The idea of a Southern Criminology

Southern Criminology is a theoretical perspective that shifts the focus from the state criminal justice process to global inequalities, transnational crime, and postcolonial politics. While recognising the importance of this shift in perspective for a globalising world, this paper asks two difficult questions. Firstly, how easy is it to generalise about whole regions of the world in advancing a political viewpoint? Secondly, is it possible for those in the West to imagine an alternative global criminology, if non-Western societies really do have different cultural values and epistemologies? For example, how should we respond to traditional practices among Indigenous Australians or a Confucian understanding of crime? These questions may make a Southern Criminology sound impossible in the same way as other varieties of critical theory. But this paper is intended to strengthen this emerging movement by acknowledging, and working through, potential difficulties.     

Beliefs in Government

This article conveys the general findings of the multi-national, multi-volume Beliefs in Government research project, perhaps the most exhaustive analysis of mass beliefs and attitudes conducted in the west. In spite of considerable socio–economic change in recent decades, the study provides evidence of political stability, continuity and adaptability in west European countries. This suggests that political scientists should pay more attention than hitherto to pressures for inertia and continuity in western democracies.     

Preis der Fritz Thyssen Stiftung für sozialwissenschaftliche Aufsätze des Zeitschriftenjahrgangs 1998

Mitteilungen und Berichte

Preis der Fritz Thyssen Stiftung für sozialwissenschaftliche Aufs?tze des Zeitschriftenjahrgangs 1998     

Schaderpreis für Peter Graf Kielmansegg

Mitteilungen und Berichte

     

Does Terrorism Pay? An Empirical Analysis

Does terrorism help perpetrators to achieve their demands? Few research questions about terrorism generate as much controversy. This study contributes to the debate in two main ways. First, we identify major limitations within the burgeoning literature on the effectiveness of terrorism. Specifically, we highlight the main methodological problems vexing empirical assessments of whether terrorism promotes government concessions. Second, we present a research design that circumvents those recurrent methodological shortcomings. In short, we find no empirical evidence to suggest that terrorism pays. In fact, multiple variants of the tactic in hostage standoffs impede the perpetrators from coercing government compliance. The negative effect of terrorism on the odds of compliance is significant and substantial across logistic and multilevel logistic model specifications, particularly when civilians are killed or wounded in the coercive incident. These findings have important implications for both scholars and practitioners of counterterrorism.