The Globalisation of Crime Control: The Case of Youth and Juvenille Justice

The concept of globalization has gradually permeated criminology, but more so as applied to transnational organized crime, international terrorism and policing than in addressing processes of criminal justice reform. Based on a wide range of bibliographic and web resources, this article assesses the extent to which a combination of neo-liberal assaults on the social logics of the welfare state and public provision, widespread experimentation with restorative justice and the prospect of rehabilitation through mediation and widely ratified international directives, epitomized by the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, have now made it possible to talk of a global juvenile/youth justice. Conversely it also reflects on how persistent national and local divergences, together with the contradictions of contemporary reform, may preclude any aspiration for the delivery of a universal and consensual product

Responsibilisation and Rights: Explorations in Comparative Youth Criminology

Studies of international youth justice, punishment and control are in their infancy but the issues of globalisation, transnationalisation, policy transfer and localisation are gradually being addressed. There also appears a growing demand in policy and pressure group circles in the UK to learn more about other jurisdictions in order to emulate ‘best practice’ and avoid the worst excesses of punitive populism. However, existing comparative work in this area rarely ventures much beyond country specific descriptions of historical development, powers and procedures. Statistical comparisons – predominantly of custody rates – are becoming more sophisticated but remain beset with problems of partial and inaccurate data collection. The extent to which different countries do things differently, and how and why such difference is maintained, remains a relatively unexcavated territory. This article suggests a conceptually comparative framework in which degrees of international, national and local convergence and divergence can begin to be revealed and assessed.

Illusions of Difference: Comparative Youth Justice in the Devolved UK

Surprisingly, there has been little or no systematic research to date that has explored the significance of UK devolution for youth justice policy and practice. This article explores the extent of differential justice in the United Kingdom, particularly as it is expressed in the myriad action plans, criminal justice reviews, frameworks for action, delivery plans and offending strategies that have surfaced since 1998. In particular, the article considers how far policy convergence and divergence are reflected through the discourses of risk, welfare, restoration and children's rights in the four administrations of England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. For comparative criminology, the United Kingdom offers a unique opportunity to explore how international and national pressures towards convergence and/or divergence can be challenged, rebranded, versioned, adapted or resisted at sub-national and local levels.

Rethinking Youth Prostitution: National Provision at the Margins of Child Protection and Youth Justice

In March 2000, the Department of Health and the Home Office issued guidance fundamentally altering policy and practice with regard to young people in prostitution. 1 Instead of being arrested and punished for prostitution-related offences, those under 18 years old were to be thought of as children ‘in need’ and offered welfare-based interventions. The practice that has developed in the last three years has offered interventions that are located within both child protection and youth justice work. This article examines these changes in order to generate insights about the changing nature of youth justice. In particular, it is argued that the drive to manage the risks posed by young people in prostitution to specific organisations, takes precedence over either the desire to care for, or the demand to punish them. Through an analysis of how practitioners and policy makers responsible for implementing this new approach to youth prostitution talk about ‘risk’ and ‘responsibility’, ‘liability’, ‘protection’ and ‘punishment’, the article argues that the contradiction between care and control has been re-interpreted, such that there is noticeable blurring of the boundaries between welfare and punishment at the margins of youth justice work.