Penal Populism and the Public Thermostat: Crime, Public Punitiveness, and Public Policy

Abstract

This article makes the case that feedback processes in democratic politics-between crime rates, public opinion, and public policy-can account for the growth of penal populism in Britain. It argues that the public recognize and respond to rising (and falling) levels of crime, and that in turn public support for being tough on crime is translated into patterns of imprisonment. This contributes to debates over the crimeopinion-policy connection, unpacking the dynamic processes by which these relationships unfold at the aggregate level. This uses the most extensive data set ever assembled on aggregate opinion on crime in Britain to construct a new over-time measure of punitive attitudes. The analysis first tests the thermostatic responsiveness of punitive attitudes to changes in recorded crime rates as well as self-reported victimization, and then examines the degree to which changes in mass opinion impact on criminal justice policy.

Thatcherism, Crime and the Legacy of the Social and Economic ‘Storms’ of the 1980s

“…Regardless of precisely how 'short-lived' such social stress is (is ten years a long or a short period of time, for example? ), we have been at pains to chart and document the long-term implications of such periods of rapid change (see Farrall, Burke and Hay 2016a;Farrall et al 2016b;Jennings et al, 2016;Hay and Farrall 2011). From this perspective, theories of anomie offer a potential avenue to stretch our understanding of how dramatic social change and shifts in the patterns and pace of crime (such as that experienced during and after the Thatcherite era) impact upon society.…”

Criminal Justice’s Ailing Role

“…One of the defining elements of this transformation is the growing sentiment of a risk society which primarily results in punitivism and over criminalisation (Garland, 2001). Through the growing, often politicised rhetoric of protecting the society from harm, the world has seen the rise of penal populism (Jennings et al, 2016). These aspects of modern criminal justice policies and strategies have ensured a reconfiguration of the conventional narratives by ushering in a new paradigm in almost every aspect in the criminal justice circle including the rise of private players (Jones and Newburn, 2005;Burkhardt and Jones, 2016).…”

“…It was, however, argued that far from promoting liberal democratic values, state sensitivity to public opinion is a phenomenon tha often leads to 'penal populism'. By reacting to public sentiment, the system is bound to amplify crime control measures and raise the degree of sanctions, which in the end compels the state to prioritize punitive measures as core in criminal justice policies (Hough and Roberts, 2005;Jennings et al, 2016). Burke (2012) also points out that because harsh sentencing is often part of the sentiment of the public on crime and criminals, politicians tend to exploit and capitalise on it for political gains.…”

Moral Panics and Punctuated Equilibrium in Public Policy: An Analysis of the Criminal Justice Policy Agenda in Britain

“…Moral panics are not inconsistent with public responsiveness to actual policy problems. For example, rising public anxiety about crime has been shown to be a function of actual crime rates (Enns, ; Jennings, Farrall, Gray, & Hay, ; Miller, ). They may explain, however, why certain problems are suddenly elevated onto the policy agenda at particular times, thus contributing to punctuations in public policy.…”

“…There is a substantial and ongoing debate concerning the politicization of crime and why it emerged as a political issue in the United States as well as in other advanced democracies. A small number of scholars have argued that crime rates shape both public attitudes and political responses to crime in the United States (e.g., Enns, ; Fortner, ; Miller, ; Weaver, ), and in the United Kingdom (e.g., Downes & Morgan, ; Jennings et al, ; Newburn, ). In The Myth of Mob Rule , Miller () offers rare comparative evidence—from the United States, United Kingdom, and the Netherlands—on the connection between crime rates and policy responses.…”