Our growing Criminology list takes a critical stance and features boundary-pushing work with innovative, research-led publications.
A particular focus of the list are books that engage with our global social challenges, both on a local and international level. We aim to publish books in a wide range of formats that will have real impact and shape public discourse.
Criminology
You are looking at 41 - 50 of 2,969 items
The authors explain the difference between tax avoidance and tax evasion and how governments behave towards these phenomena. Evading tax due is a crime with a long history, but in modern times we now have criminals stealing the tax paid by others from the tax authorities.
Globalisation has led to wholesale international tax evasion disguised as legal avoidance. The authors emphasise the ongoing importance of the British Empire and the role of companies with secret Ultimate Beneficial Owners who appear to own most of the world. If only we could find them, we could tax them.
Finally, international tax evasion is not a crime, and the authors argue that it should be, and that the historic failure of tax authorities should be bolstered by engaging with other criminal justice agencies.
This chapter explores the idea that technology is the solution to all our AML/CFT problems. While technology may have some benefits, such as saving time and costs, the claims as to what today’s solutions can achieve are not always entirely correct. Claims may be more attuned to a cycle of fighting regulatory punishments than preventing money laundering. While AI and machine learning can raise interest in an AML technology solution, are such aspects actually based on the essential principles and understanding of today’s money laundering activities?
Billions of dollars are wasted each year trying to prevent ‘dirty money’ entering a financial system that is already awash with it. The authors challenge the global approach, arguing that complacency, self-interest and misunderstanding have now created long-standing absurdities.
International and government policy makers inadvertently facilitate tax evasion, corruption, environmental and organised crime by separating crime from its root cause. The handful of crime-fighters that do exist are starved of resources whilst an army of compliance box-tickers are prevented from truly helping. The authors provide a toolbox of evidence-based solutions to help the frontline tackle financial crime.
Basic terms and concepts have multiple meanings, leading to real-world failure to cooperate. Two alternative definitions of ‘money laundering’ are critiqued and it is argued that one – the concept of ‘placement, layering and integration’ – should be abolished.
Jargon is a significant problem in the global war because technical experts speak their own language but need to communicate with foreign experts. Basic terms such as ‘money laundering’, ‘asset recovery’ and ‘offshore’, are explained to support a call for a return to basic principles agreed over 30 years ago.
Routine problems of cross-border cooperation are multiplied by multiple agencies, incompatible laws and arcane procedures. The result is unchecked transnational crime.
Europe is cited as relatively good at cooperating, but the sixth European money laundering directive speaks to successive failure to even harmonise laws, let alone develop one law. International organisations try to help countries cooperate but lack a consistent systematic approach.
This article presents empirical findings from a British Academy funded project concerned to explore victim-survivor experiences of domestic violence disclosure schemes (DVDS) in the UK. In so doing it draws on the concept of responsibilisation as one way of making sense of the experiences reported. It goes on to suggest a note of caution for the development of these schemes in other jurisdictions, since the failure to take account of victim-survivor voices in relation to DVDS in the UK has contributed to such schemes rendering victim-survivors responsible.
A discipline takes on the contours of its context. Therefore, the sociology of science asks in what context science occurs and what implications it has for scientific findings. Worldwide, criminology exists as an independent science linked to sociology or law. What determines the dependency or independency of criminology? In this article, through archival research, I explore the emergence of critical criminology in Argentina. My goal is to explain why it emerged among scholars and practitioners of law, and I propose five reasons for this. All these reasons have as a background the fact that law in Argentina is, at least it was in the 1970s and 80s when critical criminology emerged, more sensitive to cultural, geographical, and historical-critical (and generalist) developments than social and behavioural sciences.
This research, part of a broader exploration of the sources of current Brazilian critical criminology, aims to map the canonical works in the field, especially the publications and research of the 1970s, in order to identify theoretical guidelines, methodological perspectives, and to which extent there is an alignment with the debate of the Global North. This exploration seeks to identify (a) the theoretical perspectives, (b) the empirical emphasis, (c) how gender and race issues were faced, and (d) whether the boundaries between criminology and criminal law were delimited in the general framework of criminal sciences. The conclusion presents a synthesis of the foundational methodological guidelines and the present state of critical criminology in Brazil.
In this paper we address how in the birth of critical criminology in Latin America, one of its key architects, Eugenio Raúl Zaffaroni, poses in detail a problematisation that has acquired a very great centrality in the current debate: the hierarchy, asymmetry and dependency between the Global North and the Global South in the production of criminological knowledge, and offers ways to challenge the reproduction of this dynamic as a long-term phenomenon. His theoretical and political position in the 1980s, defined as a ‘marginal criminological realism’, anticipates a series of revealing points that we rediscover in the contemporary discussion. In this way, this paper seeks to avoid falling into an ‘amnesia’ by revitalising the historical exploration of the critical perspectives on the criminal question. In this exploration, we identify what constitutes, from our point of view, a firm foundation on which to build our own critical work from both a scientific and political point of view in Latin America and, more generally, in peripheral, marginal contexts.
Over the last 40 years, academics, activists and policymakers have attempted to improve police and criminal justice (CJ) responses to rape, yet attrition in rape cases continues to rise (). Rape attrition studies have increasingly scrutinised the CJ process, initially in smaller scale, local research (for example, ) and more recently through national analysis of the CJ outcomes of police reported cases (for example, ). While this has greatly enhanced understanding of why cases may drop out, the focus has increasingly been on explaining attrition in the hope of improving CJ outcomes, rather than victim-survivors’ voices and what they want from the process. Similarly, to explore attrition at the police stage, surveys have been undertaken with officers to understand their attitudes, including rape myth acceptance (for example, ); again, with a focus on improving substantive CJ outcomes. In this article we call for researchers, activists and policymakers to pause and reflect upon the political and ideological reasons behind a focus on particular research questions using particular methodologies; and whether there is a need for more victim-survivor centred, indeed person-centred, research and practice where the focus is more on procedural justice rather than substantive justice.
