Zoekresultaat: 5 artikelen

x
Jaar 2011 x
Artikel

Tien jaar veiligheidsonderzoek in het Tijdschrift voor Veiligheid

Weerspiegeling van een vakgebied in ontwikkeling

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Veiligheid, Aflevering 4 2011
Trefwoorden safety research, security research, multidisciplinary research, Journal of Safety Studies
Auteurs Wouter Stol
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    From its beginning in 2002, the Dutch Journal of Safety Studies (JSS) has wanted to be a platform for Dutch and Belgian academic articles about all facets of safety and security. Furthermore the journal wants to be a platform for multidisciplinary articles in which safety and security issues are studied from different and complementary perspectives or academic fields.This article provides a content analysis of all 129 JSS-articles. The analysis shows that the focus of JSS is on matters of social safety (and less on the more ‘technical’ safety issues) and on the organization of safety (functioning of organizations or networks and/or the effectiveness of measures) and less on safety as such. Over the years, a few changes have taken place. (1) In the field of social safety the focus has shifted somewhat from ‘the organization of safety’ towards safety as such. (2) Although the proportion of articles from Belgium is small (5,4%), it has increased over the years. (3) Authors from Dutch universities of applied sciences have published no more than 4 articles (3,1%), the first one of which appeared in Volume 6. After some years, these authors discovered the JSS as a platform for their work.JSS covers a wide range of subjects in the field of safety and how it can be organized. Although most articles stem from criminology and/or public management, JSS contains articles from different academic fields such as criminology, communication, law, psychology, engineering, public management, medical science, etc. However, in one and the same article one does not often find a combination of really different academic perspectives, such as engineering and psychology or informatics and criminology. If the JSS aims to be a truly multidisciplinary journal, it should contain more articles of this kind over the next ten years.


Wouter Stol
Prof. dr. W.Ph. (Wouter) Stol is lector Cybersafety aan de NHL Hogeschool en de Politieacademie en bijzonder hoogleraar Politiestudies aan de Open Universiteit. E-mail: wstol@planet.nl
Artikel

Over objectieve en subjectieve onveiligheid

En de (on)zin van het rationaliteitdebat

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Veiligheid, Aflevering 4 2011
Trefwoorden fear of crime, fear victimization paradox, rationality debate
Auteurs Stefaan Pleysier
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This contribution focuses on ‘fear of crime’ research. Departing from the classic distinction between crime and victimization as objective threats, on the one hand, and fear of crime as a subjective and emotional interpretation of that threat, on the other hand, the research tradition is confronted with the so-called fear victimization paradox. This paradox emerges from the observation that fear of crime is greater among women and elderly people, while these groups actually are less at risk of becoming a crime victim. It has immersed the research tradition in a dominant debate on the rationality of the fear of crime, with two opposing paradigms: rationalist and symbolic.Whilst both the paradox and the different paradigms in the debate offer a view at the core of fear of crime research, and illustrate how similar empirical observations can lead to differing explanations, and policy implications for that matter, we argue that the fear victimization paradox and the rationality debate surrounding this paradox, has occupied the bulk of research on fear of crime with what is essentially a nonsensical and redundant debate.


Stefaan Pleysier
Prof. dr. S. (Stefaan) Pleysier is docent Jeugdcriminologie en Methoden van onderzoek aan de Faculteit der Rechtsgeleerdheid van de K.U.Leuven, en verbonden aan het Leuvens Instituut voor Criminologie (LINC) waar hij co-coördinator is van de onderzoekslijn Jeugdcriminologie. E-mail: stefaan.pleysier@law.kuleuven.be
Artikel

Zijn Nederlandse burgers écht enthousiast over de nieuwe antiterrorismemaatregelen?

Een vergelijking van attitudes en willingness to pay

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Veiligheid, Aflevering 3 2011
Trefwoorden counterterrorism policy, public opinion, willingness to pay, legitimacy
Auteurs Johan van Wilsem en Maartje van der Woude
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Since 2001, the Netherlands have broadened their array of antiterrorism legislation and policies. However, there is hardly any insight into the level of public support for them. This article assesses the Dutch public opinion on four measures that were recently made effective: enhanced possibilities for stop-and-search, broadening of possibilities for special investigative resources, increased obligations for identification, and body scans in airports. Two randomly selected, comparable groups were asked different questions about these issues: attitudes or willingness to pay. The results show that respondents have positive attitudes towards newly introduced antiterrorism measures, yet simultaneously, they have low willingness to pay. Both groups were also asked how they would allocate an imaginary fixed budget to various criminal justice policies and tax rebate. These results show similar relations for both attitudes and willingness to pay, suggesting they both measure the relative importance assigned to antiterrorism policies. A right political orientation predicts both positive attitudes and high willingness to pay. Furthermore, people with high income have higher willingness to pay. The results underline the necessity to pay attention to the subtleties underlying public opinion on crime control.


Johan van Wilsem
Dr. J.A. (Johan) van Wilsem is universitair hoofddocent criminologie bij het Instituut voor Strafrecht & Criminologie van de Universiteit Leiden. E-mail: J.A.van.Wilsem@law.leidenuniv.nl.

Maartje van der Woude
Mr. dr. M.A.H. (Maartje) van der Woude is universitair docent criminologie bij het Instituut voor Strafrecht & Criminologie van de Universiteit Leiden. E-mail: m.a.h.vanderwoude@law.leidenuniv.nl.
Artikel

Van overlastmelding naar een globale typering van problematische jeugdgroepen: de shortlist als quickscan

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Veiligheid, Aflevering 2 2011
Trefwoorden shortlist, Beke, teenagers causing trouble, youth groups, youth group inventory, youth group causing trouble, criminal youth group
Auteurs Paul Harland
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    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.


Paul Harland
Dr. Paul Harland is senior onderzoeker bij de Politie Haaglanden, afdeling Analyse & Research (Staf Korpsdirectie). E-mail: Paul.harland@haaglanden.politie.nl.
Artikel

Integrale veiligheidszorg en de burgemeester

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Veiligheid, Aflevering 1 2011
Trefwoorden integraal, burgemeester, veiligheidsbeleid, religie
Auteurs Ruth Prins en Lex Cachet
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Changing public safety problems as well as an increasing societal demand for public safety made way for new policy approaches. During the 1990s, the so called ‘integral safety approach’ was introduced in the Netherlands. This approach manifested itself mainly on the municipal level where the mayor is being held responsible for managing public safety and order. The central question raised in this article is: what are the consequences of an integral approach to public safety problems for the mayor when managing local order and public safety? We will demonstrate that ‘integrality’ is no clear cut concept. Careful inspection of the concept learns that it has multiple meanings. Of these various meanings, especially the ambition to address public safety problems by means of ‘new alliances’ characterized the actual implementation of integral policies. However, working together within these new alliances uniting various more or less independent actors from both the public and private sector, seemed to be hampered by a lack of coordination and control. In that sense, the introduction of the integral approach had consequences for steering and control of public safety policies. These consequences have to be addressed, especially by the mayor who is accountable for local order and safety. The mayor had attributed to him – first in practice, soon by law as well – the role of director of public safety policy on the municipal level. However, as we will demonstrate in this article, the mayor lacks an important trait needed for effective directorship: decisive powers. Therefore the mayor is not able to realize effective cooperation between partners within the new alliances of the integral approach to public safety problems. As a potential solution, we will describe the characteristics of a ‘model of anticipation’ granting the mayor a certain level of decisive powers to be used as an ultimum remedium.


Ruth Prins
Ruth Prins MSc is promovendus Burgemeester en Veiligheid, Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam. Contactadres: Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam, Burg. Oudlaan 50 (kamer M7-06), Postbus 1738, 3000 DR Rotterdam. Tel. 010-4088714, e-mail: prins@fsw.eur.nl

Lex Cachet
Dr. Lex Cachet is Universitair Hoofddocent Bestuurskunde aan de Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam, Faculteit der Sociale Wetenschappen, Opleiding Bestuurskunde. E-mail: cachet@fsw.eur.nl
Interface Showing Amount
U kunt door de volledige tekst zoeken naar alle artikelen door uw zoekterm in het zoekveld in te vullen. Als u op de knop 'Zoek' heeft geklikt komt u op de zoekresultatenpagina met filters, die u helpen om snel bij het door u gezochte artikel te komen. Er zijn op dit moment drie verschillende filters: tijdschrift, rubriek en jaar.