Social and Academic Context
Emerging during a period of massive societal upheaval—including civil rights movements, anti-colonial struggles, and student protests—The New CriminologyThe scientific study of crime, criminal behavior, prevention, and societal reactions to deviance within and beyond the criminal justice system. reflects the desire for a sociology that not only explains but also transforms the world. The authors take a clear stance against the dominant American sociology of the 1960s and advocate for a structurally informed, critically emancipatory criminology.
Key Points
Taylor, Walton & Young – The New Criminology
Main Authors: Ian Taylor, Paul Walton, Jock Young
First Published: 1973
Country: United Kingdom
Core Idea: Development of a “fully social” critical criminology that considers both the structural roots and the subjective meanings of deviance. Integration of Marxist social critique with interactionist approaches to the social construction of crime.
Theoretical Connections: MarxismA socio-economic theory that analyzes class struggle, capitalism, and historical materialism as drivers of social change. (capitalism and domination), Labeling Approach (social construction of deviance), Critical Theory (Frankfurt SchoolAn intellectual movement that developed Critical Theory to analyze power, ideology, and domination in modern societies.), AnomieA state of normlessness in which social norms lose their power to regulate individual behavior. Theory and Subcultural Theories
Core Arguments and Contributions
- Critique of traditional approaches: Taylor, Walton, and Young reject deterministic theories such as anomie or subcultural theory, but also criticize seemingly progressive approaches like the labeling theory for lacking a structural critique of society.
- Development of a “fully social” theory of crime: The authors call for an integrated theory that accounts for both the social-structural conditions and the conscious actions of offenders. This includes:
- the societal origins of rule creation,
- the motives and meanings for the offenders,
- the social reactions to the act,
- and the overall effects on the social system.
- Marxist foundation: CrimeActs or omissions that violate criminal laws and are punishable by the state. is seen as an expression of contradictions and power imbalances in society. The focus is placed on domination, ideology, and class structures.
- Criminology as social praxis: The goal is not merely understanding, but social change. Criminological research should contribute to the liberation from oppression and help create a more just society.
The Nine Elements of the “Fully Social Theory of Deviance”
In The New Criminology (1973), Taylor, Walton, and Young propose a comprehensive theory of deviance. They argue that crime must be understood through an integrative framework that includes the following nine elements:
- Origins of rule-making: Who defines what counts as deviant? (e.g., societal power relations, ideology)
- Origins of the immediate social context: In what socio-economic setting does the deviant act occur?
- The act itself: What are the subjective motives and meanings for the actor?
- Immediate reaction of others: How do peers and social surroundings respond to the act?
- Societal reaction: What official sanctions follow (e.g., police, judiciary)?
- Effect of reaction on the actor: How does labeling impact the self-image and biography of the individual?
- Structural origins of the societal reaction: Why do institutions react in this way? What role do political, economic, and ideological factors play?
- Development of a deviant career: How does a deviant life course evolve over time?
- Wider societal context: How is the social system organized? What role does social structure play?
These elements underscore the need for a theory that integrates both micro-level (action, meaning) and macro-level (power, structure) perspectives.
Etiological vs. Critical Criminology Compared
The “critical criminology” developed by Taylor, Walton, and Young explicitly distinguishes itself from classical etiological approaches, which see crime primarily as individual misconduct. While etiological theories search for the causes of deviance within the individual (e.g., in socialization, personality, or environment), the critical perspective shifts the focus to power relations, norm-setting processes, and the function of criminal law within capitalist societies.
The following table offers a systematic comparison of both perspectives:
Etiological vs. Critical Criminology Compared
| Dimension | Etiological Criminology | Critical CriminologyA perspective that examines power, inequality, and social justice in understanding crime and the criminal justice system. |
|---|---|---|
| Understanding of Crime | Crime as individual misconduct or maladaptation | Crime as a social construct and expression of structural inequality |
| Cause Analysis | Search for causes within the individual or immediate environment | Analysis of political, economic, and ideological conditions of deviance |
| Analytical Focus | Offender-centered; emphasis on socialization, personality, environment | Society-centered; focus on social control, labeling, power |
| Objective | Explanation, prediction, and control of deviant behavior | Exposure and critique of social inequalities and institutional interests |
| Theoretical Roots | Empirical-quantitative, behaviorist, psychological, positivist | Marxist, conflict-theoretical, sociologically informed |
Example Application: White-Collar Crime
The analysis of white-collar crime exemplifies the authors’ approach: While classical theories often ignore or depoliticize such offenses, critical criminology highlights structural interests, legal loopholes, and the symbolic power to define. Crime is thus revealed as a socially selective construct.
Criticism and Reception
The New Criminology sparked intense debate. Supporters praised its theoretical ambition and political momentum, while critics pointed to its lack of empirical grounding, theoretical vagueness, and ideological bias. Nevertheless, the book is considered foundational for several subsequent developments—including the debates on left realism, cultural criminology, and queer or feminist criminology.
Further Thinking: Critical Criminology Beyond the 1970s
In the decades following the publication of The New Criminology, critical criminology has evolved into a diverse field that continues to resist the technocratic rationality of so-called “administrative criminology.”
Contemporary critical scholars such as David Garland, Loïc Wacquant, and Jonathan Simon emphasize that punishment and criminal justice are not merely tools of social order but instruments of social control, exclusion, and neoliberal governance. In this view, crime control becomes a political strategy to manage insecurity, inequality, and dissent.
Organizations like the European Group for the Study of Deviance and Social ControlSocial control refers to the mechanisms, strategies, and processes societies use to regulate individual behavior and maintain social order. and the Critical Criminology Division of the ASC uphold the tradition of a criminology that is emancipatory, structurally informed, and socially engaged. They continue to challenge the reduction of criminological research to predictive models, risk management, and state-centered policies.
- Loïc Wacquant – Punishing the Poor (2009)
- David Garland – The CultureThe shared symbols, beliefs, values, and practices of a group or society. of Control (2001)
- Jonathan Simon – Governing Through Crime (2007)
References
- Taylor, I., Walton, P. & Young, J. (1973). The New Criminology: For a Social Theory of Deviance. London: Routledge.
- Walton, P. & Young, J. (1998). The New Criminology Revisited. London: Macmillan Press. [available here as full text]
- Scraton, P. (2007). Power, Conflict and Criminalisation. London: Routledge.
- Young, J. (1999). The Exclusive Society: Social Exclusion, Crime and Difference in Late Modernity. London: Sage.
