participants came from Ireland, Japan,Norway, Estonia, Lithuania, Iran,Malta, Iceland, Georgia, Romania,Turkey, Ukraine, Armenia, Bosnia andHerzegovina, India, Korea, Latvia,New Zealand, Pakistan, Serbia, andSouth Africa.
Around 63 percent came fromWestern Europe, around 15 percentfrom Central and Eastern Europe,around 12 percent from NorthAmerica, around 8 percent from theMiddle and Far East, around 2 percentfrom Australia and New Zealand, andless than 1 percent from Africa.
The conference’s theme wasUnderstanding Crime: Structural andDevelopmental Dimensions, and theirImplications for Policy. The openingceremony and reception on Saturdayevening were attended by mostparticipants. Representatives of theFederal Ministry of Justice (Berlin),the State Ministry of Justice(Stuttgart), the City, and theUniversity of Tübingen gave welcomeaddresses. From Sunday morning toMonday afternoon, central fields ofthe main theme were dealt with in fourwell-attended plenary meetings.
The first plenary was devoted toLongitudinal Studies on Criminalityand Crime. Presenters were KlausBoers (University of Münster,Germany) and Ineke Haen Marshall(Northeastern University, USA). Thetopic of the second plenary meetingwas Public Opinion and CrimeControl through Policing and Law
Another Successful ESC Conference Continued from page 1
EUROPEAN SOCIETY OF CRIMINOLOGY DECEMBER 2006 PAGE 9
A quartet of ESC presidents
Enforcement. Presenters were Jan J.M. van Dijk (University of Tilburg, theNetherlands) and Gorazd Meško(University of Maribor, Slovenia). Thethird plenary was on Crime Controlthrough Prosecution, Adjudication,and Sentencing.Speakers were Jörg-Martin Jehle(University ofGöttingen, Germany)and Tapio Lappi-Seppälä (NationalResearch Institute ofLegal Policy, Helsinki,Finland). The fourthplenary was devotedto the topic of CrimeControl throughDeprivation ofLiberty andTreatment ofOffenders. Speakerswere Alison Liebling(University ofCambridge, UnitedKingdom) andSantiago RedondoIllescas (University ofBarcelona, Spain).
Otherwise the conferenceprogramme consisted of 125 panelsessions, round tables, and specialmeetings, dealing with a broadspectrum of other criminologicalconcerns. Some 35 of them were pre-arranged, i.e. panel sessions with a
specific subject proposed by a singlescholar or by a group of scholars, withpresenters and presentationsproposed in advance. The others werethematic sessions put together by theco-organisers and their aides. A postersession attracted 30 exhibitors.
Apart from the lively, crowdedwelcome reception, hosted by theInstitute of Criminology and theFederal Ministry of Justice, withsupport by the Association ofTübingen Criminologists (wine), thesocial programme included two otherlarge events: an ice-cream, wine, and
cheese social, supported by theAmerican Society of Criminology (ice-cream) and the Association of German,Austrian and Swiss Criminologists(wine); a gala-dinner in the historicMonastery of Bebenhausen nearTübingen, with a hunting horn band
and a specialperformance by the“JapaneseDrummers” ofMunich.Professionalexcursions wereavailable to themuseum of prisonhistory inLudwigsburg, aforensic clinic inZwiefalten, and acriminal court inTübingen. Themost prominentsight-seeing venuewas Castle Hohen-zollern nearHechingen, wherethe last Germanemperors´ family
originated.The Tübingen conference attracted
and hosted more pre-conferenceevents (on Friday and Saturday) andpost-conference events (on Tuesday)than previous ESC conferences,altogether thirteen. This interestingdevelopment is worth supporting ifnot actively promoting by the ESCboard and future conferenceorganisers. It provides opportunitiesfor committees and groups to tackletheir special subjects and issues in arelaxed atmosphere without strongtime boundaries, and to join in themain conference. The subjects dealtwith in Tübingen were, apart fromformal committee or board meetings:the last wave of the international self-reported delinquency study (ISRD),the ISRD studies in so-called Daphne-Countries, the European PostgraduateResearchers’ group, the increasingimportance of public prosecutionservices within criminal justicesystems, the recent developmentswith the European Sourcebook onCrime and Criminal Justice Statistics,and recent development of theEUROGANG network.
Hans-Jürgen Kerner with some of his team
EUROPEAN SOCIETY OF CRIMINOLOGYPAGE 10 DECEMBER 2006
simultaneous translation service forUlrich Futter, acting director of theBaden-Württemberg Ministry ofJustice.
Work and PlayMany people have commented on
the seriousness of purpose of the ESCannual conferences. Typically, whenpanels are in session, corridors andcoffee rooms are deserted. (Theplenary sessions in Tübingen were sopopular that Hans-Jürgen needed tofind a larger room at the last minute.)Working groups take advantage ofhaving their members together in oneplace by holding post-sessionmeetings. Snippets of conversationsabout prisons, gangs, desistance, andrecidivism can be overheard in thehost town’s bars and restaurants. Toprevent participants takingthemselves far too seriously, asuccessful conference should alsooffer ample opportunity fornetworking – catching up with farflung colleagues and makingunexpected new contacts.
The Copper Building wasparticularly conducive to meeting andmingling. The opening formalities overwith, participants got down to theserious business of searching out oldfriends and the nearest source ofalcohol. In the spacious lobby, groupsformed, expanded, dissolved, andreformed as introductions were madeand old friends located. Lubricated byplentiful supplies of excellentWürttemberg wine, conversationflowed.
Making it WorkAnyone who has organised a major
conference knows how much work isneeded to create an easy-going yetproductive atmosphere. Forwardplanning and attention to detail arevital. Hans-Jürgen and his team werehappy to benefit from the hindsight ofKrzysztof Krajewski and colleagueswho hosted last year’s meeting inKrakow.
‘The greatest task,’ says Hans-Jürgen, ‘is organising the abstracts wereceive into panel sessions. ElmarWeitekamp and I arranged the panel
programme. We decided to adapt theprocedure used in Krakow. We tried toread all abstracts immediately uponreceipt and contact their authors thesame day to accept or reject theirofferings.’
Hans-Jürgen and Elmar werefortunate to secure the help of JasminLöffler, a former graduate student ofEberhard Karls and now a part-timelawyer. Fortunately, Jasmin’s legalduties left her time to wade throughhundreds of abstracts, followingHans-Jürgen’s carefully prescribedcriteria. Her keen eye and scientificmind proved invaluable when actingas ‘first filter.’
Once the abstracts were accepted,came the Herculean task of sortingthem into appropriate panels, eachsession comprising four or five relatedpapers. As usual with the ESC, aproportion of panels come pre-arranged. This pre-arranged modelworks like a dream. The constituentpapers complement each other and achair is appointed by the panelarrangers, leaving no juggling act forthe overworked conference organiser.The remaining abstracts (the largerproportion of those submitted) needto be carefully categorised and linedup with sibling papers on similartopics. A couple of waifs and straysare inevitable but Hans-Jürgen isproud to boast that 95 percent of thepapers in Tübingen’s open panelsessions fit together like apple strudeland cream.
Conference secretary Maria Pessiuhandled all the practical arrangementsand designed the programme coverand contents layout. Hans-Jürgen’sregular secretary, Ursula Haug-Lénert,found herself working almost full-timeon ESC issues in the weeks leading upto the event. No ESC meeting wouldrun smoothly without the good will oflocal volunteer helpers. ElmarWeitkamp took responsibility for ateam of around 50 volunteers whohelped with everything from handingout registration packs to directingpeople to the right lecture rooms.
Inevitably, the odd hitch occurred.Five minutes before the first plenarythe lecture room’s electronics decided
not to work. The lights fizzled andwent out and when Hans-Jürgenplugged in the data projector, itexploded with an apologetic pop.Disaster was averted thanks to thecalm practicality of the CopperBuilding’s young janitor, ChristinePaal.
‘Without her I would have beentotally lost,’ admits Hans-Jürgen.‘She’s dependable, technicallysophisticated, and seems able to fixanything. She can work beamers,projectors, and sound systems, locatereplacement laptops, and rewirefrazzled nerves!’
Problems are always caused whenpresenters fail to show up, leavinggaping holes in carefully designedpanel sessions. Several peopleunderestimated the length of timeneeded to obtain a German visa, andone participant changed the title orthe timing of her presentation twelvetimes before finally phoning to sayshe was stuck in Helsinki with noconnecting flight to Stuttgart.
Making it SpecialPlenty of materials on German crime
prevention were on display
throughout, illustrating how advancedGermany is in this respect. What ashame so many of us lack thelinguistic abilities to appreciate thisfully! English language materials soldlike hot-cakes from the conference‘gift shop’. Hans-Jürgen and
Enjoying Correctional Wine
Tübingen: A Very German Conference Continued from page 1
EUROPEAN SOCIETY OF CRIMINOLOGY DECEMBER 2006 PAGE 11
colleagues were keen to ensure thattheir ESC meeting would bememorable for being uniquely Germanand more precisely that it shouldshowcase their local Swabian culture.Nowhere was this more evident thanat the gala dinner at Bebenhausenmonastery. A fanfare of hunting hornsannounced the onset of a seriouseating and drinking session.
What an opportunity to show offTübingen’s famed hunting horn band!The Bebenhausen monastery is one oftheir favourite venues, particularlywhen the university hosts eventsthere. The band counts severalprofessors amongst its brass-blowingmembers.
Platters of rich Swabian disheswere enough to challenge thehungriest guest after a hard daypondering the latest theories oneffective interventions. While notexactly Swabian, Japanese drumsprovided a memorable diversion
between the main course and dessert.The ‘Japanese Magic Drummers’
actually hail from exotic Munich butspecialise in ‘drums of the world’ andhave studied indigenous music and itstraditions round the world and havegiven concerts in Senegal, PuertoRico, Brazil, Cuba, and the UnitedStates.
What a pity that the rain also
Monastic Meal
Claudia Fried and Bruce Weber on the Drums
drummed downrelentlessly, forcingthe event insiderather than out inthe monastery’slovely courtyard!On a happier note,wine and beer wereas copious asrainwater.
Wine featured ingenerous quantitiesat another popularevent. TheAmerican Societyof Criminologytraditionallyorganises an ‘ice-cream social’ atevery ESCgathering. In Tübingen, however, theAssociation of German, Swiss, andAustrian Criminologists had the brightidea of supporting local industry bysecuring several barrels worth of wine,
from the winery of the HeilbronnCorrectional Institution! It’s great funto watch prominent academics tryingto shake hands while balancing aglass of finest Heilbronn weiss and amountain of raspberry ripple.
Excursions were offered toHohentübingen and Hohenzollerncastles and, for the truly dedicated,trips were available to the corrections
museum at Ludwigsburg Castle, hometo the last guillotine to be used inGermany; to a forensic psychiatricclinic housed within a baroquemonastery; and, most popular of all, toTübingen’s district court to gain abrief insight into German criminalcourt proceedings.
I recall how last year Hans-Jürgenexpressed some concern thatparticipants might find Tübingen smalland provincial after the bright lights ofKrakow. However, the ESC’s smallesthost city yet proved a real star. It is ahuge advantage to be able to goeverywhere on foot and it seemed onehad only to step into a restaurant orwander past one of the scenic streetcafés to be greeted by cries of, ‘Hello.How good to see you! Won’t you joinus?’
Memories of beer gardens on thebanks of the Neckar, vast plates offood served in cellar restaurants, andpunts laden with party-goers shouldlinger in our memories for just as longas our newly acquired knowledge offemale delinquency or policeprocedures in Bosnia.
Sara Harrop is assistant editor ofCriminology in Europe.
* * * * *
EUROPEAN SOCIETY OF CRIMINOLOGYPAGE 12 DECEMBER 2006
France and Finland though, nationalfigures are restricted to the populationof prisoners.
Some countries monitor recidivismrates over time. In the UnitedKingdom, the Nordic countries,Switzerland, and the Netherlands,measurements are held annually, orcan be. In Germany, there are plans tomeasure recidivism on a yearly basis.One-off measurements have beencarried out in Austria. In France andIreland, it is not clear yet whether theresearch will be repeated.
Each country handles crime in itsown way, so there are bound to becross-national differences in howcentral concepts are defined. Elevenof fourteen countries use records oncourt appearances to establishrecidivism rates. In these countries theoperative word for recidivism is‘reconviction’. Germany and theNetherlands include cases decided byprosecutors’ offices, but bothcountries use the term ‘reconviction’to delineate the events concerned.Norway, Finland, and Ireland are theexceptions. Norway uses police dataon charged crimes and Finland andIreland limit the definition of recid-
ivism to events of ‘reincarceration’. InNorway and Finland, there are plansto use other types of data as well.
In presenting their figures, mostcountries use a standard period ofobservation. In the UK for instance,most research uses the reconvictionrate two years after imposition of thesanction or release from custody. Othercountries, including France, Germany,and Austria, use longer observationperiods. Of course, as a consequence,their reconviction rates are higher.
Most countries take account oftype of offence and type of sanctionin calculating the reconviction rates.
The sanctions most frequentlymentioned are an unconditional prisonterm, a community service order, atraining order, a probation order, and afine. Demographic variables oftenused to disaggregate data are sex, age,nationality or country of birth, andprevious criminal record. In Norway,Sweden, Finland, Denmark, andIceland recidivism data can routinelybe linked to other data sourcescontaining social-demographicinformation (work status, education,income, and so on). In other countries,researchers foresee technical, judicial,
and political problems whendatabases of different origins aremerged. In England and Wales, anintegrated system is being developedcontaining information on criminogenicneeds. In the Netherlands, data linkageis at an experimental stage.
Making InternationalComparisons
While a growing number ofcountries use a standardisedmethodology to produce nationalstatistics on recidivism, the nextobvious thing to do is to makeinternational comparisons and find outwhat sanctions yield the lowestreconviction rates worldwide. Ofcourse, if one is seriously consideringsuch an undertaking, one should realisethat the problem of noncomparability ofthe recidivism figures may well besolved at a national level, but continueto be a hindrance internationally.
Table 2 presents the reconvictionrates of prisoners released in severalEuropean countries and the USA. Ineach country recidivism is defined as‘having a new conviction’, so there isno prima facie problem of incom-parability. Still, one has to wonder ifthe term ‘reconviction’ means thesame in the UK and the USA as in theNetherlands or France. Besides, thereare technical questions. What datasources do researchers in differentcountries use? What cases and kindsof offences are left out? For eachcountry the answers to these questionsdefine the universe of possible eventsof recidivism. It is unlikely that theseuniverses are identical.
Another problem is the definitionof the offender group. Can a prisonerin the Netherlands be compared to aprisoner in Scotland? Table 2 showsthere are slight differences in ageranges of the prisoners from the sixcountries. Knowing age is a strongpredictor of recidivism, thesedifferences must have affected thereconviction rates. Furthermore, if acountry is more restrictive in theimposition of an unsuspended prisonsentence, only high-risk offenders willbe sent to prison and it would benatural for this country to have higherreconviction rates.
National Reconviction Rates Continued from page 3
Figure 1European Countries with and without National Recidivism Studies
Present No responseNot present
EUROPEAN SOCIETY OF CRIMINOLOGY DECEMBER 2006 PAGE 13
Table 1Some Examples of National Studies on Recidivism
Country Reference Offender Group
Austria Pilgram (1994) Adults and juveniles sentenced in 1993
Denmark Prison & Probation Persons released from prison or with a suspended sentence inDepartment (2001) 1996-1999
England & Wales Spicer & Glicksman (2004) Adults convicted or released from prison in 2001
Home Office (2005) Juveniles (10-17) convicted or discharged from custody in 2003
Finland Hypen (2004) Offenders with an unconditional prison sentence and releasedin 1993-2001
France Kensey & Tournier (2005) Prisoners released from May 1996 - April 1997
Germany Jehle, Heinz, & Sutterer Persons sentenced or released from prison in 1994(2003)
Iceland Baumer et al (2002) All persons released from prison from Jan 1994 - Nov 1998
N. Ireland McMullen & Rudy (2001) Adults with a non-custodial disposal or released fromcustody in 2001
Decodts (2001) Juveniles (10-16) with a non-custodial disposal or releasedfrom custody in 2001
Norway Statistics Norway (2006) Persons charged in 1996
Scotland Scottish Executive (2005) Adults discharged from custody or given non-custodialsentences in 1999
Sweden National Council (2004) All persons found guilty of criminal offences in 1999
Switzerland Storz (1997) Adults convicted in 1986-1994
The Netherlands Wartna, Tollenear, Adults and juveniles (12-18) sanctioned in 1997& Blom (2005)
Considering the ‘detention rate’, i.e.the number of prisoners per 100,000 ofthe national population, the UnitedStates is far less selective in sendingpeople to prison than is Europe. Maybethis is why reconviction rates for theUSA are lower than for the UK and forHolland. It does not explain theoutcome for Switzerland, France,Northern Ireland, and Iceland, though.For these countries, notably, theimprisonment rates are low, and thereconviction rates are also low.Interestingly, Baumer et al. (2002)concluded earlier that recidivism ratesin Iceland are ‘not appreciably lowerthan those observed in other nations’.
Considering the figures presentedhere, we think they are.
Progress Made so FarTable 2 is merely an appetiser. It
raises more questions than it answers.A prison term is far from being ahomogenous sanction. There aremany differences in the way thesesentences are executed, both withinand across countries and the samegoes, of course, for any othersanction. So, before rushing toconclusions on data such as in table2, one should stop and think aboutthe pitfalls. The European Researchgroup on National Reconviction rates
(ERNR) is doing just that. This grouphad its second meeting in Tübingenand is now spelling out the conditionsunder which cross-nationalcomparisons can be made. When thiswork has been done, the ERNR aimsto publish annotated tables like table1, perhaps in a next version of theEuropean Sourcebook.
Making international comparisonsof reconviction rates is a difficult andsomewhat hazardous enterprise. To doa proper job, one should considercultural differences that affect thepenal systems of the countriesinvolved, check the nature and
Continued on next page
EUROPEAN SOCIETY OF CRIMINOLOGYPAGE 14 DECEMBER 2006
Table 2Reconviction Rates of Prisoners in Six European Countries and in the USA
Percentage of prisoners reconvicted at N years after release
Release ImprisonmentCountry period N Age range Rate * 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Netherlands 1996-99 69,602 18 and up 85 43,4 55,5 62,0 66,0 67,0 71,1 72,9 74,1
Scotland 1999 5,738 16 and up 120 46,0 60,0 67,0 71,0 England 2001 14,569 18 and up 127 58.2&Wales
France 1996-1997 2,859 13 and up 89 51,9
N. Ireland 2001 703 17 and up 52 45,0 Iceland 1994-98 1,176 18 and up 44 37,0 53,0
Switzerland 1988 6,393 18 and up 79 12,0 26,0 34,0 40,0 45,0 48,2
USA 1994 33,796 18 and up 600 21,5 36,4 46,9(15 states)
* Approximate figures per 100,000 population from the International Centre for Prison Studies/World Prison Brief
National Reconviction Rates Continued from previous page
logistics of the interventions imposed,and account for differences inmeasurements being made. At thesame time, it is a good way to learnabout different systems of criminallaw, variations in the application ofpenal interventions, and theconsequences these variations mayhave for the level of recidivism. So,since a growing number of countriesproduce standard statistics onrecidivism, why not make the most ofit and add international comparisonsto the agenda of criminologicalresearch?
ReferencesBaumer, E., R. Wright, K.
Kristinsdottir, and H.Gunnlaugsson.2002. ‘Crime, Shame, and Recidivism:The Case of Iceland.’ British Journalof Criminology 41:40-59.
Decodts, D. 2005. Juvenile Recon-viction in Northern Ireland 2001.Research and Statistical Bulletin 6.
Home Office. 2005. JuvenileReconviction: Results from the 2003Cohort.. London: Stationery Office.
Hypén, K. 2004. Released fromPrison in Finland 1993-2001 and the
Re-entered. Helsinki.Jehle, J., W. Heinz, and P. Sutterer.
2003. Legalbewährung nachstrafrechtlichten Santionen. Einkommentierte Rückfallstatistik.Berlin: Bundesministerium der Justiz.
Kensey, A., and P.V. Tournier. 2005.Sortants de Prison: Variabilité desRisques de Retour. Paris: Ministère dela Justice.
Langan, P.A., and D.J. Levin. 2002.Recidivism of Prisoners Released in1994. Washington D.C.: Bureau ofJustice Statistics.
McMullan, S., and D. Ruddy. 2005.Adult Reconviction in NorthernIreland 2001. Research and StatisticalBulletin 3.
Pilgram, A. 1994. ‘Wandel undregionale Varianten derJugendgerichtspraxis auf demPrüfstand der ÖsterreichischenRückfallstatistik.’ ÖsterreichischeJuristenzeitung 49:121-26.
Prison and Probation Department.2001. Recidivism 1996-1999.Kopenhagen: Department of Prisonand Probation.
Scottish Executive NationalStatistics. 2005. Reconvictions of
Offenders Discharged from Custodyor Given Non-custodial Sentences in1999. Statistical Bulletin CriminalJustice series CrJ 7.
Spicer, K., and A.Glicksman. 2004.Adult Reconviction: Results from the2001 Cohort. London: Home Office.
Wartna, B.S.J., N. Tollenaar, andA.A.M. Essers. 2005. Door na deGevangenis. Den Haag, BoomJuridische uitgevers.
Wartna B.S.J., and L.T.J. Nijssen.2006. National Studies on Recidivism.Den Haag: WODC.
Bouke Wartna is a seniorresearcher and Laura Nijssen aresearcher at the WODC.
EUROPEAN SOCIETY OF CRIMINOLOGY DECEMBER 2006 PAGE 15
team can then pursue. In addition, wehope to publish special sectionswithin issues. These may consist oftwo or three related papers, orpossibly two papers representingdifferent perspectives on a particulartopic.
The country surveys that appear inalmost every issue will be continued.In addition we hope to host a seminarat the annual ESC meeting at whichthe author(s) of the latest countrysurvey will present a brief oral versionof the survey and respond toquestions about crime, criminologyand criminal justice in that jurisdiction.
Finally, we would like to take thisopportunity to encourage members ofthe European Society of Criminologyto consider the journal as an outlet for
European Journal of CriminologyCentre for Criminology,University of OxfordManor Road BuildingOxford OX1 3UQ, UKEmail: [email protected] hope members will try to
ensure that The European Journal ofCriminology is available at their hostinstitutions. The quality of anyscholarly journal is dependent uponthe volume and quality ofsubmissions as well as the number ofsubscriptions. In this respect, theultimate success of our journal lies inthe hands of the membership of thesociety’s scholars.
Julian Roberts is editor of the‘European Journal of Criminology.’
ESC Working Groups Continued from page 3
around the ESC annual conference inBologna, Italy, 26-29 September 2007.The working group aims to organiseone or more panels on developmentaland life course criminology inBologna.
While much DLC research isquantitative, the EDLC emphaticallyinvites developmental theorists andqualitative researchers to participate.
The working group is co-chairedby Arjan Blokland and PaulNieuwbeerta (NSCR). If you work onDLC research and would like to join,please send your name, position,affiliation, and a description of yourcurrent research to:
Arjan Blokland or Paul NieuwbeertaNSCR (Netherlands Institute for theStudy of Crime and Law Enforcement)P.O. Box 7922300 AT LeidenThe NetherlandsTel: +31 (0)71 – 527 8527 (secr.)Fax: +31 (0)71 – 527 8537E-mail: [email protected]
The EHRHomicide is a dramatic and tragic
offence. It has high priority inresearch, public opinion, policy, andprevention in the European nations.Unfortunately, it is one of the most
difficult crimes to study due to its lowfrequency and high variability. Moststatistical sources in Europeancountries are not cross-nationallycomparable. Knowledge abouthomicide in Europe is extremelylimited.
Therefore, it is important tostimulate study of homicide inEuropean countries. There is a need todescribe differences in homicidepatterns across European countriesand to examine explanations for cross-national differences. Violent crimesresult from complex interplaysbetween individual and contextualfactors, including societal and legalinstitutions. Since these institutionsdiffer cross-nationally, homicidepatterns may also do so. Cross-national research is essential forgaining knowledge about homicideand testing for criminological theories.
To stimulate homicide research inEurope and to promote contact amongEuropean researchers working onhomicide studies, the ESC hasestablished the European HomicideResearch (EHR) working group. Itsaims are to facilitate research onhomicide in Europe, enhancecollaborative multi-national studiesand maximize internationaldissemination of homicide research
ESC members involved in homicidestudies are invited to join the EHRWorking Group. The first meeting willbe held around the next ESC annualconference in Bologna, Italy, 26-29September 2007. The working groupaims to organise one or more panelson homicide research at theconference.
The working group is chaired byPaul Nieuwbeerta (NSCR). If you workon homicide research and would liketo join, please send your name,position, affiliation, and a descriptionof your current research:
Paul NieuwbeertaNSCR (Netherlands Institute for theStudy of Crime and Law Enforcement)P.O. Box 7922300 AT LeidenThe NetherlandsTel: +31 (0)71 – 527 8527 (secr.)Fax: +31 (0)71 – 527 8537E-mail: [email protected]
Stan C Proband is a free-lancecriminologist who regularlycontributes to diverse journals.
The European Journal of Criminology Continued from page 3
Julian Robertstheir research. Submissions should besent to us at:
EUROPEAN SOCIETY OF CRIMINOLOGYPAGE 16 DECEMBER 2006
University of CambridgeInstitute of CriminologyMPhil in CriminologyMPhil in Criminological Research
World-leading criminologists Wide range of taught coursesVibrant research environment Highest level empirical research
Information and application packages available from:Graduate Secretary, Institute of CriminologySidgwick Avenue, Cambridge CB3 9DT, UK
EUROPEAN SOCIETY OF CRIMINOLOGY DECEMBER 2006 PAGE 17
been the first Western country to emerge from the crimeepidemic of the 1960s – 1980s, but almost all Europeancountries have followed suit. The European epidemicsstarted in the 1980s and seem to have reached their peaksbetween 1995 and 2000. Since then many types of crime,including burglaries and thefts, have shown dramaticdecreases. Figure 1 shows figures by country but withoutidentifying individual countries1.
The data in figure 1 show that the level of crime acrossthe EU countries shows curvilinear trends since the mid-1980s in all countries participating in several sweeps of thestudy. Results for the first four waves can be found inNieuwbeerta 2002 The key finding of the 2004 ICVSpresents a clear challenge for epidemiological criminology.
What macro-level factors inWestern societies can explain theupward trends in crime till 1995-2000 and the downward trendsthereafter? Conventional notionsthat crime is mainly driven bypoverty cannot provide the answer.Nor can competing perspectivesthat crime is driven by affluence.
Politicians and practitionershave understandably been keen toclaim the drop in crime as evidenceof the success of anti-crime policiesintroduced over the past twentyyears. Available statistics aboutpolicing and imprisonment sheddoubt on the validity of this ‘claim’.
Across the Western world bothpolicing and sentencing policieshave shown huge variation duringthe period under study.Imprisonment rates are almost tentimes higher in the USA than in theEU but crime rates have plummetedacross the EU as well. In some EUcountries such as Finland, Poland,and Estonia, imprisonment rateshave decreased since 1990. Crimerates went down there to the sameextent as elsewhere. There is noprima facie evidence that crimerates in Europe have been drivendown by more severe sentencing.
Resources available for policingshow similar high variation acrosscountries. Numbers of policeofficers per 100,000 vary in Europefrom around 200 in Scandinaviancountries and Holland to 300 inAustria and Belgium, 400 inPortugal, and 600 in Italy. In somecountries police resources havegone up since 1990 and in others
down. A general upward trend in policing efforts since 1990is definitely not in evidence. It seems unlikely thereforethat increased policing has been the driving force behinddecreasing crime rates.
The most plausible driving factor behind the curvilineartrends in crime is the availability of suitable targets ofcrime. Opportunities for crime have gone up together withincreasing affluence since the post-war economic boom.This has resulted in epidemics in volume crime across theWestern world. The finding that crime started to boomlatest in Ireland is in line with this interpretation sinceeconomic growth came relatively late to that country. Asforecast in a 1994 article in the British Journal ofCriminology (van Dijk 1994), crime booms seem to have
What Comes up Goes Down Continued from page 3
CALL FOR NOMINATIONS
Figure 1One year Prevalence Victimisation Rates for 10 crimes in 2004 and Results
from Earlier Surveys
0 5 10 15 20 25 3
Percentage
20041999199519911988
EUROPEAN SOCIETY OF CRIMINOLOGYPAGE 18 DECEMBER 2006
catalysed spontaneous counter-forcesin the form of better security anddemands for more community-orientedpolicing. Around 1995-2000 theavailability of suitable targets seemsto have reached a ceiling with moreand more householders andbusinesses having secured theirproperty against crime. This seems tohave been the determining forcebehind downward trends in volumecrime.
Figure 2 presents ICVS-basedevidence on consistent increases inthe use of burglar alarms acrossEurope. Rates of burglar alarms vary
across countries in relation to types ofhousing. But in all countries alarm usehas gone up significantly since 1990.Unlike resources for policing orimprisonment, private investments inanti- crime measures have universallygone up.
Better security against crime bymainstream society seemsincreasingly to have discouragedpotential offenders from committingvolume crimes such as burglary ortheft and thereby driven rates ofvolume crime down. Credit for thecrime drops should go primarily to theincreased readiness of the public to
invest in self-protection.The role of governments has been
of secondary importance. There seemslittle reason for triumph among thechampions of ‘tough on crime’policies. Crime rates are decreasingeverywhere in the Western world,regardless of national anti-crimepolicies. Countries that have investedcomparatively little in their state-based anti-crime policies are reapingthe benefits of crime drops againstconsiderably lower costs for the taxpayer. Governments are well-advisedto rely more strongly on market forcesin the fight against volume crime.Anti-crime efforts should focus moreon the regulation of crime marketsthrough financial interventions in theuse of crime prevention than inconventional criminal justiceinitiatives alone.
Notes1 Results of the EU/ICVS 2005
have not been released by theorganising consortium due to ongoingcommunications with the EC.
ReferencesNieuwbeerta, P,ed. 2002. Crime
Victimization in ComparativePerspective. Den Haag: Boom.
van Dijk, J.J.M. 1994.‘Understanding crime rates : on theinteractions between the rationalchoices of victims and offenders.’British Journal of Criminology 34 (2)105-21.
Jan van Dijk is director ofIntervict, Tilburg University.
What Comes up Goes Down Continued from previous page
Figure 2Percentage of Households Possessing a Burglar Alarm in 2005 Plus Results
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Percentage
20052000199619921989
* * * * *
EUROPEAN SOCIETY OF CRIMINOLOGY DECEMBER 2006 PAGE 19
EUROPEAN SOCIETY OF CRIMINOLOGYPAGE 20 DECEMBER 2006
New Criminology Books from WNew Criminology Books from Willan Publishingillan Publishing
European Sourcebook of Crime and Criminal Justice Statistics – 2006 (3e)Authors: Marcelo fernando Aebi, Kauko Aromaa, Bruno Aubusson de Cavarlay, Gordon Barclay, Beata Gruszczyñska, Hanns von Hofer, Vasilika Hysi,Jörg-Martin Jehle, Martin Killias, Paul Smit, Cynthia Tavares
How do police deal with crime throughout Europe? How many offenders are convicted? How many police officers are therein any given country? The third edition of the European Sourcebook of Crime and Criminal Justice Statistics contains datafor 37 European countries. In order to make the reader aware of possible limitations to the comparability of figures, allchapters contain information on offence definitions and recording practices. At present, this is the largest collection oncriminal justice and crime-related data covering Europe.
August 2006 173pp (158 x 242 mm)ISBN-10 90-5454-733-2 and ISBN-13 978-90-5454-733-4 (paperback) £29.50
Theorizing Surveillance: the panopticon and beyondEdited by David Lyon (Queen’s University, Ontario)
This book brings together some of the world’s leading surveillance scholars to discuss the ‘why’ question. The field hasbeen dominated, since the groundbreaking work of Michel Foucault, by the idea of the panopticon and this book exploreswhy this metaphor has been central to discussions of surveillance, what is fruitful in the panoptic approach, and what otherpossible approaches can throw better light on the phenomena in question.
July 2006 360pp (234 x 156mm)ISBN-10 1-84392-191-X and ISBN-13 978-1-84392-191-2 (paperback) £25.00ISBN-10 1-84392-192-8 and ISBN-13 978-1-84392-192-9 (hardback) £45.00
Adolescent Crime: Individual differences and lifestylesPer-Olof H Wikström and David A. Butterworth (Institute of Criminology, University of Cambridge)
This book seeks a better understanding of adolescent crime by studying the relationship between individual characteristics(social bonds and morality and self-control) and lifestyles (as defined by delinquent peers, substance use and exposure torisky behaviour settings) and their joint influence on adolescent involvement in crime, against the backdrop of the juveniles'social context – taking into account family, school and neighbourhood influences.
July 2006 272pp (234 x 156mm)ISBN-10 1-84392-177-4 and ISBN-13 978-1-84392 177-6 (hardback) £40.00
Forensic Identification and Criminal Justice: forensic science, justice and riskCarole McCartney (University of Leeds)
This book provides an account of the development of forensic identification technologies and the way in which this hasimpacted upon the legal system. It traces the advent of forensic identification technologies, focusing on fingerprinting andforensic DNA typing, and their growing deployment within the criminal justice system.
July 2006 272pp (234 x 156mm)ISBN-10 1-84392-184-7 and ISBN-13 978-1-84392-184-4 (hardback) £35.00
For further information about these and other forthcoming books, or to place an order, please contact
The Price of Sex: prostitution, policy and societyBelinda Brooks-Gordon (Birkbeck College, University of London)
This book seeks to address the range of issues and contemporary debates on the sex industry, including the demand bycustomers who buy sex, the policing of women who work in the street sex industry, and the violence that pervadesprostitution. It shows how these issues have been addressed in policy terms, the problems that have emerged in this, andhow a social policy might be formulated to minimize harm and enhance public understanding.
August 2006 312pp (234 x 156mm)ISBN 1-84392-087-5 and ISBN-13 978 1-84392-087-8 (paperback) £22.00ISBN 1-84392-088-3 and ISBN-13 978 1-84392-088-5 (hardback) £45.00
Managing Persistent and Serious Offenders in the CommunityRobin Moore (NOMS), Emily Gray, Colin Roberts, Emily Taylor and Simon Merrington (University of Oxford)
This book critiques the development of intensive community programmes for both young and adult offenders in a numberof different jurisdictions, examining their multi-faceted theoretical foundations and the strong political impetus behind theirexpansion. It includes a review of the evidence-base and a detailed study from the national evaluation of the IntensiveSupervision and Surveillance Programme (ISSP) – the most robust multi-modal community programme currently availablefor young offenders in England and Wales.
July 2006 272pp (234 x 156mm)ISBN-10 1-84392-181-2 and ISBN-13 978-1-84392-181-3 (paperback) £26.00
