Justice in the Risk Society: Challenging and Re-affirming Justice in Late Modernity
Publication Year: 2003
`The book is a unique combination of criminology, politics and philosophy which can be recommended' - Network, Newsletter of the British Sociological Association `Hudson's Justice in the Risk Society is stunning in the depth and breadth of its scholarship. In examining the challenges the risk society presents for established conceptions of justice she compels a profound rethinking of what justice does, and can, mean. Her analysis will frame and inspire future debate' - Clifford Shearing, Professor, Law Program, Research School of Social Science, Australian National University `Remarkably comprehensive, ambitious in its scope and morally compelling. Barbara Hudson draws skilfully from a wide range of frameworks… She asks fundamental questions about the nature of justice and argues for a radical rethink of liberalism. She explores complex ...
- Front Matter
- Back Matter
- Subject Index
Part I: Challenging Liberal Justice
- Chapter 1: Justice in the Liberal Tradition
- The Emergence of the Liberal Agenda
- The Morality of Reason
- The Greatest Good
- Fairness and Impartiality
- Liberalism and Punishment
- Consequentialist Theories of Punishment
- Liberal Retributivist Approaches
- Threats to Security
- Chapter 2: Risk and the Politics of Safety: Justice Endangered
- The ‘Risk Society’ Thesis
- Risk and Criminal Justice
- Risk, Blame and the End of Solidarity
- Risk, Insurance and Governmentality
- Risk and Sovereignty
- Explaining the Move from Risk Management to Risk Control
- Risk and Justice
- Risk Society and Liberal Security Concerns
- Chapter 3: The Communitarian Challenge
- The Emergence of a Politics of Community
- Community as Moral Resource
- Community Justice
- Critical Communitarianism
- Communitarian Constructivism
- The Value of Community
- Membership, Power and Rights
- Chapter 4: Identity and Difference: Feminist and Postmodernist Critiques of Liberalism
- Liberal Feminism
- Rights, Equality and Identity
- Discourse Ethics: The Encounter with the Concrete Other
- The Contingent Subject; Universalism without Guarantees
- Feminist Legal Theory and the Problem of Essentialism
Part II: Reaffirming Justice
- Chapter 5: Reaffirming Modernity: Habermas and Discourse Ethics
- Background: Habermas and the Frankfurt School
- The Development of Discourse Ethics: (1) Consensus and Truth
- The Development of Discourse Ethics: (2) Discourse and Universality
- Assessment and Critique
- Law and Democracy: Habermas's Recent Work
- Does Between Facts and Norms Meet Earlier Critiques of Habermas's Discourse Theory?
- Legitimacy and the Risk Society
- Habermas's Argument with Post-Structuralism
- Conclusion: Habermas and Criminal Justice
- Chapter 6: Giving Difference its Due: Discourse and Alterity
- Liberalism and the Expulsion of Difference
- Law's Violence
- Justice and the Ethics of Alterity
- Lyotard: Justice and the Multiplicity of Discourses
- Conclusion: Postmodernism and the Possibilities of Justice
- Chapter 7: Doing Justice in the Risk Society
- Justice and Risk
- Liberal Justice and Its Critics
- Discourse and Community
- The Importance of Human Rights
- Human Rights: Conditional or Inalienable
- Defending Human Rights: Rights, Discourse and Community
© Barbara Hudson 2003
First published 2003
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, transmitted or utilised in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without permission in writing from the Publishers.
SAGE Publications Ltd
6 Bonhill Street
London EC2A 4PU
SAGE Publications Inc
2455 Teller Road
Thousand Oaks, California 91320
SAGE Publications India Pvt Ltd
B-42, Panchsheel Enclave
Post Box 4109
New Delhi 100 017
British Library Cataloguing in Publication data
A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library
ISBN 0–7619 6159 3
0–7619 6160 7
Library of Congress control number available
Typeset by C&M Digitals (P) Ltd, Chennai, India
Printed in Great Britain by Athenaeum Press, Gateshead
In memory of my father, Frederick Groves Leigh, a good man who cared about justice[Page vi]
This book has taken an inordinately long time to write, and I wish to thank Gillian Stern and her colleagues at Sage for their patience. There are always tales that could be told about why books take so long, but with this book there are two principal causes of delay. The first is that I didn't want not to be writing it: so much of my work is about things I dislike — race discrimination in punishment, for example — and it was good to be writing something positive and idealistic, what justice should and could be like. The second reason is that each chapter engaged with vast bodies of literature, and at times I felt both intimidated and overwhelmed. I am therefore extremely grateful to David Garland, for his wise words at an ‘author meets readers panel’ at the British Criminology Conference in July 2002: ‘A book should know its questions and try to answer them, not try to answer all possible questions.’ Thanks David, that got me out of the trees and into the wood!
Lots of people have helped me develop the ideas in the book. Andrew Ashworth, Andrew von Hirsch and Antony Duff have been important throughout, and the arguments and debates we have had have helped sharpen my thinking at various points. My own ‘risk society’ was a group of criminologists who write influentially and insightfully about risk: Kelly Hannah-Moffat, Pat O'Malley, Jonathan Simon, Kevin Stenson and Richard Sparks have provided good ideas and good company. Stan Cohen's work is inspirational as always; Kathy Daly, Joe Sim and Phil Scraton have provided debate, encouragement and friendship whenever I've needed it. Colleagues and students at the University of Central Lancashire have questioned, argued and encouraged: Gaynor Bramhall, Helen Codd, Michael Salter and David Scott have been the most supportive and understanding colleagues one could wish for. Heather Scott has been a far better friend than I deserve.
Finally, my love and thanks to Harry, for your patience, sharing laughter, pouring gin and tonic when required, and all kinds of good things.
This book was prompted by concern that ‘justice’ is very much under threat in the ‘risk society’. In contemporary western societies adherence to long-held principles of justice is endangered by excessive concern with safety: fear of crime and fear of terrorism are rational fears, but are heightened to the point where they overwhelm our care for liberty and justice. Contemporary Britain furnishes plenty of examples of fears overwhelming concern for justice: policy proposals about sex offenders and persons diagnosed with serious personality disorders; restrictions on asylum seekers’ rights to move freely about the country and to receive welfare benefits; detention without trial of suspected terrorists, are just a few that spring to mind. Less serious threats are also being responded to with scant regard for justice: proposals to admit hearsay evidence in trials; unregulated extension of CCTV systems; proliferation of ‘gated’ communities, are examples. The idea that ‘it is better for ten guilty persons to go free than for one innocent person to be convicted’ is seen as naive and ‘soft’ on criminals; the ‘beyond reasonable doubt’ standard of proof is regarded as inconvenient and outmoded. Readers can no doubt think of many examples of developments in the name of safety which have raised questions for them about the balance to be struck between freedom and safety, justice and risk.
Western societies seem to be becoming much more concerned with rights and justice abroad than at home. While we sacrifice liberty to safety, and compromise justice through our strategies to control risk in our own countries, we refuse trade and aid, and threaten or (maybe, by the time this book is published) actually wage war in the name of justice and human rights. While we disregard the rights of offenders and other risky people here, dividing people into those (potential victims) who deserve rights and those (potential offenders) who don't, we condemn rights abuses in other countries, and the arguments of their governments that incarcerating dissidents and other ‘enemies’ is necessary for public safety are dismissed. Some of the practices western democracies are currently pursuing in the name of public safety would be condemned by us if they were happening in another country.
Around the time I was beginning to plan this book, I gave a lecture in Budapest. One of the other speakers, a forensic psychiatrist, was explaining the idea of the Serious Personality Disorder incarceration. The translator repeatedly asked the speaker to repeat her words: she could not believe she was interpreting correctly, that it was proposed in democratic, rights-regarding England and Wales to imprison people indefinitely who had not committed [Page xi]any offence, on the grounds that they could be dangerous. We should, perhaps, all be Hungarians in our own country!
Liberal legal theorists such as Andrew Ashworth and Andrew von Hirsch, and liberal criminologists like Rod Morgan, have challenged many of these recent developments that are so worrying from the point of view of justice; their counterparts in other countries have similarly challenged innovations there which disregard justice. These powerfully argued, impeccably reasoned challenges, however, have not been successful in stemming the tide of risk-oriented, justice-careless policy shifts. The most prominent example is the demise of the 1991 Criminal Justice Act. This was based very firmly on liberal justice principles of proportionality, consistency and fairness; its introduction was accompanied by an unprecedented amount of training of criminal justice professionals and explanations of its principles to the public through the media, and it was heralded as the legislation to set the principles of criminal justice for decades to come. Within six months, however, it was being undermined in the courts and by politicians, and from 1993 onwards a series of Acts and amendments — and sentencing practice itself — reflected less concern with justice and more concern with public protection.
While this story has been told by many writers, I wanted to explore the question of whether liberal theories of justice were not so much inadequately defended, but were in themselves inadequate to meet the challenges of risk politics. This meant looking at the two primary branches of liberalism: deontological liberalism and Utilitarianism. Deontological theories are theories which inquire not into the nature and essence of goodness, but into the nature of ethical duty. They put forward no ideas about the ‘good life’, but look at what it is to behave according to principles of justice. Deontological liberals do not seek to promote substantive goods, such as happiness or welfare, but to delineate regulatory principles, such as equal respect, fairness and consistency so as to create a social framework in which individuals can pursue their own ideas about the good life without interference from others. These values are clearly behind the main principles of the 1991 Criminal Justice Act.
Utilitarianism seeks to promote the good of all members of society, and defines this good as happiness, or absence of pain. The problem with Utilitarianism is that it does not offer adequate protection of each individual citizen against encroachments in the name of the good of society as a whole, or of the majority. In criminal justice terms, the rights of offenders to proportionate punishment cannot be guaranteed against the good of crime prevention in the wider society. Criminal justice systems in actual societies necessarily balance these two liberal models, and most analysts of the demise of the 1991 Criminal Justice Act feel that it was too preoccupied with its internal goals (fairness and consistency), and not enough concerned with the utilitarian goal of public safety (Bottoms, 1995). Rebalancing, towards greater public protection during the early 1990s was, therefore, scarcely surprising.
[Page xii]Beyond pendulum swings within the criminal justice response to routine crimes, however, could be detected moves which raised questions about the adequacy of liberal theory in any version to deal with the challenges of risk. People's estrangement from each other; their unwillingness to pay taxes for public services; the demands being made by feminists and by minority ethnic and religious groups; hostility towards foreigners; terrorism and threats of terrorism: these new orders of risk and claims to justice seem to be beyond the scope of liberalism's repertoire of theory and politics. I wanted to explore challenges to established ideas and institutions of justice that were coming from beyond liberalism. The most powerful challenges are those of communitarian-ism, feminism, and postmodernism.
Part I of the book — ‘Challenging Liberal Justice’ — opens with an outline and analysis of liberal moral philosophy and political theory, explaining the tensions between the two branches of liberalism, and then discusses liberal approaches to punishment and to security. This is followed by chapters on the politics of risk and safety; the communitarian challenge; and the critiques of liberalism advanced by liberal and post-structuralist feminists.
The critiques of liberal theories and practices of justice explored in Part I are powerful and persuasive. The chapter on risk shows how vulnerable the ideal of justice can be in face of heightened populist and political demand for safety from dangers (real or imagined) posed by other people. We see in our everyday lives how difficult it can be to achieve a balance between promoting security and respecting justice. Issues such as the penetration of CCTV systems — their location; whether private individuals as well as public bodies should be able to install cameras; who should have access to the films; camera footage's status as evidence; who, if anyone, has a right to object if cameras are sited in residential areas and other privatised space — make us think about the requirements of safety but also raise questions about the right to privacy. Measures put in place to strengthen prevention of terrorism post-11 September 2001; tighter border controls, detention and other measures to restrict illegal immigration, and the pros and cons of compulsory identity cards make us think about the balance between freedom and safety, for ourselves as well as for those we think may threaten us. These questions not only provoke different responses in different people, but they provoke different responses in the same people at different times: we are all supportive of greater restriction in the immediate aftermath of a terrorist attack or a particularly outrageous crime.
The difficulty of thinking through these issues reveals at least two deficiencies in liberalism as a guide to practical actions. First of all, liberalism provides the principle that restriction on freedom is to be allowed only in the cause of prevention of harm, but this principle gives us no firm guidance about how to balance harm and freedom. Secondly, it can provide little help in drawing the boundaries of justice: who is included in, and who is excluded by the social contract. Liberalism has not solved the problems of relationships [Page xiii]between different cultures and nations, and it has not solved the problems posed by radical pluralism within liberal societies.
Utilitarian liberalism cannot guarantee the rights of individuals or minorities against majority opinions. This is particularly significant in present times when the clamorous politics of risk and safety drowns out the voices of those who seek to defend the rights of unpopular or unorthodox persons or groups, whether or not these persons or groups pose any real danger. Deontological versions of liberalism attempt to solve this problem by doing away with the promotion of good: in order to prevent any one person being sacrificed to the general or majoritarian good, pursuit of the good must be given up. What this leaves is an approach to justice which is devoid of substantive ethical content, so that doing justice entails — only — following justly decided procedures. The price of seeing all persons as being owed equal justice is to substitute a fictitious, abstract, identical ‘person of reason’ for the real, individual, flesh-and-blood moral citizen.
Just as Utilitarian liberalism resolves the problem of the relation of individual to society by dissolving the notion of the individual in the idea of the general good, deontological liberalism resolves the same problem by dissolving society, abstracting the individual from her social context. Communitarian critiques are directed at this aspect of liberalism. They are undoubtedly correct in objecting to this abstraction of individual from context, and any reconstruction of justice must take the relationship of individual to society much more seriously than traditional liberalism has done.
This is especially the case with criminal justice. The essence of crime is that it is a wrong against society as well as a harm against another individual. As Duff (1996) has insisted in his communitarian approach to punishment, assessment of harm does not capture the whole meaning of a crime; we are offended by crime because it offends a community's shared sense of right and wrong, not just because it is a harm done by one person to another. In Durkheimian terms, while the sense of crime as an offence against God might have disappeared from most sections of modern secularised societies, there remains the sense that when society's moral boundaries have been transgressed, justice requires blaming commensurate with the wrongness of the crime as well as recompense for the harm suffered by individual victims.
Communitarians, then, are on firm ground when arguing for the replacement of the Kantian ‘unencumbered self with a ‘situated self. However, they thereby return us to the utilitarian dilemma of how to protect the individual against community majoritarianism. In many ways, communitarianism appears as a new form of utilitarianism, with its emphasis on the general good rather than on individual freedoms. As well as the problem of toleration of a moderate range of diversity envisaged by liberal founding fathers such as Locke and Mill, however, contemporary consciousness recognises a much deeper and wider spectrum of difference. Feminist and post-structuralist writers challenge the potential repressiveness of communitarianism, and [Page xiv]also its failure to move beyond Kantian liberalism's logic of identity which formulates principles of justice deriving from the qualities that all humans have in common (the ability to reason; the desire to pursue their own ends). In fact, it can be argued that communitarianism adds a political logic of identity to the philosophical logic of identity of deontological liberalism, because contemporary communities are groupings of ‘people like us’, to be defended against people who are not ‘like us’.
Feminists and post-structuralists pose challenges that go beyond the tolerance of a diversity of views and beliefs about the good life and the rules necessary to organise society according to principles of justice. They locate diversity in the idea of the human subject herself. Gender, race, the contingencies of individual biographies mean that there cannot be a single subjectivity; the logic of identity is an illogic. Whether difference is taken to be so central to human being, and identity so contingent on the flux of relationships and experiences that no categories can be stabilised, or whether there are some categories of identity which do reflect commonalities of experience and are therefore useful as a basis for developing ideas and institutions of justice (categories such as gender, race, religion, class, nationality) is a matter of debate, but feminists and postmodernists are agreed that there can be no single voice of all humankind, no legislating reason which can lay down rules to which we can all, rationally, accede.
Theories and practices of justice are found wanting because they do not meet the political challenges of our times and also because they are founded on unsatisfactory philosophical grounds (Matravers, 2000; Norrie, 2000). Nonetheless, all the critical perspectives discussed in Part I recognise the need for some sort of universalistic ideal of justice. No one denies that societies and communities should treat their citizens justly; that social institutions should dispense the goods within their domain justly, be these ‘goods’ education, health and welfare, or punishment and safety. No one disputes that recognising a practice or a distribution as unjust is reason for changing it; no one disputes that there should be mechanisms and institutions for remedying injustice between citizens and between government and citizen. The task is, then, to develop ideas about justice which can meet the challenges of the times — both political and theoretical.
Part II — ‘Reaffirming justice’ — engages with some ideas and practices that have emerged which can be regarded either as resources for reconstructing theories and institutions of justice, or as glimpses of new forms of justice in theory and practice. Chapter 5 looks at the work of Jurgen Habermas, whose writing addresses questions of truth and justice, rights, and the constitutional challenges posed by the rise of the ‘security state’. Habermas has developed a model of discursive justice, which is drawn upon by feminist political philosophers including Seyla Benhabib and Iris Young, whose work is discussed in Chapter 4. Habermas's early work reflects the concerns of the Frankfurt School of German critical theorists, but in his later work he has set [Page xv]himself the task of reworking Kantian Enlightenment ideas to meet the conditions and challenges posed by contemporary society. He lays down rules of discourse which, he argues, can reconcile competing claims, and which are necessary if decisions are to reflect the concerns of justice as well as those of instrumental effectiveness. Habermas's latest work takes account of criticisms made by feminists of his earlier writings, and although he concedes a great deal to them, he does not answer all their objections. Habermas has disputed vigorously with postmodernists, especially Foucault, Lyotard and Derrida, whom he sees as representing a new ‘conservative irrationalism’ in their rejection of Enlightenment categories of reason and subjectivity.
Chapter 6 examines the work of ‘affirmative postmodernists’: Lyotard, Derrida and Bauman. They mount a powerful case that liberalism's exclusions and omissions from the circle of rights and justice are not accidental, but are entailed by the very categories of thought and language in which liberalism assembles its philosophy and politics. Unlike Habermas, they do not see the impetus of discourse as being towards intersubjective agreement, but towards domination. Who is excluded, who is marginalised, who is repressed, are the questions they say should be raised against systems of law and ideas of justice. These postmodernists do not put forward any new models of justice, but they adopt Levinas's ethics of alterity as the starting-point for justice. This is an ethics which, if it can be incorporated into a practice of justice, can go beyond liberalism's limit of doing justice to people like ourselves, because the ethics of alterity insists that our responsibility to others is prior to, and does not depend on, our being able to understand them.
Postmodern approaches go beyond discursive justice towards a more radical reflective justice. Reflective justice involves making judgments based on the individual case, a judgment which looks at the individual case in the light of more universal aspirations to justice, rather than applying general rules to particular cases (Ferrara, 1999). Law's usual relationship between the general and the particular (that particular cases should be fitted into the categories of general rules) is reversed in reflective justice: individual judgments look to universal horizons rather than to general rules.
The final chapter looks at restorative justice as the mode of contemporary justice which comes closest to the ideal of discursiveness. Its progressive potential is acknowledged, but it is criticised for its failure to develop a fully relational perspective. Legal philosophers who do develop relational theories of justice (Duff and Norrie) are discussed, and relationalism is commended as a possible way to avoid the extremes of either Kantian individualism or communitarian repressiveness.
The chapter, and the book, closes with a reflection on human rights. Although communitarianism, feminism and postmodernism are critical of some aspects of liberalism's construction of rights, they nonetheless remain attached to the idea of rights. Questions about the conditionality or inalienability of rights are discussed, and it is the book's conclusion that some rights [Page xvi]must be regarded as inalienable, while others may be suspended only in extreme circumstances and with properly argued justification. Discursive justice, it is argued, reaches its limits at the edge of communities who share the same basic moral principles or who can at least make themselves comprehensible to each other; beyond sympathy and beyond comprehension only rights can guard against injustice.
Discursive justice, relational justice, reflective justice and rights-regarding justice are very much work-in-progress perspectives, and although much has been done within them, none has reached the level of sophistication and influence of, for example, liberal social contract theory which has been diversified into its Utilitarian and Kantian traditions and been so influential among western theorists and institution-builders. These new perspectives are, however, beginning to influence ideas about policy and practice in criminal justice and may point the way towards avoidance of throwing the baby of regard for individual liberty and universal respect out with the bathwater of insufficient regard to the self-society relationship and misguided conceptions of identical, essentialist human subjectivity. Doing justice in the risk society may mean rethinking liberalism (Bellamy, 2000); the rethinking, however, needs to be radical.
As well as wishing to make a substantive, albeit modest, contribution to rethinking justice, the book was prompted by a wish to bring this range of political and legal philosophical writing on justice to the attention of criminologists and penologists. I am concerned that not only has society at large lost a sense of justice, but penology and criminology have lost interest in justice too. The criminology of control and sociology of punishment have been enriched by utilising a range of social theory — risk society, governmentality — and by drawing on the ideas of a range of writers such as Foucault, Bauman, Beck, Bataille and others who write on the boundaries of sociology and philosophy. These perspectives have been deployed to produce analytically rich descriptions of what is going on in late-modern societies in relation to crime, control and punishment. What criminology and penology have lost touch with, however, is work aimed at normative reconstruction of law and penality. Penology seems content to be descriptive or instrumental: it does not appear to see its endeavour as an aspiration to justice. It is not surprising that Stan Cohen described himself as having ‘stopped doing criminology’ in favour of ‘doing human rights’ (Cohen, 1993). Theoretical books on punishment seem to stop — chronologically and conceptually — with Foucault, who, as I argue, gives us complex descriptions of punishment, but little by way of inspiration or signposts towards justice.
The book, therefore, is intended to introduce students, academics and professionals involved in criminology and penology to work being produced in parallel disciplines that aim to reconstruct theories and institutions of justice Each chapter deals with work that is in itself the subject of large bodies of literature, and I make no claims to comprehensive coverage of liberalism, risk, [Page xvii]communitarianism, feminism, Habermas's work, postmodernism, restorative justice, relational justice or human rights. I only discuss aspects of these theories and bodies of work which are relevant to my topic of challenges to, and reaffirmations of, justice in the risk society. My hope is that I might kindle some spark of concern for the problems facing justice, and some inspiration to come to its defence.[Page xviii]
References[Page 227]1995) ‘Contested communities’, Journal of Law and Society, 22: 113–26http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1410708(1980) Social Justice in the Liberal State, New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press(1970) Kant's Moral Philosophy, London: Macmillan(1950) with E. Frenkel-Brunswick, D.J. Levinson and R.N. Sanford, The Authoritarian Personality, New York: Harper(1973) with M. Horkheimer, The Dialectic of the Enlightenment, trans. J.Cumming, London: Allen Lane(1973) Negative Dialectics, New York: Continuum(1969) For Marx, trans. B.R.Bennett, London: Allen Lane(1976) Essays in Self-Criticism, trans. G.Lock, London: New Left Books(1972) Struggle for Justice, New York: Hill and Wang(1997) Safety First: The Making of New Labour, London: Grantaand (1973) The Origins of Totalitarianism, New York: Harcourt and Brace(2002a) ‘Responsibilities, rights and restorative justice’, British Journal of Criminology, 42, 3: 578–95http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/bjc/42.3.578(2002b) Human Rights, Serious Crime and Criminal Procedure, The Hamlyn Lectures, London: Sweet and Maxwell(1981) ‘Wider, stronger and different nets: the dialectics of criminal justice reform’, Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 18, 1: 165–96http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/002242788101800110and (1996) ‘Discourse ethics and human rights in criminal procedure’, in M.Deflem, ed. Habermas, Modernity and Law, London: Sage(1998) Introduction to Feminist Jurisprudence, London: Cavendish Publishing(1965) Political Argument, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul(1973) The Liberal Theory of Justice, Oxford: Oxford University Press(1995) A Treatise on Social Justice Vol. 11 Justice as Impartiality, Oxford: Clarendon Press(1996) ‘Partnerships, business and urban politics: new forms of urban governance’, Urban Studies, 33, 3: 539–55http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00420989650011906(1987) Legislators and Interpreters: On Modernity, Post-Modernity and Intellectuals, Cambridge: Polity Press(1989) Modernity and the Holocaust, Cambridge: Polity Press(1991) Modernity and Ambivalence, Cambridge: Polity Press(1993) Postmodern Ethics, Oxford: Blackwell(1996) ‘On communitarians and human freedom: or, how to square the circle’, Theory, Culture and Society13, 2: 79–90http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/026327696013002006(2001) ‘Social Issues of Law and Order’, British Journal of Criminology, 40, 2: 205–21http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/bjc/40.2.205(2000) Liberalism and the Politics of Difference, Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press(1999) ‘On Crimes and Punishments’, in D.Williams, ed. The Enlightenment, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 439–70([Page 228]1995) Crime and Security: Managing the Risk to Safe Shopping, Leicester: Perpetuity Presshttp://dx.doi.org/10.1057/9780230377868and (1992) Risk Society: Towards a New Modernism, London: Sage(1994) Reflexive Modernization: Politics, Tradition and Aesthetics in the Modern Social Order, Cambridge: Polity Press, and (1992) What's the Matter with Liberalism?Berkeley: University of California Press(1996) Habits of the Heart — Individualism and Commitment in American Life, New York: University of California Press, , , and (1998) ‘Justice in the community: Walzer on pluralism, justice and equality’, in D.Boucher and P.Kelly, eds, Social Justice: From Hume to Walzer, London: Routledge(2000) Rethinking Liberalism, London: Pinter(1986) Critique, Norm and Utopia, New York: Columbia University Press(1987) ‘The generalized and the concrete other’, in S.Benhabib and D.Cornell, eds, Feminism as Critique, London: Polity Press, pp. 77–96(1990) ‘In the shadow of Aristotle and Hegel: communicative ethics and current controversies in practical philosophy’ in M.Kelly, ed. Hermeneutics and Critical Theory in Ethics and Politics, Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press(1992) Situating the Self: Gender, Community and Postmodernism in Contemporary Ethics, Cambridge: Polity Press(1995) ‘Subjectivity, historiography and politics’, in S.Benhabib, D.Cornell and N.Fraser, eds, Feminist Contentions, London: Routledge(Benhabib, S., Butler, J., Cornell, D. and Fraser, N., eds. (1995) Feminist Contentions, LondonRoutledgeBenjamin, A., ed. (1992) Judging Lyotard, London: Routledge1996) Body Count: Moral Poverty … And How to Win America's War Against Crime and Drugs, New York: Simon and Schuster, Jr., and (1970) An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation, ed. J.H.Burns and H.L.A.Hart, London: Methuen (first published 1789)(1969) Four Essays on Liberty, Oxford: Oxford University Press(1990) ‘Troping to Pretoria: the rise and fall of deconstruction’, Telos, 85 (Fall): 4–6http://dx.doi.org/10.3817/0990085004(1988) The Provocation of Levinas: Rethinking the Other, London: Routledgeand (1995) Recovering Ethical Life: Jürgen Habermas and the future of Critical Theory, London: Routledge(1993) Dialectic: the Pulse of Freedom, London: Verso(1988) ‘Gilligan and Kohlberg: implications for moral theory’, Ethics, 98: 47–91http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/292966(2000) The Social Control of Cities, Oxford: Gendrothttp://dx.doi.org/10.1002/9780470712757(1994) ‘Review essay: Complexity, pluralism and the constitutional state: on Habermas's Faktizitat und Geltung’, Law and Society Review, 28, 4: 897–930http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3054001(1995) ‘The Philosophy and politics of punishment and sentencing’, in C.R.V.Clarkson and R.Morgan, eds, The Politics of Sentencing Reform, Oxford: Clarendon Press(1983) ‘Dangerousness and rights’, in J.Hinton, ed. Dangerousness: Problems of Assessment and Prediction, London: Allen and Unwinand (1999) Violent Racism: Victimisation, Policing and Social Context,(revised edition, Oxford: Oxford University PressBoyne, R. and Rattansi, A., eds. (1990) Postmodernism and Society, London: Macmillan1989) Crime, Shame and Reintegration, Cambridge: Cambridge University Presshttp://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511804618([Page 229]1999) ‘Restorative justice: assessing optimistic and pessimistic accounts’, in M.Tonry, ed. Crime and Justice: A Review of Research, vol. 25, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. 1–127http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/449287(1990) Not Just Deserts: A Republican Theory of Criminal Justice, Oxford: Clarendon Pressand (2000) ‘Detention law “an abuse of rights”‘, the Guardian, 26 May, p. 11(1998) ‘New Labour — new penology? Punitive rhetoric and the limits of managerialism in criminal justice policy’, Journal of Law and Society, 25, 3: 313–35http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-6478.00094(2002) Basic Documents on Human Rights,and (4th edition, Oxford: Oxford University PressBurchell, G., Gordon, C. and Miller, P. eds. (1991) The Foucault Effect: Studies in Governmentality, Chicago: University of Chicago Press1990) Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity, New York and London: Routledge(1992) ‘Contingent foundations: Feminism and the question of postmodernism’, in J.Butler and J.W.Scott, eds. Feminists Theorize the Political, London: Routledge(1995) ‘For a careful reading’, in S.Benhabib, J.Butler, D.Cornell and N.Fraser, eds, Feminist Contentions, London: Routledge(1992) Feminists Theorize the Political, London: Routledgeand (1993) Goliath: Britain's Dangerous Places, London: Methuen(1990) Alternatives to Women's Imprisonment, Milton Keynes: Open University Press(1998) Sledgehammer: Women's Imprisonment at the Millennium, Basingstoke: Macmillanhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1057/9780230375352(1983) Crime and Justice: A Conservative Strategy, Washington, DC: The Heritage Foundation(1990) ‘Introduction: Post-modern law’, in A.Carty, ed. Post-Modern Law: Enlightenment, Revolution and the Death of Man, Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press(1991) ‘From dangerousness to risk’, in G.Burchell, C.Gordon and P.Miller, eds, The Foucault Effect: Studies in Governmentality, Chicago: University of Chicago Press(1996) ‘Reparation, retribution and rights’, International Review of Victimology, 4: 233–53http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/026975809700400401and (1997) The Penal System: An Introduction,and (2nd edition, London: Sage1997) ‘Feminist criminology: thinking about women and crime’, in B.D.MacLean and D.Milanovic, eds, Thinking Critically About Crime, Vancouver: Collective Pressand (1978) The Reproduction of Mothering: Psychoanalysis and the Sociology of Gender, Berkeley, Calif.: Berkeley University Press(1964) Current Issues in Linguistic Theory, The Hague: Mouton(1972) Studies on Semantics in Generative Grammar, The Hague: Mouton(1975) The Logical Structure of Linguistic Theory, New York: Plenum Press(1993) Crime Control as Industry: Towards Gulags Western Style?London: Routledge(2000) ‘Truth and reconciliation as risks’, Social and Legal Studies, 9, 2: 179–204http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/096466390000900201(2001) ‘Risk and community practice’, in K.Stenson and R.R.Sullivan, eds, Crime, Risk and Justice: The Politics of Crime Control in Liberal Democracies, Cullompton: Willan Publishingand (1999) The Community Justice Ideal: Preventing Crime and Achieving Justice, Chicago: Westview Pressand ([Page 230]1997) ‘The domestication of violence in mediation’, Law and Society Review, 31: 397–440http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3054041(1995) Democracy and Association, London: Versoand (1979) ‘The punitive city: notes on the dispersal of social control’, Contemporary Crises, 3: 339–63http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00729115(1985) Visions of Social Control: Crime, Punishment and Classification, Cambridge: Polity Press(1993) ‘Human rights and crimes of the state: the culture of denial’, Australia and New Zealand Journal of Criminology, 26: 9–15(2000) States of Denial: Knowing About Atrocities and Suffering, Cambridge: Polity Press(1976) Critical Sociology, Harmondsworth: Penguin(1989) Rich Law, Poor Law, Milton Keyes: Open University press(1993) ‘Racism, citizenship and exclusion’, in D.Cook and B.Hudson, eds, Racism and Criminology, London: Sage(2001) ‘Snap decisions’, the Guardian, 30 October: 8(1996) ‘Habermas and the question of alterity’, in M.Passerini d'Entreves and S.Benhabib, eds. Habermas and the Unfinished Project of Modernity, Cambridge: Polity Press(1991) Beyond Accommodation: Ethical Feminism, Deconstruction and the Law, London: Routledge(1992) The Philosophy of the Limit, New York: Routledge(1995a) ‘Rethinking the time of feminism’, in S. Benhabib, J. Butler, D. Cornell, and N. Fraser, Feminist Contentions, London: Routledge(1995b) The Imaginary Domain, London: Routledge(1995c) ‘What is ethical feminism?’ in S. Benhabib et al., op. cit.(1984) The Sociology of Law: An Introduction, London: Butterworths(1986) ‘Violence and the word’, Yale Law Journal, 95: 160–29http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/796468(1996) ‘The spirit of community: rights, responsibilities and the communitarian agenda’, Journal of Law and Society, 23, 2: 24–62http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1410419(1997) The Local Governance of Crime, Oxford: Clarendon Press(1998) ‘Community safety and the quest for security: holding back the dynamics of social exclusion’, Policy Studies, 19, 34: 237–53http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01442879808423759(Crawford, A. and Goodey, J., eds. (2000) Integrating a Victim Perspective within Criminal Justice, Aldershot: Ashgate2002) ‘Recent developments in restorative justice for young people in england and wales: community participation and representation’, British Journal of Criminology, 42, 3: 476–95http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/bjc/42.3.476and (1992) The Ethics of Deconstruction: Derrida and Levinas, Oxford: Blackwell(1999) ‘Ordering risks’, in D.Lupton, ed. Risk and Sociocultural Theory, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press(1996) ‘The discourse of modernity: Hegel, Nietzsche, Heidegger and Habermas’, in M.Passerim d'Entreves and S.Benhabib, eds, Habermas and the Unfinished Project of Modernity, Cambridge: Polity Press(1989) ‘Criminal justice ideologies and practices in different voices: some feminist questions about justice’, International Journal of the Sociology of law, 17: 1–18(1994) Gender, Crime and Punishment, New Haven, Conn: Yale University Press(2002a) ‘Sexual assault and restorative justice’, in H.Strang and J.Braithwaite, eds. Restorative Justice and Family Violence, Melbourne: Cambridge University Press(2000b) ‘Restorative justice: the real story’, Punishment and Society, 4, 1: 55–79http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/14624740222228464(1998) ‘The past, present and future of restorative justice: some critical reflections’, Contemporary Justice Review, 1, 1: 21–45and ([Page 231]Damico, A., ed. (1986) Liberals and Liberalism, Totowa, NJ: Rowman and Littlefield1990) City of Quartz, Berkeley: University of California Press(Deflem, M. (1996) ed. Habermas, Modernity and Law, London: Sage1990) The Politics of Redress: Crime, Punishment and Penal Abolition, London: Unwin Hyman(1978) Writing and Difference, trans. AlanBass, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul(1987) ‘The laws of reflection: Nelson Mandela, in admiration’, in J.Derrida and M.Thili, eds, For Nelson Mandela, New York: Seaver Books(1990) ‘Force of law: the “Mystical Foundation of Authority”‘, Cardozo Law Review, 11: 919–1045(1997) Reasonable Doubt: The Criminal Justice System and the O.J. Simpson Case, New York: Touchstone(1992) ‘Editor's Introduction’, in P.Dews, ed. Autonomy and Solidarity: Interviews with Jürgen Habermas,(revised edition, London: Verso2002) ‘Restorative justice: limiting principles’, in A.von Hirsch, J.Roberts, A.E.Bottoms, K.Roach and M.Schiff, eds. Restorative Justice and Criminal Justice: Competing or Reconcilable Paradigms?Oxford: Hart Publishing(1994) ‘Let ‘em rot’, Wall Street Journal, 26 January: 1714.(1990) ‘Dilemmas of difference: feminism, modernity and postmodernism’, in L.Nicholson, ed. Feminism/Postmoderinism, London: Routledge(1966) Purity and Danger: An Analysis of Conceptions of Purity and Taboo, London: Routledge and Kegan Paulhttp://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9780203361832(1992) Risk and Blame: Essays in Cultural Theory, London: Routledgehttp://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9780203430866(1982) Risk and Culture: An Essay on the Selection of Technological and Environmental Dangers, Berkeley: University of California Pressand (1994) ‘The face of justice: a jurisprudence of alterity’, Social and Legal Studies, 3, 3: 405–26http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/096466399400300306and (1990) Discursive Democracy: Politics, Policy and Political Science, New York: Cambridge University Press(1986) Trials and Punishment, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press(1993a) Intention, Agency and Criminal Liability, Oxford: Blackwell(1993b) ‘Choice, character and criminal liability’, Law and Philosophy: (12) 345http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF01000637(1996) ‘Penal communications: recent work in the philosophy of punishment’, in M.Tonry, ed. Crime and Justice: A Review of Research, vol. 20, pp. 97, Chicago: University of Chicago Press(1998a) ‘Law, language and community: some preconditions of criminal liability’, Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, (18) 189–206http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ojls/18.2.189(1998b) ‘Inclusion and exclusion: citizens, subjects and outlaws’, Current Legal Problems, 51: 24–66http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/clp/51.1.241(2001) Punishment, Communication and Community, Oxford: Oxford University Press(Dunne, T. and Wheeler, N.J., eds. (1999) Human Rights in Global Politics, Cambridge: Cambridge University Presshttp://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO97811391712981978) Taking Rights Seriously, Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press(1986 a) A Matter of Principle, Oxford: Clarendon Press(1986b) Law's Empire, London: Fontana(2002) ‘The real threat to US values’, the Guardian, Saturday Review, 9 March: 3(1986) Justice for Women? Family, Court and Social Control, Milton Keynes: Open University Press(1984) Women on Trial, Manchester: Manchester University Press(1994) ‘The fragmentation of criminology’, in D.Nelken, ed. The Futures of Criminology, London: Sageand ([Page 232]1993) The Spirit of Community: Rights, Responsibilities and the Communitarian Agenda, New York: Simon and Schuster(Etzioni, A., ed. (1998) The Essential Communitarian Reader, New York: Rowman and LittlefieldEvans, J., ed. (1998) Human Rights Fifty Years On: A Reappraisal, Manchester: Manchester University Press1991) ‘Insurance and Risk’, in G. Burchell et al., op. cit.(1997) ‘Human development and criminal careers’, in M.Maguire, R.Morgan and R.Reiner, eds. The Oxford Handbook of Criminology,(2nd edition, Oxford: Clarendon Press1996) Darkness and Light: Justice, Crime and Management for Today, London: Howard League for Penal Reform(1992) ‘The new penology: notes on the emerging strategy of communications and its implications’, Criminology, 30: 449–74http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9125.1992.tb01112.xand (1994) ‘Actuarial justice: the emerging new criminal Law’, in D.Nelken, ed. The Futures of Criminology, London: Sageand (1999) Justice and Judgment: The Rise and the Prospect of the Judgment Model in Contemporary Political Philosophy, London: Sage(1991) At the Boundaries of Law: Feminism and Legal Theory, London: Routledgeand (1980) Natural Law and Natural Rights, Oxford: Clarendon Press(1990) ‘Sexual offenders out of prison: principles for a realistic utopia’, International Journal of the Sociology of Law, 18: 157(1991) Deliberative Democracy, New Haven, Conn: Yale University Press(1992) The Mythology of Modern Law, London: Routledge(1995) ‘Race, gender and the ethics of difference’, Political Theory, 23, 3: 500–10http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0090591795023003005(1994) ‘Down the passage which we should not take: the folly of hate crime legislation’, Journal of Law and Policy, 2: 1–54(1999) ‘Strategies of justice: the project of philosophy in Lyotard and Habermas’, Philosophy and Social Criticism, 25, 2: 87–13http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/019145379902500205(1977) Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison, London: Allen Lane(1978) The History of Sexuality, Vol. I: An Introduction, trans. R.Hurley, New York: Random House(1986) The History of Sexuality, Vol. II: The Use of Pleasure, trans. R.Hurley, New York: Random House(1991) ‘Governmentality’, in G.Burchell et al., eds. op. cit(1993) The Politics of Community: A Feminist Critique of the Liberal-Communitarion Debate, Hemel Hempstead: Harvester-Wheatsheafand (1989) ‘Struggle over needs: outline of a socialist-feminist critical theory of late capitalist culture’, in N.Fraser, ed. Unruly Practices: Power, Discourse and Gender in Contemporary Social Theory, Minneapolis: University of Minneapolis Press(1992) ‘Rethinking the public sphere: a contribution to the critique of actually existing democracies’, in C.Calhoun, ed. Habermas and the Public Sphere, Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press(1995a) ‘Pragmatism, feminism and the linguistic turn’, in S.Benhabib et al., eds, op. cit.(1995b) ‘From redistribution to recognition? Dilemmas of justice in a post-socialist age’, New Left Review, 212: 68–94(1997) Justice Interruptus: Critical Reflections on the Post-Socialist Condition, New York: Routledge([Page 233]1990) ‘Social criticism without philosophy: an encounter between feminism and post-modernism’, in L.Nicholson, ed. Feminism/Postmodernism, London: Routledgeand (2000) ‘Guerillas in our midst? Judicial responses to governing the dangerous’, in M.Brown and J.Pratt, eds. Dangerous Offenders: Punishment and Social Order, London: Routledge(2002) Culture of Fear: Risk-taking and the Morality of Low Expectation, London: Continuum(1996) ‘A Torturer's Tale’, International Journal for the Semiotics of Law, 27: 305–14http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF01570811(1988) The Free Economy and the Strong State: The Politics of Thatcherism, London: Macmillan(1992) ‘Law, politics and the claims of community’, Michigan Law Review, 90: 685–760http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1289400(1990) Punishment and Modern Society: A Study in Social Theory, Oxford: Clarendon Press(1995) ‘Penal modernism and post-modernism’, in T.G.Blomberg and S.Cohen, eds. Punishment and Social Control, New York: Aldine de Gruyter(1996) ‘The limits of the sovereign state: strategies of crime control in contemporary society’, British Journal of Criminology, 36, 4: 445–70http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.bjc.a014105(1997) “Governmentality” and the problem of crime: Foucault, criminology, sociology’, Theoretical Criminology, 1, 2: 173–214http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1362480697001002002(2000) ‘The culture of high crime societies: some preconditions of recent “law and order” policies’, British Journal of Criminology, 40, 3: 347–75http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/bjc/40.3.347(2001) ‘Introduction: The meaning of mass imprisonment’, in D.Garland, ed. Mass Imprisonment: Social Causes and Consequences, London: Sagehttp://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781446221228(2000) ‘Criminology, social theory and the challenge of our times’, British Journal of Criminology, 40, 2: 189–204http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/bjc/40.2.189and (1991) ‘Sticks and stones can put you in jail, but can words increase your sentence? Constitutional and policy dilemmas of ethnic intimidation laws’, 39 UCLA Law Review, 39: 333–96(1996) ‘A meta-analysis of the predictors of adult offender recidivism: what works?Criminology, 34, 4: 575–608http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9125.1996.tb01220.x, and (1990) The Consequences of Modernity, Cambridge: Polity Press(1993) New Rules of Sociological Method,(2nd edition, Cambridge: Polity Press (first published 1976, Hutchinson)1999) ‘Risk and Responsibility’, Modern Law Review, 62, 1–10http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1468-2230.00188(1982) In a Different Voice, Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press(1993) ‘Crime prevention discourses and the multi-agency approach’, International Journal of the Sociology of Law, 21: 145–57(1993) The Black Atlantic, Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press(1959) The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life, New York: Doubleday Anchor(1983) Mill on Liberty: A Defence, London: Routledge and Kegan Paulhttp://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9780203432471(1995) Liberalism,(2nd edition, Buckingham: Open University Press1998) Getting Tough on Crime: The History and Political Context of Sentencing Reform Developments Leading to the Passing of the 1994 Crime Act, New York: Soros Foundation(1993) The Sense of Appropriateness: Application Discourses in Morality and Law, trans. J.Farell, Albany, NY: State University of New York Press(1980) Liberal Equality, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press(2001) ‘Introduction’, in M. Ignatieff, Human Rights as Politics and Idolatry, Princteon: Princeton University Press([Page 234]1971) Knowledge and Human Interests, trans. J.Shapiro, Boston: Beacon Press(1976) Legitimation Crisis, trans. T.McCarthy, London: Heinemann(1982) ‘Reply to my critics’, in J.Thompson and D.Held, eds. Habermas: Critical Debates, Cambridge, Mass: MIT press(1984, 1987) The Theory of Communicative Action, vol. 1, and vol. 2, trans. T.McCarthy, Cambridge: Polity Press(1987) The Philosophical Discourse of Modernity: Twelve Lectures, trans. F.G.Lawrence, Cambridge: Polity Press(1988) ‘Law and morality’, in S.M.McMurrin, ed. The Tanner Lectures on Human Values, vol. 8, Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press(1990) ‘Justice and solidarity: on the discussion concerning “Stage 6” ‘, in M.Kelly, ed. Hermeneutics and Critical Theory in Ethics and Politics, Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press(1992a) ‘On morality, law, civil disobedience and modernity’, in P.Dews, ed. Autonomy and Solidarity: Interviews with Jürgen Habermas,(revised edition, London: Verso1992b) ‘Discourse, ethics, law and sittichkeit’, in P.Dews ed. Autonomy and Solidarity: Interviews with Jürgen Habermas(revised edition, London: Verso1993) ‘The second life fiction of the Federal Republic: we have become normal again’, New Left Review, 197: 58–66(1996a) Between Facts and Norms, trans. W.Rehg, Cambridge: Polity Press (first published in German, 1992)(1996b) ‘Postscript to Between Facts and Norms’. In M.Deflem, ed. Habermas, Modernity and Law, London: Sage(1996c) ‘ “Modernity: An Unfinished Project”: lecture on receiving the Adorno Prize, City of Frankfurt, September 1980’, trans. N.Walker, in M.Passerin d'Entreves and S.Benhabib eds. Habermas and the Unfinished Project of Modernity, Cambridge: Polity Press(1996d) ‘Reply to symposium participants’, Cardozo Law Review, 17: 1477–557(1998) The Inclusion of the Other: Studies in Political Theory, ed. CiaranCronin and Pablode Grieff, Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press(1986) ‘Making up people’, in T.C.Heller, M.Sosna and D.E.Wellerby, eds. Reconstructing Individualism: Autonomy, Individuality and the Self in Western Thought, Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press(1989) Keith Joseph: A Single Mind, Basingstoke: Macmillan(1980) Drifting into a Law and Order Society, London: Cobden Trust(Hand, S. (1989) ed. The Levinas Reader, Oxford: Basil Blackwell2002) ‘Governing through need: the hybridisation of risk and need in penality’. Paper presented at Law and Society Association Annual Meetings, Vancouver, 29 May-1 June(2000) ‘A community justice dimension to effective probation practice’, Howard Journal, 39: 132–49http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1468-2311.00158(2002) ‘Psychopathy and risk for recidivism and violence’, in N.Gray, J.Laing and L.Noaks, eds. Criminal Justice, Mental Health and the Politics of Risk, London: Cavendish Publishing(1990) ‘Race and essentialism in feminist legal theory’, Stanford Law Review, 42: 581–616http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1228886(1968) Punishment and Responsibility, Oxford: Oxford University Press(1960) The Constitution of Liberty, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul(1973) Being and Time, trans. J.Macquarrie and E.Robinson, Oxford: Basil Blackwell (first published in German, 1927)([Page 235]1986) ‘Models of justice: Portia or Persephone? Some thoughts on equality, fairness and gender in the field of criminal justice’, International Journal of Sociology of Law, 14: 287–98(1998) ‘Human rights, due process and sentencing’, British Journal of Criminology, 38, 4: 592–610http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/bjc/38.4.592(1994) ‘Displacement: a review of the empirical literature’, in R.V.Clarke, ed. Crime Prevention Studies, 3, Monsey, N.Y.: Willow Tree Press(1991) Leviathan, ed. R.Tuck, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press (first published 1651).(1964) Liberalism, London: Oxford University Press(2002) ‘Criminology beyond the nation state: global conflicts, human rights and the new world order’, in K.Carrington and R.Hogg, eds., Critical Criminology: Issues, Debates, Challenges, Cullompton: Willan Publishing(1999) ‘The coming chaos? Armed conflict in the world's periphery’, in T.Paul and J.Hall, eds. International Order and the Future of World Politics, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press(1970) Advisory Council on the Penal System [The Wootton Report], London: HMSO hooks, b. (1981) Ain't I a Woman, London: Pluto Press(2002) ‘Sex offenders emerging from long-term imprisonment: a study of their long-term reconviction rates and of parole board members’ judgement of their risk, British Journal of Criminology, 42, 2: 371–394http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/bjc/42.2.371, , and (2000) ‘Inequality and the clubbing of private security’, in T.Hope and R.Sparks, eds. Crime, Risk and Insecurity, London: Routledge(Hope, T. and Sparks, R., eds. (2000) Crime, Risk and Insecurity, London: Routledge1947) Eclipse of Reason, New York: Oxford University Press(1950) ‘The lessons of Fascism’, in H.Cantril, ed. Tensions that Cause Wars, Urbana: University of Illinois Press(1968) Kritische Theorie, ed. AlfredSchmidt, Frankfurt: S. Fischer Verlag(1992) In the Shadow of Death: Living Outside the Gates of Mauthausen, New York: The Free Press(1994) Punish and Critique: A Feminist Analysis of Penality, London: Routledge(1994) ‘Conflicting conceptions of critique: Foucault versus Habermas’, in D.Couzens Hoy and T.McCarthy, eds. Critical Theory, Oxford: Blackwell(1987) Justice through Punishment: A Critique of the ‘Justice Model’ of Corrections, London: Macmillan(1993) Penal Policy and Social Justice, Basingstoke: Macmillan(1995) ‘Beyond proportionate punishment: difficult cases and the 1991 Criminal Justice Act’, Crime, Law and Social Change, 22: 59–78http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF01300839(1996) Understanding Justice: An Introduction to Ideas, Perspectives and Controversies in Modern Penal Theory, Buckingham: Open University Press(1998a) ‘Punishment and governance’, Social and Legal Studies, 7, 4: 553–60http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/096466399800700406(1998b) ‘Restorative justice: the challenge of sexual and racial violence’, Journal of Law and Society, 25, 2: 237–256http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-6478.00089(1999) ‘Punishment, poverty and responsibility: the case for a hardship defence’, Social and Legal Studies, 8, 4: 583–91(2000) ‘Punishing the poor: dilemmas of justice and difference’, in W.C.Heffernan and J.Kleinig, eds. From Social Justice to Criminal Justice, New York: Oxford University Press(2001) ‘Punishment, rights and difference’, in K.Stenson and R.R.Sullivan eds. Crime, Risk and Justice: The Politics of Crime Control in Liberal Democracies, Cullompton: William Publishing([Page 236]2002a) ‘Gender issues in penal policy and penal theory’, in P.Carlen, ed. Women and Punishment: The Struggle for Justice, Cullompton: Willan Publishing(2002b) ‘Victims and Offenders’, in A. von Hirsch et al., op. cit.(2002c) ‘Restorative justice and gendered violence: diversion or effective justice?British Journal of Criminology, 42, 3: 616–34http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/bjc/42.3.616(Hudson, J., Morris, A., Maxwell, G. and Galway, B., eds. (1996) Family Group Conferences: Perspectives on Policy and Practice, Monsey, N.Y.: Criminal Justice Press1998) Understanding Crime Prevention, Milton Keynes: Open University Press(1986) ‘Critical criminology and the concept of crime’, in H.Bianchi and R.van Swaaningen, eds. Abolitionism: Towards a Non-Repressive Approach to Crime, Amsterdam: The Free Press(1955) Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding ed. C.W.Hendel, New York: Oxford University Press(1957) Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Morals, ed. C.W.Hendel, New York: Oxford University Press (first published 1758)(1978) A Treatise of Human Nature, ed. L.A.Selby-Bigge, Oxford: Clarendon Press (first published in 1739)(2001) Human Rights as Politics and Idolatry, ed. A.Gutman, Princeton: Princeton University Press(1985) Speculum of the Other Woman, trans. G.Gill, Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press(1992) ‘Catherine MacKinnon and feminist jurisprudence: a critical appraisal’, Journal of Law and Society, 19, 2: 195–213http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1410220(1993) ‘The emergence and implications of american hate crime jurisprudence’, Israeli Yearbook on Human Rights, 22: 113–39, Netherlands: Martinus Nijhoff(2000) European Human Rights Law: Text and Materials,, and (2nd edition, Oxford: Oxford University Press2000) ‘Civil commitment as social control: managing the risk of sexual violence’, in M.Brown and J.Pratt, eds. Dangerous Offenders: Punishment and Social Control, London: Routledge(1973) The Dialectical Imagination: A History of the Frankfurt School and the Institute of Social Research 1923–950, London: Heinemann(1995) ‘Researching violence against women: Statistics Canada's national survey, Canadian Journal of Criminology, 37, 3: 281–304and (2001) ‘Distorted communications: feminism's dispute with Habermas’, Philosophy and Social Criticism, 27, 1: 39–62http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/019145370102700103(1965a) The Metaphysical Elements of Justice, trans. J.Ladd, Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill (first published 1797)(1965b) Critique of Practical Reason, trans. L.W.Beck, Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill (first published 1788)(1986) Critique of Judgment, trans. JamesCreed Meredith, Oxford: Clarendon (first published 1790)(1996) ‘A Definition of Justice from The Metaphysical Elements of Justice’, in J.Westphal, ed. Justice, Indianapolis: Hacket(1991) ‘Policing a perplexed society: no-go areas and the mystification of police-black conflict’, in E.Cashmore and E.McLaughlin, eds. Out of Order? Policing Black People, London: Routledge(1990) Utilitarianism and Distributive Justice: Jeremy Bentham and the Civil Law, Oxford: Oxford University Press(2002) ‘Public protection, partnership and risk penality: the multi-agency risk management of sexual and violent offenders’, in N.Gray, J.Laing and [Page 237]L.Noaks eds. Criminal Justice, Mental Health and the Politics of Risk, London: Cavendish Publishingand (1991) Jurisprudence as Ideology, London: Routledge(1973) Collected Papers on Moral Development and Moral Education, Cambridge, Mass: Moral Education Research Foundation, Harvard University(1981) The Philosophy of Moral Development, San Francisco: Harper and Row(2000) ‘Restorative and community justice in the United States’, in M.Tonry, ed. Crime and Justice: A Review of Research, vol. 26Chicago: University of Chicago Press(1989) liberalism, Community and Culture, Oxford: Clarendon Press(1988) State Punishment: Political Principles and Community Values, London: Routledge(1993) ‘Closure and critique in feminist jurisprudence: transcending the dichotomy, or a foot in both camps’, in A.Norrie, ed. Closure and Critique: New Directions in Legal Theory, Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press(1995) ‘Discourses of community in criminal justice’, Journal of Law and Society, 22: 301–24http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1410584and (1961) The Self and Others, London: Tavistockhttp://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9780203210321(1998) ‘Criminology and postmodernity’, in P.Walton and J.Young, eds. The New Criminology Revisited, Basingstoke: Macmillan(2002) ‘Riskiness and at-risk-ness: some ambiguous features of the current penal landscape’, in N.Gray, J.Laing and L.Noaks, eds. Criminal Justice, Mental Health and the Politics of Risk, London: Cavendish Publishingand (1998) Blackstone's Guide to the Crime and Disorder Act, 1998, London: Blackstone, and (1969) Totality and Infinity: An Essay on Exteriority, trans. A.Lingis, Pittsburgh: Duquesne University Press(1981) Otherwise Than Being or Beyond Essence, trans. A.Lingis, The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff(1989) ‘Ideology and Idealism’, in S.Hand, ed. The Levinas Reader, Oxford: Blackwell(1992) Ethics and Infinity, Pittsburgh: Duquesne University Press(1968) Structural Anthropology, London: Allen Lane(2001) ‘Law's progressive potential: the value of engagement with the law for domestic violence’, Social and Legal Studies, 10, 1: 105–30, , and (2000) ‘Dangerization and the end of deviance: the institutional environment’, British Journal of Criminology, 40, 2: 26–78http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/bjc/40.2.261with (1984) The Man of Reason: Male and Female in Western Philosophy, London: Methuenhttp://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9780203423240(1967) Two Treatises of Government, ed. P.LazlettCambridge: Cambridge University Press(1998) ‘Contemporary penal trends: modern or postmodern?’British Journal of Criminology, 38, 1: 106–23http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.bjc.a014215(1985) A Sociological Theory of Law, trans. E.King and M.Albrow, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul(1993) ‘Five fables about human rights’, in S.Shute and S.Hurley, eds, On Human Rights: The Oxford Amnesty Lectures 1993, New York: Basic Books(1984) The Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge, trans. G.Bennington and B.Massumi, Manchester: Manchester University Press(1988) The Différend: Phrases in Dispute, Manchester: Manchester University Press([Page 238]1990) Heidegger and the ‘Jews’, Minneapolis: Minnesota University Press(1993) ‘The other's right, in S.Shute and S.Hurley, eds, On Human Rights: The Oxford Amnesty Lecture 1993, New York: Basic Books(1985) Just Gaming, Manchester: Manchester University Pressand (1976) ‘Translator's Introduction’, in J. Habermas, Legitimation Crisis, trans. T.McCarthy, London: Heinemann(1978) The Critical Theory of Jürgen Habermas, Cambridge: Polity Press(1997) ‘Descriptive or critical sociology: the choice is yours’, British Journal of Criminology, 37, 3: 347–58http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.bjc.a014173and (2002) ‘Introduction: practice, performance and prospects for restorative justice’, British Journal of Criminology, special edition on Restorative Justice, 42, 3: 469–75http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/bjc/42.3.469, and (1985) After Virtue: A Study in Moral Theory, London: Duckworth MacIntyre, A. (1988) Whose Justice? Which Rationality?London: Duckworth(1987) Feminism Unmodified: Discourses on Life and Law, Boston, Mass: Harvard University Press(1989) Toward a Feminist Theory of the State, Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press(1991) ‘Reflections on sex equality under law’, Yale Law Journal, 100: 1281–328http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/796693(1993) ‘Crimes of war, crimes of peace’, in S.Shute and S.Hurley, eds, op. cit.(1997) ‘Images of criminals and victims: a study on women's fear and social control’, Gender and Society, 11: 342–56http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/089124397011003005(1996) The Time of the Tribes, London: Sagehttp://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781446222133(1994) The Charter of Rights and the Legalization of Politics in Canada,(revised edition, Toronto: Thompson Education Publishing1968) One-Dimensional Man: Studies in the Ideology of Advanced Industrial Societies, Boston: Beacon Press(1997) The Prevalence of Convictions for Sexual Offending in England and Wales, Research Findings, number 55, London: Home Office, Research and Statistics Directorate(1999) Restorative Justice: An Overview, London: Home Office, Research and Statistics Directorate(1993) A System of Rights, Oxford: Clarendon Press(1991) ‘A forum on lavallee v. R.: women and self-defence’, British Columbia Law Review, 25: 23, and (1988) Under Cover: Police Surveillance in America, Berkeley: University of California Press(1988) ‘Portia and Persephone revisited: thinking about feeling in criminal justice’, Theoretical Criminology, 2, 1: 5–28http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1362480698002001001and (2000) Justice and Punishment, Oxford: Oxford University Presshttp://dx.doi.org/10.1093/0198295731.001.0001(2001) ‘Putting restorative justice into practice for adult offenders’, Howard Journal of Criminal Justice, 40, 1: 55–69http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1468-2311.00189and (Meehan, J., ed. (1995) Feminists Read Habermas: Gendering the Subject of Discourse, New York: Routledge2000) ‘Feminism and Habermas's discourse ethics’, Philosophy and Social Criticism, 26, 3: 39–52http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/019145370002600302(2000) ‘Social theory and changing representations of the criminal’, British Journal of Criminology, 40, 2: 296–320http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/bjc/40.2.296(1989) Toleration and the Limits of Liberalism, Basingstoke: Macmillan([Page 239]1981) Urban Danger: Life in a Neighbourhood of Strangers, Philadelphia: Temple University Press(1963–91) The Collected Works of John Stuart Mill, ed. J.Robson, Toronto: University of Toronto Press: Utilitarianism, vol. 10 (1969) and On Liberty, vol. 19 (1977)(1989) The Subjugation of Women, (first published 1869) Cambridge: University of Cambridge Press(2001) ‘Looking for postmodernism in all the wrong places: implementing a new penology’, British Journal of Criminology, 41, 1: 168–84http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/bjc/41.1.168(1990) ‘Governing economic life’, Economy and Society, 19: 1–27http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03085149000000001and (1990) Making All the Difference: Inclusion, Exclusion and American Law, Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press(1998) Between Vengeance and Forgiveness: Facing History after Genocide and Mass Violence, Boston: Beacon Press(1996) The 1996 British Crime Survey, London: HMSO, and (1975) Psychoanalysis and Feminism, Harmondsworth: Penguin(1989) Justice, Gender and the Family, New York: Basic Books(1989) The Spirit of Laws, ed. and trans. A.M.Cohler, B.C.Miller and H.S.Stone, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press(1903) Principia Ethica, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press(2000) ‘The Utilitarian justification of torture’, Punishment and Society, 2, 2: 181–96http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/14624740022227944(1994) Dangerous Classes: The Underclass and Social Citizenship, London: Routledge(1982) Madness and the Criminal Law, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, Chapter 5.(2000) ‘Re-visioning men's violence against female partners’, Howard Journal, 39, 4: 412–28http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1468-2311.00179and (1993) Playing in the Dark. Whiteness and the Literary Imagination, New York: Vintage Books(1997) Jurisprudence: From the Greeks to Post-Modernism, London: Cavendish(1987) ‘Does Kant Have a theory of punishment?’Columbia Law Review, 87: 509–32http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1122669(1973) ‘Marxism and retribution’, Philosophy and Public Affairs, 2: 217–43(2000) ‘Two cheers for vindictiveness’, Punishment and Society, 2, 2: 131–44http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/14624740022227917(1984) Losing Ground-American Social Policy 1950–1980, New York: Basic Books(1990) Law and the Sexes, Sydney: Allen and Unwin(1986) The View from Nowhere, Oxford: Oxford University Press(1985) ‘Community involvement in crime control’, Current Legal Problems, 38: 239–267(Nicholson, L. (1990) ed. Feminism/PostmodernismLondon: Routledge1962a) The Quest for Community, New York: Oxford University Press(1962b) The Sociological Tradition, New York: Basic Books(2000) Punishment and Responsibility: A Relational Critique, Oxford: Oxford University Presshttp://dx.doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198259565.001.0001(1998) ‘The suspicious eye’, Criminal Justice Matters, 33, Autumn: 10–11http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09627259808552818and (Norris, C., Armstrong, G. and Moran, J., eds. (1998) Surveillance, Closed Circuit Television and Social Control, Aldershot: Ashgate1974) Anarchy, State and Utopia, New York: Basic Books([Page 240]1964) ‘Locke’, in D.J.O'Connor, ed. A Critical History of Western Philosophy, New York: The Free Press of Glencoe, pp. 253–74(1985) Sexual Divisions in Law, London: Weidenfeld and Nicholson(1993) ‘Law's knowledge: the judge, the expert, the battered woman, and her syndrome’, Journal of Law and Society, 20, 4: 427–37http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1410210(1983) ‘The family and the market: a study of ideology and legal reform’, Harvard Law Review, 96: 1497http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1340916(1992) ‘Risk, power and crime prevention’, Economy and Society, 21: 252–75http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03085149200000013(1998) ‘Introduction’, in P.O'Malley, ed. Crime and the Risk Society, Aldershot: Ashgate(1999) ‘Volatile and contradictory punishment’, Theoretical Criminology, 3, 2: 175–96http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1362480699003002003(2000) ‘Risk societies and the government of crime’, in M.Brown and J.Pratt, eds. Dangerous Offenders: Punishment and Social Order, London: Routledge(2001) ‘Risk, crime and prudentialism revisited’, in K.Stenson and R.R.Sullivan, eds. op. cit.(1994) Habermas: A Critical Introduction, Cambridge: Polity Press(1969) The Limits of the Criminal Sanction, Stanford, Calif: Stanford University Press(1969) Hermeneutics, Evanston: Northwestern University Press(2000) Rethinking Multiculturalism, Basingstoke: Macmillan(1991) ‘Criminology: the birth of a special knowledge’, in G.Burchell et al., eds. op. cit(1996) ‘Introduction’ in M.Passerin d'Entreves and S.Benhabib, eds. Habermas and the Unfinished project of Modernity, Cambridge: Polity Press(1988a) The Sexual Contract, Cambridge: Polity Press(1988b) ‘The theoretical subversiveness of feminism’, in C.Pateman and S.Grosz, eds, Feminist Challenges, Sydney: Allen and Unwin(1983) Hooligan: A History of Respectable Fears, London: Macmillan(2002) ‘Crime reduction’, in M.Maguire, R.Morgan and R.Reiner, eds, The Oxford Handbook of Criminology,(3rd edition, Oxford University Press1960) The Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Pierce, vols 1 and 2, ed. C.Hartshorne and P.Weiss, Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press(1998) The Idea of Human Rights: Four Inquiries, Oxford: Oxford University Press(1980) Judging Justice, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul(1982) ‘Habermas on truth and justice’, Royal Institute of Philosophy Lecture Series, Cambridge: University of Cambridge Press, pp. 207–28(1997) Republicanism: A Theory of Freedom and Government, Oxford: Clarendon Press(1971) Structuralism, trans. C.Maschler, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul(1977) The Moral Judgement of the Child, Harmondsworth: Penguin(1945) The Open Society and its Enemies, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul(1995) ‘Dangerousness, risk and technologies of power’, Australia and New Zealand Journal of Criminology, 28: 3–31http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/000486589502800102(1996) ‘Governing the dangerous: an historical view of dangerous offender legislation’, Social and Legal Studies, 5, 1: 21–36http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/096466399600500102(1998) Governing the Dangerous, Sydney: Federation Press(2000a) ‘Dangerousness and modern society’, in M.Brown and J.Pratt, eds, Dangerous Offenders: Punishment and Social OrderLondon: Routledge(2000b) ‘The return of wheelbarrow man; or the arrival of postmodern penalityBritish Journal of Criminology, 40, 1: 127–45http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/bjc/40.1.127([Page 241]1949) Moral Obligation, Oxford: Clarendon Press(Punishment and Society (January 2001) 3, 1: Special issue on Mass Imprisonment in the USA1990) Reading Habermas, Oxford: Blackwell(1972) A Theory of Justice, Oxford: Oxford University Press(1987) ‘The idea of overlapping consensus’, Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, 7: 1–25http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ojls/7.1.1(1989) ‘The domain of the political and overlapping consensus’, New York University Law Review, 64: 233–55(1993a) Political Liberalism, New York: Columbia University Press(1993b) ‘The law of peoples’ in S.Shute and S.Hurley, eds, On Human Rights: The Oxford Amnesty Lectures 1993. New York: Basic Books(1986) The Morality of Freedom, Oxford: Clarendon Press(1996) ‘Translator's Introduction” in J.Habermas, Between Facts and Norms trans. WilliamRehg, Cambridge: Polity Press(1989) The Rich Get Richer and the Poor Get Prison: Ideology, Class and Criminal Justice,(3rd edition, New York: Macmillan1990) Justice and Modern Moral Philosophy, New Haven, Conn: Yale University Press(Richardson, J. and Sandland, R., eds. (2000) Feminist Perspectives on Law and Theory, London: Cavendish1998) ‘Mill on justice’, in D.Boucher and P.Kelly, eds. Social Justice: From Hume to Walzer, London: Routledge(1992) ‘Critiquing the law: themes and dilemmas in Anglo-American feminist legal theory’, Journal of Law and Society, 19, 4: 423–40http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1410062(1989) Contingency, Irony and Solidarity, Cambridge: Cambridge University Presshttp://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511804397(1993) ‘Human rights, rationality and sentimentality’, in S.Shute and S.Hurley, eds. On Human Rights: The Oxford Amnesty Lectures 1993, New York: Basic Books(2000) ‘Freedom from domination: the republican revival’, Philosophy and Social Criticism, 26, 3: 83–8http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/019145370002600306(1996a) ‘Governing “advanced” liberal democracies’, in A.Barry, T.Osborne and N.Rose, eds. Foucault and Political Reason, London: UCL Press(1996b) ‘The death of the “social”? Refiguring the territory of government’, Economy and Society, 26, 4: 327–46http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03085149600000018(2000) ‘Government and Control’, British Journal of Criminology, 40, 2: 321–339http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/bjc/40.2.321(1992) Post-Modernism and the Social Sciences: Insights, Inroads and Intrusions, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press(1930) The Right and the Good, Oxford: Clarendon Press(1990) Beyond Punishment: A New View on the Rehabilitation of Criminal Offenders, New York: Greenwood Press(1968) Punishment and Social Structure, New York: Russell and Russelland (1996) Criminal Policy and the Eliminative Ideal, inaugural lecture, Institute of Criminal Justice, University of Southampton(1982) ‘On markets for risk’, Maryland Law Review, 41: 755–83(1978) Orientalism, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul(1993) Culture and Imperialism, London: Chatto and Windus(1996) ‘The impossibility of human rights within a postmodern account of law and justice’, Journal of Civil Liberties, 1: 29–66(1982) Liberalism and the Limits of Justice, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,(second edition 19981997) ‘Vengeance, victims and the identities of law’, Social and Legal Studies, 6, 2: 163–90http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/096466399700600201([Page 242]1991) A journey through forgetting: toward a jurisprudence of violence’, in A.Sarat and T.R.Kearns, eds. The Fate of Law, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Pressand (1938) La Nausée, published in English as Nausea, trans. R.Baldick (1965), Harmondsworth: Penguin(1958) Being and Nothingness, trans. H.E.Barnes, London: Methuen(2000) ‘William Horton's long shadow: “punitiveness” and “managerialism” in the penal politics of Massachusetts, 1988–1999’,in T.Hope and R.Sparks, eds. op. cit.(1974) The Structures of the Life-World, trans. R.M.Zaner and H.Tristram Engelhardt Jr., London: Heinemannand (1988) ‘Deconstructing equality-versus-difference’, Feminist Studies, 14, 1: 33–50http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3177997(Scraton, P., ed. (1987) Law, Order and the Authoritarian State, Milton Keynes: Open University Press2001) ‘Rights in their place’. Paper presented to the Law and Society Association (USA) Annual Meetings, Central European University, Budapest, 4–7 July(Sen, A. and Williams, B., eds. (1982) Utilitarianism and Beyond, Cambridge: Cambridge University Presshttp://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO97805116119641992) The Conscience of the Eye, New York: W.W. Norton(1986) The Evolution of Rights in Liberal Theory, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press(1981) ‘Private security: its growth and implications’, in M.Tonry and N.Morris, eds, Crime and Justice: An Annual Review of Research, Chicago: University of Chicago Pressand (1998) ‘The liberalism of fear’, in S.Hoffman, ed. Political Thought and Political Thinkers, Chicago: University of Chicago Press(1990) ‘Hazards, risks and enterprise: approaches to science, law and social policy’, Law and Society Review, 24: 179–98http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3053792(Shute, S. and Hurley, S., eds. (1993) On Human Rights: The Oxford Amnesty Lectures 1993, New York: Basic Books1907) The Methods of Ethics,(7th edition, London: Macmillan2002) Innocence Betrayed: Paedophilia, the Media and Society, Cambridge: Polity Pressand (2000) ‘Against the punitive wind: Stuart Hall, the state and the great moving right show’, in P.Gilroy, L.Grossberg and A.McRobbie, eds. Without Guarantees: In Honour of Stuart Hall, London: Verso(1987) ‘The emergence of a risk society: insurance, law and the state’, Socialist Review, 95: 6–89(1998) ‘Managing the monstrous: sex offenders and the new penology’, Psychology, Public Policy and Law, 4, 1: 1–16http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/1076-8971.4.1-2.452(2001) ‘Entitlement to cruelty: neo-liberalism and the punitive mentality in the United States’, in K.Stenson and R.R.Sullivan, eds. op. cit.(1999) Facing Modernity: Ambivalence, Reflexivity and Morality, London: Sage(1989) Feminism and the Power of Law, London: Routledgehttp://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9780203206164(1995) Law, Crime and Sexuality, London: Sage(2002) Textbook on International Human Rights, Oxford: Oxford University Press(2000) ‘Sex offenders: specialists, generalists — or both?’British Journal of Criminology, 40: 56–67http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/bjc/40.1.56, , and (1990) Inessential Woman: Problems of Exclusion in Feminist Thought, London: The Women's Press(1984) The Spectacle of Suffering, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press(1990) Everyday Violence: How Women and Men Experience Physical and Sexual Violence, London: Pandora([Page 243]1997) ‘Safety talk: conceptualising women's risk assessment as a “technology of the soul”‘, Theoretical Criminology, 1, 4: 490–9http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1362480697001004004(2000) ‘Naturalising danger: women, fear and personal safety’, in M.Brown and J.Pratt, eds. Dangerous Offenders: Punishment and Social Order, London: Routledge(2000) International Human Rights in Context,and (2nd edition, Oxford: Oxford University Press1998) ‘Displacing social policy through crime control’, in S.Hanninen, ed. Displacement of Social Policies, Jyväskylä: SoPhi Publications(1999) ‘Crime control, governmentality and sovereignty’, in R.Smandych, ed. Governable Places: Readings in Governmentality and Crime Control, Aldershot: Dartmouth(Stenson, K. and Sullivan, R., eds. (2001) Crime, Risk and Justice: The Politics of Crime Control in Liberal Democracies, Cullompton: Willan Publishing2001) ‘The schizophrenic state: neo-liberal criminal justice’, in K.Stenson and R.Sullivan, eds, op. cit.(1979) Hegel and Modern Society, Cambridge: Cambridge University Presshttp://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139171489(1985) Philosophical Papers: Vol. 2 Philosophy and the Human Sciences, Cambridge: Cambridge University Presshttp://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139173490(1989) Sources of the Self: The Making of the Modern Identity, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press(2001) ‘Unthought thoughts: the influence of changing sensibilities on penal policies’, Punishment and Society, 3, 1: 167–82http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/14624740122228168(2000) ‘Computer to score chance of criminals reoffending’, the Guardian, 18 August(1992) ‘Communicative ethics in the face of alterity: Habermas, Levinas and the problem of post-conventional universalism’, Praxis International, 11, 4: 412–27(1996a) ‘Social facticity and the law: a social expert's eyewitness account of law’, Social and Legal Studies, 5, 2: 201–8http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/096466399600500204(1996b) ‘Despotism and ethical liberal governance’, Economy and Society, 25, 3: 357–72http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03085149600000019(1993) ‘New wine and old wineskins: four challenges of restorative justice’, Criminal Law Forum, 4: 251–76http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF01096074(1997) Critical Criminology: Visions from Europe, London: Sage(1998) ‘Tolerance or zero tolerance: is that the question?’ Paper presented at the American Society of Criminology Annual Meetings, Washington DC, 1–14 November(1997) ‘Beyond enlightenment? After the subject of foucault, who comes?’Theory, Culture and Society, 14, 3: 28http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/026327697014003001(1976) Doing Justice: The Choice of Punishments, New York: Hill and Wang(1985) Past or Future Crimes: Deservedness and Dangerousness in the Punishment of Crimes, Manchester: Manchester University Press(1993) Censure and Sanctions, Oxford: Clarendon Press(1991) ‘Gauging criminal harm: a living-standard analysis’, Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, 1, 1: 1–38http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ojls/11.1.1and (von Hirsch, A., Roberts, J., Bottoms, A.E., Roach, K. and Schiff, M., eds (2002) Restorative Justice and Criminal Justice: Competing or Reconcilable Paradigms, Oxford: Hart Publishing2001) ‘Deadly symbiosis: when ghetto and prison meet and merge’, Punishment and Society, 3, 1: 95–34http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/14624740122228276(2002) Blackstone's Guide to the Human Rights Act, 1998,and ([Page 244]3rd edition, Oxford: Blackstone Press2002) ‘Restoration and punishment: duet or duel’, in A.von Hirsch et al., eds. op. cit.(1991) Why Punish?Oxford: Oxford University Press(1997) ‘Risk and criminal victimisation: a modernist dilemma?’British Journal of Criminology, 37, 1: 35–46http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.bjc.a014148(1983) Spheres of Justice: A Defence of Pluralism and Equality, Oxford: Martin Robertson(1986) ‘The politics of Michel Foucault’, in D.Couzens Hoy, ed. Foucault: A Critical ReaderOxford: Basil Blackwell(1987) Interpretation and Social Criticism, Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press(1994) Thick and Thin: Moral Argument at Home and Abroad, Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press(1998) An Introduction to Critical Legal Theory, London: Cavendish(1980) ‘On racism and sexism’, in R.Wasserstrom ed. Philosophy and Social Issues, Notre Dame: Notre Dame University Press(Westphal, J., ed. (1996) Justice, Indianapolis: Hackett1987–8) ‘Justice and the Postmodern Problematic’, Praxis International, 7, 3–4: 306–19(1988) The Recent Work of Jürgen Habermas: Reason, Justice and Modernity, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press(1979) ‘No risk is the highest risk of all’, American Scientist, 67, Jan/Feb: 32(Williams, D., ed. (1999) The Enlightenment, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press1991) The Alchemy of Race and Rights, Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press(1983) Thinking About Crime,(2nd edition, New York: Basic Books1982) ‘Broken windows: the police and community safety’, Atlantic Monthly, March: 29–38and (1967) A Vindication of the Rights of Woman, New York: W.W. Norton (first published 1792)(1990) Offending Women: Female Lawbreakers and the Criminal Justice System, London: Routledgehttp://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9780203405840(2002) ‘The court as last resort: victim-sensitive, community-based responses to crime’, British Journal of Criminology, 42, 3: 654–67http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/bjc/42.3.654(1990) Justice and the Politics of Difference, Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press(1999) The Exclusive Society, London: Sagehttp://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781446222065(2001) ‘Just cops doing “shameful” business: police-led restorative justice and the lessons of research’, in A.Morris and G.Maxwell, eds, Restorative Justice for Juveniles, Oxford: Hart Publishing(1994) ‘Reparation and retribution: are they reconcilable?’Modern Law Review, 57: 228–50http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2230.1994.tb01934.x(2000) ‘The pursuit of security’, in T.Hope and R.Sparks, eds, op. cit(1990) Changing Lenses: A New Focus for Crime and Justice, Scottsdale, PA.: Herald Press(2001) ‘Imprisonment rates and the new politics of criminal punishment’, Punishment and Society, 3, 1: 161–6http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/14624740122228159(1995) Incapacitation: Penal Confinement and the Restraint of Crime, New York: Oxford University Pressand (