Presidential address, Michele Burman: 25 years of the ESC

I am writing this presidential message at the time that many European leaders have come out to stand by Ukraine in the wake of the recent meeting between Volodymyr Zelenskyy and Donald Trump in the White House. At a time when Europe faces domestic unrest, budgetary constraints and political divisiveness over critical issues, it is heartening to see glimpses of unity and coalition-building in the face of the fracturing of a long-standing alliance with the US.  

At the same time, the emerging socio-political realities across Europe and beyond – and the powerfully mediated public discourses about them - are playing out in an increasingly tense global context. The up-swing of right-wing allegiances, political polarisation, the continued decline of participatory democracy, the mobilising of notions of crime and criminality to justify increased punitiveness and repressive border control regimes, rising security threats, ongoing conflicts, and the erosion of the rights of women all alongside the rising of right-wing rhetoric surrounding these realities summon themes of deteriorating democracy, power, security, marginalisation, (in)equalities and (in)justice. All the while raising questions about whether and how these issues might be addressed rather than be allowed to worsen. These are all themes with which many criminologists are deeply familiar, indeed have pursued in their scholarship.

Though a daunting task, criminological knowledge should be particularly suited to making some sense of the current socio-political situation, of its challenges, of the possible courses and directions that may be taken and of their consequences[MOU1] . Sensitivity to political, spatial and temporal context is demanded in criminological scholarship and this attentiveness has served us well in the past; it has allowed criminologists to develop capacity of insight into the dynamics at play in the societies and environments within which we work and enabled us to trace the implications for both conceptualising and responding to crime.  As Nils Christie (1971) wrote many years ago, changing times create new situations. They also provide opportunities.  For example, in my own area of research interest, feminist criminologists have long had to exercise a keen attentiveness to underlying and changing societal forces and possibilities in order to challenge entrenched views, expand definitions of crime, victimisation and justice and widen methods and theory to enrich our (mutual) knowledge base.

In the recognition that the credibility of evidence and social science academic research is viewed at best sceptically by many, and without massively overplaying the transformative power of criminological work, how might we as criminologists be positioned to make sense of these contemporary socio-political realities and their implications for crime and justice. Of course, a fundamental question here (once again) is how can (or should) criminology as a reflexive discipline engage with politics, policies and public discourses?  What are the possibilities?

Whilst public criminology is, for some, highly contested both as a term and a concept, it does offer a way of thinking about possible or suitable interactions between criminological knowledge and different kinds of public engagement. Loader and Sparks (2010) in their seminal work Public Criminology? outlined how criminologists have variously responded to the increasing politicisation of crime and criminal justice by either seeking to ‘insulate’ criminological research from public discourse or by embracing the ‘hot topics’ of crime and justice to engage with public discourse and challenge existing structures of power and control. 

As they and others have recognised, criminology is not homogenous; it spans a range of topic areas and theoretical, methodological and empirical perspectives producing different kinds of criminological knowledge that may or may not lend itself to civic engagement or purposeful action.  But just as there are many kinds of criminologies, there are many different kinds of criminologists. Some of us are more attuned to critically engaging with policy, practice or public discourse than others and have crafted ways to do this. For many of us, faced with successive work deadlines and pressures, and the demands of family life, there is rarely sufficient time to reflect in any profound way on how society is changing, or the implications this may have on our work and scholarship or how we might challenge contemporary forces.  Others try to make a difference through their teaching, aiming to impart a strong sense of social justice to their students.  Some of us live and work in places where there are significant constraints placed on possibilities for critical interactions of academic knowledge and public engagement. For some of us, however, marshalling criminological knowledge to combat and disrupt injustice and inequality is a raison d’être of our scholarship; the link between academia and activism has a long history.

This is not intended to be a call to action. Rather, it is a call for critical reflection. 2025 is already a year of disruption and seismic change. The dramas of the moment are becoming increasingly consequential and signal a need for reflexivity along with some clear criminological thinking if we are to fully understand their implications for crime, punishment and justice and, in turn, for our own work. What are the challenges and the possibilities? European criminology, in its broadest sense, is vibrant and insightful and driven by intellectual energy. It is also based on rigorous scientific standards and methods. It seems timely to apply these standards in critical reflection on the current context of matters of concern, as a means of imagining and working towards fairer and socially just societies.

Update on Eurocrim 2025

Preparations are now far advanced for our most anticipated annual event, Eurocrim 2025, to be held in Athens in September 3-6. The deadline for abstract submissions has now passed and we have received an abundance of abstracts speaking to a diverse range of criminological topics and themes. The 2025 conference, which also marks the ESC’s 25th anniversary, will be crammed with fantastic panels, round tables, author-meets-critics and, of course, plenary sessions, all of which touch upon crucial issues of our time.[MOU2] 

Eurocrim 2025 promises to encompass a diverse range of theoretical, conceptual and methodological approaches, including on the dynamics and consequences of crime, violence and harm, assessments of major crime and security risks, and critiques of state and justice responses. As well as papers on the furtherance of human rights, equality and fair treatment within criminal justice systems, and on the promotion of the interests of disadvantaged communities and groups.  All very pertinent to the contemporary situation, giving much scope for reflection.

With inclusivity at its core, the ESC conference will continue to provide a forum for dialogue and knowledge exchange between all criminologists on all criminological topics. It is a celebration of the diversity of our discipline.   It is also an opportunity for open and scholarly discussion and debate in the spirit of collegiality and, I hope, kindness.  I look forward to seeing you there.

References

Christie N. (1971). Scandinavian Criminology Facing the 1970s .Scandinavian Studies in Criminology, Vol. 43, 121–149

Loader, I. and Sparks, R. (2010). Public Criminology? (Key Ideas in Criminology Series). London: Routledge.