Skip Navigation


British Journal of Criminology Advance Access originally published online on November 28, 2005
British Journal of Criminology 2006 46(1):97-118; doi:10.1093/bjc/azi047
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
46/1/97    most recent
azi047v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (1)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Norris, C.
Right arrow Articles by McCahill, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

The British Journal of Criminology 46:97-118 (2006)
© The Author 2005. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Centre for Crime and Justice Studies (ISTD). All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oupjournals.org

CCTV: Beyond Penal Modernism?

Clive Norris and Michael McCahill*

* Clive Norris, Department of Sociological Studies, University of Sheffield, Elmfield Building, Northumberland Road, Sheffield S10 2TU and Michael McCahill, Department of CASS, University of Hull, Cottingham Road, Hull HU6 7RX; m.mccahill{at}hull.ac.uk.

In recent years, a number of writers have suggested that contemporary strategies of crime control have called into question some of the central features of ‘penal modernism’. The return of punitively orientated ‘ostentatious’ forms of punishment whereby state representatives try to bring penal policy more in line with public sentiment is implicated (Pratt 2000; 2002). For other writers, the apparent erosion of state power accompanied by ‘new modes of governance’ based upon ‘risk management’ rather than the normalization of individual offenders is at the centre of a shift towards a ‘late modern’ or ‘postmodern’ penality (Feeley and Simon 1992; 1994; Smandych 1999; Garland 1996). This article draws upon research conducted for the EU-funded URBANEYE project to ask how the rapid growth in the use of CCTV in the United Kingdom fits in with contemporary debates on the emergence of a ‘postmodern’ penality (Garland 1995; 1996; 2001; Hallsworth 2002; O’Malley, 1999; Simon 1994). We begin with a review of the theoretical literature on visual surveillance. Next, we draw upon our empirical research to provide an account of the extent and sophistication of CCTV usage in publicly accessible spaces in London. Finally, we examine the ‘practice of video surveillance’ in four different settings—an open-street CCTV system, a transport system (mainline railway station), West London Mall and South London Mall.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 International Criminal Justice ReviewHome page
N. Zurawski
Video Surveillance and Everyday Life: Assessments of Closed-Circuit Television and the Cartography of Socio-Spatial Imaginations
International Criminal Justice Review, December 1, 2007; 17(4): 269 - 288.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.