A Response to Farrell

Bibliographic Data

ID11636112
AuthorsKeith Hayward (0000-0001-7135-9131, corresponding author)
Year2011
Volume46
Issue1
Pages21-34
Publication date2011-09-16
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueSocial Policy and Administration (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0144-5596 • E-ISSN: 1467-9515
PublisherWiley (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1111/j.1467-9515.2011.00812.x
OpenAlexW2165875750
LanguageEN
Citations received7
References cited17

This article responds directly to an article published in this journal in February 2010 by Graham Farrell entitled ‘Situational crime prevention and its discontents: rational choice and harm reduction versus “cultural criminology” ’. (Farrell's article, in turn, was a rejoinder to my original 2007 article ‘Situational crime prevention and its discontents: rational choice theory versus the “culture of now” ’). In his article, Farrell sets out a case for the role of ‘harm reduction’ and rational choice theory as tools to reduce the contemporary crime problem, concluding that ‘Cultural criminology seems to offer little, if anything, useful to inform crime reduction efforts’. This article rejects this statement and offers a counter critique of the instrumental approach promoted by Farrell. Importantly, this response article is not intended as an outright critique of situational crime prevention per se, rather it is an assessment of Farrell's specific critical logic and the various shortcomings associated with his argument

Argument (complex analysis · Crime prevention · Criminology · Economics · Epistemology · Harm · Harm reduction · Political science · Positive economics · Rational choice theory (criminology · Situational ethics · Sociology · Statement (logic · Crime Patterns and Interventions · Criminal Justice and Corrections Analysis · Law · Medicine · Philosophy · Psychology · Social Psychology · Wildlife Conservation and Criminology Analyses

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub