By Jon Heidt

This report reviews the key research literature on the impact of decriminalization, depenalization, diversion, and harm reduction programs from countries in Europe, North America, South America Oceania, and several U.S. states including California, Maine, Oregon, and Washington state. From this review, key indicators emerged in two domains: crime and criminal justice and mental and public health. Crime and criminal justice indicators include crime rates, levels of organized crime, rates of imprisonment, levels of public disorder (e.g., open air drug use and dealing), drug use trends and patterns, drug availability and price, rates of treatment uptake, addiction and overdose, police clearance rates, costs of enforcement, and functioning. Mental and public health indicators include drug use rates and patterns, rates of drug treatment participation, and rates of drug related mortality. These indicators were used to evaluate the impact that different approaches to drug policy have on society.

Vancouver, BC:  International Centre for Criminal Law Reform, 2021. 80p.

By: Steven Kohm and Michael Weinrath

This volume of essays was drawn from the conference “Practicing Justice: Interdisciplinary Perspectives on Crime, Law and Justice” held over three days in May 2010. “Practicing Justice” was the second annual justice-themed event hosted by the Centre for Interdisciplinary Justice Studies (CIJS) at the University of Winnipeg Criminal Justice department. Our hope was to provide a forum for open and intellectual discus sion about justice in all its forms. To this end, we assembled a diverse group of participants including practitioners from the various justice agencies, Honours students from our own program, graduate students from a number of universities across Canada, local researchers, and academics from a variety of disciplinary backgrounds in Canada and the United States. What united all these participants was an interest in the elusive concept of ‘justice.’

The objective of the conference was to examine justice from a variety of standpoints. The practice of justice is all too often characterized by rigid dichotomies and entrenched rivalries: practitioners versus academics; applied researchers versus theoretical scholars; and community versus university. “Practicing Justice” was envisioned as an inclusive forum that might close the gap that separates often divergent perspectives on justice. We firmly believe that in order to understand justice and move toward the practice of justice – however defined – we must first be able to hear and understand others who bring different perspectives to the table.

We must acknowledge the hard work of Professor Richard Jochelson and Kelly Gorkof who a year earlier initiated a bold dialogue across the disciplines which culminated in our inaugural justice-themed conference “Theorizing Justice: Interdisciplining the Divide”. their goal was to “bridge the gap between disciplines, community agents, and institutional forces ... to identify the division between disciplines and to build an inclusive approach. hey cited the words of our keynote speaker Professor John P. Crank – who writes: “one must gather together liberals and conservatives, professionals and academicians, federal and local justice organizations, judges, defence counsel, prosecutors, sworn officers, managers... they all bring something to the table... they all bring a commitment to justice” (Crank, 2003).

The present volume of essays showcases a diversity of perspectives on justice. We are pleased to present submissions from practitioners of justice, Honours and graduate students, and academics of divergent disciplinary backgrounds. The essays that follow both critique conventional understandings of justice and suggest ways to better practice justice, however defined. Some works are highly theoretical and abstract, while others are more hands-on and applied. What unites all these submissions, however, is their commitment to and passion for justice.

Centre for Interdisciplinary Justice Studies (CIJS), Volume 1, Fall 2010

By Volkan Topalli, Timothy Dickinson, and Scott Jacques

Active offender research relies on the collection of data from noninstitutionalized criminals and has made significant contributions to our understanding of the etiology of serious crime. This review covers its history as well as its methodological, scientific, and ethical pitfalls and advantages. Because study subjects are currently and freely engaging in crime at the time of data collection, their memories, attitudes, and feelings about their criminality and specific criminal events are rich, detailed, and accurate. Contemporary approaches to active offender research employ systematized formats for data collection and analysis that improve the validity of findings and help illuminate the foreground of crime. Although active offender research has traditionally relied on qualitative techniques, we outline the potential for it to make contributions via mixed methods, experiments, and emerging computational and technological approaches, such as virtual reality simulation studies and agent-based modeling.  

Annu. Rev. Criminol. 2020. 3:189–215   

may contain markup

By CESARE BECCARIA. Translated, with an introduction, by HENRY PAOLUCCI

On Crimes and Punishments is a seminal treatise on legal reform written by the Italian philosopher and thinker Cesare Beccaria between 1763 and 1764. The essays proposed many reforms for the criminal justice system, including prompt administration of clearly prescribed and consistent punishments, well-publicized laws made by the legislature rather than individual courts or judges, the abolition of torture in prisons and the use of the penal system to deter would-be offenders, rather than simply punishing those convicted. It is also one of the earlier, and most famous, works against death penalty. The main reason put forward against that measure is that the State, by putting people to death, was committing a crime to punish another one.On Crimes and Punishments is widely considered one of the founding texts of Classical Criminology.

By the Brookings-AEI Working Group on Criminal Justice Reform

U.S. criminal justice figures continue to make us numb, elected officials and citizens alike. Yes, we know the U.S. incarcerates more people per capita than any other country in the world. Yes, we know that when we rank the per capita rate of incarcerations, the U.S. is followed closely by countries like El Salvador and Turkmenistan. We know that our recidivism rates are too high, and that we police our racial/ethnic minority communities too much and too often with tragic results. We know our fellow citizens, mainly people of color, living in those communities continue to suffer from higher rates of crime and police violence. And, lastly, we know these conditions prevail even though U.S. crime rates have fallen to 50-year lows (even considering the recent COVID-era surge) making America about as safe as it was in the 1950s. It is almost as if over policing, prosecution, and imprisonment are habits that the United States just cannot break. 

For two decades now, there has been a bipartisan effort to tackle these systemic problems. Action by President George W. Bush in the mid-2000s to foster improved reentry pathways for men and women returning from prison opened the door to the passage of the bipartisan Second Chance Act and hundreds of millions of dollars in investment in programs designed to reform numerous aspects of the criminal justice system including mandatory minimum sentences and felony hiring initiatives. President Barack Obama expanded and accelerated these initiatives adding his own programs including  Banning the Box, presidential commissions on 21st century policing and mass incarceration, as well as pilot programs to reinstitute access to Pell Grants for prisoners. Just last year, President Trump signed the First Step Act beginning the process of reforming sentencing practices and providing funding for training and vocational education for incarcerated people to be more prepared for the labor market after prison. And now President Joe Biden has promised to accelerate criminal justice policy with an eye toward reforming the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, of which he was a principle author, to reduce crime and incarceration. By slow and steady steps, we are moving away from “tough on crime” policies that created the world’s largest prison population and one of its costliest and, from the perspective of rehabilitation and recidivism, most ineffective criminal justice systems. George Floyd’s death at the hands of police last spring and the frequent, though less-noticed, events like it in other American cities, towns, and rural areas, has added new urgency and momentum to the drive to reform our criminal justice system. Unfortunately, the debate has too often collapsed into an unhelpful binary: “support the blue” or “abolish the police.” Either of these poles would tend to have a negative impact on the very communities who have suffered disproportionately under our current criminal justice and law enforcement policies. Excessive policing and use of force, on one hand, and less public safety and social service resources on the other, can both be detrimental to communities that are exposed to high levels of criminal activity and violence. We must find a path of genuine reform, even transformation, that fosters safer, more peaceful, and more resilient communities.   

This volume is a “down payment” on the policy debate America needs right now to continue moving toward a criminal justice system—police, courts, prison, reentry, community supervision—that is focused on the safety, health, and well-being of communities rather than on maintaining a harsh, semi-militarized revolving door system from which, for too many, there is often no escape. The essays in this volume are intended to provide policymakers in Congress and the Biden Administration with research-grounded guidance and insight on core issues and strategies that can sustain bipartisan support for critically needed criminal justice reforms. Our authors come from a broad spectrum of domains and policy perspectives. In fact, most chapters paired scholars, practitioners, and thought leaders from different disciplines and political ideologies. In this regard, each of their chapters concisely summarize the state of research on a given topic and offer bipartisan recommendations for short-, medium- and long-term reforms that will move each of the key sectors of the criminal justice system toward a more humane and effective footing.

Washington, DC: Brookings Institution, 2021. 95p.

By Jamie J. Fader and Kenneth Sebastian León

This review, published on the twenty-fifth anniversary of the publication of Code of the Street (1999), considers the legacies of Elijah Anderson's groundbreaking analysis of the interactional rules for negotiating street violence within the context of racism and structural disadvantage in Philadelphia. Empirical testing has yielded substantial support for Code of the Street’s key arguments. In the process of assessing its generalizability, such scholarship has inadvertently flattened and decontextualized the theory by, for example, reducing it to attitudinal scales. We identify a more politically conscious analysis in the original text than it is generally credited with, which we use to argue that “code of the street” has outgrown its reductive categorization as a subcultural theory. We conclude that the pressing issue of urban gun violence makes now an ideal time to refresh the theory by resituating it within the contemporary structural and cultural landscape of urban violence, analyzing the social-ecological features that shape the normative underpinnings of interpersonal violence, and studying the prosocial and adaptive features of the code.

Annual Review of Criminology, Volume 7, Page 19 - 38

By Ireland Bellsmith, Olivia Goertzen, Kia Neilsen and Olivia Stinson

Poverty is both a source and a consequence of injustice. The following is a brief review of some of the many issues at the intersection between poverty and the justice system, and more generally, poverty and access to justice. It is based on a review of the literature as well as some of the prior work by the International Centre for Criminal Law Reform and Criminal Justice Policy, an institute of the UN Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice Programme Network based in Vancouver, BC. In their first report, the National Advisory Council on Poverty (NACP) defined poverty as the deprivation of resources and the lack of power required to attain basic living standards and to facilitate social integration and inclusion, thus clearly linking poverty to social exclusion or marginalization. Although the Council agreed with that broad definition of poverty, initially used in Opportunity for All – Canada’s First Poverty Reduction Strategy, it also acknowledged that a more comprehensive definition would further emphasize the feelings of social disconnect and disempowerment that commonly characterize poverty. Poverty limits people’s access to justice and their ability to resolve conflicts and deal with everyday legal problems. It is a very disempowering and alienating experience. The resulting inability to successfully resolve legal problems is itself contributing to people’s inability to attain or maintain basic living standards. The justice system instead of empowering poor people and allowing them to fight for their rights is too often a source for them of frustration, disillusionment, and disempowerment, as well as a direct reflection of prevailing social inequality and exclusion. The experience of the justice system for marginalized victims of crime and individuals struggling with poverty is also problematic and is also contributing to and dictated by poverty. Yet, poverty is linked to higher rates of victimization and the consequences of victimization are often direr for people experiencing poverty and marginalization. Finally, the experience of people facing criminal charges or being convicted of a crime is also affected by their social and economic status. The likelihood of a criminal conviction and the consequences of a criminal conviction are directly influenced by the means of the defendants and the means and social capital of those who are convicted. The lack of support for convicted offenders, compounding their ostracization, is a further source of inequality and contributes to further entrenching them and their family in poverty and exclusion. This report presents an overview of recent research and general information gathered from persuasive articles, publications, and research studies on the topic of poverty in Canada and its implications and influence on access to justice. By evaluating different areas of justice and legal proceedings, we seek to identify emerging themes in research and analyze effective practices and those that appear to fall short. Thus far, evident themes between poverty and access to justice include unsatisfactory victim experience, conditions leading to incarceration despite the availability of alternatives, lack of legal awareness within communities, and problematic disempowerment. While current practices and legislation have sought to address these obstacles inherent to the Canadian justice system, we suggest that the circumstances of poverty continue to impede equal access to justice in a number of ways and recommend that further research be conducted to evaluate best practices.

Vancouver, BC: International Centre for Criminal Law Reform , 2022. 38p

By Hermann Mannheim

From the preface: “It happened perhaps eleven years ago, not long before my retirement from the teaching of criminology in the University of London. One day, after I had just completedmy first lecture of the new session and distributed copies of my, notoriously rather lengthy, reading listfor the course, Iwas approached by ayoung girl student who, holding her copy ni her hand, said ni avoice which sounded polite butalsorather determined: Sir, I am quite willing to read a bookon criminology, but itm u s t be only one, in which I can find everything required. Can you recommend such a book?' After some hesitation and with a strong feeling of guilt I replied that I could not comply with her request as there was no such book and she would probably have to read several of the items on my list, whereupon she silently and rather despondently withdrew.”

Boston. Houghton Mifflin Co. 1965. 772p. CONTAINS MARK-UP.

Edited by Graeme R. Newman

“To celebrate our 200th year of crime, I have tried to bring together a number of papers which (1) trace some historical origins of crime and justice in America; (2) examine some cultural expressions of crime through fact, fiction, and policy; and (3) are themselves representative of the cultural context of crime. Some of the papers attempt to destroy myths; others to comprehend them. Still others try to break out of the visionary mold and plead for rationality. We have on our hands, Wilkins says, a “mad, bad, sick” confusion. The colossal complexity of the concept of crime cannot be doubted, and its role in the mythical foundations of national culture has yet to be apprehended. Perhaps if we can rid ourselves of this confusing moralism about crime, we will be able to go forward with clear heads and protect ourselves.”

Philadelphia. Tha Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Sciences. 1976. 240p.

By Raimo Lahti.

This collection of essays on criminal law, criminology and criminal policy includes a selection of my articles from the year of 1972 to the year of 2020, i.e., from a period of 49 years. The writings – in all 32 – chosen for the compilation are written in English and 30 of them have been published earlier. The main aim with this anthology is to crucially widen the access of my writings for comparative purposes. The articles are divided into seven chapters. Chapters I–VI cover a large spectrum of criminal sciences, and they are – in particular, in Chapters IV–VI – written rather from a Nordic (Scandinavian) than from a narrower Finnish perspective. The title of the anthology expresses its main message: towards an efficient, just and humane criminal justice. Chapter VII includes five articles related to bio-ethics and (criminal) law. The reason for that chapter’s attachment is to present some of my contributions to the new discipline entitled ‘Medical law and biolaw’.

The intensified internationalization and Europeanization of criminal law and justice have changed the role of comparative law and criminal sciences in general. There is much more need for comparison of legal orders due to the emergence of European criminal law and international criminal law and due to the increased interaction between European and global legal regulations and the national legal orders. We also need more evidence-based criminological research to be utilized in criminal-policy planning and as a foundation for rational policy decisions.

Helsinki: Suomalainen lakimiesyhdistys, 2021. 554p.

By Carl Murchison.

“This material is offered for the special consideration of lawyers, psychologists, siociologists, social workers, and all those who have to do with the formulation of criminal law, the treatment of criminals, and the molding of public opinion concerning the enemies of organized society…”

A Read-Me.Org Classic Reprint (1926) 483 pages.

By Arthur Train.

“The pleasant fiction of the innocence.”

New York Scribner’s (1912) 256 pages.