Disorderly analysis: how might we best understand the riots in August 2011?

Purpose – The general consensus amongst policy makers regarding the causal explanations for the involvement of young people in the August Riots of 2011 seems to have centred on “mindless criminality” and “thuggery”. These explanations have tended to be quite one dimensional where complexity has been avoided in favour of simplicity. Issues of structural inequality, poverty and social injustice appeared to be negated by political figures in favour of an emphasis on neo-liberal, individualistic explanations and solutions. Understanding that there have been very different interpretations of the riots, where some have come to very different opinions from the same data, the purpose of this paper is to revisit the causes and meanings of the rioting that took place over a five-day period in August 2011. Second by drawing on social democratic perspectives the paper stipulates several factors that if not dealt with may give rise to future rioting. Design/methodology/approach – The paper takes the form of a conceptual analysis. I draw on the work of a number of key academics and commentators to enrich the analysis. Findings – Within the paper it is argued that the policies that emanate from neo-liberal political ideologies have impacted disproportionately on working class children and young people. More specifically the paper finds that problems experienced are deemed to be the responsibility of the individual, side-lining the influence of ecological and socio-economic factors. Originality/value – In the light of the criticisms of neo-liberalistic approaches, social democratic perspectives are drawn upon in order to consider new ways of approaching the issues facing children and young people within contemporary society. Such perspectives are concerned with addressing structural inequality, poverty and social injustice

Targeting, labelling and stigma: challenging the criminalisation of children and young people

By creating 'outsiders'... labelling invariably gives rise to repeat interventions of increasing intensity that... ultimately establish, consolidate, and/or confirm offender 'identities'. Such 'identities' attract further intervention and/or negative reaction and so the process continues. (Goldson, 2010)As the above quote attests, labelling theorists recognise the harmful impact of formal system contact on the individual and contend that problems occur when members of society become intolerant towards the individual's offending, forming a 'negative social reaction', invoking damaging consequences for the 'offender' (ibid).</p

Risk, prevention and early intervention: youth justice responses to girls

Purpose: The purpose of the paper is to examine the discourses of risk, prevention and early intervention, with particular reference, the treatment of girls in the contemporary Youth Justice System. Design: The paper has two broad objectives: firstly, the paper reviews the literature on early intervention and youth crime prevention policy. Secondly, the paper focuses on youth justice practice in relation to girls who are engaged in youth justice processes or “at risk” of criminal involvement. Findings: The paper argues that: girls are drawn into the system for welfare rather than crime-related matters; and youth justice policy and practice seems to negate girls’ gender-specific needs. Moreover, the paper highlights research evidence and practice-based experience, and contends that youth justice policy and practice must be re-developed in favour of incorporating gender-specific, child and young person centred practices. Value: The results presented in this article will be particularly pertinent to policy makers, educators and practitioners in the sphere of youth justice, especially since the contemporary youth justice system, in its rigorous, actuarial pursuance of risk management, fails to distinguish between “gender” within its formulaic assessment documentation

Beyond pre-emptive criminalisation: Towards a child-friendly youth justice

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is first, to explore the impact of risk‐focussed intervention on the lives of young offenders and young people defined to be “at risk” of crime. Second, the paper considers “alternative perspectives” and the prospect of a youth justice predicated upon the principles of informal justice, child‐friendly values and the notion of inclusion.Design/methodology/approachThe first part of the paper reviews the theory and literature on early‐preventative intervention in the youth justice system. The second part of the paper explores “alternative perspectives”, drawing on restorative justice, restorative approaches and diversionary measures.FindingsThe paper presents three general findings. First, young people can be subject to youth justice intervention without a “presenting problem” or offence committed. More pertinently this form of pre‐emptive criminalisation violates the child's human rights, due‐process and legal safeguards. Second, young people who are drawn into the net of formal youth justice intervention can suffer from the stigmatising and labelling effects of being criminalised. Third, there is a pressing need for youth justice policy and practice to be transformed, in order to allow for the implementation of more informal, diversionary and restorative measures.Originality/valueThe paper has great value for students of youth justice, and policy makers, especially the conservative‐liberal democrat government who wish to cut costs, introduce restorative justice on a large scale and appear to be in favour of diverting young people away from formal youth justice intervention.</jats:sec

The benefits of participation for young offenders

Originality/value - This paper argues that despite good policy and practice intentions, the involvement of young offenders in the design and delivery of youth justice services requires further development. Indeed, there needs to be greater opportunities provided to young people, across the Youth Justice System, to "share their views" and influence practice.Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to evaluate the benefits of participation for young offenders. It also explores some of the challenges giving young people "a say".Design/methodology/approach - This paper reviews and critiques a number of published sources, including peer reviewed journal articles. By critically reviewing the literature, the paper intends to promote discussion and ignite debate on the topic of "offender participation".Findings - This paper argues that if young people are given a voice and provided with the opportunity to influence how a service is implemented it is more probable that the child will be "rehabilitated". Furthermore, participation has many benefits for the individual child. More specifically, not only does it increase levels of engagement and compliance with a particular form of intervention or programme, but by being involved in the process, the child's self-esteem increases, making "motivation to change" more likely.</p

The position of relationship based practice in youth justice

Purpose: This paper considers the position of relationship-based practice in youth justice by looking at how ‘effective programmes’ seem to have been given heightened importance over ‘effective’ young person-worker relationships. Design: By critically reviewing the literature on the topic, the paper promotes debate on the position of relationship based practice in youth justice. Findings: It is argued that the young person-worker relationship is very important. A genuine and empathetic relationship can reduce the chances of reoffending and improve the child’s personal, social and emotional development. By being respectful and listening attentively to children’s ‘life stories’, barriers can be overcome, potentially resulting in lifestyle, social and behavioural change. However, although there is evidence that developing a trusting relationship is ‘effective’ and that it is a key component of effective practice, what is less clear is how to practically secure the engagement of a child. Originality: In comparison to the emphasis on effective programme intervention, there has been less research done on the ‘characteristics’ of effective staff practice in youth justice

Incentive for insincerity- pre sentence restorative justice: in whose interests?

Purpose: The purpose of the paper is twofold. First it examines the use of restorative practices in the Youth Justice System. Second the paper seeks to critically assess the benefits of Restorative Justice at the pre-sentence stage in England and Wales, particularly in terms of its ethical and practical application. Design/methodology/approach: The authors draw on the experiences of a small scale pilot into the use of pre-sentence Restorative Justice and data from in depth interviews with one of the pilot sites. A snapshot survey and discussions with a Youth Offending Team piloting pre- sentence Restorative Justice was also undertaken. Findings: The authors find that the level of personal involvement of victims in Restorative Justice has fallen short of expectations. The authors note that if there is to be reduced stress and trauma for victims participation needs to be independent of coercion or reward. Offenders who are lacking in sincerity should not be coerced or pressured into accepting pre-sentence RJ as this could, despite benign intent, exacerbate feelings of anger and distress for victims. Furthermore the importance of practitioners being properly trained in Restorative Justice conferencing is highlighted as they have a fundamental part to play in mitigating against some of the potential risks. Practical implications: The article identifies issues and ambiguities with pre-sentence Restorative Justice and examines in detail the complexities of working in such an environment. The article will be of use to local and potentially national decision makers and commissioners of Restorative Justice programmes. Originality/value: The authors explore the under researched concept and delivery of pre-sentence Restorative Justic

The transaction footprints of Scottish food and drink SMEs

This research is funded by Scottish Government’s Rural and Environmental Science and Analytical Services Division (RESAS) under Theme 8 ‘Vibrant Rural Communities’ of the Food, Land and People Programme (2011 - 2016).This paper presents a survey approach to measuring the “transaction footprints” of rural small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs). Combined with a graphical presentation of results, this contributes to the evidence base on the roles of local and global linkages. Findings suggest that the food and drink industry of Scotland is relatively localised in its input and sales interaction pattern, although substantial variations, associated with product specialisms, remoteness/accessibility, input purchasing and marketing strategies, exist. Localised SMEs have weathered the recession slightly better, but more outward-looking in firms tend to have greater optimism about the future. Transaction footprint analysis should be viewed as component of an ongoing process of re-mapping the network infrastructure of the rural economy, alongside analysis of untraded interdependencies, and institutional networks in the realm of governance.Publisher PDFPeer reviewe