No description available.

Surveillance has long been used as an enforcement tool to detect conventional crimes and identify and punish offenders. However, its watchful gaze has been strategically directed away from the area of corporate crime. Corporate crime has long been under-studied and under-researched, despite the fact that the damages it causes amount to millions, even billions, of dollars. Its omission from the surveillant gaze, however, has been no accident. Because corporate offenders hold higher positions in society and possess greater political and economic resources than conventional street criminals, corporate offenders have often been able to resist the regulatory attempts against them. This thesis explores the underuse of surveillance as an enforcement tool in corporate crime, but also examines the regulatory climate that perpetuates this. It explores the main tools for addressing criminal and regulatory violations that are used by law enforcement agencies charged with enforcing corporate crime. This thesis identifies and examines five barriers—cultural, political, economic, legal, and technological—that have acted to limit and even prevent surveillance as a tool of regulation against corporate crime. Through an analysis of academic literature and public sources, this thesis assesses the small number of initiatives where surveillance strategies have been attempted in the field of corporate crime and investigates the reasons the attempts have been limited in number, scope and effect. The aim of this thesis is to draw attention to underuse of surveillance in corporate crime and question the current regulatory framework. / Thesis (Master, Sociology) -- Queen's University, 2011-04-26 14:38:11.581

Politicians and scholars often frame schooling as one of society’s most important crime preventive measures. The object of the study is to examine and problematize the hopes and ambitions that have evolved around what the study conceptualizes as the crime preventive educational task of public schooling and its historical trajectory as articulated in government publications. Drawing on governmentality theory, the study focuses on the liberal conception of the autonomous and self-regulating subject, and how the liberal mode of government works through the governing of freedom. The study identifies three discourses on crime preventive education: The emancipatory (1970s onwards), the deterrence (late 1980s onwards) and the safety/security discourse (21st century). The discursive shifts identified are further analysed in respect to how i) the explanation of crime, and the relationship between the deviant and the law-abiding subject, ii) control and iii) freedom and responsibility, are conceptualized over time. The conceptualization of criminal behaviour goes from being caused by social deprivation, becoming instead a calculated rational act. Subsequently, the deviant is altered from a person in need of reintegration to a deterrent example and a risk. The problematization of control has a trajectory from being a matter of social control and integration, ending instead as a matter of risk control and prudentialism. The conceptualization of the kind of freedom and responsibility the crime preventive education should foster is also reframed, from a strategy to counter a lack of democracy and influence, to a way of making prudent citizens. In this, the notion of a collective responsibility has been superseded by a belief in individual responsibility. The key problematization vindicating the process has gone from how to integrate youths into a society in constant flux, to how to restore control if lost and how to protect a pre-given social order.

No description available.

With the knowledge that risk has become an omnipresent concept used to understand various social problems, this study aims to fill a perceived gap in literature by investigating the way in which risk discourse is applied to understand different categories of crime, namely traditional crime and corporate crime. It is hypothesized that risk logic is heavily applied to the understanding of traditional crime, with minimal attribution to conversations surrounding corporate crime. The pervasiveness of risk as a technique or tactic of government renders the study of its application to different types of crime an important addition to the existing risk literature. Using the method of a comparative content analysis, the parallels and discrepancies between the ways in which risk is used to discuss traditional and corporate crime by Canadian federal criminal justice organizations are explored. The results indicate a lack of focus on risk logic with respect to corporate crime, but demonstrate that risk discourse is perhaps not altogether absent from corporate crime discussions.

Thesis (MInternationalStudies)--University of South Australia, 2007.

Thesis (MInternationalStudies)--University of South Australia, 2007.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Carleton University, 2002. / Includes bibliographical references (p. 437-478). Also available in electronic format on the Internet.

Thesis (M. Soc. Sc.)--University of Hong Kong, 1998. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 109-116).

Thesis (M. Soc. Sc.)--University of Hong Kong, 1995. / Xeror copy of the original. Includes bibliographical references (leaf 68-75).