Broadening the Criminological Terrain - Public Criminology meets Southern Criminology

Abstract

At present, Northern criminological circles are in heated debate about the nature and meaning of their role in the public arena. Within public criminology discussions, Turner (2013) reminds us of the importance of considering the characteristics of the discipline and contemporary socio-political circumstances. At the same time, calls from “afar” are emerging for a broader, even alternative criminologies, including Southern criminology. Those from “far” have challenged the dominant frames with reminders of the salience of culture, geopolitics, globalization, and colonialism in understanding crime, its control, and justice. This paper examines these two dialogues in the context of doing criminology in Asia where there has been increasing interest in the discipline and its role in public policy. NGOs, government departments, and policymakers in the region are increasingly turning to criminology in an attempt to make sense of emerging social problems – establishing estimates and trends of crime, evaluating treatment and control strategies, and reviewing crime control philosophies and practices from other countries. This growth in criminology in Asia, is due, in part, to the emergent social issues and problems arising from the rapid and phenomenal growth and presence of the region in the global economy, global consumption, large scale migration. What has emerged in many Asian locales is a type of administrative criminology (differing from that of the North) that has fundamentally shaped the ways research and policy questions are raised, projects funded, and influenced public policy. In what ways are these directives in the Asian context similar and different from what is being asked of public criminology? I draw from several research projects and ongoing justice issues to examine these questions.