Suchergebnisse

Throughout most of the twentieth century, Western criminological thought was preoccupied by theories of modern criminology, which were concerned with the question of why individuals commit crime. Since the late 1970s, however, the Western world has experienced new reconfigurations in the crime control field, one of which is the transformation of Western criminological thought. New crime theories have emerged in which the focus has shifted from the 'criminal' to the 'criminal activity'. Despite their importance, these developments have had no impact on the criminological thought in the Arab world, which is, to this day, is dominated by Western theories of modern criminology. This paper has three purposes. First, it discusses the status quo of criminology in the Arab world. Second, it suggests plausible explanations that help understand the current status of criminology in this region. Third, it discusses the relevance of some criminological developments (notably crime theories and environmental criminology) in the Arab context. In that eventuality, it argues that the Western developments might bring insightful crime prevention lessons for the Arab world.

ObjectiveTo survey the contemporary literature in the social and biological sciences relevant to race that examines both the reality and the usefulness of the concept. Race is considered a major correlate of criminal behavior, and thus a fresh look at the concept is of obvious importance to criminologists and sociologists.MethodSocial, genetic, medical, and criminology databases were keyword searched for articles on race that either addressed its existence/nonexistence or usefulness as a concept.ResultsWe find that biologist and social constructionists talk past one another and never venture beyond the comfort of their own positions. Genetic studies using very few chromosomal loci find that genetic polymorphisms divide human populations into clusters with almost 100 percent accuracy and that they correspond to the traditional anthropological categories.ConclusionThere is much to gain by recognizing that these categories differ genetically, and that we can dispense with the term race in favor of some other term such as population or ethnic group and nothing would be lost except a word.

Abstract The substantive area of criminology has increasingly become politicized with new paradigms arising to challenge the traditional perspectives. For the purpose of this analysis the voluminous amount of criminological research and writing is placed within three major paradigms: (1) kinds of people, (2) kinds of environments, and (3) power/conflict. The increasing articulation of the power/conflict paradigm has brought about an intensification of conflict in society and among criminologists. The future of criminology and subsequently of criminologists will be determined by the interplay of these and emerging other paradigms among academic criminologists and their competing expression among the public at large.

This paper contributes to a rethinking of animal abuse control and animal welfare protection in criminology, specifically, and in the social sciences more broadly. We do this, first, through a broad mapping of the institutional control complex around animal abuse in contemporary Britain. Second, we focus on the institutional strategies and practices, past and present, of the main agency of animal protection, and the policing thereof, in this society, namely the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (RSPCA). In looking back to this charity's growth since the first decades of the nineteenth century at the time of the birth of modern industrial capitalism and also to its current rationale and practices as a late-modern, corporate organisation, we explore the seeming paradox of a private body taking a lead on the regulation and prosecution of illegalities associated with animal-human relationships. Finally, the ideology and strategy of the RSPCA are explored in the context of the often visceral and culturally influential 'morality war' associated with proponents, respectively, of animal rights ('abolition') and 'anthropic' welfare proponents ('regulation' and 'protection').

This paper contributes to a rethinking of animal abuse control and animal welfare protection in criminology, specifically, and in the social sciences more broadly. We do this, first, through a broad mapping of the institutional control complex around animal abuse in contemporary Britain. Second, we focus on the institutional strategies and practices, past and present, of the main agency of animal protection, and the policing thereof, in this society, namely the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (RSPCA). In looking back to this charity's growth since the first decades of the nineteenth century at the time of the birth of modern industrial capitalism and also to its current rationale and practices as a late-modern, corporate organisation, we explore the seeming paradox of a private body taking a lead on the regulation and prosecution of illegalities associated with animal-human relationships. Finally, the ideology and strategy of the RSPCA are explored in the context of the often visceral and culturally influential 'morality war' associated with proponents, respectively, of animal rights ('abolition') and 'anthropic' welfare proponents ('regulation' and 'protection').

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