Advertisement

Studying Penal Policy

  • Gemma Birkett
Chapter
Part of the Palgrave Studies in Prisons and Penology book series (PSIPP)

Abstract

A policy can be defined as a course or principle of action adopted by an organisation or individual, and there are multiple ways to examine it. While some scholars are interested in the role of power, others are interested in its development (from formulation to implementation). Some are interested in the formulation of domestic policy while others investigate its influence on an international scale. This book is concerned with the role of ideas in the policy process, and the ways that key policy players work to define what they regard as pressing issues. As such, it views public policy ‘as a form of discourse, whereby the rules of language and the practice and conventions of rhetoric shape public actions’ (John, 2012: 125). It is important to recognise that problem definition is a competitive process, involving increasing numbers of policy actors. Such actors are

Bibliography

  1. Anderson, J. (1975) Public Policy Making. London: Thomas Nelson and Sons Ltd.Google Scholar
  2. Ball, S. (1994) ‘Political Interviews and the Politics of Interviewing’. In G. Walford (Ed.) Researching the Powerful in Education. London: UCL Press.Google Scholar
  3. Barton, A., and Johns, N. (2013) The Policy-Making Process in the Criminal Justice System. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  4. Baumgartner, F., and Jones, B. (1993) Agendas and Instability in American Politics. Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Beer, S. (1956) ‘Pressure Groups and Parties in Britain’. The American Political Science Review 50:1 1–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Best, J. (1987) ‘Rhetoric in Claims-Making: Constructing the Missing Children Problem’. Social Problems 34:2 101–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Best, J. (2013) Social Problems. (Second Edition). New York: W.W Norton and Company.Google Scholar
  8. Birkett, G. (2014) ‘Politics, Power and Gender: reflections on researching female policy actors in criminal justice’. In K. Lumsden and A. Winter (Eds.) Reflexivity in Criminological Research: Experiences with the Powerful and Powerless. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  9. Birkland, T. (2007) ‘Agenda Setting in Public Policy’. In F. Fischer, G. Miller, and M. Sidney (Eds.) Handbook of Public Policy Analysis: Theory, Politics and Methods. Boca Raton: Taylor and Francis.Google Scholar
  10. Blumer, H. (1971) ‘Social Problems as Collective Behaviour’. Social Problems 18: 298–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Borzel, T. (1998) ‘Organizing Babylon – On the Different Conceptions of Policy Networks’. Public Administration 76: 2533–2273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Broom, A., Hand, K., and Tovey, P. (2009) ‘The Role of Gender, Environment and Individual Biography in Shaping Qualitative Interview Data’. International Journal of Social Research Methodology 12:1 51–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Burnham, P., Gilland Lutz, G., Grant, W., and Layton-Henry, Z. (Eds.) (2004) Research Methods in Politics. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  14. Burr, V. (1995) Social Constructionism. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  15. Cavadino, M., Dignan, J., and Mair, G. (2013) The Penal System: An Introduction. (Fifth Edition). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  16. Chibnall, S. (1977) Law-and-Order-News. London: Tavistock.Google Scholar
  17. Cope, S. (2001) ‘Towards a Policy Networks Approach’. In M. Ryan, S. Savage, and D. Wall (Eds.) Policy Networks in Criminal Justice. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  18. Cotterill, P. (1992) ‘Interviewing Women, Issues of Friendship, Vulnerability, and Power’. Women’s Studies International Forum 15: 593–606.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Dahl, R. (1961) Who Governs? New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Davies, P., Francis, P., and Jupp, V. (Eds.) (2000/2011) Doing Criminological Research. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  21. Dearing, W. J., and Rogers, M. E. (1996) Agenda-Setting. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  22. Desmond, M. (2004) ‘Methodological Challenges Posed in Studying an Elite in the Field’. Area 36:3 262–269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Dorey, P. (2005) Policy Making in Britain: An Introduction. London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Dowding, K. (1995) ‘Model or Metaphor? A Critical Review of the Network Approach’. Political Studies 43:1 136–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Downs, A. (1972) ‘Up and Down with Ecology: The Issue Attention Cycle’. Public Interest 28: 38–50.Google Scholar
  26. Duffy, B., Wake, R., Burrows, T., and Bremner, P. (2008) Closing the Gaps: Crime and Public Perceptions. London: Ipsos MORI.Google Scholar
  27. Duke, K. (2002) ‘Getting Beyond the ‘Official Line’: Reflections on Dilemmas of Access, Knowledge and Power in Researching Policy Networks’. Journal of Social Policy 31:1 39–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Dunleavy, P., and Rhodes, R. A. W. (1990) ‘Core Executive Studies in Britain’. Public Administration 68:1 3–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Easton, D. (1965) A Systems Analysis of Political Life. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  30. Easton, S., and Piper, C. (2012/2016) Sentencing and Punishment: The Quest for Justice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Entman, R. (1993) ‘Framing: Toward Clarification of a Fractured Paradigm’. Journal of Communication 43:4 51–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Esmee Fairbairn Foundation (2004) Rethinking Crime and Punishment: The Report. London: Esmee Fairbairn Foundation.Google Scholar
  33. Finch, J. (1993) ‘It’s Great to Have Someone to Talk to’: Ethics and Politics of Interviewing Women’. In M. Hammersley (Ed.) Social Research: Philosophy, Politics and Practice. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  34. Fitz, J., and Halpin, D. (1994) ‘Implementation Research and Education Policy: Practice and Prospects’. British Journal of Educational Studies 42:1 53–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Galtung, J., and Ruge, M. H. (1965) ‘The Structure of Foreign News’. The Journal of Peace Research 2:1 64–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Gramsci, A. (1971) Selections from the Prison Notebooks of Antonio Gramsci. London: Lawrence and Wishart.Google Scholar
  37. Grant, W. (1978) ‘Insider Groups, Outsider Groups and Interest Group Strategies in Britain’ University of Warwick Department of Politics Working Party no. 19.Google Scholar
  38. Grant, W. (1989) Pressure Groups, Politics and Democracy in Britain. Hemel Hempstead: Philip Allen.Google Scholar
  39. Grant, W. (2004) ‘Pressure Politics: The Changing World of Pressure Groups’. Parliamentary Affairs 57:2 408–419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Grimshaw, R. (2004) ‘Whose Justice? Principal Drivers of Criminal Justice Policy, Their Implications for Stakeholders, and Some Foundations for Critical Policy Departures’ British Society of Criminology paper Available at: http://britsoccrim.org/volume7/005.pdf.
  41. Hay, C., and Richards, D. (2000) ‘The Tangled Webs of Westminster and Whitehall: The Discourse, Strategy and Practice of Networking within the British Core Executive’. Public Administration 78:1 1–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Heffernan, R. (2005) ‘Exploring (and explaining) the British Prime Minister’. The British Journal of Politics and International Relations 7:4 605–620.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Henry, S. (2009) ‘Social Construction of Crime’. In J. Miller (Ed.) 21st Century Criminology: A Reference Handbook. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  44. Hilton, M., McKay, J., Crowson, N., and Mouhout, J. (2013) The Politics of Expertise: How NGOs Shaped Modern Britain. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Hobbs, S., and Hamerton, C. (2014) The Making of Criminal Justice Policy. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  46. Hutton, N. (2005) ‘Beyond Populist Punitiveness?’. Punishment and Society 7:3 243–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Indermaur, D., and Hough, M. (2002) ‘Strategies for Changing Public Attitudes to Punishment’. In J. Roberts and M. Hough (Eds.) Changing Attitudes to Punishment: Public Opinion, Crime and Justice. Cullompton, Devon: Willan.Google Scholar
  48. Jennings, W., Gray, E., Farrall, S., and Hay, C. (2015) ‘Penal Populism and the Public Thermostat: Crime, Public Punitiveness and Public Policy’ Paper for the P.S.A. Elections, Public Opinion and Parties Specialist Group annual conference, Cardiff. Available at: http://sites.cardiff.ac.uk/epop2015/files/2016/02/Penal-Populism-and-the-Public-Thermostat-Crime-Public-Punitiveness-and-Public-Policy-Will-Jennings.pdf.
  49. Jewkes, Y. (2004) Media and Crime London: Sage to the revised 2015 edition of the book ‘Media & Crime’ (Jewkes, Y. (2015) Media and Crime London: Sage).Google Scholar
  50. John, P. (2012) Analyzing Public Policy. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  51. John, P., Bertelli, A., Jennings, W., and Bevan, S. (2013) Policy Agendas in British Politics. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Johnson-Cartee, K. S. (2005) News Narratives and News Framing: Constructing Political Reality. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.Google Scholar
  53. Jones, B. D., and Baumgartner, F. R. (2005) The Politics of Attention: How Government Prioritizes Problems. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  54. Jones, T., and Newburn, T. (2005) ‘“Comparative Criminal Justice Policy-Making in the United States and the United Kingdom” British’. Journal of Criminology 45:1 58–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Judge, D. (1993) The Parliamentary State. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  56. Kennamer, D. (1994) Public Opinion, The Press and Public Policy. Westport, Connecticut: Praeger.Google Scholar
  57. Kingdon, J. (1984/2003) Agendas, Alternatives and Public Policies Pearson Education.Google Scholar
  58. Koch-Baungarten, S., and Voltmer, K. (Eds.) (2010) Public Policy and Mass Media: The Interplay of Mass Communication and Political Decision Making. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  59. Liamputtong, P. (2007) Researching the Vulnerable: A Guide to Sensitive Research Methods. London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Lilleker, D. (2003) ‘Interviewing the Political Elite: Navigating a Potential Minefield’. Politics 23:3 207–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Loader, I., and Sparks, R. (2011) ‘Criminology’s Public Roles: A Drama in Six Acts’. In M. Bosworth and C. Hoyle (Eds.) What is Criminology?. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  62. Maloney, W., Jordan, G., and McLaughlin, A. (1994) ‘Interest Groups and Public Policy: The Insider/Outsider Model Revisited’. Journal of Public Policy 14:1 17–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Marsh, D., and Rhodes, R. A. W. (1992) ‘Policy Networks in British Politics’. In D. Marsh and R. A. W. Rhodes (Eds.) Policy Networks in British Government. Oxford: Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. McCombs, M. E. (1981) ‘The Agenda-Setting Approach’. In D. D. Nimmo and K. R. Sanders (Eds.) Handbook of Political Communication. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  65. McCombs, M. E. (2014) Setting the Agenda: Mass Media and Public Opinion. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  66. McCombs, M. E., and Shaw, D. (1972) ‘The Agenda-Setting Function of Mass Media’. Public Opinion Quarterly 36 176–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. McDowell, L. (1992) ‘Doing Gender: Feminism, Feminists and Research Methods in Human Geography’. Transactions of the British Institute of Geographers 17 399–416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. McDowell, L. (1993) ‘Space, Place and Gender Relations: Part I. Feminist Empiricism and the Geography of Social Relations’. Progress in Human Geography. 17:2 157–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. McNair, B. (2009) News and Journalism in the UK. (Fifth Edition). Routledge: Abingdon.Google Scholar
  70. McQuail, D. (1987) Mass Communication Theory: An Introduction. (Second Edition). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  71. Middlemas, K. (1979) Politics in Industrial Society. London: Andre Deutsch.Google Scholar
  72. Miller, W. B. (1973) ‘Ideology and Criminal Justice Policy: Some Current Issues’. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology 64:2 141–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Miller, D. (2010) ‘Public Relations’. In D. Albertazzi and P. Cobley (Eds.) The Media: An Introduction. Third Edition. Harlow: Pearson.Google Scholar
  74. Mills, H., and Roberts, R. (2011) ‘Is Penal Reform Working? Community Sentences and Reform Sector Strategies’. Criminal Justice Matters 84:1 38–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Mills, H., and Roberts, R. (2012) ‘Reducing the Numbers in Custody: Looking Beyond Criminal Justice Solutions’ Centre for Crime and Justice Studies.Google Scholar
  76. Neal, S., and McLaughlin, E. (2009) ‘Researching Up? Interviews, Emotionality and Policy-Making Elites’. Journal of Social Policy 38:4 689–707.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Newburn, T., and Jones, T. (2005) ‘Symbolic politics and penal populism: the long shadow of Willie Horton’. Crime, Media, Culture 1:1 72–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Norton, P. (2000) ‘Barons in a Shrinking Kingdom: Senior Ministers in British Government’. In R. A. W. Rhodes (Ed.) Transforming British Government, Vol. 2. Changing Roles and Relationships London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  79. Oakley, A. (1981/1982) ‘Interviewing Women: A Contradiction in Terms’. In H. Roberts (Ed.) Doing Feminist Research. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  80. Page, E. (1999) ‘The insider outsider distinction: an empirical investigation’. British Journal of Politics and International Relations 1:2 205–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Page, E., and Jenkins, B. (2005) Policy Bureaucracy: Government with a Cast of Thousands. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Pahl, R., and Winkler, J. (1974) ‘The Coming of Corporatism’. New Society 10 October.Google Scholar
  83. Peelo, M. (2006) ‘Framing homicide narratives in newspapers: mediated witness and the construction of virtual victimhood’. Crime, Media, Culture 2:2 159–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Price, V., and Tewksbury, D. (1997) ‘News Values and Public Opinion: A theoretical Account of Media Priming and Framing’. In G. A. Barnett and F. J. Boster (Eds.) Progress in Communication Sciences: Advances in Persuasion. Vol 13. Greenwich, Conn: Ablex.Google Scholar
  85. Puwar, N. (1997) ‘Reflections on Interviewing Women MPs’ Sociological Research Online 2:1 http://www.socresonline.org.uk/2/1/4.html.
  86. Ramazanoglu, C. and Holland, J. (2002) Feminist Methodology: Challenges and Choices. London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Reinharz, S., and Chase, S. E. (2001) ‘Interviewing Women’. In J. F. Gubrium and A. Holstein (Eds.) Handbook of Interview Research: Context and Method. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  88. Rhodes, R. A. W. (1995) ‘Introducing the Core Executive’. In R. A. W. Rhodes and P. Dunleavy (Eds.) Prime Minister Cabinet and Core Executive. London: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Rhodes, R. A. W. (1997) Understanding Governance. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  90. Rhodes, R. A. W. (2007) ‘Understanding Governance: Ten Years On’ Organization Studies 28 1243–1264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Rhodes, R. A. W. (2011) Everyday Life in British Government. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  92. Rice, G. (2010) ‘Reflections on Interviewing Elites’. Area 42:1 70–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Richardson, J. (2000) ‘Government, Interest Groups and Policy Change’. Political Studies 48 1006–1025.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Richardson, J., and Jordan, G. (1979) Governing Under Pressure: The Policy Process in a Post-Parliamentary Democracy. Oxford: Robertson.Google Scholar
  95. Riessman, C. (1987) ‘When Gender Is Not Enough: Women Interviewing Women’. Gender and Society 1:2 172–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Roberts, J. V. (2008) ‘Prisons and the Public’ Public Opinion and the Media Seminar: Commission on English Prisons Today Available at: http://www.howardleague.org/fileadmin/howard_league/user/pdf/Commission/Prisons_and_the_Public_-_Julian_Roberts.pdf.
  97. Rutherford, A. (1993) Criminal Justice and the Pursuit of Decency. Winchester: Waterside Press.Google Scholar
  98. Ryan, M. (1978) The Acceptable Pressure Group: A Case Study of the Howard League and RAP Saxon House.Google Scholar
  99. Ryan, M. (1983) The Politics of Penal Reform. Harlow: Longman.Google Scholar
  100. Sasson, T. (1995) Crime Talk: How Citizens Construct a Crime Problem. New York: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  101. Schattschneider, E. E. (1935) Politics, Pressures and the Tariff. New York: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  102. Schlesinger, P., and Tumber, H. (1994) Reporting Crime: The Media Politics of Criminal. Justice Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  103. Schlesinger, P., Tumber, H., and Murdock, G. (1991) ‘The Media Politics of Crime and Criminal Justice’. The British Journal of Sociology 42:3 397–420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. Silverman, J. (2012) Crime, Policy and the Media: The Shaping of Criminal Justice 1989–2010. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  105. Simon, H. (1957) Administrative Behaviour: A Study of Decision-Making Processes in Administrative Organization. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  106. Slote Morris, Z. (2009) ‘The Truth about Interviewing Elites’. Politics 29:3 209–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. Smith, M. J. (1999) The Core Executive in Britain. Basingstoke: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. Smith, K. (2006) ‘Problematising Power Relations in “Elite” Interviews’. Geoforum 37: 643–653.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. Snow, D. A., Burke Rochford Jr., E., Worden, S. K., and Benford, R. D. (1986) ‘Frame Alignment Processes, Micromobilization, and Movement Participation’. American Sociological Review 51:4 464–481.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  110. Stacey, J. (1991) ‘Can There Be a Feminist Ethnography?’. In S. Berger Gluck and D. Patai (Eds.) Women’s Words: The Feminist Practice of Oral History. New York and London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  111. Swift, A., and White, S. (2008) ‘Political Theory, Social Science and Real Politics’. In D. Leopold and M. Stears (Eds.) Political Theory: Methods and Approaches. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  112. Terkildsen, N., Schnell, F. I., and Ling, C. (1998) ‘Interest Groups, the Media, and Policy Debate Formation: An Analysis of Message Structure, Rhetoric, and Source Cues’. Political Communication 15:1 45–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  113. Waldron, J. (1999) Law and Disagreement. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  114. Walford, G. (2011) ‘Researching the Powerful’ British Educational Research Association on-line resource. Available at: www.bera.ac.uk/system/files/Researching%20the%20powerful.pdf.
  115. Wilson, C. (2001) ‘Networking and the Lobby for Penal Reform: Conflict and Consensus’. In M. Ryan, S. Savage, and D. Wall (Eds.) Policy Networks in Criminal Justice. Basingstoke: Palgrave.Google Scholar
  116. Woliver, L. (2002) ‘Ethical Dilemmas in Personal Interviewing’. PS: Political Science and Politics 35:4 677–678.Google Scholar
  117. Wright, V. (1994) ‘Reshaping the State: The Implications for Public Administration’. West European Politics 17:3 102–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  118. Josselson, R. (1996) The Space Between Us: Exploring the Dimensions of Human Relationships. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage.Google Scholar
  119. Mickelson, R.A. (1994) ‘A Feminist Approach to Researching the Powerful in Education’. In G. Walford (Ed.) Researching the Powerful in Education. London: UCL Press.Google Scholar
  120. Ostrander, S. (1995) ‘Surely you’re not in this just to be helpful: Access, Rapport and Interviews in Three Studies of Elites’. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography 22:1 7–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  121. Ramazanoglu, C. (1992) ‘On Feminist Methodology: Male Reason Versus Female Empowerment’. Sociology 26:2 207–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  122. Richards, D. (1996) ‘Elite Interviewing: Approaches and Pitfalls’. Politics 16:3.Google Scholar
  123. Westmarland, N. (2001) ‘The Quantitative/Qualitative Debate and Feminist Research: A Subjective View of Objectivity’. Forum: Qualitative Social Research 2:1. Available at: http://www.qualitativeresearch.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/974/2124

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gemma Birkett
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of SociologyCity, University of LondonLondonUnited Kingdom

Personalised recommendations