Today, reflexive mechanism operates in all phases of Japanese society, which enters the age of high-modernity. Social fluidity increases a keen sense of risk in every individual daily life. But, the influence of social fluidity in old layer is different from it in young layer. Therefore the sense of risk in old layer is also different from it in young layer, which occurs from social fluidity. Consequently, persons who belong to old layer indicate psychological sense of short distance to deviant behavior. On the contrary, persons who belong to young layer indicate psychological sense of long distance to deviant behavior. The aim of this paper is to explicate from such point of view about the difference between the social factor of the tendency of the arrest number of persons who violate criminal law in young layer and the social factor of it in old layer in Japan today.
Quite a few theoretical criminologists recognize that, in a changing crime control trend from discipline to management, risk has been increasingly associated not with oﬀender treatment but with crime prevention and management of the risky population. This inﬂuential understanding, however, is not necessarily correct both empirically and theoretically. Risk-based oﬀender treatment such as cognitive behavioral therapy has been globalized with the rise of “evidence-based practice,” functioning as a neoliberal responsibilization of the “risk avoiding self.” Nevertheless, more recently, a newly introduced oﬀender treatment focusing on “resilience” has increased its presence in parallel with the rise of risk-based treatment. Crisis situations or radical uncertainties, which are viewed in risk-based treatment as “criminogenic risks” to be avoided or dealt with, should be willingly accepted in resilience-based treatment as “chances for further progress and growth” and ex-oﬀenders can be responsibilized as the “uncertainty embracing self.” Although the prudential risk avoiding self and the entrepreneurial uncertainty embracing self are qualitatively diﬀerent, both might not be in a conﬂictual relationship in post-risk-based oﬀender treatment, supporting in concert the neoliberal image of selves. Further investigations on post-risk-based treatment from both empirical and normative viewpoints are needed.
A purpose of this article is to discuss a range of issues related to risk and security from welfare organizations’ perspective by examining collaboration between the criminal justice and welfare systems, which has been evolving since mid 2000s. Firstly, the author describes the collaboration’s current status and its characteristics. Secondly, triggers for and purposes of the collaboration are considered from both the criminal justice and welfare sides. Thirdly, the author examines risk and security recognized by the welfare organizations. There are four risk types recognized by the welfare organizations working with the criminal justice system, namely, (1) risk associated with client’s re-oﬀending, (2) risk associated with possible legal liability, (3) risk associated with relationship with other organizations and reputation within the community, (4) risk associated with the organization’s relationship with its clients and their families. Security, measures to deal with these risks, can over-emphasize possibility of client’s re-oﬀending and/or exclude them from the services. It is argued that in order to establish and maintain welfare organizations’ equal and independent relationship with their counterparts, they need to recognize that security for their perceived risks can create new and further risk, viz. transforming them into de facto criminal justice agencies.
An indispensable vehicle of neo-liberalism, risk has been heavily debated in relation to social welfare practices and policies, especially in connection with penal systems. This article considers how the expert knowledge on which neo-liberal government depends provides guidelines by which populations are assessed against norms. Review of scholarly opinion about governance and power of risk leads to discussion of how risk assessment aﬀects the policy shift from child welfare to child protection that is occurring in many western countries and in Japan. Of particular interest are poor and single mothers who are regulated by a risk assessment tool predicated on intensive maternal child care, a tool that causes high risk populations to conform to an inherent gendered norm. Evidence is presented to suggest that, instead of being factual, child abuse risk calculation merely excludes other possible interpretations. Child protection professionals are encouraged to reconsider risk policy that makes individuals and families responsible for assigned risk factors such as poverty, unemployment, single parenting and substandard housing.
In Japan, conventional discussions on crime were on how people viewed crime trends, both from the perspective of “subjective security” and “fear of crime.” Newspapers, assembly members, and officials valued “subjective security,” while academicians talked about the “fear of crime.” However, no attention was drawn to the diﬀerence between the two viewpoints. In this paper, a crime prevention project called “Convenience Store Security Box Project in Chiba prefecture” was tested to understand the eﬀect on residents’ “subjective security” and their “fear of crime.” The project was undertaken at two places. The preliminary survey and the post-trial survey were conducted at both places. The project resulted in improving the subjective security of the residents, but their perceived risk of crime partially increased and their fear of crime worsened. Therefore, we concluded that both are diﬀerent concepts and that both are necessary to evaluate crime prevention projects.