Distributive justice and the crime drop

Dainis Ignatans, Ken Pease

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

15 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The present chapter seeks to link two of the central facts concerning victimization by crime in the Western world. The first is that the burden of crime is borne very unequally across areas and within areas across households and individuals (Tseloni et al., 2010). The second is that there has been a very substantial cross-national drop in crime as captured by victimization surveys (van Dijk et al., 2007) (Farrell et al., 2010). The authors seek to establish whether the crime drop has resulted in a more or less equitable distribution of crime across households. Inequality of victimization challenges distributive justice. Harms as well as goods should be distributed equitably. Changes in inequality would suggest whether we should regard the crime drop as unequivocally benign (inequality reducing or neutral) or have reservations about its benefits (inequality increasing). The possible outcomes of the analysis have differing implications for criminal justice in general and policing in particular. There is already evidence that policing concentration at least in England and Wales is not proportionate to the presenting crime problem (Ross & Pease, 2008), and reasons have been suggested for this, the writers’ favoured account being labelled the “winter in Florida, summer in Alaska” paradox (Townsley & Pease, 2002).
LanguageEnglish
Title of host publicationThe Criminal Act
Subtitle of host publicationThe Role and Influence of Routine Activity Theory
EditorsMartin A. Andresen, Graham Farrell
PublisherPalgrave Macmillan Ltd.
Pages77-87
Number of pages11
ISBN (Electronic)9781137391322
ISBN (Print)9781137391315, 9781349482917
Publication statusPublished - 2015
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

distributive justice
Social Justice
Crime
offense
Crime Victims
victimization
Western World
Criminal Law
Wales
Western world
England
justice
writer
present
evidence

Cite this

Ignatans, D., & Pease, K. (2015). Distributive justice and the crime drop. In M. A. Andresen, & G. Farrell (Eds.), The Criminal Act: The Role and Influence of Routine Activity Theory (pp. 77-87). Palgrave Macmillan Ltd..
Ignatans, Dainis ; Pease, Ken. / Distributive justice and the crime drop. The Criminal Act: The Role and Influence of Routine Activity Theory. editor / Martin A. Andresen ; Graham Farrell. Palgrave Macmillan Ltd., 2015. pp. 77-87
@inbook{a4bf634b0b854c029c5729ae40395a57,
title = "Distributive justice and the crime drop",
abstract = "The present chapter seeks to link two of the central facts concerning victimization by crime in the Western world. The first is that the burden of crime is borne very unequally across areas and within areas across households and individuals (Tseloni et al., 2010). The second is that there has been a very substantial cross-national drop in crime as captured by victimization surveys (van Dijk et al., 2007) (Farrell et al., 2010). The authors seek to establish whether the crime drop has resulted in a more or less equitable distribution of crime across households. Inequality of victimization challenges distributive justice. Harms as well as goods should be distributed equitably. Changes in inequality would suggest whether we should regard the crime drop as unequivocally benign (inequality reducing or neutral) or have reservations about its benefits (inequality increasing). The possible outcomes of the analysis have differing implications for criminal justice in general and policing in particular. There is already evidence that policing concentration at least in England and Wales is not proportionate to the presenting crime problem (Ross & Pease, 2008), and reasons have been suggested for this, the writers’ favoured account being labelled the “winter in Florida, summer in Alaska” paradox (Townsley & Pease, 2002).",
author = "Dainis Ignatans and Ken Pease",
year = "2015",
language = "English",
isbn = "9781137391315",
pages = "77--87",
editor = "Andresen, {Martin A.} and Graham Farrell",
booktitle = "The Criminal Act",
publisher = "Palgrave Macmillan Ltd.",
address = "United Kingdom",

}

Ignatans, D & Pease, K 2015, Distributive justice and the crime drop. in MA Andresen & G Farrell (eds), The Criminal Act: The Role and Influence of Routine Activity Theory. Palgrave Macmillan Ltd., pp. 77-87.

Distributive justice and the crime drop. / Ignatans, Dainis; Pease, Ken.

The Criminal Act: The Role and Influence of Routine Activity Theory. ed. / Martin A. Andresen; Graham Farrell. Palgrave Macmillan Ltd., 2015. p. 77-87.

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

TY - CHAP

T1 - Distributive justice and the crime drop

AU - Ignatans, Dainis

AU - Pease, Ken

PY - 2015

Y1 - 2015

N2 - The present chapter seeks to link two of the central facts concerning victimization by crime in the Western world. The first is that the burden of crime is borne very unequally across areas and within areas across households and individuals (Tseloni et al., 2010). The second is that there has been a very substantial cross-national drop in crime as captured by victimization surveys (van Dijk et al., 2007) (Farrell et al., 2010). The authors seek to establish whether the crime drop has resulted in a more or less equitable distribution of crime across households. Inequality of victimization challenges distributive justice. Harms as well as goods should be distributed equitably. Changes in inequality would suggest whether we should regard the crime drop as unequivocally benign (inequality reducing or neutral) or have reservations about its benefits (inequality increasing). The possible outcomes of the analysis have differing implications for criminal justice in general and policing in particular. There is already evidence that policing concentration at least in England and Wales is not proportionate to the presenting crime problem (Ross & Pease, 2008), and reasons have been suggested for this, the writers’ favoured account being labelled the “winter in Florida, summer in Alaska” paradox (Townsley & Pease, 2002).

AB - The present chapter seeks to link two of the central facts concerning victimization by crime in the Western world. The first is that the burden of crime is borne very unequally across areas and within areas across households and individuals (Tseloni et al., 2010). The second is that there has been a very substantial cross-national drop in crime as captured by victimization surveys (van Dijk et al., 2007) (Farrell et al., 2010). The authors seek to establish whether the crime drop has resulted in a more or less equitable distribution of crime across households. Inequality of victimization challenges distributive justice. Harms as well as goods should be distributed equitably. Changes in inequality would suggest whether we should regard the crime drop as unequivocally benign (inequality reducing or neutral) or have reservations about its benefits (inequality increasing). The possible outcomes of the analysis have differing implications for criminal justice in general and policing in particular. There is already evidence that policing concentration at least in England and Wales is not proportionate to the presenting crime problem (Ross & Pease, 2008), and reasons have been suggested for this, the writers’ favoured account being labelled the “winter in Florida, summer in Alaska” paradox (Townsley & Pease, 2002).

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84958907636&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.palgrave.com/us/book/9781137391315

M3 - Chapter

SN - 9781137391315

SN - 9781349482917

SP - 77

EP - 87

BT - The Criminal Act

A2 - Andresen, Martin A.

A2 - Farrell, Graham

PB - Palgrave Macmillan Ltd.

ER -

Ignatans D, Pease K. Distributive justice and the crime drop. In Andresen MA, Farrell G, editors, The Criminal Act: The Role and Influence of Routine Activity Theory. Palgrave Macmillan Ltd. 2015. p. 77-87