This thesis seeks to understand and theorise the process of penal transformation, using changes in penal policy within post-devolution Scotland as a case study. It is based on an in-depth analysis of the evolution, passage and implementation of the Management of Offenders etc. (Scotland) Act 2005, including interviews with key players at each stage of the process (politicians, civil servants, practitioner groups) and documentary analysis. The thesis draws on Kingdon’s multiple streams framework to explain how rapid changes in policy can occur. Kingdon argued that the greatest changes occur when a policy window is opened which allows three independent streams which run through policy at any one time, politics, problems and policies, to become joined (1995). However the thesis argues that to account fully for transformation, this framework needs to be developed to incorporate analysis of institutional structures which provide the most compelling explanation for the factors which lead to, escalate and impede change. Although structures are central in this analysis however, this thesis shows how both structure and agency are important in penal change: institutional structure forms the parameters in which political choice is made. Pre-devolution policy-making was carried out in partnership between civil servants and agencies and the rate of change was incremental. Post-devolution criminal justice policy-making has been thrust into a volatile and politicised environment, although this has varied under the different administrations thus far. The primary reason for the accelerated rate of change that occurred following devolution was because of the creation of new democratic structures which provided the means and the incentives to create rapid change but it also involved explicitly political choices by key members of the Scottish Executive. Somewhat paradoxically, once change was instigated, the structure of post-devolution political institutions became critical in mitigating the pace and rate of change. The existence of PR electoral arrangements together with the relative decentralisation of power (in relation to the ownership of criminal justice services) meant that change had to be achieved through negotiation and compromise. Institutional structure is also important in the extent of the Parliament’s ability to form any meaningful veto point on executive power. Overall it was new democratic structures combined with a political capacitybuilding project and the availability of a politicised approach to law and order from England and Wales which could be easily translated to Scotland, which together, explain the period of rapid change in Scotland during this time.

No description available.

Prosecutors have enormous discretion in the criminal justice system. Their decisions can ultimately impact and shape the course of the lives of the offenders whom they prosecute. This is certainly true for juvenile offenders considered for transfer to the adult court. Previous research indicates that serious, violent offenders are the most likely to be transferred to the adult court. However, very little is known on prosecutors' views of the role of the juvenile court, the process of transfer or the facts that influence their decision to transfer a juvenile to the adult court. A statewide survey of 800 Florida prosecutors was implemented using factorial vignettes. The results indicate that prosecutors support the idea of transfer generally, particularly when they are making the final determination to transfer to the adult court. Further, prosecutors indicate that juvenile transfer should be used sparingly, in extreme cases that are not appropriate to the resources of the juvenile court. The data were also examined to determine the effect of juvenile offender and juvenile offense characteristics on the decision to transfer a juvenile to the adult court. Analysis revealed several significant predictors of preference for transfer: age, threat to society, presence of a violent offense, ethnicity of juvenile, presence of prior adjudications, and amenability to treatment.

With over two million inmates, the United States’ prison population is the largest in the world. Nearly one in one hundred Americans are behind bars, either in prisons or pre-trial detention facilities. The rapid growth in incarceration is well-documented. However, social science explanations often stop at the prison gates, with little work on treatment inside prisons. This black box approach ignores important bureaucratic decisions, including the provision of rehabilitative services and the application of punishment. This dissertation offers a systematic analysis of treatment decisions inside the American prisons. I use a mixed methods approach, combining multiple quantitative datasets with environmental observation at four prisons, and original interviews of twenty-three correctional staff members. I offer the only large-n comparative analysis of American state prisons. Characteristics of the inmates as well as characteristics of staff are explored. I am able to analyze data at the state, facility and individual level. All of this is to answer a crucial and somewhat overlooked question; how do prison staff decide who should be punished and who should receive rehabilitative treatment? I find that theories of social construction offer insight into the treatment of American prison inmates. Specifically, I find that socially constructed racial categories offer explanatory value for inmate treatment. Black and Hispanic inmates are less likely to receive important rehabilitative programs, including access to mental health and medical care. Black and Hispanic inmates are also more likely to receive punishment including the use of solitary confinement in administrative segregation units. I find, consistent with theories of representative bureaucracy that staffing characteristics also impact treatment decisions, with black and Hispanic staff members expressing lower preferences for punishment and prisons with higher percentages of black staff members utilize administrative segregation less. I provide a historical overview of the changing social constructions of crime and prisons inside the United States, from colonial to present day America. I argue that the treatment of prisoners changes as our conception of crime changes. I discuss recent bipartisan attempts at prison reform and offer my own suggestions for reform of the American prison system.

The purpose of this study was to assess the extent to which community colleges have implemented major post-Virginia Tech campus safety recommendations. In addition to gaining a comprehensive overview of the safety policies and practices in place, this study assessed if campus safety policy implementation levels at the community colleges correlated with institutional characteristics, and the internal and external forces that helped drive the implementation of these policies. Focusing specifically upon the Virginia Community College System, data on the policies and practices in place at each of the 23 Virginia community colleges were collected from institutional websites and through follow-up telephone calls. Interviews were then conducted with a small group of administrators from various Virginia community colleges. Analysis of the data indicated that large variance exists across the community colleges, as some have implemented most of the major campus safety recommendations that currently exist, while other have only implemented far less. The results also revealed potential support for larger community colleges with more resources and more campuses implementing more campus safety recommendations. Interview data detailed that external mandates and internal college leadership are the most important forces driving campus safety policy change among the community colleges. A number of policy implications arose regarding where community colleges need to improve their campus safety and how to best drive campus safety policy changes in the future.

This thesis examines the interaction of criminal justice policy and social policy within the Prolific and Priority Offenders Scheme (PPOS), a government initiative which aims to reduce offending by persistent offenders. The research on which this thesis is based takes an interpretative approach to social inquiry and employs a qualitative methodology. It examines the operation of four PPO Schemes in the Thames Valley through semi-structured interviews with 22 practitioners and 16 offenders, and participant observation of over 45 multi-agency meetings. The interaction between crime and social policy is explored through examination of three aspects of the PPOS: the coercion of offenders within the Schemes; the working practices and roles of the police and probation officers seconded to the Schemes; and the way in which information and intelligence is used and generated within the Schemes. The central argument of this thesis is that the widely-accepted idea that social policy is being ‘criminalised’ provides an inadequate account of the relationship between criminal justice and social policy in the PPOS. Rather, this Scheme evidences a merger of criminal justice and social welfare agendas, which includes elements of the ‘socialisation’ of crime policy in addition to elements of ‘criminalisation’ of social policy. Whilst the ultimate aim of the PPOS is to reduce crime, and whilst social welfare services such as health, housing and benefits are provided in pursuance of this aim, the ways in which these services are provided accords with the ethos and values of social policy. The idea of a merger of criminal justice and social policy has relevance beyond the PPOS, providing a framework for analysis of other contemporary criminal justice policies, and contributing to broader debates in criminology which have for so long been dominated by the ‘criminalisation’ thesis.