Building on prior quantitative analyses by Rovers (1999) and Rovers and Boers (2009), the present article provides a quantitative overview of 60 years Dutch Journal of Criminology, with an emphasis on the period 1999-2018. Dutch criminology is beginning to lose sight of its first generation of researchers. Males still dominate the top 25 most published authors. A social network analysis of the co-author network on the one hand reveals a significant proportion of singletons. Many of the remaining authors on the other hand, are included in one giant component that links authors directly or indirectly by co-authorship.

Two developments are discussed that have a significant influence on the scope and content of the penology of the future, but otherwise have little to do with each other: The expansion of the sentencing field has resulted in a completely fluid research field. However, the important questions of penology can only be answered by integrally mapping and analyzing that sentencing field. For that reason, penology should radically free itself of the limitation of its field of research to the penal sanction. Ongoing insight into the functioning of the brain and the predictability of behavior on the basis of algorithms shine a different light on the portraits of mankind on which we base punishment. It also exposes a range of new possibilities to influence behavior and prevent criminal behavior. It is also part of the research field of penology to question which of those possibilities we want to use and under which conditions.

In this contribution, I describe several key developments that have been fundamental to the development of criminology in the past 50 years. Next, I sketch the contours of several more recent developments, paying particular attention to three technologies, virtual reality, smartphones and wearables that will leave their imprint on the field. These developments will also imply a shift from the study of criminality to researching criminal behaviour.

Forensic psychiatric treatment plays a mayor role in keeping society safe. However, the expectations about what can be achieved with forensic treatment do not seem to be realistic. This complicates the chances of a successful re-socialization. It is foreseen that the number of patients will increase significantly in the upcoming years.
More effective treatment programs and instruments for risk assessment are needed. For this, the causal relationship between psychopathology and delinquency must be better understood. This requires more criminological research.

If, as criminologists, we really want to contribute to solutions for the great challenges of our time, we should be…surfing more. In a dynamic environment full of contradictions, we should be constantly in motion, moving left and right between different theoretical-normative perspectives as well as between methodological perspectives. This paper clarifies that surfing movement with some illustrations. It then proposes three goals for a criminological research agenda that should help us address the great challenges: actual (as opposed to superficial) relevance for practice, causal ambitions and multidisciplinarity. The paper concludes with some reflections about the organization and funding of criminological research.

Scenario techniques allow for dynamic explorations of possible futures. With the uncertainties about interdisciplinarity and the public role of criminology four scenarios for criminology in 2040 are presented. Crime Science and Criminal Policy describe situations which combine a strong public role for criminology to a low and high level of interdisciplinarity. Da Vinci and Theoretical Criminology portray futures with a limited public role for criminology and a high and low level of interdisciplinarity.

This contribution reflects on the criminological meaning of the still ongoing trend of digitalisation. What does this mean for crime as a phenomenon and for the explanation of criminal behaviour? Not only did we see the emergence of new types of offending, also the context of crime has changed. In principle, the underlying explanatory processes can remain the same, but their application in the online world is complex and deserves further attention. Online social interactions are not only important for online crime, but also for traditional offenses. However, systematic research on how this actually takes place is scarce.

What role do Dutch criminologists play in the – especially since the onset of the so-called migration crisis – heated national and international debates on the criminalization of migration and border mobility? This will be the central question in this publication. Based on an inventory of national and international peer-reviewed publications written by Dutch criminologists, the article will reflect upon Dutch criminologists’ public role. In addition, based on the observed ‘silences’ in the scholarly debates on the criminalization of migration and border mobility, three avenues for further criminological research will be identified.