Risky business : mapping ethical landscapes and negotiating governance tensions when researching female offending

Whilst there is an excellent and growing body of literature around female criminality underpinned by feminist methodologies, the nitty gritty of the methodological journey is nowhere as well detailed as it is in the context of the Higher Degree Research (HDR) thesis. Thus the purpose of this paper is threefold: i) to explore a range of feminist methodologies underpinning 20 Australian HDR theses focussing on female criminality; ii) to identify and map the governance/ethics tensions experienced by these researchers whilst undertaking high risk research in the area of female offending; and iii) to document strategies drawn from negotiations, resolutions and outcomes to a range of gate-keeping issues. By exploring the strategies used by these researchers, this paper aims to: promote discussion on feminist methodologies; highlight pathways that may be created when negotiating the challenging process of accessing data pertinent to this relatively understudied area; contribute to a community of practice; and provide useful insights into what Mason & Stubbs (2010:16) refer to as “the open and honest reflexivity through the research process by describing the assumptions, and hiccups” for future researchers navigating governance landscapes.

Shifting global power and shifting state power

The adoption of the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (DRIP) by the United Nations General Assembly in September 2007 has been heralded by many as a major breakthrough in the promotion of Indigenous rights under international law. Many however are sceptical as to whether DRIP actually promotes Indigenous rights or rather limits them in ways that serve the interests of nation states thereby diminishing the universality of human rights with respect to Indigenous peoples. This paper will examine how shifts in global power from the United States to the BRIC nations (Brazil, Russia, India and China) are likely to impact on the realisation of the right of self determination for Indigenous peoples. It will start by outlining the right of self determination as articulated in the Declaration, and in particular how the United States and its allies - the CANZUS group (Canada, Australia, New Zealand and United States) - were influential in shaping its form and content. The paper will then assess the extent to which the right to self determination is realised in Australia, the United States and the BRJC nations to provide an indication of the likely future direction of recognition and realisation of Indigenous rights at a global level.

Restorative justice and “Empowerment” : producing and governing active subjects through “Empowering” practices

During the last quarter-century, restorative justice has emerged as a widely utilised response to crime in Western nations. This article, which stems from a Foucauldian genealogy of restorative justice, argues that its embeddedness within the discourse of ‘‘empowerment’’ renders restorative justice a politically acceptable response to crime. ‘‘Empowerment’’, it is argued, is one of many conditions of emergence of restorative justice. The discourse of ‘‘empowerment’’ underpins restorative justice in tangible ways, and has informed legislation and policy in Western jurisdictions. This article seeks to problematise the taken-for-granted nature of this discourse. It argues that the discourse of ‘‘empowerment’’ produces restorative justice subjects who are increasingly governed and governable. As ‘‘empowering’’ restorative practices are targeted towards ‘‘disempowered’’ individuals and communities, concerns are raised about the potential of restorative justice to disproportionately impact upon socially marginalised populations and to increase social exclusion.

Effective punishment experiences : the need for a more comprehensive approach to conceptualising behavioural punishers and reinforcers in a road safety context

Determining what consequences are likely to serve as effective punishment for any given behaviour is a complex task. This chapter focuses specifically on illegal road user behaviours and the mechanisms used to punish and deter them. Traffic law enforcement has traditionally used the threat and/or receipt of legal sanctions and penalties to deter illegal and risky behaviours. This process represents the use of positive punishment, one of the key behaviour modification mechanisms. Behaviour modification principles describe four types of reinforcers: positive and negative punishments and positive and negative reinforcements. The terms ‘positive’ and ‘negative’ are not used in an evaluative sense here. Rather, they represent the presence (positive) or absence (negative) of stimuli to promote behaviour change. Punishments aim to inhibit behaviour and reinforcements aim to encourage it. This chapter describes a variety of punishments and reinforcements that have been and could be used to modify illegal road user behaviours. In doing so, it draws on several theoretical perspectives that have defined behavioural reinforcement and punishment in different ways. Historically, the main theoretical approach used to deter risky road use has been classical deterrence theory which has focussed on the perceived certainty, severity and swiftness of penalties. Stafford and Warr (1993) extended the traditional deterrence principles to include the positive reinforcement concept of punishment avoidance. Evidence of the association between punishment avoidance experiences and behaviour has been established for a number of risky road user behaviours including drink driving, unlicensed driving, and speeding. We chose a novel way of assessing punishment avoidance by specifying two sub-constructs (detection evasion and punishment evasion). Another theorist, Akers, described the idea of competing reinforcers, termed differential reinforcement, within social learning theory (1977). Differential reinforcement describes a balance of reinforcements and punishments as influential on behaviour. This chapter describes comprehensive way of conceptualising a broad range of reinforcement and punishment concepts, consistent with Akers’ differential reinforcement concept, within a behaviour modification framework that incorporates deterrence principles. The efficacy of three theoretical perspectives to explain self-reported speeding among a sample of 833 Australian car drivers was examined. Results demonstrated that a broad range of variables predicted speeding including personal experiences of evading detection and punishment for speeding, intrinsic sensations, practical benefits expected from speeding, and an absence of punishing effects from being caught. Not surprisingly, being younger was also significantly related to more frequent speeding, although in a regression analysis, gender did not retain a significant influence once all punishment and reinforcement variables were entered. The implications for speed management, as well as road user behaviour modification more generally, are discussed in light of these findings. Overall, the findings reported in this chapter suggest that a more comprehensive approach is required to manage the behaviour of road users which does not rely solely on traditional legal penalties and sanctions.

Punishment and 'the People' : Rescuing Populism from its Critics

The term 'penal populism' is now reflexively used by criminologists to describe what many see as a dominant trend within penal policymaking in many western countries. The epithet 'populist' is used with no Jess frequency by media and other public commentators to refer (always pejoratively) to this or that political announcement, policy or style of political leadership, whether the context be specifically related to crime or some other arena of public affairs. In most accounts 'penal populism' (or 'populist punitiveness': Bottoms, 1995) is treated as a composite term. The two words are inseparably coupled and it is the penal that receives most of the detailed attention. As in more general political commentary, populism is tacitly understood as a negative and rather dangerous phenomenon, suggestive of manipulation, shallow-ness and demagoguery: in short, a corruption of normal, healthy democratic politics. As against such accounts, I want to suggest that debate about penal policymaking and its future -and particularly the prospects for more progressive policymaking in the area -would be assisted if populism was taken more seriously both conceptually and politically. This requires a decoupling of the concept of populism from what is habitually taken to be its punitive partner and that which defines its content. Currently the term is used without clear definition, let alone conceptual elaboration, to reference political pathology. Instead populism should be examined as a regular, meaningful dimension of contemporary political practice that has to be understood and engaged, not just denounced and extirpated. That is, I am seeking to make a case for bringing populism in from the despised margins to the centre of political practice and reflection. I will also briefly consider some of the implications this may have for penal politics specifically.

Talking the talk : therapeutic jurisprudence and oral competence

In Australian criminal justice systems, a wide range of pathways to sentencing and punishment exist alongside traditional court processes. In particular, therapeutic jurisprudence ('TJ') processes have emerged during the last quarter of a century and now occupy a key position in the criminal justice landscape. This article provides an introduction to TJ, highlighting in particular the emphasis it places on the active participation of offenders, before critically discussing offenders' capacity to engage with TJ processes. The article then summarises the research on the oral competence of offenders, and argues that offenders who lack oral competence may be disadvantaged in TJ processes. Finally, we provide an overview of the limited guidance that has been provided to TJ practitioners on how to maximise the participation of offenders with limited oral competence.

Bail and remand for young people in Australia : a national research project

Funded and endorsed by the Australasian Juvenile Justice Administrators, this is one of the first national scale research reports into the bail and remand practices for young Australians. A young person can be placed in custody on remand (ie refused bail) after being arrested by police in relation to a suspected criminal offence, before entering a plea, while awaiting trial, during trial or awaiting sentence. Although custodial remand plays an important role in Western criminal justice systems, minimising the unnecessary use of remand is important given the obligations Australia has under several UN instruments to use, as a last resort, youth detention of any kind. This research identifies trends in the use of custodial remand and explores the factors that influence its use for young people nationally and in each of Australia’s jurisdictions.

Child complainants and the court process in Australia

In recent years, it has been recognised that child complainants in the criminal justice system can experience difficulties over and above those of other complainants and that children can experience the court process as extremely traumatising. This can be exacerbated if children are complainants in child sexual offence matters and if they have to give evidence against a family member. This paper has three primary aims. First, it outlines the major factors that contribute to making court processes harrowing for child complainants. Second, it outlines some of the main initiatives that have been introduced to address these factors. Finally, it weighs up the evidence about initiatives designed to assist child complainants and concludes that such initiatives have had only limited practical impact for child complainants in the criminal justice system. The limited impact is attributed to the need to balance the rights of the accused with consideration for the complainant, a failure to translate legislative changes into practice, the impact of judicial discretion and/or a focus on protecting child complainants at the expense of increasing convictions.

What’s Oprah Winfrey got to do with it? The rise and rise of restorative justice

In recent years, restorative justice has become an immensely popular criminal justice option in contemporary western societies. Restorative practices have emerged in diverse parts of the world often in total isolation from one another – that is, they have emerged without knowledge of other, similar practices. This quandary prompts us to question how it is that restorative processes have come about, and what it is that has allowed restorative justice to become such a widely acceptable way of thinking about crime and criminal justice. The research project from which this pa-per stems takes this as its central problem, and aims to explore the many dis-courses which inform the field of restorative justice, or more specifically, the “conditions of emergence” of this field. This paper focuses on one of these discourses – the discourse of the therapeutic/recovery/self-help movement, famously championed by talk-show host Oprah Winfrey. It aims to investigate the ways in which the taken-for-granted nature of this discourse has permitted restorative justice to be-come an approved way of “doing justice”.

Submission to the inquiry into the high level of involvement of Indigenous juveniles and young adults in the criminal justice system

Introduction • The Australian Institute of Criminology (AIC) is Australia's national research and knowledge centre on crime and justice. • The Institute seeks to promote justice and reduce crime by undertaking and communicating evidence-based research to inform policy and practice. • The AIC is governed by the Criminology Research Act and has been in operation since 1973. • The AIC is pleased to have the opportunity to contribute to the Committee's Inquiry into the high level of involvement of Indigenous juveniles and young adults in the criminal justice system. • There is a great deal of evidence to demonstrate that Indigenous young people are significantly over-represented at every stage of the criminal justice system in Australia.

Queer criminology, critique, and the "art of not being governed"

This article builds on previous work that argues that a useful path for a ‘‘queer/ed criminology’’ to follow is one that takes ‘‘queer’’ to denote a position. It suggests that one way of developing such an approach is to adopt a particular understanding of critique—specifically one that draws from Michel Foucault’s view of critique as ‘‘the art of not being governed.’’ It then charts some of the possible directions for such a ‘‘queer/ed criminology.’’ While such an approach to critique has previously been discussed within critical criminologies, this article suggests that it is useful for queer criminologists to explore the opportunities that it affords, particularly in order to better appreciate how ‘‘queer/ed criminology’’ might connect to, draw from, or push against other currents among critical criminologies, and help to delineate the unique contribution that this kind of ‘‘queer/ed criminology’’ might make.

Democracy and the Project of Liberal Inclusion

Democracy is a multi-dimensional concept, ranging from definitions based exclusively on institutional frameworks (for example, Held, 2005, Przeworski, Alvarez, Cheibub and Limongi, 2000) to complex and integrated measures that include political and civil rights, democratic practices, values and, finally, a diverse set of institutional arrangements in society, including welfare, education, industrial relations and the legal system (Inglehart and Welzel, 2005, Jaggers and Gurr, 1995, O'Donnell, Cullel and Iazetta, 2004). This reflects the range of and distinction between merely formal electoral democracy and genuinely 'effective liberal democracy' (Inglehart and Welzel, 2005: 149), where democracy is firmly embedded not only in its institutions but in the values of its citizenry. Evidence from cross-national research confirms that formal democratic institutions, different dimensions of effective democracy, and democratic values are indeed strongly linked (Inglehart and Welzel, 2005: 154, Jaggers and Gurr, 1995: 446). Democracy is more than just a set of institutions, rules and mechanisms: it is a set of core values engrained in the 'lived experience' of its citizens. Core values of democracies are individual autonomy and egalitarianism, tolerance of diversity, and freedom from oppression for both individuals and institutions. Democracies restrain their governments by the rule of law and grant its citizens equal access to and equal treatment by legal institutions. Among these institutions, criminal justice and the treatment of those who violated rules and regulations represent sensitive seismographs for the quality of effective democracies, and the ways how democracies realise their core values.

“We’re not like these weird feather boa-covered AIDS-spreading monsters” : How LGBT young people and service providers think riskiness informs LGBT youth–police interactions

Research has suggested that lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) young people are “at-risk” of victimization and/or legally “risky.” Relatively few studies have examined the social construction of risk in “risk factor” research and whether risk as a concept influences the everyday lives of LGBT young people. This article reports how 35 LGBT young people and seven service provider staff in Brisbane, Queensland, Australia perceived LGBT youth–police interactions as reflecting discourses about LGBT riskiness and danger. The participants specifically note how they thought looking at-risk and/or looking risky informed their policing experiences. The article concludes with recommendations for improving future policing practice.