Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Evidenzorientierte Kriminalprävention in Deutschland pp 619–642Cite as

Kriminalprävention durch elektronische Aufsicht?

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

Zusammenfassung

Die elektronische Aufsicht wird weltweit mit vielseitigen Zielsetzungen angewandt, von denen man sich in erster Linie meist eine negative oder positive spezialpräventive Wirkung erhofft. Nach wie vor fehlen allerdings empirisch fundierte Antworten auf zentrale Fragen im Zusammenhang mit der angenommenen kriminalpräventiven Wirkung der Maßnahme. Der Beitrag analysiert die Logik diverser auf Kriminalprävention abzielende Anwendungsbereiche. Diesen theoretischen Annahmen werden aktuelle empirische Befunde zur Wirksamkeit der elektronischen Aufsicht gegenübergestellt. Besonderes Augenmerk wird des Weiteren auf die im deutschen Sanktionensystem vorhandenen Möglichkeiten der elektronischen Aufsicht gelegt.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   119.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD   159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literatur

  • Aichinger, P. (2017). Fußfessel für Gefährder rechtlich kaum umsetzbar. Die Presse, 24. 01.2017. http://diepresse.com/home/innenpolitik/5158800/Fussfessel-fuer-Gefaehrderrechtlich-kaum-umsetzbar. Zugegriffen: 17. 01. 2018.

  • Albrecht, H.-J., Arnold, H., & Schäfer, W. (2000). Der hessische Modellversuch zur Anwendung der „elektronischen Fußfessel“, Darstellung und Evaluation eines Experiments. Zeitschrift für Rechtspolitik, 11, 466 – 469.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andersen, S. H., & Telle, K. (2016). Electronic monitoring and recidivism, quasi-experimental evidence from Norway. Statistics Norway Research Department, 844.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andersen, L. H., & Andersen, S. H. (2012). Losing the stigma of incarceration: Does serving a sentence with electronic monitoring causally improve post-release labor market outcomes? Odense: University Press of Southern Denmark.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aos, S., Miller, M., & Drake, E. (2006). Evidence-Based Public Policy Options to Reduce Future Prison Construction, Criminal Justice Costs, and Crime Rates. Olympia: Washington State Institute for Public Policy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arenas García, L. (2016). La eficacia de la vigilancia electrónica en la violencia de género: análisis criminológico. International e-Journal of Criminal Science, Research Report 1, Número 10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Armstrong, G. S., & Freeman, B. C. (2011). Examining GPS monitoring alerts triggered by sex offenders: The divergence of legislative goals and practical application in community corrections. Journal of Criminal Justice, 39, 175 – 182.

    Google Scholar 

  • Black, M., & Smith, R. G. (2003). Electronic monitoring in the criminal justice system. Trends and Issues in Crime and Criminal Justice, 254, 1 – 6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bonta, J., Wallace-Capretta, S., & Rooney, J. (2000). Can electronic monitoring make a difference? An evaluation of three Canadian programs. Crime and Delinquency, 46, 61 – 75.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boone, M., & Herzog-Evans, M. (2013). Decision-making and offender supervision. In F. McNeill & K. Beyens (eds.), Offender Supervision in Europe (pp. 51 – 96). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boscher, M. (2016). Comment fonctionnent les bracelets électroniques? Le Monde, 27. 07. 2016. http://www.lemonde.fr/les-decodeurs/article/2016/07/27/comment-fonctionnent-les-bracelets-electroniques_4975441_4355770.html. Zugegriffen: 17. 01. 2018.

  • Bottos, S. (2007). An Overview of Electronic Monitoring in Corrections: The Issues and Implications. Correctional Service Canada.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bräuchle, A. (2016). Die elektronische Aufenthaltsüberwachung gefährlicher Straftäter im Rahmen der Führungsaufsicht. In J. Kinzig & H.-J. Kerner (Hrsg.), Tübinger Schriften und Materialien zur Kriminologie, 37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bräuchle, A., & Kinzig, J. (2016). Die elektronische Fußfessel bei entlassenen Straftätern. In F. Neubacher & N. Bögelein (Hrsg.), Krise – Kriminalität – Kriminologie (S. 197 – 206). Mönchengladbach: Forum Verlag Godesberg GmbH.

    Google Scholar 

  • Breuer, M., Endres, J., Vornholt, E., & Müller, C. (2013). Elektronische Aufenthaltsüberwachung, Erkenntnisse aus einem bayerischen Pilotprojekt im offenen Vollzug. Bewährungshilfe, 60, 146 – 158.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brey, P. (2017). Theorizing technology and its role in crime and law enforcement. In M. R. McGuire & T. J. Holt (eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Technology, Crime and Justice (S. 17 – 34). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cornish, D., & Clarke, R. V. G. (1986). The Reasoning Criminal. Rational Choice Perspectives of Offending. New York, Berlin, Heidelberg, Tokyo: Springer Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cotter, R., & de Lint, W. (2009). GPS-Electronic monitoring and contemporary penology: A case study of US GPS-electronic monitoring programmes. The Howard Journal of Criminal Justice, 48, 76 – 87.

    Google Scholar 

  • Council of Europe (2014). Recommendation CM/Rec(2014)4 of the Committee of Ministers to member States on electronic monitoring. Council of Europe: Strasbourg.

    Google Scholar 

  • DeMichele, M., Payne, B. K., & Button, D. M. (2008). Electronic monitoring of sex offenders: Identifying unanticipated consequences and implications. Probation and Parole, 46, 119 – 135.

    Google Scholar 

  • Di Tella, R., & Schargrodsky, E. (2013). Criminal recidivism after prison and electronic monitoring. Journal of Political Economy, 121, 28 – 73.

    Google Scholar 

  • Erez, E. (2012). Electronic monitoring and crime victims. CEP conference, 08. – 10. 11. 2012, Balsta, Sweden. http://cep-probation.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Day-3.1-Presentation-Edna-Erez-B.pdf. Zugegriffen: 17. 01. 2018.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fallesen, P., & Andersen, L. H. (2016). Explaining the consequences of imprisonment for union formation and dissolution in Denmark. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 36, 154 – 177.

    Google Scholar 

  • Felson, M., & Clarke, R. V. (1998). Opportunity makes the thief. Practical theory for crime prevention. Police Research Series, 98.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fünfsinn, H., & Kolz, A. (2016). Gegenwärtige Nutzung und Anwendungsperspektiven der Elektronischen Überwachung in Deutschland. Strafverteidiger, 3, 191 – 197.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gies, S. V. (2016). The use of electronic monitoring as a supervision tool. In E. L. Jeglic & C. Calkins (eds.), Sexual Violence – Evidence Based Policy and Prevention (pp. 95 – 117). Cham: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gies, S. V., Gainey, R., Cohen, M. I., Healy, E., Duplantier, D., Yeide, M., Bekelman, A., Bobnis, A., & Hopps, M. (2012). Monitoring High-Risk Sex Offenders with GPS Technology: An Evaluation of the California Supervision Program. Final Report. Bethesda, MD: Development Services Group.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gur, O. M., Ibarra, P. R., & Maskaly, J. (2016). Short- and long-term impact of GPS tethering on domestic violence. Paper presented at the 72nd Annual Meeting of the American Society of Criminology, New Orleans, LA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haverkamp, R., Schwedler, A., & Wößner, G. (2012). Die elektronische Aufsicht von als gefährlich eingeschätzten Entlassenen. Recht und Psychiatrie, 30, 9 – 20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henneguelle, A., Monnery, B., & Kensey, A. (2016). Better at home than in prison? The effects of electronic monitoring on recidivism in France. Journal of Law and Economics, 59, 629 – 667.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hucklesby, A. (2008). Vehicles of desistance? The impact of electronically monitored curfew orders. Criminology and Criminal Justice, 8, 51 – 71.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hucklesby, A. (2009). Understanding offenders’ compliance: A case study of electronically monitored curfew orders. Journal of Law and Society, 36, 248 – 271.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hucklesby, A., & Holdsworth, E. (2016). Electronic Monitoring in England and Wales. Centre for Criminal Justice Studies, University of Leeds, UK. http://28uzqb445tcn4c2464ahmel.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/files/2016/06/EMEU-Electronic-monitoring-in-England-and-Wales.pdf. Zugegriffen: 17. 01. 2018.

  • Ibarra, R., & Erez, E. (2005). Victim-centric diversion? The electronic monitoring of domestic violence cases. Behavioral Sciences & The Law, 23, 259 – 276.

    Google Scholar 

  • Justizministerium Hessen (2013). https://justizministerium.hessen.de/presse/pressemitteilung/justizminister-hahn-zieht-bilanz-ein-jahr-guel-bad-vilbel. Zugegriffen: 17. 01.2018.

  • Killias, M., Gillieron, G., Kissling, I., & Villettaz, P. (2010). Community service versus electronic monitoring – what works better? Results of a randomized trial. British Journal of Criminology, 50, 1155 – 1170.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kornhauser, R., & Laster, K. (2014). Punitiveness in Australia. Electronic monitoring vs the prison. Crime, Law and Social Change, 62, 445 – 474.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lilly, J. R., & Nellis, M. (2013). The limits of techno-utopianism: electronic monitoring in the United States of America. In M. Nellis, K. Beyens & D. Kaminski (eds.), Electronically Monitored Punishment (pp. 21 – 43). New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacKenzie, D. (2006). What Works in Corrections. Reducing the Criminal Activities of Offenders and Delinquents. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marie, O., Moreton, M., & Goncalves, M. (2011). The effect of early release of prisoners on Home Detention Curfew (HDC) on recidivism. Ministry of Justice Research Summary 1/11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marklund, F., & Holmberg, S. (2009). Effects of early release from prison using electronic tagging in Sweden. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 5, 41 – 61.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin, J. S., Hanrahan, K., & Bowers, J. H. (2009). Offenders’ perceptions of house arrest and electronic monitoring. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 48, 547 – 570.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martínez García, E. (2013). La experiencia española en la prevención y erradicación de los delitos de violencia de género: perspectivas de futuro en un marco comparativo europeo. Asparkía, 24, 19 – 34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marx, G. T. (2016). Windows into the Soul. Surveillance and Society in an Age of High Technology. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, M. (2004). Modellprojekt elektronische Fußfessel, Studien zur Erprobung einer umstrittenen Maßnahme. Freiburg: edition iuscrim.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nellis, M. (2006). Surveillance, rehabilitation, and electronic monitoring: Getting the issues clear. Criminology & Public Policy, 5, 103 – 108.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nellis, M. (2015). Standard and ethics in electronic monitoring. Strasbourg: Council of Europe.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nellis, M., Beyens, K., & Kaminski, D. (2013). Introduction: making sense of electronic monitoring. In M. Nellis, K. Beyens & D. Kaminski (eds.), Electronically Monitored Punishment (pp. 1 – 18). New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nellis, M., & Torres Rosell, N. (2011). Electronic monitoring and probation: Offender rehabilitation and the reduction of prison populations. Conference report of the 7th European Electronic Monitoring Conference, 05. – 07. 05. 2011, Évora, Portugal.

    Google Scholar 

  • Padgett, K., Bales, W., & Blomberg, T. (2006). Under surveillance. An empirical test of the effectiveness and consequences of electronic monitoring. Criminology & Public Policy, 5, 61 – 91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Payne, B. K. (2014). It’s a small world, but I wouldn’t want to paint it. Criminology & Public Policy, 13, 381 – 391.

    Google Scholar 

  • Payne, B. K., & DeMichele, M. (2011). Sex offender policies: Considering unanticipated consequences of GPS sex offender monitoring. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 16, 177 – 187.

    Google Scholar 

  • Payne, B. K., & Gainey, R. R. (2004). The electronic monitoring of offenders released from jail or prison: Safety, control, and comparisons to the incarceration experience. The Prison Journal, 84, 413 – 435.

    Google Scholar 

  • Petersilia, J., & Turner, S. (1990). Comparing Intensive and Regular Supervision for High-Risk Probationers. Early Results from an Experiment in California. Crime & Delinquency, 36, 87 – 111.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pinto, S., & Nellis, M. (2011). 7th European electronic monitoring conference survey of electronic monitoring. Analysis of questionnaires.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ratzel O., & Wulf, R. (2010). Elektronische Aufsicht im Vollzug der Freiheitsstrafe. Forum Strafvollzug, 6, 336 – 340.

    Google Scholar 

  • Renzema, M. (2003). Electronic monitoring’s impact on reoffending. Kutzzown, PA: Department of Criminal Justice and Social Work, Krutztown University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Renzema, M., & Mayo-Wilson, E. (2005). Can electronic monitoring reduce crime for moderate to high-risk offenders? Journal of Experimental Criminology, 2, 215 – 237.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmallegger, F. (1996). Criminology today (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwedler, A., & Woessner, G. (2017). Identifying the rehabilitative potential of electronically monitored release preparation: A randomized German pilot study. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 61, 839 – 856.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwedler, A., & Wößner, G. (2015) Elektronische Aufsicht bei vollzugsöffnenden Maßnahmen. Implementation, Akzeptanz und psychosoziale Effekte des baden-württembergischen Modellprojekts. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwind, H.-D. (2016). Kriminologie und Kriminalpolitik (23. Aufl.). Heidelberg: C. F. Müller.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shute, S. (2007). Satellite tracking of offenders: A study of the pilots in England and Wales. London: Ministry of Justice.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sidahmed, M. (2016). Rudy Giuliani suggests Muslims on US watchlist should wear GPS bracelets. The Guardian, 28. 07. 2016. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jul/28/rudy-giuliani-muslims-watchlist-monitoring-bracelets. Zugegriffen: 17. 01. 2018.

  • Sugg, D., Moore, L., & Howard, P. (2001). Electronic monitoring and offending behaviour – reconviction results for the second year of trials of curfew orders. London: Home Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sykes, G. (1958). The Society of Captives: A Study of a Maximum Security Prison. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tennessee Board of Probation and Parole. (2007). Monitoring Tennessee’s Sex Offenders Using Global Positioning Systems – A Project Evaluation; https://ccoso.org/sites/default/files/import/BOPP-GPS-Program-Evaluation%2C-April-2007.pdf. Zugegriffen: 17. 01. 2018.

  • Tewksbury, R. (2005). Collateral consequences of sex offender registration. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 21, 67 – 21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Toon, J. (2003). Electronic monitoring in England and Wales. In M. Mayer, R. Haverkamp & R. Levy (Hrsg.), Will electronic monitoring have a future in Europe? Contributions from a European workshop, June 2002, Freiburg i. Br. (S. 51 – 59). Freiburg i. Br.: edition iuscrim.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turner, S., Chamberlain, A. W., Jannetta, J., & Hess, J. (2015). Does GPS improve recidivism among high risk sex offenders? Outcomes for California’s GPS pilot for high risk sex offender parolees. Victims & Offenders, 10, 1 – 28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vanhaelemeesch, D., Vander Beken, T., & Vandevelde, S. (2013). Punishment at home: Offenders’ experience with electronic monitoring. European Journal of Criminology, 11, 273 – 287.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wennerberg, I. (2013). High level of support and high level of control. In M. Nellis, K. Beyens & D. Kaminski (eds.), Electronically Monitored Punishment (S. 113 – 127). New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Western, B., Kling, J. R., & Weiman, D. F. (2001). The labor market. Consequences of incarceration. Crime & Delinquency 47, 410 – 427.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, C. (2015). Keeping track of potential terrorists in Australia is difficult. The Sydney Morning Herald, 14. 01. 2014. http://www.smh.com.au/comment/keeping-trackof-potential-terrorists-in-australia-is-difficult-20150114-12o3un.html. Zugegriffen: 17. 01. 2018.

  • Williams-Taylor, L. (2012). Increased Surveillance of Sex Offenders: impacts on recidivism. El Paso, CA: LFB Scholarly Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yeh, S. S. (2010). Cost-benefit analysis of reducing crime through electronic monitoring of parolees and probationers. Journal of Criminal Justice, 38, 1090 – 1096.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zeldin, W. (2015). Malaysia: New Anti-Terrorism Measures Tabled in Parliament. Library of Congress Global Legal Monitor. http://www.loc.gov/law/foreign-news/article/malaysia-new-anti-terrorism-measures-tabled-in-parliament/. Zugegriffen: 17. 01. 2018.

  • Zimring, F. E., & Hawkins, G. (1995). Incapacitation – Penal Confinement and the Restraint of Crime. New York & Oxford: OFP.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Freiburg, Deutschland

    Katharina Meuer & Gunda Wößner

Authors
  1. Katharina Meuer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Gunda Wößner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Katharina Meuer .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Nationales Zentrum für Kriminalprävention (NZK), Bonn, Germany

    Maria Walsh

  2. Nationales Zentrum für Kriminalprävention (NZK), Bonn, Germany

    Benjamin Pniewski

  3. Nationales Zentrum für Kriminalprävention (NZK), Bonn, Germany

    Marcus Kober

  4. Nationales Zentrum für Kriminalprävention (NZK), Bonn, Germany

    Andreas Armborst

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, ein Teil von Springer Nature

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Meuer, K., Wößner, G. (2018). Kriminalprävention durch elektronische Aufsicht?. In: Walsh, M., Pniewski, B., Kober, M., Armborst, A. (eds) Evidenzorientierte Kriminalprävention in Deutschland . Springer VS, Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-20506-5_32

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-20506-5_32

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer VS, Wiesbaden

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-658-20505-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-658-20506-5

  • eBook Packages: Social Science and Law (German Language)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation