Can we avoid reductionism in risk reduction?

Risk assessment and risk reduction have become increasingly central to criminal justice policy and practice in the last 25 years. Yet there remains a lack of consensus both on the theoretical and methodological foundations of risk and on its social and practical implications. Some proponents see ris...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Prins, Seth J. (Author)
Contributors: Reich, Adam Dalton
Format: Electronic Article
Language:English
Published: 2018
In: Theoretical criminology
Online Access: Presumably Free Access
Volltext (Resolving-System)
Journals Online & Print:
Drawer...
Check availability: HBZ Gateway
Keywords:

MARC

LEADER 00000caa a22000002 4500
001 1679248774
003 DE-627
005 20191022120238.0
007 cr uuu---uuuuu
008 191021s2018 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c
024 7 |a 10.1177/1362480617707948  |2 doi 
035 |a (DE-627)1679248774 
035 |a (DE-599)KXP1679248774 
040 |a DE-627  |b ger  |c DE-627  |e rda 
041 |a eng 
100 1 |a Prins, Seth J.  |e VerfasserIn  |4 aut 
245 1 0 |a Can we avoid reductionism in risk reduction?  |c Seth J. Prins, Adam Reich 
264 1 |c 2018 
336 |a Text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a Computermedien  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a Online-Ressource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
520 |a Risk assessment and risk reduction have become increasingly central to criminal justice policy and practice in the last 25 years. Yet there remains a lack of consensus both on the theoretical and methodological foundations of risk and on its social and practical implications. Some proponents see risk assessment and reduction as solutions to the inefficiencies and injustices of contemporary mass incarceration. Some critics see actuarial risk as being partially responsible for mass incarceration, and warn that recent iterations will only reinscribe existing inequalities under a new guise of objectivity. Both perspectives contain elements of truth, but each falls short because neither adequately specifies the different dimensions of risk that condition its effects. Using two prominent frameworks as foils, this article excavates the contested terrain of risk assessment and exposes a set of distinctions that can inform the use—and prevent the abuse—of risk knowledge in criminal justice policy. 
700 1 |a Reich, Adam Dalton  |d 1981-  |e VerfasserIn  |0 (DE-588)143039598  |0 (DE-627)704371855  |0 (DE-576)334717825  |4 aut 
773 0 8 |i Enthalten in  |t Theoretical criminology  |d London [u.a.] : Sage, 1997  |g 22(2018), 2, Seite 258-278  |h Online-Ressource  |w (DE-627)320645681  |w (DE-600)2025383-7  |w (DE-576)098253387  |x 1461-7439  |7 nnns 
773 1 8 |g volume:22  |g year:2018  |g number:2  |g pages:258-278 
856 |u https://europepmc.org/articles/pmc6065265?pdf=render  |x unpaywall  |z Vermutlich kostenfreier Zugang  |h repository [oa repository (via OAI-PMH doi match)] 
856 4 0 |u http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1362480617707948  |x Resolving-System 
936 u w |d 22  |j 2018  |e 2  |h 258-278 
951 |a AR 
ELC |a 1 
LOK |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 
LOK |0 001 352577172X 
LOK |0 003 DE-627 
LOK |0 004 1679248774 
LOK |0 005 20191021150105 
LOK |0 008 191021||||||||||||||||ger||||||| 
LOK |0 040   |a DE-21-110  |c DE-627  |d DE-21-110 
LOK |0 092   |o n 
LOK |0 689   |a s  |a Criminal justice 
LOK |0 689   |a s  |a Criminology 
LOK |0 689   |a s  |a Methodology 
LOK |0 689   |a s  |a Risk assessment 
LOK |0 689   |a s  |a Risk reduction 
LOK |0 852   |a DE-21-110 
LOK |0 852 1  |9 00 
LOK |0 935   |a krub  |a krzo 
OAS |a 1 
ORI |a SA-MARC-krimdoka001.raw