Governing Criminological Knowledge - the Politics and Practice of Criminological Research

Abstract

This thesis examines the extent to which criminological knowledge, both historical and contemporary, has been, or is, shaped by processes and practices of governance. It explores the contours that have forged a nexus between criminological endeavour and government and analyses the ways in which criminology's legitimation as a scientific specialism has been influenced by its technocratic and policy directed orientations. This thesis also examines the 'political' dynamics or the minutiae of conducting criminological research on a day-to-day basis. As Foucault has pointed out, the 'art of governing' or 'to govern not only involves the protection of principality but also the governing of 'things', the daily events that influence, or are capable of influencing, the economy of the state (Foucault, 1978:89-91). Research per se is a powerful and political process. It is capable of unearthing unwanted information and challenging the decisions of those who govern. As such, the researcher must be aware that they enter a realm of political turmoil when they question the underlying assumptions and philosophies of those in power. Criminological research often impinges upon topics of sensitivity. It can challenge the existing social order or criticise state policy and practice in ways that directly impact upon government managers and decision-makers. From the inception of a research topic to the production of its findings, criminological researchers consequently often encounter a range of difficulties. As Hughes (1996) argues, the 'finished product' of criminological research that is often presented as an 'antiseptic and tidy picture' fails to convey the ongoing struggles and tensions involved in 'doing research' (Hughes, 1996:58). This thesis examines the difficulties that criminologists sometimes endure when conducting research and charts the ways in which criminological scholarship is influenced, shaped or governed. It explores the role of government and commercial contracts in contemporary criminological scholarship as well as the various obstacles (legal and ethical issues, securing funding, accessing and gathering information, and publishing results) that criminologists must negotiate prior to, during and after the completion of a research project. This thesis further examines the criminological implications of the ways in which academic environments are changing under neo-liberal managerialist philosophies. The commercialisation of criminological research provides a useful mechanism for developing strategic approaches to risk populations. These developments have promoted intense competition within universities to access resources. Funding sources, both internal and external to the university, have become hotly contested as governments calculate budgets on research activity. The increased competition for grants has resulted in criminological researchers seeking funds through commercial sources. The emergence of consultancies and other forms of private work places the researcher in a relationship of service provider to a client, where there is a responsibility to deliver a product by a said date. Finally, this thesis examines the ways in which critical criminological scholarship has been influenced by neo-liberal mentalities of rule. Notions of 'critique' have become wedded or subordinate to the politics of existing governing rationalities. As a result, post disciplinary criminologies must begin to re-examine critical scholarship within frameworks that focus on the politics and rationales of new modes of governance. In doing so, it explores new pathways and horizons for the deployment of future criminological knowledge.