Abstract
The Chapter concludes the book, arguing that the previous theories put forward to explain the crime drop are (typically) mono-causal, focusing on one causal variable. The account which I have presented acts as a corrective to this position; suggesting that a number of processes, not least of all political decision making, brought about the dramatic increases in crime in the 1980s and the punitive response to it in the 1980s.
“In retrospect it was all too much to be absorbed in a short time. … Crime rates rose as did support in many countries for neo-liberal and xenophobic political movements. That harsh crime policies emerged in some countries is not surprising” Tonry (2014: 51)
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
On this point, see Crawford (2009):18.
References
Byrne, D. (1998). Complexity theory and the social sciences. London: Routledge.
Crawford, A. (2009). Situating crime prevention policies in comparative perspective. In A. Crawford (Ed.), Crime prevention policies in comparative perspective (pp. 1–37). Cullomption: Willan.
Farrell, G., Tilley, N., & Tseloni, A. (2014). Why the crime drop? In M. Tonry (Ed.), Why crime rates fall and why they don’t (pp. 421–490). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Hall, P. (2003). Aligning ontology and methodology in comparative politics. In J. Mahoney & D. Rueschemeyer (Eds.), Comparative Historical Analysis in the Social Sciences (pp. 373–406). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hope, T. (2009). The political evolution of situation crime prevention in England and Wales. In A. Crawford (Ed.), Crime prevention policies in comparative perspective (pp. 38–61). Cullomption: Willan.
King, M. (1989). Social crime prevention a la Thatcher. Howard Journal of Criminal Justice, 28(4), 291–312.
Levitsky, S., & Way, L. (2015). Not just what, when (and how). In K. Thelen & J. Maloney (Eds.), Advances in comparative-historical analysis (pp. 97–120). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Marsh, D., & Rhodes, R. (1992). Implementing Thatcherite policies. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.
O’Malley, P. (1994). Neoliberal crime control: Political agendas and the future of crime prevention in Australia. In D. Chappell & P. Wilson (Eds.), The Australian criminal justice system. Sydney: Butterworths.
Pitts, J. & Hope, T. (1997). The local politics of inclusion. Social Policy & Administration, 31(5): 37–58.
Pratt, J. (2008). Scandinavian exceptionalism in an era of penal excess. British Journal of Criminology, 48, 275–292.
Skocpol, T. (2003). Doubly engaged social science. In J. Mahoney & D. Rueschemeyer (Eds.), Comparative historical analysis in the social sciences (pp. 407–428). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Tonry, M. (2014). Why crime rates are falling throughout the Western World. In M. Tonry (Ed.), Crime and Justice (Vol. 43, pp. 1–63). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Wyvekens, A. (2009). The evolving story of crime prevention in France. In A. Crawford (Ed.), Crime prevention policies in comparative perspective (pp. 110–129). Cullomption: Willan.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Farrall, S. (2017). Conclusion. In: Re-Examining The Crime Drop. Critical Criminological Perspectives. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-67654-8_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-67654-8_6
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-67653-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-67654-8
eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)