Search:
Computing and Library Services - delivering an inspiring information environment

Evidence-based youth justice? Some valuable lessons from an evaluation for the youth justice board

Wilcox, Aidan (2003) Evidence-based youth justice? Some valuable lessons from an evaluation for the youth justice board. Youth Justice, 3 (1). pp. 21-35. ISSN 1473-2254

[img] PDF
Restricted to Registered users only

Download (164kB)

    Abstract

    This article explores the reasons behind government support for the evidence-based approach and considers the limitations of this concept. In the criminal justice field the government has made repeated claims that it is using evidence to help inform policy. Drawing on the experience of an evaluation of restorative justice (RJ) projects - commissioned by the Youth Justice Board for England and Wales (YJB) - the article concludes that, in this instance, the YJB by-passed an evidence-based approach and gave more priority to developing practice than to the needs of rigorous evaluation. On a more positive note, it is argued that the YJB has recognised the tension between the needs of dynamic policy development and the requirements of rigorous evaluation, and its recent approach to evaluation signals a move towards the latter.

    Item Type: Article
    Additional Information: UoA 40 (Social Work and Social Policy and Administration) © 2003 The National Association for Youth Justice.
    Subjects: H Social Sciences > HN Social history and conditions. Social problems. Social reform
    H Social Sciences > H Social Sciences (General)
    Schools: School of Human and Health Sciences
    Related URLs:
    References:

    Blunkett, D. (2000) Influence or Irrelevance: Can Social Science Improve Government? Secretary of State’s
    ESRC Lecture 2 February. London, DfEE.
    Bryans, S. (2000) The Managerialisation of Prisons: Efficiency Without a Purpose. Criminal
    Justice Matters. 40: 7–8.
    Bullock, K., Farrell, G. and Tilley, N. (2002) Funding and Implementing Crime Reduction Initiatives.
    RDS On-line Report 10/02 London, Research, Development and Statistics Directorate.
    Available online at http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs2/rdsolr1002.pdf
    Burnett, R. and Appleton, C. (2002) Teaming up to Reduce Youth Crime: A Study of the Oxfordshire
    YOT. Oxford, Centre for Criminological Research.Burnett, R. and Appleton, C.
    (forthcoming) Joined-up Services to Tackle Youth Crime: a Case-study in England. The
    British Journal of Criminology.
    Cabinet Office (1999) Modernising Government. Cm. 4310. London, Stationery Office.
    Colledge, M., Collier, P. and Brand, S. (1999) Programmes for Offenders: Guidance for Evaluators.
    Crime Reduction Programme – Guidance Note 2. London, Home Office.
    Crawford, A. (1997) The Local Governance of Crime: Appeals to Community and Partnerships. Oxford,
    Clarendon Press.
    Crawford, A. (2001) Joined up but Fragmented. Contradiction, Ambiguity and Ambivalence at
    the Heart of New Labour’s ‘Third Way’. in Matthews, R. and Pitts, J. (Eds.) Crime, Disorder
    and Community Safety: A New Agenda? London, Routledge.
    Davies, H. T. O., Nutley, S. M. and Smith, P. (2000) Introducing Evidence-based Policy and
    Practice in Public Services. in Davies, H. T. O., Nutley, S. M. and Smith, P. (Eds.) What
    works? Evidence-based Policy and Practice in Public Services. Bristol, The Policy Press.
    Davis, G., Wikely, N. and Young, R. (1998) Child Support in Action. Oxford, Hart Publishing.
    Dickersin, K. and Manheimer, E. (1998) The Cochrane Collaboration: Evaluation of Health
    Care and Services using Systematic Reviews of the Results of Randomized Controlled Trials.
    Clinical Obstetrics and Gynecology. 41: 2, 315–31.
    ESRC (2002) The ESRC UK Centre for Evidence-Based Policy and Practice. Available online at
    http//www.esrc.ac.uk/ESRCContent/researchfunding/ebp&pi–annex1.asp
    Ghate, D. and Ramella, M. (2002) Positive Parenting: The National Evaluation of the Youth Justice
    Board’s Parenting Programme. Available online at http://www.youth-justice
    board.gov.uk/policy/positive–parenting.pdf
    Goldson, B. (2001) A Rational Youth Justice? Some Critical Reflections on the Research, Policy
    and Practice Relation. Probation Journal. 48: 2, 76–85.
    Holdaway, S. et al. (2001) New Strategies to Address Youth Offending. The National Evaluation of the
    Pilot Youth Offending Teams. RDS Occasional Paper No. 69. London, Home Office.
    Hood, R. (1967) Research on the Effectiveness of Punishments and Treatments. Collected Studies in
    Criminological Research. Strasbourg, Council of Europe.
    Hood, R. (2001) Penal Policy and Criminological Challenges in the New Millennium. The
    Australian and New Zealand Journal of Criminology. 34: 1, 1–16.
    Hoyle, C., Young, R. and Hill, R. (2002) Proceed with Caution: an Evaluation of the Thames Valley
    Police Initiative in Restorative Cautioning. York, Joseph Rowntree Foundation.
    Jennings, D. and Howard, P. (2001) Report on all Young Offenders’ 12 Month Reconviction Rates.
    (Unpublished internal report.) London, Home Office.
    Jennings, D. (2002) One Year Juvenile Reconviction Rates July 2000 Cohort. London, Home Office.
    Available online at: http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs2/reconrates.pdf
    Kogan, M. (1999) The Impact of Research on Policy. in Coffield, M. (Ed.) Speaking Truth to
    Power: Research and Policy on Lifelong Learning. Bristol, Polity Press.
    Loveday, B. (2000) Policing Performance. Criminal Justice Matters. 40: 23–4.Marshall, T. (1999) Restorative Justice: An Overview. London, Home Office.Marshall, T. and Merry,
    S. (1990) Crime and Accountability: Victim/Offender Mediation in Practice. London, HMSO.
    Martinson, R. (1974) What works? – Questions and Answers about Prison Reform. The Public
    Interest. 10: 22–54.
    Martinson, R. (1979) New Findings, New Views: A Note of Caution Regarding Sentencing
    Reform. Hofstra Law Review. 7: 243–58.
    McGuire, J. and Priestley, P. (1985) Offending Behaviour: Skills and Stratagems for Going Straight.
    London, Batsford.
    McIvor, G. (1997) Evaluative Research in Probation: Progress and Prospects. in Mair, G. (Ed.)
    Evaluating the Effectiveness of Community Penalties. Aldershot, Avebury.
    McLaughlin, E. and Murji, K. (2001) Lost Connections and New Directions: Neo-liberalism,
    New Public Managerialism and the ‘Modernization’ of the British Police. in Stenson, K. and
    Sullivan, R. (Eds.) Crime, Risk and Justice: the Politics of Crime Control in Liberal Democracies.
    Cullompton, Willan.
    Merrington, S. and Stanley, S. (2000) Doubts about the What Works Initiative. Probation Journal.
    47: 4, 272–5.
    Nutley, S., Davies, H. T. O. and Tilley, N. (2000) Editorial: Getting Research into Practice.
    Public Money and Management. 20: 4, 3–6.
    Nutley, S. and Webb, J. (2000) Evidence and the Policy Process. in Davies, H. T. O., Nutley,
    S. and Smith, P. (Eds.) What works? Evidence-based Policy and Practice in Public Services. Bristol,
    Policy Press.
    Parsons, W. (2002) From Muddling Through to Muddling up. Evidence Based Policy-Making
    and the Modernisation of British Government. Public Policy and Administration. 17: 3, 43–60.
    Pawson, R. and Tilley, N. (1997) Realistic Evaluation. London, Sage Publications.
    Plewis, I. (2000) Educational Inequalities and Education Action Zones. in Pantazis, C. and
    Gordon, D. (Eds.) Tackling Inequalities: Where We Are Now and What Can be Done. Bristol,
    Policy Press.
    Richards, D. and Smith, M.J. (2002) Governance and Public Policy in the United Kingdom. Oxford,
    Oxford University Press.
    Robinson, G. (2001) Power, Knowledge and ‘What Works’ in Probation. Howard Journal. 40: 3,
    235–54.
    Sabatier, P. A. (1986) What Can We Learn From Implementation Studies? in Kaufmann, F.X.
    et al. (Eds.) Guidance, Control and Evaluation in the Public Sector. London, Harvester Wheatsheaf.
    Sanderson, I. (2000) Evaluation in Complex Policy Systems. Evaluation. The International Journal
    of Theory, Research and Practice. 6: 4, 433–54.
    Sanderson, I. (2002) Evaluation, Policy Learning and Evidence-based Policy Making. Public
    Administration. 80: 1, 1–22.
    Smith, D. (2000) The Limits of Positivism Revisited. Paper presented at Theorising Social Work
    Conference. London, ESRC.
    Solesbury, W. (2001) Evidence Based Policy: Whence it Came and Where it’s Going. Working Paper 1.
    London, ERSC UK Centre for Evidence Based Policy and Practice. Available online at
    http://www.evidencenetwork.org/Documents/wp1.pdf
    Tilley, N. (2001) Evaluation and Evidence-led Crime Reduction Policy and Practice. in
    Matthews, R. and Pitts, J. (Eds.) Crime, Disorder and Community Safety: A New Agenda. London,
    Routledge.
    Warner, N. (2001) Plenary Session: Restorative Justice and the Youth Justice Board. Address to the
    Conference Restorative and Community Justice: Inspiring the Future Winchester, 28–31
    March.
    Wilcox, A. and Hoyle, C. (forthcoming) Final Report for the Youth Justice Board on the National
    Evaluation of Restorative Justice Projects. London, YJB.

    Depositing User: Sara Taylor
    Date Deposited: 10 Sep 2007
    Last Modified: 28 Jul 2010 19:21
    URI: http://eprints.hud.ac.uk/id/eprint/392

    Document Downloads

    Downloader Countries

    More statistics for this item...

    Item control for Repository Staff only:

    View Item

    University of Huddersfield, Queensgate, Huddersfield, HD1 3DH Copyright and Disclaimer All rights reserved ©