Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Access Criminology and Criminal Justice journals now

CiteULike is a free service for managing and discovering scholarly references - click here to get started.

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Criminal Justice
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Maguire, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

The Crime Reduction Programme in England and Wales

Reflections on the vision and the reality

Mike Maguire

Cardiff University, UK

The article contrasts the original vision behind the Crime Reduction Programme - an ambitious plan (initially intended to run for 10 years) to accumulate, disseminate and use research-based knowledge about the effectiveness of a wide variety of interventions - with the reality of the multiple problems experienced during its implementation in England and Wales between 1999 and its premature end in 2002. Ultimately, few projects were implemented as planned, with the knock-on effect of a dearth of conclusive research findings. It is argued that the Crime Reduction Programme benefitted initially from an unusual ‘window of opportunity’ when such a programme appeared attractive to politicians, administrators, practitioners and researchers alike, resulting in a level of funding for pilot projects and evaluation which was unprecedented in the UK in the crime reduction field. However, it was undermined significantly by inherent risks and tensions that became increasingly prominent as circumstances (and the political climate) changed. While initially conceived as research-driven, it was ‘sold’ to politicians as contributing to the government’s challenging crime reduction targets, an aim which progressively took priority over research. It was over-ambitious in scale and raised unrealistic expectations of its outcomes. It suffered from major practical problems caused by unfeasible timescales, slow-moving bureaucratic procedures, and shortages of ‘capacity’. Low commitment to project integrity, cultural resistance among practitioners, and insufficient attention to differences between academics’ and policy makers’ understandings of research, also contributed to its problems. While some useful outcomes can be claimed, the results of the Crime Reduction Programme as a whole were unquestionably disappointing. In the light of these experiences, it might be argued that - tempting as it was to seize the rare opportunity of major funding - the ideal of ‘evidence-based policy’ may be more effectively pursued as a quiet iterative process over the longer term, rather than through a risky investment in one high profile and rapidly implemented ‘programme’ which promises more than it can guarantee to deliver.

Key Words: crime reduction • evaluation • evidence-based policy • what works

Criminal Justice, Vol. 4, No. 3, 213-237 (2004)
DOI: 10.1177/1466802504048463


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
PolicingHome page
P. Dawson and E. Williams
Reflections from a Police Research Unit--An Inside Job
Policing, November 6, 2009; (2009) pap043v1.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Br J CriminolHome page
M. Levi and J. Burrows
Measuring the Impact of Fraud in the UK: A Conceptual and Empirical Journey
Br. J. Criminol., May 1, 2008; 48(3): 293 - 318.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Youth JusticeHome page
H. Kemshall
Risks, Rights and Justice: Understanding and Responding to Youth Risk
Youth Justice, April 1, 2008; 8(1): 21 - 37.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Theoretical CriminologyHome page
T. Newburn and T. Jones
Symbolizing crime control: Reflections on Zero Tolerance
Theoretical Criminology, May 1, 2007; 11(2): 221 - 243.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Br J CriminolHome page
F. Dodsworth
Police and the Prevention of Crime: Commerce, Temptation and the Corruption of the Body Politic, from Fielding to Colquhoun
Br. J. Criminol., May 1, 2007; 47(3): 439 - 454.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Criminal JusticeHome page
S. Lewis, M. Maguire, P. Raynor, M. Vanstone, and J. Vennard
What works in resettlement? Findings from seven Pathfinders for short-term prisoners in England and Wales
JCriminology and Criminal Justice, February 1, 2007; 7(1): 33 - 53.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Criminal JusticeHome page
M. Maguire and P. Raynor
How the resettlement of prisoners promotes desistance from crime: Or does it?
JCriminology and Criminal Justice, February 1, 2006; 6(1): 19 - 38.
[Abstract] [PDF]