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.
Criminology and 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 Zedner, L.
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?

Liquid security

Managing the market for crime control

Lucia Zedner

University of Oxford, UK

Liquid security captures the shift from the solid-state technology of the criminal justice state to the more fluid, transient and dispersed operations of the private security industry. Despite its promise to sell security, the industry is often better known for the dangers it poses to the safety of people and property. Marked by high levels of corruption, violence, rapid staff turnover and high customer churn the private security industry cannot maintain consumer confidence or public respect. This article examines various attempts to manage the market for crime control and seeks to disclose their underlying rationale. Attempts to govern through industry self-regulation, market competition and the design and architecture of provision have failed to secure standards. Yet formal state regulation appears directed less at compliance with articulated ethical standards, a clear conception of what security is for and whom it should serve, than ensuring the health of the market. The state presents itself as facilitator, but appears as pimp, to the security industry. Regulation is sold as a ‘business opportunity’ and compliance as the means to ensuring profitability. In the telling words of the Security Industry Authority, ‘Good security is good for the whole business environment’.

Key Words: accountability • governance • private security • regulation • security policy

Criminology and Criminal Justice, Vol. 6, No. 3, 267-288 (2006)
DOI: 10.1177/1748895806065530


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
Theoretical CriminologyHome page
L. Zedner
Pre-crime and post-criminology?
Theoretical Criminology, May 1, 2007; 11(2): 261 - 281.
[Abstract] [PDF]