No abstract

White ethnicity is generally invisible and unexamined in racism, crime and justice debates. Serving mostly as a default comparator to describe visible minority experiences of crime and criminal justice processes, white ethnicity is seen as unproblematic as an ethnicity except as a potential source of racism. This article draws on aspects of `whiteness studies' in the USA and UK—focusing on marginalized white ethnicities—to explore racialized `white' ethnicity, both historically and today. Designations such as white `underclass', `new' migrants, `white trash' are offered to show that some whites are seen as `less white' than others within a hierarchy of `whiteness'. The article concludes that racism and classism towards marginalized white working-class ethnicities have criminalized these groups in ways not too dissimilar from the criminalization of visible working-class minorities.

Using qualitative biographical data from a longitudinal study of youth transitions, criminal careers and desistance, this paper casts doubt on the veracity and predictive power of risk assessment devices such as Asset and OASys. These devices, and the research on which they are based, suggest that earlier and current childhood and teenage influences trigger and sustain later re-offending. In contrast, we argue that focus must be shifted to contingent risk factors that accrue in late teenage and young adulthood. Secondly, risk assessment and criminal career research has ignored the influence that unforeseen and unforeseeable processes of neighbourhood destabilization and life events have in criminal careers and their cessation.

Drawing upon qualitative, longitudinal research with "socially excluded" young adults from some of England"s poorest neighbourhoods, the paper explores how locallyembedded, social networks become part of the process whereby poverty and class inequalities are reproduced. Networks of family and friends, rooted in severely deindustrialised locales, supported young people as they carved out transitions to adulthood in adverse circumstances. Examples are given in respect of informants" highly localised housing careers and their longer-term experience of "poor work".Paradoxically, though, whilst local networks helped in coping with the problems of growing up in poor neighbourhoods and generated a sense of inclusion, the sort of social capital embedded in them served simultaneously to close down opportunities and to limit the possibilities of escaping the conditions of social exclusion. Overall, and contrary to some recent youth sociology, the paper stresses the continuing importance of class and place in shaping youth transitions.

Although enjoying a period of renewed government policy interest and favourable research funding, youth studies has recently come under considerable intellectual attack, much of it from within. A common theme is that the major conceptual approach of most British youth research over the past twenty years - the sociological study of youth transitions - is not helpful in approaching ‘the youth question’. The paper locates these recent critiques in terms of the development of ‘two traditions’ of youth research in the UK; a development which has served to separate structural and cultural analyses and so to limit the theoretical potential of the field. A recent qualitative study of young people growing up in Teesside, Northeast England is then discussed. Close analysis of the biographies of two of its participants are used as the basis for a reconsideration of the nature of transitions amongst ‘socially excluded’ youth and a discussion of some of the limitations of recent critiques of youth studies. The paper argues that the sort of research, methods and analysis employed here provide one example of how interests in the cultural and structural aspects of youth might be integrated. It concludes by reasserting the theoretical value of a broad conceptualisation of transition in understanding the social, economic and cultural processes that define the youth phase.