Department of Social Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, London, UK.
Addiction. 2019 Sep;114(9):1696-1705. doi: 10.1111/add.14609. Epub 2019 Apr 23.
During the past three decades an expansive literature has emerged that is dedicated to analysing the processes of policy transfer. One neglected pathway involves subnational agents emulating crime control innovations that have emerged in subnational jurisdictions of other nations. This paper presents the case of the London Mayor's Office for Policing and Crime's (MOPAC) Alcohol Abstinence Monitoring Requirement (AAMR) Pilot to examine the multi-level factors that facilitate and/or constrain international-subnational crime and justice policy transfer.
A qualitative case study design reconstructed the (in)formal events that led to components of the South Dakota 24/7 Sobriety Project (USA) being either abandoned or integrated into MOPAC's AAMR Pilot. Evidence is drawn from elite interviews and documentary materials.
A series of inter/transnational-, macro-domestic-, meso- and micro-level factors enabled and/or obstructed processes of complete international-subnational policy transfer. Exclusion of domestic violence perpetrators from the London Pilot was fuelled by interest-group hostility and mobilization. Use of alcohol tags rather than breathalysers to monitor compliance was a result of political-economic constraints, concern surrounding intrusion, technological innovation and policy-orientated learning. The decision to omit an 'offender pays' funding mechanism was a consequence of legal incompatibility and civil service reluctance, while 'flash incarceration' for breach was not implemented due to European policy harmonization.
The London Alcohol Abstinence Monitoring Requirement Pilot was a policy 'synthesis' that combined ideas, goals, vocabulary, principles, technology and practices from the South Dakota model with the existing English and Welsh criminal justice framework. Structural factors and the actions of particular agents limited the extent to which policy transfer occurred.
在过去的三十年中,出现了大量专门分析政策转移过程的文献。一个被忽视的途径是,次国家行为者模仿其他国家的次国家管辖区出现的犯罪控制创新。本文介绍了伦敦市长警务和犯罪办公室(MOPAC)戒酒监测要求(AAMR)试点的情况,以考察促进和/或限制国际-次国家犯罪和司法政策转移的多层次因素。
采用定性案例研究设计,重建了导致南达科他州 24/7 清醒项目(美国)的部分内容被放弃或纳入 MOPAC 的 AAMR 试点的(非正式)事件。证据来自于精英访谈和文件材料。
一系列跨国/国内、宏观国内、中观和微观层面的因素促进和/或阻碍了完整的国际-次国家政策转移。将伦敦试点中的家庭暴力犯罪者排除在外,是由于利益集团的敌意和动员。使用酒精标签而不是呼气酒精测试器来监测合规性是政治经济限制、对侵犯隐私的担忧、技术创新和政策导向学习的结果。决定省略“罪犯付费”的资金机制是由于法律不兼容和公务员的不情愿,而违反规定的“闪电监禁”则没有实施,因为这与欧洲政策协调一致。
伦敦戒酒监测要求试点是一个政策“综合”,它将南达科他州模式的思想、目标、词汇、原则、技术和实践与现有的英国和威尔士刑事司法框架相结合。结构因素和特定行为者的行动限制了政策转移的程度。