48 pages : 26 cm
Defining and Defying Organised Crime: Discourse, Perceptions and Reality
β Scribed by Felia Allum, Francesca Longo, Daniela Irrera, Panos A. Kostakos
- Publisher
- Routledge
- Year
- 2010
- Tongue
- English
- Leaves
- 252
- Series
- Routledge Advances in International Relations and Global Politics
- Edition
- 1
- Category
- Library
No coin nor oath required. For personal study only.
β¦ Synopsis
Organized crime is now a major threat to all industrial and non-industrial countries. Using an inter-disciplinary and comparative approach this book examines the nature of this threat. By analysing the existing, official institutional discourse on organized crime it examines whether or not it has an impact on perceptions of the threat and on the reality of organized crime.
The book first part of the book explores both the paradigm and the rationale of policy output in the fight against organized crime, and also exposes the often βhiddenβ internal assumptions embedded in policy making. The second part examines the perceptions of organized crime as expressed by various actors, for example, the general public in the Balkans and in Japan, the criminal justice system in USA and circles within the international scientific community. Finally, the third part provides an overall investigation into the realities of organized crime with chapters that survey its empirical manifestations in various parts of the world.
This book will be of interest to students and scholars of international relations, criminology, security studies and practitioners.
π SIMILAR VOLUMES
Our lives are full of defining moments, but do we recognise them?Β We often fail to appreciate the significance of these moments. At work the pressure can be relentless and we can fail to enjoy theseΒ moments. The author shows how to recognise and appreciate these moments, which in turn helps us to be
<DIV><DIV><P style=''MARGIN: 0pt; WORD-SPACING: 0pt; TEXT-INDENT: 0pt; LINE-HEIGHT: 150%''>In <I>Defining Reality, </I>Edward Schiappa argues that definitional disputes should be treated less as philosophical questions of Βisβ<I> </I>and more as sociopolitical questions of Βought.β Instead of asking