Crime control and devolution: policy-making and expert knowledge in a multi-tiered democracy

These four seminars bring together academics from a number of relevant fields (including criminology, politics and law), policy-makers, practitioners, and interested others (journalists, for example) to discuss the making of crime policy in the various parts of the United Kingdom since devolution. The UK is no longer, if it ever was, a unitary state. There are extended traditions of criminology and legal studies across the UK; and these speak to distinct histories and circumstances. Yet studies of crime as a public issue and of crime policy formation have not yet fully addressed the realities of living in a multi-tiered democracy. Neither, by extension, have they explored the potential for discovery and innovation that this may herald by sytematic comparative work.

How differently has policy developed in Scotland, Wales, England and Northern Ireland in recent years in light of the very distinct powers and political trajectories of the places concerned? Do any such differences owe their character to factors that pre-exist devolution given that, for example, the Scottish or Northern Irish prison and probation services were already quite separate from the English and Welsh system, as were various other agencies? On the other hand can we see new bodies of law, new practices or policies that clearly flow from the devolved arrangements? How differently have these evolved in Wales and Scotland, after more than a decade of devolution, given the quite different powers of the institutions there? What can be learned from these for Northern Ireland, where key areas of criminal justice have only recently been devolved, from these accounts? What can we learn anew about England - the dominant yet in some salient respects unexamined case - by viewing it from other vantage points?

There is great scope for mutual learning for all concerned in creating a forum in which people with a range of insights and responsibilities can discuss these matters in a concerted way. There is also great potential for comparative studies of the effects and effectiveness of policy within the UK. Yet few examples of systematic comparison yet exist.

We can learn a lot about policy-making in this way. In what different networks and social settings is policy developed in Edinburgh, Cardiff, Belfast and London, or in other locations? How do political demands bear upon the generation, formulation or implementation of policies in each place? What resources of expertise are called upon? Who takes part in consultative processes and how inclusive or how effective are these? How is research organized, funded and used? What opportunities or obstacles attend the principle of evidence-informed policy-making in each case?

Finally, what can research and policy-makers in the new policy spaces of the devolved UK learn from those in other European countries with their distinct experiences of federal or regional governance. Who makes policy, and who provides and who uses what kinds of knowledge, in Germany or in Spain, for example? What is the bearing on each of the assumption of greater competences for the 'area of freedom, justice and security' of European institutions themselves?

We will hold four one-day seminars in Edinburgh, Belfast, Cardiff and Oxford. They will cover: i) History, politics and culture in criminal justice before and since devolution; ii) Questions of knowledge and policy - doing and using research on crime and justice; iii) Mutual learning and comparative studies: offender management and policing; iv) Crime and justice in the UK in European perspective: comparative case studies and European institutions.

We aim to produce at least one edited book and a number of articles, possibly including a special issue of a journal. We will provide accessible and widely circulated briefings following each seminar and will share insights from the seminars with policy communities and wider publics through a range of established and 'new' media

All aspects of the seminars will be collaborative, from inception to dissemination. We construe policy-makers, practitioners and members of civil society groups not simply as 'audiences' for these events but as partners in their co-production. For example, non-academic participants in the seminars will be involved as presenters on each occasion. This will have the direct benefit of building alliances, or in many case strengthening relationships that already exist, across sectors. More than this, however, the seminars will contribute to facilitating relationships, with the longer-term goal of establishing formally constituted networks, between policy and research communities across the constituent countries of the UK.

Richard Sparks (PI) and Mike Maguire (Co-I) are Directors respectively of the Scottish Centre for Crime and Justice Research (www.sccjr.ac.uk) and of the Welsh Centre for Crime and Social Justice (www.wccsj.ac.uk). These are both multi-institutional research centres with significant knowledge exchange capacities, and whose remits include promoting dialogue and informing policy in Scotland and Wales through research. Shadd Maruna (Co-I) is Director of the Institute for Criminology and Criminal Justice at Queen's University. Ian Loader is Director of the Centre for Criminology at the University of Oxford. All these organizations maintain well-visited websites and extensive mailing lists (SCCJR mailings are distributed to approximately 1000 individuals and organizations, for example) and publicize their research through social media, as well as through all the channels available to their partner institutions. This means that we can be certain that outputs from the seminars will be made available to policy and practice communities, and to other interested publics across the UK and internationally.

A principal focus of these seminars is the nexus between research and policy. We aim to promote discussion on the institutional arrangements in and through which research is conducted, the channels through which research informs policy, the conditions under which research is utilized and the creation of sustainable relationships between research and policy communities within and across the four countries. Comparative discussion of these questions can help to clarify which arrangements, channels, conditions and relationships best meet the needs of the parties concerned and to dialogue on what researchers and policy-makers can properly expect from one another.

We will circulate accessible briefings on the outcome of each seminar widely and promptly. The audiences for these will include: Governmental policy makers; parliamentarians/assembly members; practitioners; lobbying organisations (for example Howard League Scotland); third sector service providers (for example Apex, SACRO, NIACRO, Children First, Victim Support), opinion formers, selected members of the press. The anticipated impacts of these actions include:

- Increased awareness of and access to the research evidence about criminal justice policies and mechanics of policy making
- Improved understanding about why and how policies are made in devolved territories
- Raised profile about different criminal justice policy responses, highlighting different policy ideas and presenting devolved administrations as potential comparators/partners in international networks

The seminars wil lead tol:

- Improved dialogue between those involved in policy-making from different perspectives and focused on different issues
- Stronger relationships and links between academic, policy and practitioner communities
- Improved understanding about policy making, and the links between policy, practice and research in the criminal justice field
- Learning from experience in other UK jurisdictions based on insights into the similarities and differences in policy, policy making processes and environments and examples of innovative practice.