Difference between revisions of "Cultural criminology"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
= Cultural criminology = |
= Cultural criminology = |
||
| − | + | '''Cultural criminology''' considers dynamic change, pluralism of values, ethnic diversity, conversely to an overly technological approach to security.<ref>D. Garland: The Culture of Control: Crime and Social Order in Contemporary Society. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 2001, p. 162.</ref> [[Culture aspects|Culture aspects]] in urban planning can for the most part be referred to the approach of '''cultural criminology'''<ref> E.g. D. Garland: The Culture of Control: Crime and Social Order in Contemporary Society. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 2001, pp. 6-11.</ref>. |
|
| + | E.g. fear of crime can be read as being a cultural factor in the context of the change of the political culture of response to crime. It formerly was attributed to localized and situational anxiety, but was later recognized to be a major social problem and characterized by contemporary culture. |
||
| + | In a similar vein as [[New_urbanism|New Urbanism]], cultural criminology entails a concept of [[vulnerability]] and [[resilience]]. |
||
| − | == Fear of crime == |
||
| − | Garland as one of the most popular proponents of the cultural criminology approach locates fear of [[crime]] as a criminological subject of study as well as a public and political concern in the context of the change of the political culture of response to crime as it took place in the Western world in the 1970ies<ref>D. Garland: The Culture of Control: Crime and Social Order in Contemporary Society. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 2001, pp. 6-11.</ref>. The decline of the ideal of rehabilitation of convicted, the emergence of new normative ideal of punitiveness and the evolution of “''expressive justice''” – meaning public shaming and humiliation of culprits together with overemphasizing personal feelings of the victim and public outrage over individual acts of crime – have introduced a new emotional culture into crime policy: Whereas fear of crime originally used to be investigated and politically perceived at the level of “''a localized, situational anxiety, affecting the worst-off individuals and neighbourhoods''”, it now became “''regarded as a major social problem and a characteristic of contemporary culture.''”<ref>D. Garland: The Culture of Control: Crime and Social Order in Contemporary Society. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 2001, p. 10. </ref> Accordingly, fear of crime can be read as being a cultural factor – if not “''cultural theme''”<ref>D. Garland: The Culture of Control: Crime and Social Order in Contemporary Society. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 2001, p. 10. </ref> – in itself, rather than being a dependent variable, in part influenced by (other) cultural factors. |
||
| + | ==Security related aspects and benefits== |
||
| + | Safety measures and security installations solely based on technological approaches can be ineffective if the cultural background of crime situations remain unconsidered. E.g. youth criminology in schools is raising although technical solutions are implemented. Additional social and school programs might be required. |
||
| + | Often, political response is required to ease the social tension (e.g. youth unemployment etc.). |
||
| − | This approach fits into Garland’s theoretical tenet that citizens’ knowledge and opinion about urban insecurity is “''based upon collective representations rather than actual information; upon a culturally mediated experience […], rather than the thing itself.''”<ref>Ibid.</ref> His sum-up argument is, however, more socially rooted: that media-mediated change in cultural practices has reduced middle-class citizens’ cognitive and emotional distance from insecurity, in particular from crime.<ref>D. Garland: The Culture of Control: Crime and Social Order in Contemporary Society. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 2001, p. 158. </ref> However, Garland goes on to identify cultural and institutional practices to construct artifacts which allow a continuation of imagined middle-class separation from crime.<ref>D. Garland: The Culture of Control: Crime and Social Order in Contemporary Society. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 2001, p. 158-163.</ref> He illustrates his argument with examples from [[urban planning]], especially the concept of offering citizens new middle-class type privacy in private public spaces, such a commercial malls based on architectures “''to separate out different ‘types’ of people''” and including commercial policing by private companies.<ref>D. Garland: The Culture of Control: Crime and Social Order in Contemporary Society. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 2001, p. 162. </ref> This, Garland suggests, has resulted in writing the publics’ (which is in fact economically consuming middle-class citizens’ in urban areas) fear of crime into the everyday culture and associated practices of Western societies.<ref>D. Garland: The Culture of Control: Crime and Social Order in Contemporary Society. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 2001, p. 163. </ref> |
||
| + | ==Approaches how to address it== |
||
| + | *Consider crime situation and cultural/social backgrounds; |
||
| + | *Find planning solutions for socially disadvantaged (new/other recreation areas, social facilities etc.); |
||
| + | *Integrate socially disadvantaged into public places; |
||
| + | *Avoid exclusion of certain groups. |
||
| + | ==Related subjects== |
||
| − | == Symbolization, humanity and built environment == |
||
| + | * [[New_urbanism|New Urbanism]] |
||
| − | As Garland also argues, the victim and its fears have become a “''symbolic figure''”, individual victims are taken as “''Everyman''” and the public opinion rests on the assumption of a constant increase in crime rates met by no efficient public response, thus reducing public confidence and reinforcing the perception of certain types of [[victimization]] as symbol of the state of public [[safety]]/[[security]] affairs in general.<ref>D. Garland: The Culture of Control: Crime and Social Order in Contemporary Society. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 2001, p. 11. </ref> The “[[%22designing out%22 approach]]” to crime and [[Urban terrorism|terrorism]] can be largely attributed to this symbolization tendency. |
||
| − | Many examples of community-enhancing constructions represent an “''elitism of architectural choice''”<ref>M. Gottdiener/R. Hutchison: The New Urban Sociology. 4th ed. Boulder, CO: Westview, 2011, p. 331. </ref>, that may in the end increase societal gaps and [[Social risk perception and communication of risk|perceptions]] of fear, as well as actual insecurity. Cultural criminology supports this argument from the point of view of a critique of the approach of “[["designing out" approach|designing-out]]” (crime and terrorism) through [[Environmental design|environmental design]]<ref>E.g. S. Geason/P. R. Wilson: Designing out Crime. Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design. Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology, 1989. Online: http://www.aic.gov.au/documents/9/E/8/%7B9E810185-7D54-4480-8EEC-D92D84C3FB36%7Dcpted.pdf.</ref>, as for example in the case of commercial malls based on architectures “''to separate out different ‘types’ of people''” and related risks<ref>D. Garland: The Culture of Control: Crime and Social Order in Contemporary Society. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 2001, p. 162. </ref>. Therefore, cultural criminologists are strong critics of the approach to "designing out" by certain choices of ''infrastructure'' and architecture. |
||
| − | |||
| − | Cultural criminology, in contrast, sets out to appropriately consider dynamic change, pluralism of values, ethnic diversity and, “in terms of method”, to “rescue the human actors”, among other things from an overly technological approach to security.<ref>D. Garland: The Culture of Control: Crime and Social Order in Contemporary Society. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 2001, p. 162.</ref> |
||
Revision as of 11:10, 11 October 2012
Contents
Cultural criminology
Cultural criminology considers dynamic change, pluralism of values, ethnic diversity, conversely to an overly technological approach to security.[1] Culture aspects in urban planning can for the most part be referred to the approach of cultural criminology[2].
E.g. fear of crime can be read as being a cultural factor in the context of the change of the political culture of response to crime. It formerly was attributed to localized and situational anxiety, but was later recognized to be a major social problem and characterized by contemporary culture.
In a similar vein as New Urbanism, cultural criminology entails a concept of vulnerability and resilience.
Safety measures and security installations solely based on technological approaches can be ineffective if the cultural background of crime situations remain unconsidered. E.g. youth criminology in schools is raising although technical solutions are implemented. Additional social and school programs might be required. Often, political response is required to ease the social tension (e.g. youth unemployment etc.).
Approaches how to address it
- Consider crime situation and cultural/social backgrounds;
- Find planning solutions for socially disadvantaged (new/other recreation areas, social facilities etc.);
- Integrate socially disadvantaged into public places;
- Avoid exclusion of certain groups.
Related subjects
Footnotes and references
MAP
<websiteFrame> website=http://securipedia.eu/cool/index.php?wiki=securipedia.eu&concept=Cultural criminology height=1023 width=100% border=0 scroll=auto align=middle </websiteFrame>
<headertabs/>
