Extending a geographical perspective to the study of jurisdictional consistency in sentencing outcomes

Consistency in sentencing has long been regarded as a fundamental principle of justice. Yet despite its universal importance, research has been hindered by many theoretical and methodological challenges. This study identifies a new concern with strategies used to measure jurisdictional consistency:...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Reid, Andrew A. (Author)
Contributors: MacAlister, David
Format: Electronic Article
Language:English
Published: 2018
In: The British journal of criminology
Year: 2018, Volume: 58, Issue: 5, Pages: 1147-1170
Online Access: Presumably Free Access
Volltext (Resolving-System)
Journals Online & Print:
Drawer...
Check availability: HBZ Gateway
Keywords:
Description
Summary:Consistency in sentencing has long been regarded as a fundamental principle of justice. Yet despite its universal importance, research has been hindered by many theoretical and methodological challenges. This study identifies a new concern with strategies used to measure jurisdictional consistency: direct measures fail to account for sentencing patterns developed at the local level. The objective of this study is to assess the utility of applying a geographical perspective to analyses of sentencing outcomes—one concerned with proportionate comparisons between jurisdictions. This is achieved by proposing a variant of a common metric applied in geographical research: the location quotient. Analyses using the new strategy compare sentence outcomes across provincial/territorial jurisdictions in Canada (2014–15). The technique identifies new patterns of consistency and inconsistency that would otherwise have gone undetected.
ISSN:1464-3529
DOI:10.1093/bjc/azx084