How Rural Criminology Informs Critical Thinking in Criminology

Joseph F Donnermeyer,Elaine Barclay,John Scott

doi:10.5204/ijcjsd.v2i3.122

Joseph F Donnermeyer, Elaine Barclay + Show 1 more

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.5204/ijcjsd.v2i3.122

Copy DOI

Abstract

Over the past quarter century, a growing volume of rural-focused criminological work has emerged. In this article, the literature related to three rural criminological issues are examined and discussed in terms of their lessons for critical criminology. Research on rural communities and crime is examined as a way to criticize and challenge mainstream criminological theories and concepts like social disorganisation and collective efficacy, and to remind critical criminologists of the importance for developing critical perspectives for place-based or ecological theories of crime. Agricultural crime studies are discussed in terms of the need to develop a critical criminology of agriculture and food. Finally, criminological studies of rural ‘others’ is used to show the need for critical criminologists to give greater analytic attention to divisions and marginalities of peoples living in smaller and more isolated places based on gender, race, and lifestyles, among other factors.

Highlights

Over the past quarter century, criminology has witnessed a substantial growth of scholarly discourse about crime and deviance in rural places and among rural peoples
We argued that one of the lessons the accumulated research on rural communities and crime can teach critical criminology is the need for the development of a critical theory of place
Each area was discussed in relation to distinctive functions – criticism, problem‐solving and problem analysis – which the rich body of critical criminology has contributed in the past to criminological thought in general

Summary

Introduction

Over the past quarter century, criminology has witnessed a substantial growth of scholarly discourse about crime and deviance in rural places and among rural peoples. Despite the recent development of a more critical approach to the examination of rural criminological issues (Donnermeyer and DeKeseredy 2014; Hogg and Carrington 2006), ‘rural’ remains uncommon parlance in the scholarly considerations of most critical criminologists. More importantly, we believe each serves a distinctive function central to the work of critical criminologists (Michalowki 2012; Winlow and Atkinson 2013; Young 2011) These are: criticism, that is, to point out shortcomings and fallacies in mainstream criminological concepts and theories; problem‐solving, that is, to provide answers and insights to important questions about crime and society; and problem analysis, which is to construct interpretive frameworks for issues about crime and deviance. By attempting to identify how rural criminology informs critical criminology, we hope in turn to sharpen the critical focus of rural criminology itself

Criticising

Problem solving

Problem anlalysis

Findings

Conclusions