Dangerousness, Risk and Technologies of Power

Pratt, John

doi:10.1177/000486589502800102

Cited by 52 publications

(39 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…As both O'Malley (2000O'Malley ( , 2001 and Garland (1996Garland ( , 2000Garland and Sparks 2000) point out contemporary criminal justice policy is often contradictory and oscillates between an economic rationalist approach cited upon the entrepreneurial self (both the law abiding citizen who should avoid crime risks, and the rational choice offender); and an expressive rationality concerned with populism and the regulation of dangerous others (Pratt 1995(Pratt , 1996(Pratt , 2000a. Individualised justice itself militates against the deployment of actuarial risk and the deployment of risk in contemporary penal policy 'emerge(s) from more than one system of thought' (Brown 2000, p. 106).…”

Section: Prudence Responsibilisation and Social Controlmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effective Practice in Probation: An Example of ‘Advanced Liberal’ Responsibilisation?

Kemshall

2002

The Howard Journal of Criminal Justice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article argues that the dominant emphasis upon effective practice in probation work, particularly the emergence of effective programmes can be understood as an example of a key mechanism of social control in advanced liberal societies. Utilising Rose's concept of 'responsibilisation' the article examines the role of effective programmes in the emerging social policy agenda of citizen re-moralisation, responsibilisation and inclusion exemplified in late modern advanced liberal welfare states. The article concludes that the embracement of effective programmes has reconstituted the probation service as a key agency in the social control and exclusion of those citizens deemed 'intransigent' or 'irresponsible', thus assisting in the demarcation of those who can play a full role in the welfare society from those who cannot.

show abstract

Section: Prudence Responsibilisation and Social Controlmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effective Practice in Probation: An Example of ‘Advanced Liberal’ Responsibilisation?

Kemshall

2002

The Howard Journal of Criminal Justice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…… justice has to be 're-affirmed' as an honourable moral value in itself and not something which the law mechanically requires In similar vein, utilising Foucault's notion of 'technologies of power', Pratt [43] has described how the relationship between state moral authority and law is reciprocally created and maintained through the state's control of that body of knowledge which both defines the criminal law and determines the characteristics of those who are labelled as criminal.…”

Section: Social Controlmentioning

confidence: 99%

Penal ideology, sentencing and the legitimacy of trial justice

Henham

2011

Crime Law Soc Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The paper explores the link between penal ideology and international trial justice from the perspective of sentencing. The argument is based on the premise that the perceived legitimacy of punishment is directly related to effective governance in criminal justice. As such, loss of faith, or lack of moral empathy by individuals and communities with the ideologies, processes and outcomes of punishment compromises the ability of criminal trials to function effectively in maintaining the 'rule of law'. The paper argues that more emphasis should be given explaining the moral foundations that underpin perceptions of 'justice' in sociological accounts of the 'reality' of sentencing, and proposes an analytical framework for conceptualising this. Adopting this approach, the paper draws on examples from national and international criminal justice to illustrate how the hegemony of penal ideology and its implementation compromises the ability of sentencing outcomes to resonate with the trial's 'relevant audience'. The paper then focuses on how penal ideology influences the construction of the factual basis for sentencing in international criminal trials, and considers the consequences of this for the perceived 'legitimacy' of international trial justice.

show abstract

“…Pour des analyses supplémentaires sur la dangerosité et sa gestion jusqu'à présent voir Pratt, 1993Pratt, , 1997 3. Ce terme s'applique à la charge de responsabilité de gestion du risque que l'État a remis entre les mains des individus, communautés et familles, qui sont conseillées, formées et tenues responsables de la gestion prudente et raisonnable des risques (O'Malley, 1999 ;voir aussi O'Malley, 1998).…”

Section: Résuméunclassified