Search results

Guided by Ericson’s counter-law analytic, the focus of this paper is how peace bonds erode traditional criminal law principles to govern uncertainty and provide applicants with a “freedom from fear” (Ericson, 2007a). Peace bonds permit the courts to impose a recognizance on anyone likely to cause harm or “personal injury” to a complainant. This paper conducts a critical discourse analysis to answer the question: how and to what extent are peace bonds a form of counter-law? Facilitated by the erosion of traditional criminal law principles and rationalized under a precautionary logic, proving that a complainant is fearful through a peace bond can result in the expansion of the state’s capacity to criminalize and conduct surveillance.

The paper aims to explore the relationship between rough sleepers, welfare and policy in the city of Liverpool, taking Liverpool City Council's Homelessness Strategy 2008‐2011 as a starting point. The paper takes as its premise the notion of rough sleepers as among the most vulnerable and marginalised in society, and questions how well they are protected by policy.

The approach used is analysis and contextualisation of the strategy document in terms of welfare and criminological perspectives.

The paper posits that the city's European Capital of Culture Status for 2008 has acted as a springboard for further consumerist and regeneration‐driven aspirations, facilitated by restriction of entitlement to access city space for groups such as rough sleepers. The piece explores responses to rough sleepers and other “undesirable” city centre space users in Liverpool and contends that their behaviour and activities are criminalised. Ultimately, it is argued that the city, whilst it prioritises its goal of becoming a “world‐class city”, fails to deliver in terms of its welfare obligations.

It is argued that the failure of the strategy to adequately consider the direct needs of rough sleepers renders them subject to other approaches, namely criminalisation. The article is valuable to both academics interested in aspects of social justice and practitioners engaged in policy making, in that it highlights some of the ways in which policy can fail to meet its basic requirements.

An industry of description and interpretation has developed around the growth of surveillance, accelerated by: the development of the internet; volatile international relations since the collapse of communism; demographic mobility, segregation by class and ethnicity in the rich and poor worlds, sharpening inequalities, and post 9/11 fears of terrorism. Influential narratives have emphasised the diminishing power of sovereign nation-states in a marketised and globalised world. This chapter challenges the notion that coercive, sovereign modes of rule are a monarchical survival in decline. Rather, sovereign technologies of rule, in which surveillance is central involves strategies of governance from below as well as from above. They combine coercive with rhetorical, metaphorical communication and other ‘soft’ modes of rule. These make thinkable the nation-state as a discrete, defensible entity. Political communication translates between the complex technical expertise of evolving surveillance and security technologies and language intelligible to the public. Though surveillance technologies and information can be produced by commercial and other non-state sites of governance, metaphorically, much surveillance can be viewed as the extension of the eye of the sovereign. Although we are all targets of surveillance, those seen as threatening to the majority help to constitute and reproduce the social collectivity.

As the US criminal justice system and immigration system increasingly interconnect, even immigration policy that is facially race-neutral may involve biased practices. The purpose of this paper is to examine how institutional racism in criminal legal processes creates particular barriers for many individuals of Latin American and/or African descent facing deportation proceedings in US immigration courts, particularly in assertions regarding gang affiliation.

This research is based on ethnographic observation. The work utilized a grounded theory approach. The observation took place at public master calendar hearings at a Midwestern immigration court between 2013 and 2015, yielding over 400 pages of fieldnotes that were coded and analyzed for patterns.

Non-citizens in the USA, including lawful permanent residents, are subject to deportation if labeled “criminal.” Racial profiling and criminalization of communities of color create heightened risk of deportation. Assumptions that common tattoos or urban fashion indicate criminality, reliance on Facebook posts to “prove” gang membership, and the use of arrest records as evidence of criminality even if charges were dropped all put immigrants of Latin American and/or African descent at heightened risk.

The ethnographic method used has strong validity but weaker reliability and generalizability.

This paper can help analysts, policymakers and advocates consider how to adapt systems to increase equity.

This research provides direct examples and ethnographic evidence of how race and cultural bias in criminal legal processes and immigration policies can affect people in deportation proceedings.

Based on a considerable degree of commonality between multinational enterprises (MNEs) and cross-border criminal organisations, the purpose of this paper is to identify ways and areas in which international business (IB) research could be of value in improving understanding of the operations of cross-border criminal organisations and in the development of effective countermeasures to global crime.

A review of the characteristics of legitimate MNEs and cross-border criminal organisations is undertaken to assess the applicability of IB research approaches in understanding the strategies and structures of organised criminal groups.

Despite some obvious differences there appears to be sufficient commonality between legitimate and illegitimate international commerce so that the firm-centric focus of IB research could provide valuable insights complementing the policy-oriented approach of criminology. Some adaptation of IB research tools may be required. The exchange is not one-way: studies of cross-border crime also offer lessons for IB scholars.

IB scholarly work on cross-border crime could enrich both the fields of IB and transnational criminology. Better understanding of criminal enterprises could also facilitate the design of more effective interdiction policies.

Despite their commonalities and interactions, the two sectors of international enterprise have developed separately, and this paper identifies and explores possible synergies between the two.

The purpose of this paper is to identify the strategic options available to a weaker actor to counteract the dominance of a stronger actor in a buyer-supplier relationship, and identifies those factors that influence the choice of individual options.

Following a systematic literature review methodology, a five-phase approach of planning, searching, screening, extraction and synthesis was rigorously employed. In total, 48 studies were used to draw conclusions about the phenomena of interest.

Captured in an integrated conceptual framework, this study identified five strategic options available to the weaker actor in order to counteract a power dominance of a stronger player, which were underpinned by seven influencing factors.

The proposed conceptual framework requires first qualitative empirical validation using an abductive multi-case strategy, followed by a theory testing phase, employing a configurational approach.

The proposed framework suggested that the weaker actor in a buyer-supplier relationship has five options to address power dominance. These options were available within as well as beyond a focal dyadic relationship. For the stronger actor, the authors showed that power dominance is a temporary state rather than permanent.

This study marks one of the first attempts to present a coherent set of strategic options and underpinning factors to counteract power dominance in a buyer-supplier relationship from the perspective of a weaker actor. Given the underexplored nature of the topic, the study also provides guidelines for further research.

The purpose of this paper is to challenge the “myth” that terrorism is cheap and that terrorists are extremely efficient in how they use their money.

This paper makes a critical assessment of the “costs” involved in terrorist attacks and addresses the debate about how this affects the overall strategy against terrorist financing.

This paper argues that costs of terrorism are many and not limited to what is spent on an actual attack. Owing to military and financial counter‐measures, terrorists appear to have lost overall operational efficiency; they are no longer capable of carrying out large‐scale and complex operations like the September 2001 attacks.

Small amounts involved in carrying out a terrorist attack have led to the perception that terrorism is cheap and terrorist attacks can be inexpensively implemented. This has undermined the global and national efforts to counter the financing of terrorism (CFT). This paper is an attempt to persuade the stakeholders in the CFT community that targeting terrorist financing has been and must remain one of the most important fronts in the war against terrorism.