In this contribution the author reviews: Business as usual? Corporate involvement in international crimes, by Wim Huisman.

The transmission of violent delinquency between men from three consecutive generations is examined. Men with violent fathers are shown to have an increased risk to become violent offenders. This transmission of violent delinquency is larger than the transmission of non-violent delinquency. Moreover, it is shown that the timing of the paternal violent crime plays an important role in the intergenerational transmission of violent delinquency. The results are more in line with dynamic theories than with static theories. Though, more research is necessary to examine the precise mechanisms behind the intergenerational transmission of violent delinquency.

In this contribution the current security debate in France is dissected as if it were a play in different acts. President Sarkozy, the political producer, has launched a public ‘schizophrenic’ discussion in which criminologists/sociologists act and quarrel on the edge of a knife. This debate can only be understood in reference to French criminological history, politics, structures and scientific particularities. The contents of this criminological theatre of war can enrich criminological discussion in the Netherlands and Belgium.

In this article the authors debate the subject fire alarm system.

In this contribution the author reviews: Politiewerk aan de basis: stevig en nuchter, by Edward J. van der Torre.

Teenagers between twelve and eighteen years of age are protected by Dutch criminal law against sexual encounters that can be described as ‘voluntarily’. If teenagers are approached without force or approach a person themselves autonomously they are thus protected against such contact, but they could have played a sexual active role nevertheless. How do the alleged offenders in these criminal cases make contact and how are the punishable interactions possible considering the facilitative role of the victim? This paper will deal with the way the officials of the police and justice departments value sexual contacts with youngsters in a diverse range of settings. The crucial question is how the professionals dealing with the protection of youngsters and at the same time safeguarding the legal rights of offenders come to their juridical deliberation.

In this article the author debates the subject fire alarm system.

In this contribution the author reviews: Idealen op drift. Een pedagogische kijk op radicaliserende jongeren, by M. van San, S. Sieckelink & M. de Winter.

In this contribution the author reviews: Verkenning cybercrime in Nederland 2009, by E.R. Leukfeldt, M.M.L. Domenie & W.Ph. Stol.

The ‘Shortlist troublesome youth groups’ is a compact survey that enables police-officers to categorize problematic youth groups on a general level. The ‘shortlist’ results in three categories. The least troublesome groups are labelled ‘annoying’, the more serious groups are referred to as ‘disturbing’ and the most serious ones are called ‘criminal’ youth groups. As a quick scan, the shortlist tool has originally been developed in order to prevent criminalization of youth. It has now become a compulsorily used instrument for all 25 police services in the Netherlands. The shortlist is seen as the central starting point that should ultimately lead to the implementation of multidisciplinary interventions to tackle the specific problems that the youth groups cause.This article briefly discusses the highly subjective judgements of perceptions of disorder in society. Against this background this article describes the aim, the benefits and limits to the use of the shortlist. This analysis is based on fifteen years of experience with the annual listing of troublesome youth groups by means of the shortlist at the Haaglanden police service.This contribution concludes that the shortlist is a useful instrument that enables police officers to efficiently categorize problematic youth groups. Several changes by the Haaglanden police service with regard to the content as well as to the procedure further optimized the use of the shortlist. However, its global characteristic hampers evaluation of local safety interventions on the group. Also, comparisons of results between police services are not possible just like that. For those purposes (evaluations and comparisons) additional, i.e. more detailed information on the groups are to be gathered. The shortlist-methodology consists of further steps that include more in-depth analyses.Having said this, the shortlist is a valuable quick scan tool that enables professionals to swiftly categorize problematic youth groups.

This editorial offers an introduction to the current issue.

The authors summarize the empirical findings with regard to restorative justice and crime prevention as presented in the report of the European project on the matter at hand. With regard to the offender, they studied empirical research on the reduction of recidivism. Data refer to characteristics of the offender, the view of the offender with regard to the restorative process, characteristics of the communication processes and the type of offence as influencing factors. Results in general seem to be quite positive, although there are some cases when recidivism is worse in comparison to the traditional justice process. Crawford indicates how preventative effects for the victims can be taken into account – the researchers refer to the different effects depending on the type of crime and characteristics of the victim; satisfaction, re-victimisation and post-traumatic symptoms; and the prevention of revenge. With regard to the societal preventative effects, research on restorative justice seems to be restricted to the theoretical level: empirical research in this regard is lacking.

This article departs from a crime prevention perspective following the definition of crime prevention as adopted by the European Union Crime Prevention Network (EUCPN). This approach handles a broad notion of community involvement in crime prevention, including non-judicial measures and models of intervention. Through its participatory approaches, restorative justice has the potential of mobilising and reinforcing social capital and, therefore, of contributing to effective crime prevention and control. The community oriented approach is illustrated by the model of crime prevention and its possible connection to restorative justice as being developed in Hungary and promoted through various actions of the EUCPN.

In this article, the authors summarize some important methodological problems that may be encountered when studying the crime preventative effects of restorative justice. Studies mostly focus on tertiary preventative effects, namely the reduction of recidivism. Empirical research is in that regard mainly dealing with the effects of victim-offender mediation and conferencing practices. Some problems include the definitional issue (what can be considered as a restorative justice intervention?), the (quasi-)experimental design, the small size of samples and issues of comparability between different studies due to differences in e.g. follow-period or criteria for measuring recidivism.

This article addresses the question whether restorative justice is embedded in the current policy and legal frameworks on crime prevention in several EU member states. Crime prevention is defined as all actions that are aimed to prevent involvement in crime (thus more than prevent re-offending only). Of course, the situation differs among the EU member states, but there is a growing awareness that restorative justice can play an important role in the prevention of crime, and is especially useful to meet the interests of victim and offender. Concerning the situation in the Netherlands, there are some promising developments and initiatives in which restorative justice approaches are advocated, for instance by a recent advice to the Secretary of State of the Ministry of Safety and Justice, in which restorative justice interventions are proposed within the juvenile justice system. Another relevant initiative is the joint effort to explore the boundaries of the Dutch diversion ‘Halt’ programme in order to apply this form of restorative practice more often, because of its estimated positive effects on victim and offender.

On the basis of current definitions and approaches of restorative justice and crime prevention, and making use of a two-dimensional typology of crime prevention, this article develops a conceptual framework and seeks to offer points of connections and departure at the theoretical level between restorative justice practices and different models of offender-oriented, victim-oriented and community-oriented prevention. In order to face some of the present limitations of restorative justice, in particular the missing link to causes of crime at the societal-structural level, the author widens the perspective of restorative justice to the broader notion of ‘community justice’. The challenge for restorative justice is, then, to integrate polycentric problem-solving approaches into its operational models.

This section contains announcements of upcoming lectures, conferences and other events.