Abstract

In their recent seminal paper ‘Southern Criminology’, Carrington, Hogg and Sozzo (2016) address the issue of the global divide between South/North relations in the hierarchal production of criminological knowledge. They point out that the divide privileges theories, assumptions and methods that are largely based on the empirical specificities of the global North. Carrington et al. contend that the dominance of global North criminology has led to a severe underdevelopment of criminology in the global South, except ‘in Asia, with the establishment of the Asian Criminological Society and its journal’ (Liu 2009, in Carrington et al. 2016: 3). Carrington et al. propose an important task of bridging the global divide through further developing criminology in the global South. My present paper reviews the development of Asian criminology under the framework of the Asian Criminological Paradigm (Liu 2009). I primarily review the conceptual and theoretical developments, to suggest strategies that can contribute to the task of bridging the gap between global North and South. What Asian criminology has done is expand the theoretical tool box originally developed in the global North through the strategies of transportation of theories, elaboration of theories, and proposing new concepts and theories based on the empirical grounds of Asian contexts.

Highlights

  • In their recent seminal paper ‘Southern Criminology’, Carrington, Hogg and Sozzo (2016) address the issue of the global divide between South/North relations in the hierarchal production of criminological knowledge

  • Linking the insights of Carrington, Hogg and Sozzo (2016) to the literature of comparative criminology, the dominance of Western research and the underdevelopment of comparative research involving non‐Western countries is highly relevant to the issue of southern criminology

  • The lack of comparative studies involving non‐Western social contexts and justice systems and the dominance of Western‐based criminology is a major weakness of the discipline of criminology as well as of comparative criminology

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The lack of comparative studies involving non‐Western social contexts and justice systems and the dominance of Western‐based criminology is a major weakness of the discipline of criminology as well as of comparative criminology This important limitation of criminology has been recognized by prominent scholars (Aas 2012; Carrington, Hogg and Sozzo 2016; Connell 2007; Walklate 2015; Young 2011;). The three primary strategies are: transportation of Western theories; transformation of these theories; and proposing concepts and theories – different from Northern Theory in revolutionary ways – based on Asian empirical grounds These three stages link the North and Asia in a broader theoretical framework of global and comparative criminology

The development of Asian criminology and the Asian Criminological Paradigm
General strain theory
Social control theory
Social capital theories
Conceptual innovations in restorative justice
Findings
Future directions
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.