Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of figures and tables
- Notes on contributors
- Foreword
- Acknowledgements
- 1 Regulation and criminal justice: exploring the connections and disconnections
- PART I Regulation and criminal justice: framing the debate
- PART II Criminal justice as regulation: responsivity, alternatives and expansion
- 5 Nodal governance and the Zwelethemba Model
- 6 Regulatory compliance: organizational capacities and regulatory strategies for environmental protection
- 7 An intoxicated politics of regulation
- 8 Governing by civil order: towards new frameworks of support, coercion and sanction?
- 9 Counter-terrorism and community relations: anticipatory risk, regulation and justice
- PART III Regulation of criminal justice: monitoring, effectiveness and accountability
- Index
- References
8 - Governing by civil order: towards new frameworks of support, coercion and sanction?
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 04 February 2011
Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of figures and tables
- Notes on contributors
- Foreword
- Acknowledgements
- 1 Regulation and criminal justice: exploring the connections and disconnections
- PART I Regulation and criminal justice: framing the debate
- PART II Criminal justice as regulation: responsivity, alternatives and expansion
- 5 Nodal governance and the Zwelethemba Model
- 6 Regulatory compliance: organizational capacities and regulatory strategies for environmental protection
- 7 An intoxicated politics of regulation
- 8 Governing by civil order: towards new frameworks of support, coercion and sanction?
- 9 Counter-terrorism and community relations: anticipatory risk, regulation and justice
- PART III Regulation of criminal justice: monitoring, effectiveness and accountability
- Index
- References
Summary
Introduction
This chapter examines new forms of regulating the ‘antisocial’ conduct of individuals in the United Kingdom which have emerged over the last fifteen years. These forms of contemporary regulation have been characterized by a greater emphasis on directive, supervisory and punitive policy tools, including a reliance on sanctions (Schram et al. 2008). What has emerged is a move away from a purely criminal law model to an increasing reliance on other forms of legal regulation of conduct, including hybrid models where criminal and civil law increasingly overlap (Ashworth 2000). There has been a move away from simply increasing sanctions for past ‘bad’ behaviour (whether criminal or civil), towards requiring subjects to submit to programmes which seek to reform their behaviour into the future. While it may be argued that in criminal legal punishment there has always been an element which seeks to reform the offender, what is unique about these new forms of governance is that they are not linked to criminal law sanctions following from conviction by the court, but rather to the civil law (though in some cases criminal sanctions may eventually result for failure to comply).
These developments may be located within a historical tradition of managing marginalized populations and the use of the welfare state and welfare sanctions to reform the behaviour of problematized populations dating back to the late 1800s (Deacon 2004; O'Malley 2009).
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Regulation and Criminal JusticeInnovations in Policy and Research, pp. 192 - 210Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2010
References
and (1992) Responsive Regulation: Transcending the Regulation Debate. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
(1983) ‘Some Neglected Features of Contemporary Penal Systems’, in and (eds.), The Power to Punish. London: Heinemann, pp. 84–100.Google Scholar
and (2004) Acceptable Behaviour Contracts Addressing Antisocial Behaviour in the London Borough of Islington. London: Home Office.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (2008) ‘Do We Need a “Naughty Step”? Rethinking the Parenting Order after Ten Years’, Howard Journal, 47(5), 470–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (2005) ‘The Challenge of Anti-social Behaviour: New Relationships Between the State, Children and Parents’, International Journal of Law, Policy and the Family, 19(3), 395–420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(2009) Guidance on the Use of Family Interventional Tenancies. London: Communities and Local Government.Google Scholar
(2003) ‘“Contractual Governance” of Deviant Behaviour’, Journal of Law and Society, 30(4), 479–505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(1999) The Will to Empower: Democratic Citizens and Other Subjects. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
, and (2008) ‘An Analysis of Offending by Young People Looked after by Local Authorities’, Youth Justice, 8(2), 134–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(2004) ‘Justifying Conditionality: The Case of Anti-social Tenants’, Housing Studies, 19(6), 911–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(2007a) Sanction of Housing Benefit in Relation to Anti-social Behaviour: Guidance for Pilot Areas. London: Department for Work and Pensions.Google Scholar
(2007b) Housing Benefit Guidance on Housing Benefit Anti-social Behaviour Sanction for Local Authorities Participating in the Pilot Scheme. London: Department for Work and Pensions.Google Scholar
(2008) No One Written Off: Reforming Welfare to Reward Responsibility. London: Department for Work and Pensions.Google Scholar
, , and (2001) Evaluation of the Dundee Families Project. Edinburgh: Scottish Executive.Google Scholar
, and (2008a) An Evaluation of the Sanction of Housing Benefit: Scoping Report. London: Department for Work and Pensions.Google Scholar
, and (2008b) An Evaluation of the Sanction of Housing Benefit: Progress Update Report. London: Department for Work and Pensions.Google Scholar
(2007) ‘ “Sinbin” Solutions: The “Pioneer” Projects for “Problem Families” and the Forgetfulness of Social Policy Research’, Critical Social Policy, 27(2), 203–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (2002) Positive Parenting: The National Evaluation of the Youth Justice Board's Parenting Programme. London: Youth Justice Board.Google Scholar
(2008) ‘Room for Resistance? Parenting Orders, Disciplinary Power and the Production of “the Bad Parent” ’, in (ed.), ASBO Nation: The Criminalisation of Nuisance. Bristol: Policy Press, pp. 203–22.Google Scholar
(2007) Guidance on the Use of Acceptable Behaviour Contracts and Agreements. London: Home Office.Google Scholar
(2006) ‘The Changing Legal Framework: From Landlords to Agents of Social Control’, in (ed.), Housing and Anti-social Behaviour: Perspectives, Policy and Practice. Bristol: Policy Press, pp. 137–55.Google Scholar
and (2006) ‘Antisocial Behaviour Legislation Meets Children's Services: Challenging Perspectives on Children, Parents and the State’, Critical Social Policy, 26(1), 101–20.Google Scholar
(2004) ‘Controlling Letting Arrangements? Landlords and Surveillance in the Private Rented Sector’, Surveillance and Society, 2(4), 513–28.Google Scholar
(2008) ‘Truancy and Coercive Consent; Is There an Alternative?’, Educational Review, 60(4), 375–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and (2004) What Works in Parenting Support? A Review of the International Evidence (Research Report 574). London: Department for Education and Skills.Google Scholar
, , , , and (2006) Anti-social Behaviour Intensive Family Support Projects: An Evaluation of Six Pioneering Projects. London: Office of the Deputy Prime Minister.Google Scholar
and (2009) ‘Family Intervention Projects – Sites of Subversion and Resilience’, in and (eds.), Subversive Citizens: Power, Agency and Resistance in Public Services. Bristol: Policy Press.Google Scholar
(2006) ‘Antisocial Families and Withholding Welfare Support’, Critical Social Policy, 2(1), 121–43.Google Scholar
(2004) Evaluating the Use of Introductory and Starter Tenancies. Cardiff: Welsh Assembly Government.Google Scholar
and (1998) Starter Tenancies and Introductory Tenancies: An Evaluation. London: Housing Corporation.Google Scholar
, and (2008) ‘Neo-liberal Poverty Governance: Race, Place and the Punitive Turn In US Welfare Policy’, Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, 1(1), 17–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (2006) ‘Regulating Offensive Conduct through Two-Step Prohibitions’, in and (eds.), Incivilities: Regulating Offensive Behaviour. Oxford: Hart Publishing, pp. 173–94.Google Scholar
(2009) ‘Governing by civil order: an economist's perspective’, paper (unpublished) presented at the ESRC Regulation and Criminal Justice Seminar, University of Manchester, 11 February 2009.
(2000) ‘Punishment and Conditional Citizenship’, Punishment and Society, 2(1), 23–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
with (2007) The ASBO: Wrong Turning, Dead End. London: Howard League for Penal Reform.Google Scholar
and (2008) ‘Punishing “Poor Parents”: “Respect”, “Responsibility” and Parenting Orders in Scotland’, Youth Justice, 7(1), 5–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(2008) ‘Recuperation and Rehabilitation and the Residential Option: The Brentwood Centre for Mothers and Children’, Twentieth Century British History, 19(4), 502–29.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
(2007) ‘Pre-crime and Post-criminology’, Theoretical Criminology, 11(2), 261–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 2
- Cited by