By Ujjwal Kumar Singh

From the general editor’s introduction: “….The essays are also intended to be fairly detailed and empirical in emphasis, so as to stand in regard to the introduction in something of the relationship of evidence to interpretation. The project is directed both at specific problems and at a number of fundamental debates on the nature of discourse; and yet it is not intended primarily to generate new theory but rather to make its contribution by approaching questions from a new direction. Part of the dissatisfaction which lies behind the project is with Eurocentric terminology. This is not because we deny the possibility of there being any universal terms, nor because we think all knowledge produced by Europeans essentially the same and equally corrupted by power. It is because we are impressed by the need to avoid all essentialism, and by the importance, both intellectually and in practical situations, of an appreciation of difference. It is because we are uncertain how large categories may properly be constructed. Similar concerns are expressed in various ways in many disciplines, and constitute a crisis of interpretation…”

Delhi. Oxford University Press. 1998. 313p.

By Joe Russo, Rochisha Shukla, Bryce Peterson and KiDeuk Kim

Contraband cell phones threaten the security of prisons and jails and the safety of people who are incarcerated, correctional staff, and the public. In response, prison and jail administrators across the country employ a range of strategies to detect, disable, and remove contraband cell phones from their institutions. Though many of these strategies rely on novel technologies, nontechnological factors are equally critical for addressing the contraband cell phone issue. In this report, we describe nontechnological solutions corrections agencies can employ.

Washington, DC: Urban Institute Justice Policy Center, 2022. 21p.