Advertisement

Critiquing the Crime Drop

  • Stephen Farrall
Chapter
Part of the Critical Criminological Perspectives book series (CCRP)

Abstract

This chapter introduces readers to a body of work developed by political scientists and known as ‘historical institutionalism’. The ideas developed by historical institutionalists, along with those developed by ‘constructivist institutionalists’ and comparative political historians, are used to critique some of the core assumptions made by those who have studied the crime drop thus far. I propose a new way of explaining the crime drop which draws on an understanding of political processes.

Keywords

Historical institutionalism Constructivist institutionalism Crime drop 

References

  1. Amenta, E. (2003). What we know about the development of social policy. In J. Mahoney & D. Rueschemeyer (Eds.), Comparative historical analysis in the social sciences (pp. 91–130). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Atkinson, A. (2000). Distribution of income & wealth. In A. Halsey & J. Webb (Eds.), Twentieth-century British social trends. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  3. Bell, S. (2011). Do we really need a new ‘constructivist institutionalism’ to explain institutional change? British Journal of Political Science, 41, 883–906.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bennett, A., & Checkel, J. (2015). Process tracing. In A. Bennett & J. Checkel (Eds.), Process tracing (pp. 3–37). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Blyth, M. (2002). Great transformations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bulmer, S. (2009). ‘Politics in time’ meets the politics of time. Journal of European Public Policy, 16(2), 307–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Capoccia, G., & Kelemen, R. D. (2007). The study of critical junctures. World Politics, 59, 341–369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Crawford, A. (2009). Situating crime prevention policies in comparative perspective. In A. Crawford (Ed.), Crime prevention policies in comparative perspective (pp. 1–37). Cullomption: Willan.Google Scholar
  9. George, L. (2009). Conceptualising and measuring trajectories. In G. Elder & J. Giele (Eds.), The raft of life course research. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  10. Goldstone, J. (2003). Comparative historical analysis and knowledge accumulation in the study of revolutions. In J. Mahoney & D. Rueschemeyer (Eds.), Comparative historical analysis in the social sciences (pp. 41–90). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Hall, P. (1986). Governing the Economy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Hall, P. (2003). Aligning ontology and methodology in comparative politics. In J. Mahoney & D. Rueschemeyer (Eds.), Comparative historical analysis in the social sciences (pp. 373–406). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Hay, C. (2011). Ideas and the construction of interests. In D. Beland & R. H. Cox (Eds.), Ideas and politics in social science research (pp. 65–82). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Hope, T., & Trickett, A. (2004). Angst Essen Seele Auf … But it keeps away the Burglars! Kolner Zeitschrift fur Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie, 43(2003), 441–468.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Ikenberry, G. J. (1988). Conclusion: An institutional approach to American foreign economic policy. In G. J. Ikenberry, D. A. Lake, & M. Mastanduno (Eds.), The state and American foreign policy. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Ikenberry, G. J. (1994). History’s heavy hand, unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
  17. Jacobs, A. (2015). Process tracing the effects of ideas. In A. Bennett & J. Checkel (Eds.), Process tracing (pp. 41–73). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Jacobs, D., & Kleban, R. (2003). Political institutions. Minorities and Punishment, Social Forces, 80(2), 725–755.Google Scholar
  19. Jones, B., & Baumgartner, F. (2005). The politics of attention: How government prioritizes problems. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  20. Jones, T., & Newburn, T. (2006). Policy transfer and criminal justice: Exploring US influence over British crime control policy. London: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  21. King, M. (1989). Social crime prevention a la Thatcher. Howard Journal of Criminal Justice, 28(4), 291–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Krasner, S. (1984). Approaches to the state. Comparative politics, 16(2), 223–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Levi, M. (1997). A model, a method and a map. In M. I. Lichbach & A. S. Zuckerman (Eds.), Comparative Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Levitsky, S., & Way, L. (2015). Not just what, when (and how). In J. Maloney & K. Thelen (Eds.), Advances in comparative-historical analysis (pp. 97–120). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  25. Mahoney, J. (2003). Knowledge accumulation in comparative historical research. In J. Mahoney & D. Rueschemeyer (Eds.), Comparative historical analysis in the social sciences (pp. 131–174). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Mahoney, J., & Rueschemeyer, D. (2003). Comparative historical analysis: Achievements and agendas. In J. Mahoney & D. Rueschemeyer (Eds.), Comparative historical analysis in the social sciences (pp. 3–38). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Newburn, T. (2002). Atlantic crossings: ‘Policy transfer’ and crime control in the USA and Britain. Punishment and Society, 4(2), 165–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. O’Rand, A. (2009). Cummulative processes over the life-course. In G. Elder & J. Giele (Eds.), The raft of Life-course research. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  29. Pawson, R., & Tilley, N. (1994). What works in evaluation research? British Journal of Criminology, 34(3), 291–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Pierson, P. (2000). The limits of design: Explaining institutional origins and change. Governance, 13(4), 475–499.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Pierson, P. (2004). Politics in time. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Pouliot, V. (2015). Practice tracing. In A. Bennett & J. Checkel (Eds.), Process tracing (pp. 237–259). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  33. Ragin, C. (1987). The comparative methodology. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  34. Rosenfeld, R., & Weisburd, D. (2016). Explaining recent crime trends. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 32(3), 329–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Ross, F. (2011). Bringing political identity into discursive ideational analysis. British Politics, 8(1), 51–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Rueschemeyer, D. (2003). Can one or a few cases yield theoretical gains. In J. Mahoney & D. Rueschemeyer (Eds.), Comparative historical analysis in the social sciences (pp. 305–336). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Sanders, E. (2006). Historical institutionalism. In R. A. W. Rhodes, S. A. Binder, & B. A. Rockman (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of political institutions. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  38. Sewell, W. H. (1996). Three temporalities: Toward an eventful sociology. In T. McDonald (Ed.), The historic turn in the social sciences (pp. 245–280). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
  39. Skocpol, T. (2003). Doubly engaged social science. In J. Mahoney & D. Rueschemeyer (Eds.), Comparative historical analysis in the social sciences (pp. 407–428). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Sutton, J. (2004). The political economy of imprisonment in affluent western democracies. American Sociological Review, 69, 170–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Thelen, K. (1999). Historical institutionalism in comparative politics. Annual Review of Political Science, 2, 369–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Thelen, K., & Maloney, J. (2015). Comparative-historical analysis in contemporary political science. In J. Maloney & K. Thelen (Eds.), Advances in comparative-historical analysis (p. 336). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  43. Thelen, K., & Steinmo, S. (1992). Historical institutionalism in comparative politics. In S. Steinmo, K. Thelen, & F. Longstreth (Eds.), Structuring politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  44. Trampusch, C., & Palier, B. (2016). Between X and Y: How process tracing contributes to opening the black box of causality. New Political Economy, adv access.Google Scholar
  45. Walby, S., Towers, J., & Francis, B. (2016). Is violent crime increasing or decreasing? British Journal of Criminology, adv access.Google Scholar
  46. Wuthnow, R. (1989). Communities of discourse. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  47. Zehavi, A. (2012). A reform less ordinary? Administration and Society, 44(6), 731–753.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of SheffieldSheffieldUK

Personalised recommendations