What can we do to engender a more rational and less punitive crime policy?

David Indermaur

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    5 Citations (Scopus)

    Abstract

    This paper examines the question of what can we do, at a practical level, to respond to penal populism. It is argued that a comprehensive understanding of the nature of penal populism provides the best base for considering a range of responses across the full spectrum of precipitating factors. The paper begins with a sketch of the main understanding of penal populism articulated in earlier works, principally Roberts et al. (2003), then the putative causes of penal populism are expanded considering the contributions of precipitating factors at six levels. A number of suggestions and strategies at each of the six levels is then provided. Rather than being competing these strategies at different levels are seen as complementary although some will be more realizable than others. The paper finishes with a focus on the topic of public inclusion into the development of policy. A democratization of policy, it is argued, is crucial and, ultimately, the most profound way of addressing the challenge of penal populism.
    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)181-199
    JournalEuropean Journal on Criminal Policy and Research
    Volume15
    Issue number1-2
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 2009

    Fingerprint

    populism
    offense
    democratization
    inclusion
    cause

    Cite this

    @article{b16473024cb440c69b8d1c22724255cb,
    title = "What can we do to engender a more rational and less punitive crime policy?",
    abstract = "This paper examines the question of what can we do, at a practical level, to respond to penal populism. It is argued that a comprehensive understanding of the nature of penal populism provides the best base for considering a range of responses across the full spectrum of precipitating factors. The paper begins with a sketch of the main understanding of penal populism articulated in earlier works, principally Roberts et al. (2003), then the putative causes of penal populism are expanded considering the contributions of precipitating factors at six levels. A number of suggestions and strategies at each of the six levels is then provided. Rather than being competing these strategies at different levels are seen as complementary although some will be more realizable than others. The paper finishes with a focus on the topic of public inclusion into the development of policy. A democratization of policy, it is argued, is crucial and, ultimately, the most profound way of addressing the challenge of penal populism.",
    author = "David Indermaur",
    year = "2009",
    doi = "10.1007/s10610-008-9096-1",
    language = "English",
    volume = "15",
    pages = "181--199",
    journal = "European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research",
    issn = "0928-1371",
    publisher = "Springer",
    number = "1-2",

    }

    What can we do to engender a more rational and less punitive crime policy? / Indermaur, David.

    In: European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research, Vol. 15, No. 1-2, 2009, p. 181-199.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - What can we do to engender a more rational and less punitive crime policy?

    AU - Indermaur, David

    PY - 2009

    Y1 - 2009

    N2 - This paper examines the question of what can we do, at a practical level, to respond to penal populism. It is argued that a comprehensive understanding of the nature of penal populism provides the best base for considering a range of responses across the full spectrum of precipitating factors. The paper begins with a sketch of the main understanding of penal populism articulated in earlier works, principally Roberts et al. (2003), then the putative causes of penal populism are expanded considering the contributions of precipitating factors at six levels. A number of suggestions and strategies at each of the six levels is then provided. Rather than being competing these strategies at different levels are seen as complementary although some will be more realizable than others. The paper finishes with a focus on the topic of public inclusion into the development of policy. A democratization of policy, it is argued, is crucial and, ultimately, the most profound way of addressing the challenge of penal populism.

    AB - This paper examines the question of what can we do, at a practical level, to respond to penal populism. It is argued that a comprehensive understanding of the nature of penal populism provides the best base for considering a range of responses across the full spectrum of precipitating factors. The paper begins with a sketch of the main understanding of penal populism articulated in earlier works, principally Roberts et al. (2003), then the putative causes of penal populism are expanded considering the contributions of precipitating factors at six levels. A number of suggestions and strategies at each of the six levels is then provided. Rather than being competing these strategies at different levels are seen as complementary although some will be more realizable than others. The paper finishes with a focus on the topic of public inclusion into the development of policy. A democratization of policy, it is argued, is crucial and, ultimately, the most profound way of addressing the challenge of penal populism.

    U2 - 10.1007/s10610-008-9096-1

    DO - 10.1007/s10610-008-9096-1

    M3 - Article

    VL - 15

    SP - 181

    EP - 199

    JO - European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research

    JF - European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research

    SN - 0928-1371

    IS - 1-2

    ER -