FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2599430735> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2599430735 startingPage "99" @default.
• W2599430735 abstract "IntroductionThe study of cross-cultural and cross-national criminology and penology has the potential to offer a range of insights into our own system of criminal and community justice (Nelken, 2010; Pakes, 2015). With the advent of globalization, the speed of interchange in penal developments has accelerated (Nelken, 2011). This involves not just the exchange of academic and practice ideas, but also the ability of multi-national global corporations to become active players in criminal and community justice systems around the world. Cavadino and Dignan's (2005) definitive comparative study of international penal systems analysed the key differences in punitiveness between countries with neoliberal, corporatist or social democratic political systems. They viewed the USA and the UK (along with Australia and New Zealand) as exemplars of neoliberalism, and mounted a persuasive argument that neoliberal countries have the highest incarceration rates, not least because of the impact of their political and economic structures.An area in comparative criminology which has attracted substantial academic interest is the 'apparent convergence of penal policy between 'neoliberal' Anglophone jurisdictions (which is) exemplified by the adoption of a punitive and politicized approach to crime and punishment' (Jones & Newburn, 2013:439). Attention has been focused on the way in which crime control policies have been imported to the UK from the USA (Newburn, 2002; Jones & Newburn, 2006, 2013). To achieve insight into how probation may operate in future years in England and Wales, it is worth turning to our neoliberal American counterparts for a comparative vision of probation in different jurisdictions. Some southern US states (for example, Georgia) offer a dystopian vision of how for-profit probation may function without proper regulation. An example of probation delivery from California is also examined.Garland (2002) argued that the penal welfarist philosophy underpinning our criminal and community system was being supplanted by popular, and populist, punitiveness. His analysis of the culture of control noted the increased focus on risk assessment and public protection, both of which paralleled the embracing of incarceration as the answer to crime control. As the shift to punitivism gained purchase in USA during the 1970s and 1980s, probation's rehabilitative impetus waned and political support for a more punitive, 'tougher' orientation grew. The result of this was as unsurprising as it was inevitable: towards the end of the twentieth century, more weight was accorded to probation's law enforcement role, while rehabilitation and reintegration were deprioritised.The American probation systemWhile it is inherently difficult to measure punitiveness, it is common currency amongst criminologists that, if imprisonment rates are employed as a barometer, America is the most punitive country in the world (for example, Teague, 2008; Pratt, 2009; Travis, Western et al., 2014). Though mass incarceration has been an intrinsic part of the nation's penal culture for around four decades (Gottschalk, 2006, 2015), the punishment imperative has also firmly expressed itself within probation. Phelps (2013) analyses the upsurge of community supervision as a US criminal justice sanction and considers its relationship to mass incarceration. Her theoretical model locates probation within the wider continuum of punishment, and concludes that the paradoxical impact of probation is that it 'exerts both a prison alternative and net-widener effect, with the two forces often cancelling one another out' (2013:72). 'Net widening' refers to the potential of community sentences to convey the unintended consequence of widening the overall net of social control and punishment, resulting in those who might otherwise have been dealt with informally being channelled into the justice and penal systems (McMahon, 1990).As in the UK, the role of the US probation practitioner was originally designed to promote rehabilitation, and provide social support geared to prevent reoffending. …" @default.
• W2599430735 created "2017-04-07" @default.
• W2599430735 creator A5008351502 @default.
• W2599430735 date "2016-03-15" @default.
• W2599430735 modified "2023-09-23" @default.
• W2599430735 title "Profiting from the Poor: Offender-funded probation in the USA" @default.
• W2599430735 hasPublicationYear "2016" @default.
• W2599430735 type Work @default.
• W2599430735 sameAs 2599430735 @default.
• W2599430735 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W2599430735 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2599430735 hasAuthorship W2599430735A5008351502 @default.
• W2599430735 hasConcept C102587632 @default.
• W2599430735 hasConcept C118589477 @default.
• W2599430735 hasConcept C138921699 @default.
• W2599430735 hasConcept C144024400 @default.
• W2599430735 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W2599430735 hasConcept C185592680 @default.
• W2599430735 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W2599430735 hasConcept C2119116 @default.
• W2599430735 hasConcept C2776157319 @default.
• W2599430735 hasConcept C2777978526 @default.
• W2599430735 hasConcept C2779504321 @default.
• W2599430735 hasConcept C2780656516 @default.
• W2599430735 hasConcept C55493867 @default.
• W2599430735 hasConcept C73484699 @default.
• W2599430735 hasConcept C83645499 @default.
• W2599430735 hasConcept C94625758 @default.
• W2599430735 hasConcept C98184364 @default.
• W2599430735 hasConceptScore W2599430735C102587632 @default.
• W2599430735 hasConceptScore W2599430735C118589477 @default.
• W2599430735 hasConceptScore W2599430735C138921699 @default.
• W2599430735 hasConceptScore W2599430735C144024400 @default.
• W2599430735 hasConceptScore W2599430735C17744445 @default.
• W2599430735 hasConceptScore W2599430735C185592680 @default.
• W2599430735 hasConceptScore W2599430735C199539241 @default.
• W2599430735 hasConceptScore W2599430735C2119116 @default.
• W2599430735 hasConceptScore W2599430735C2776157319 @default.
• W2599430735 hasConceptScore W2599430735C2777978526 @default.
• W2599430735 hasConceptScore W2599430735C2779504321 @default.
• W2599430735 hasConceptScore W2599430735C2780656516 @default.
• W2599430735 hasConceptScore W2599430735C55493867 @default.
• W2599430735 hasConceptScore W2599430735C73484699 @default.
• W2599430735 hasConceptScore W2599430735C83645499 @default.
• W2599430735 hasConceptScore W2599430735C94625758 @default.
• W2599430735 hasConceptScore W2599430735C98184364 @default.
• W2599430735 hasIssue "1" @default.
• W2599430735 hasLocation W25994307351 @default.
• W2599430735 hasOpenAccess W2599430735 @default.
• W2599430735 hasPrimaryLocation W25994307351 @default.
• W2599430735 hasRelatedWork W1748957082 @default.
• W2599430735 hasRelatedWork W1870379241 @default.
• W2599430735 hasRelatedWork W1929263625 @default.
• W2599430735 hasRelatedWork W2037118121 @default.
• W2599430735 hasRelatedWork W2102137079 @default.
• W2599430735 hasRelatedWork W2152619614 @default.
• W2599430735 hasRelatedWork W2335048693 @default.
• W2599430735 hasRelatedWork W2521949823 @default.
• W2599430735 hasRelatedWork W2563309192 @default.
• W2599430735 hasRelatedWork W2566043520 @default.
• W2599430735 hasRelatedWork W2566411404 @default.
• W2599430735 hasRelatedWork W2567612391 @default.
• W2599430735 hasRelatedWork W2598198037 @default.
• W2599430735 hasRelatedWork W2741220873 @default.
• W2599430735 hasRelatedWork W2776043943 @default.
• W2599430735 hasRelatedWork W2984017160 @default.
• W2599430735 hasRelatedWork W3047041081 @default.
• W2599430735 hasRelatedWork W3209438775 @default.
• W2599430735 hasRelatedWork W585133609 @default.
• W2599430735 hasRelatedWork W867725853 @default.
• W2599430735 hasVolume "14" @default.
• W2599430735 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2599430735 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2599430735 magId "2599430735" @default.
• W2599430735 workType "article" @default.