Thinking about Punishment across Space and Time

Abstract

Abstract. This short essay shows why the customary two-categories of punishment theories (retributive theories and consequentialist theories) should be increased to three to include a-normative theory and how that would aid understanding of differences in punishment thinking and policy over time and across space. Section I lays out conventional typologies of punishment theories and explains why a-normative theory should be added. Section II introduces the general literature on determinants of punishment policies and practices. Section III briefly discusses Eastern and Central Europe. Section IV illustrates how the normative and explanatory theories when combined enrich explanations and improve understanding.

Locating the Judge within Sentencing Research

“…The focus is on law rather than on the judge as a distinct actor; the judge is the means through which any rules and principles would be given effect. This strand of legal sentencing research is theoretical and jurisprudential, focussing more on abstract sentencing principles and purpose, and less on their application by the judiciary in practice (Ashworth, von Hirsch and Roberts 2009;Braithwaite 2002;Duff and Garland 1994;Tonry 1996Tonry , 2009). This literature tends not to consider the judge at all, or sees the judge as almost entirely constrained or 'locked into… sentencing arrangements' (Henham 2012: 17-18; see also Doak 2012).…”