Crime, Law and Social Change

, Volume 53, Issue 5, pp 477–491 | Cite as

The war on street ‘terror’. Why tackle anti-social behaviour?

  • Monique Koemans


This article examines the rationales of Dutch politicians for tackling the perceived pressing problem of ‘anti-social behaviour’ (ASB) and the question did they copy the British approach? The first part will describe in short the concept of policy transfer and the recent British fight against ASB. The focus will be on the introduction of the Anti-social Behaviour Order. The second part is an empirical study into the Dutch retreat from ‘condoning’ ASB, consisting of interviews with Dutch politicians focusing on their ideas for tackling ASB. Those are compared with the British’s rationales. This kind of comparative elite ethnography is not common in criminology, but this article aims at providing evidence of its benefits. By answering the research question an insight into the origins of policy in the sphere of criminal justice can be obtained.


Antisocial Behaviour Precautionary Principle Dutch Government Policy Transfer Crime Policy 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    Ashworth, A. (2004). Social control and ‘anti-social behaviour’: the subversion of human rights? Law Quarterly Review, 120, 263–291.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bakalis, C. (2007). ASBOs, preventative orders and the European court of human rights European rights L Rev 427.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Brants, C. (2002). Criminologie en politiek. Tijdschrift voor criminologie, 4(1), 2–25.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Brown, A. (2004). Anti-social behaviour, crime control and social control. The Howard journal, 43(2), 203–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Burney, E. (2005). Making people behave. Anti-social behaviour, politics and policy. Uffculme: Willan Publishing.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Burney, E. (2009). Making people behave. Anti-social behaviour, politics and policy (2nd ed.). Uffculme: Willan Publishing.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Buruma, Y. (2007). Dutch tolerance: On drugs, prostitution, and euthanasia. In M. Tonry & C. Bijleveld (Eds.), Crime and justice in the Netherlands, vol. 35. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cobb, N. (2007). Governance through publicity: anti-social behaviour orders, young people and the problematization of the right to anonymity. Journal of Law and Society, 34(3), 342–373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Colander, D. (2004). From muddling through to the economics of control: View of applied policy from J.N. Keynes to Abba Lerner, Middlebury College Working Paper Series 0421, Middlebury College, Department of Economics.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Crawford, A. (2008). Dispersal powers and the symbolic role of anti-social behaviour legislation. The Modern Law Review, 71(5), 753–784.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Devroe, E. (2008). The policy approach of nuisance problems in public space in Belgium and the Netherlands. In L. Cachet (Ed.), Governance of security in the Netherlands and Belgium. Den Haag: BJu Legal Publishers.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Dolowitz, D. (2003). A policy-makers guide to policymaking. Political Quarterly, 74(1), 101–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Donoghue, J. (2008). Anti-social behaviour orders (ASBOs) in Britain. Contextualizing risk and reflexive modernization. Sociology, 42(2), 337–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ericson, R. (2007). Crime in an insecure world. Cambridge: Polity press.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Edwards, A., & Hughes, G. (2005). Comparing the governance of safety in Europe: a geo-historical approach. Theoretical Criminology, 9(3), 345–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Evans, M. (2004). Policy transfer in global perspective. Farnham: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Furedi, F. (2005). Politics of fear. Beyond left and right. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Garland, D. (2001). The culture of control: Crime and social order in contemporary society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Garret, P. (2006). Making ‘anti-social behaviour’: a fragment of the evolution of ‘ASBO politics’ in Britain. British Journal of Social Work, 2–18.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    von Hirsch, A., & Simester, A. (2006). Incivilities: Regulating offensive behaviour. Oxford: Hart Publishing.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hogwood, B. (2001). Beyond muddling through—can analysis assist in designing policies that deliver? Appendix 1, modern policy making. London: National Audit Office.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Home Office. (2004). Defining and measuring anti-social behaviour. Home office development and practice report.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Home Office. (2007). A guide to anti-social behaviour tools and powers.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hudson, B. (2003). Justice in the risk society: challenging and re-affirming justice in late modernity. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Huisman, W., & Koemans, M. (2008). Administrative measures in crime control. Erasmus Law Review, 1(5), 121–145.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Jacobson, J. (Ed.) (2008). Why tackle anti-social behaviour? In: P. Squires (Ed.), ASBO nation. The criminalisation of nuisance. Bristol: The Policy Press.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Jones, T., & Newborn, T. (2007). Policy transfer and criminal justice. Exploring US influence over British crime control policy. Maidenhead: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Jong, de J. (2007). Kapot moeilijk. Dissertation; Rijksuniveristeit Groningen.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Koemans, M. (2008). Ten strijde tegen overlast. Proces, 6, 206–211.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Lippens, R. (2008). The end of the social: ASBOs in England and Wales. In L. Cachet (Ed.), Governance of security in the Netherlands and Belgium. Den Haag: BJu Legal Publishers.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    MacDonald, S. (2003). The nature of the Anti-social behaviour order- R (McCann and others) v Crown Court at Manchester. Modern Law Review, 66(4), 630–639.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Matthews, R., & Easton, H. (2007). Assessing the use and impact of anti-social behaviour orders. Bristol: Policy Press.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Melossi, D. (2004). The cultural embeddedness of social control: reflections on the comparison of Italian and North-American cultures concerning punishment. In T. Newburn & R. Sparks (Eds.), Criminal justice and political cultures. Cullompton: Willan.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Millie, A. (2008). Anti-social behaviour, behavioural expectations and an urban aesthetic. British Journal of Criminology, 48, 379–394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Ministerie van BZK and Justitie (2002) Naar een veiliger samenleving, last visited 20th November 2008
  36. 36.
    Morris, J. (Ed.) (2000). Rethinking risk and the precautionary principle. Oxford: Butterworth–Heinemann.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Pakes, F. (2005). De Britse aanpak van antisociaal gedrag. Tijdschrift voor Criminologie, 47(3), 284–289.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Parsons, W. (2002). From muddling through to Muddling up. Evidence based policy-making and the modernisation of British government. Public Policy and Administration, 17(3), 43–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Pieterman, R. (2008). De voorzorg cultuur: Streven naar veiligheid in een wereld vol risico en onzekerheid. Den Haag: Boom Juridische Uitgevers.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Pollit, C. (2001). Convergence: the useful myth? Public Administration, 79(4), 933–947.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Punch, M. (2005). From ‘anything goes’ to ‘zero tolerance’: Policy transfer and policing in the Netherlands. Apeldoorn: Politie en Wetenschap.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Punch, M. (2005). Paradigm lost: the Dutch dilemma. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Criminology, 28(2), 268–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Putman, R. (2000). Bowling alone. New York: Simon and Schuster.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Ramsay, R. (2008). Vulnerability, sovereignty and police power: A theory of the ASBO (PhD thesis, University of London).Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    van Stokkom, B. (2007). Regulering van antisociaal gedrag. Aanpak van persistent overlastgevende jongeren in Engeland en Nederland. Tijdschrift voor Veiligheid, 6(3), 36–50.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Squires, P. (2008). ASBO nation. The criminalisation of nuisance. Bristol: The Policy Press.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Tonry, M. (1999). Symbol, substance and severity in western penal policies. Punishment and Society, 3(4), 517–536.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Tonry, M. (2004). Thinking about crime. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Van Swaaningen, R. (2008). Sweeping the street: civil society and community safety in Rotterdam. In J. Shapland (Ed.), Justice, community and civil society: A contested terrain across Europe (pp. 87–106). Cullompton: Willan.Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Van Weringh, J. (1978). Onrust is van alle tijden. Opstellen over criminaliteit in Nederland. Amsterdam: Boom Meppel.Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Vinocur, J. (2008). On Dutch left, a retreat from tolerance of old. Herald Tribune, December 30.Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Wittebrood, K., et al. (2008). Sociale veiligheid ontsleuteld: Veronderstelde en werkelijke effecten van veiligheidsbeleid. Den Haag: Sociaal en Cultureel Planbureau.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of LeidenLeidenthe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations