Skip Navigation


British Journal of Criminology Advance Access originally published online on November 29, 2006
British Journal of Criminology 2007 47(3):373-389; doi:10.1093/bjc/azl092
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
47/3/373    most recent
azl092v1
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 O'Malley, P.
Right arrow Articles by Hutchinson, S.
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 47:373-389 (2007)
© The Author 2006. 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@oxfordjournals.org

Reinventing Prevention

Why Did ‘Crime Prevention’ Develop So Late?

Pat O'Malley and Steven Hutchinson*

* Pat O'Malley, Faculty of Law, University of Sydney, 173–175 Pitt Street, Sydney, NSW 2000. Australia; pat_omalley{at}carleton.ca. Steven Hutchinson is at Carleton University, Ottawa, Canada, and can be reached at shutchi2{at}connect.carleton.ca.


  Abstract

While crime prevention is taken to exemplify governance in the ‘risk society’, it may represent a retarded example of risk-based urban security. Crime prevention was unaffected by risk-based prevention characteristic of much nineteenth-century government of this domain. The development of risk-based fire prevention, by contrast, was substantially in place at the turn of the twentieth century, promoted by the convergence of insurance and other interests in securing property. Rather than seeing crime prevention as exemplifying the move toward the ‘risk society’ thesis, it may be better understood as a case in which neo-liberal governance and insurance technologies transformed a domain of governance that had been unusually resistant to risk-based approaches.


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




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.