Ethical Criminologists Fly Economy: Process-oriented Criminological Engagement ‘Abroad’

  • Jarrett Blaustein


Criminology has developed into a transnational discipline (Aas 2011; Aas 2012) and many criminologists, particularly those working at universities based in the ‘Global North’, increasingly find themselves engaging with policy makers and practitioners from different jurisdictions. They are sometimes approached for their topical and methodological expertise and the proactive among them work to situate themselves in transnational policy communities that allow them to maximise their research impact. They may feel prompted to engage in this manner by a combination of idealistic and opportunistic factors yet most criminologists also recognise that these activities can generate unanticipated harms. These harms can be understood in relation to their criminological, cultural and social consequences for recipient societies (see Bowling 2011; Blaustein 2014a) and, the disempowerment or marginalisation of alternative understandings of the criminal question. The implication is that there are many pitfalls awaiting Northern criminologists undertaking or promoting their research abroad; however, this chapter proposes that it may still be possible to do so in an ethical and potentially beneficial manner.


United Nations Development Programme Criminal Justice Policy Research Engagement Security Sector Reform Time High Education 
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. Aas, K. (2011) ‘Visions of Global Control: Cosmopolitan Aspiration in a World of Friction’. In M. Bosworth and C. Hoyle (eds.) What is Criminology?, Oxford: Oxford University Press: 406–419.Google Scholar
  2. Aas, K. (2012) ‘The Earth is One but the World is Not’: Criminological Theory and its Geopolitical Divisions’, Theoretical Criminology 16(1): 5–20.ADSMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Alvesson, M. and Skoldberg, K. (2009) Reflexive Methodology: New Vistas for Qualitative Research, London: Sage.Google Scholar
  4. Bannister, J. (2014) ‘Crime Is A “Wicked Problem” – What Should Criminology Do About It?’, Lecture. Transcript available: <‘wicked-problem’-–-what-should-criminology-do-about-it/>
  5. Barak, G. (1988) ‘Newsmaking Criminology: Reflections of the Media, Intellectuals and Crime’, Justice Quarterly 5(4): 565–587.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Blaustein, J. (2014a) ‘Reflexivity and Participatory Policy Ethnography: Situating the Self in a Transnational Criminology of Harm Production’. In K. Lumsden and A. Winter (eds.) Reflexivity and Criminological Research, Basingstoke: Palgrave: 301–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Blaustein, J. (2014b) ‘The Space Between: Negotiating the Contours of Nodal Security Governance Through ‘Safer Communities’ in Bosnia-Herzegovina’, Policing & Society 24(1): 44–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Blaustein, J. (2015a) Speaking Truths to Power: Policy Ethnography and Police Reform in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Blaustein, J. (2015b) ‘The Ethics of Criminological Engagement Abroad’, OUP Blog.Google Scholar
  10. Blaustein, J. (2016) ‘Exporting Criminological Innovation Abroad: Discursive Representation, “Evidence-Based Crime Prevention” and the Post-Neoliberal Development Agenda in Latin America’, Theoretical Criminology 20(2): 165–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bowling, B. (2011) ‘Transnational Criminology and the Globalization of Harm Production’. In M. Bosworth and C. Hoyle (eds.) What is Criminology?, Oxford: Oxford University Press: 361–379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Burrawoy, M. (2005) ‘For Public Sociology’, American Sociological Review 70(1): 4–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Campesi, G. (2010) ‘Policing, Urban Poverty and Insecurity in Latin America: The Case of Mexico City and Buenos Aires’, Theoretical Criminology 14(4): 355–375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Carrington, K., Hogg, R. and Sozzo, M. (2015) ‘Southern Criminology’ British Journal of Criminology 56(1): 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Cohen, S. (1988) Against Criminology, Trenton, N.J.: Transaction Publishers.Google Scholar
  16. Collins, H. and Evans, R. (2008) Rethinking Expertise, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  17. Connell, R. (2007) Southern Theory: Social Science and the Global Dynamics of Knowledge, London: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  18. Currie, E. (2007) ‘Against Marginality: Arguments for a Public Criminology’, Theoretical Criminology 11(2): 175–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Dryzek, J.S. (2000) Deliberative Democracy and Beyond: Liberals, Critics and Contestations, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Dryzek, J.S. and Niemeyer, J.S. (2010) ‘Representation’ in Dryzek, J.S. Foundations and Frontiers of Deliberative Democracy, Oxford: Oxford University Press: 42–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hammersley, M. (1999) ‘Sociology, What’s It For? A Critique of Gouldner’, Sociological Research Online 4(3). Available: <>
  22. Latour, B. (1993) We Have Never Been Modern, Edinburgh: Pearson.Google Scholar
  23. Loader, I. (2006) ‘Fall of the ‘Platonic Guardians’: Liberalism, Criminology and Political Responses to Crime in England and Wales’, British Journal of Criminology 46(4): 561–586.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Loader, I. and Sparks, R. (2010) Public Criminology?, London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  25. Loader, I. and Sparks, R. (2013) ‘Unfinished Business: Legitimacy, Crime Control and Democratic Politics’. In J. Tankebe and A. Liebling (eds.) Legitimacy and Criminal Justice: An International Exploration, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Rosanvallon, P. (2011) Democratic Legitimacy: Impartiality, Reflexivity, Proximity, Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  27. Scottish Centre for Crime and Justice Research (n.d.) ‘Civic Criminology’. Website. Available: <>
  28. Times Higher Education. (2015) ‘About’. Available at: <> [Accessed 04 January 2015].
  29. Turner, E. (2013) ‘Beyond “Facts” and “Values” Rethinking Some Recent Debates about the Public Role of Criminology’, British Journal of Criminology 53(1): 149–166.ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Upton, S., Vallance, P. and Goddard, J. (2014) ‘From Outcomes to Process: Evidence for a New Approach to Research Impact Assessment’, Research Evaluation 23(4): 352–365,CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Wacquant, L. (2011) ‘From “Public Criminology” to the Reflexive Sociology of Criminological Production and Consumption: A Review of Public Criminology? by Ian Loader and Richard Sparks’, British Journal of Criminology 51(2): 438–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Young, I. (2000) Inclusion and Democracy, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jarrett Blaustein
    • 1
  1. 1.Monash UniversityMelbourneAustralia

Personalised recommendations