IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/crimin/v62y2022i5p1116-1135..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Crime And Punishment: Public Opinion And Political Law-And-Order Rhetoric In Europe 1996–2019

Author

Listed:
  • Susanne Karstedt
  • Rebecca Endtricht

Abstract

This article explores in which ways politicians’ law-and-order rhetoric and citizens’ attitudes and concerns about crime engage with each other in European countries. The focus is on the ‘constructionist’ or ‘framing’ model which posits that citizens’ attitudes about crime and punishment are influenced and ‘framed’ by political rhetoric. We capture the overall ‘tone’ of political rhetoric around crime and criminal justice using law-and-order statements in political party manifestos. Our indicators of crime concerns and punitive sentiment among the public are ‘crime salience’ (crime as the most important problem) and punitive preferences. We link law-and-order statements with survey data from the Eurobarometer and European Social Survey to explore the relationship between citizens and political elites for 26 European countries between 1996 and 2019. In line with previous research, we show that political law-and-order rhetoric indeed provides a framing narrative for citizens but limited to their punitive preferences. In contrast, European citizens’ assessment of crime as a problem is shaped by the level of serious violent crime (homicide) in their country during this period. This suggests a risk-based assessment and an ‘objectivist’ model. We discuss these results in the context of differences between the politization of criminal law in Europe and the United States.

Suggested Citation

  • Susanne Karstedt & Rebecca Endtricht, 2022. "Crime And Punishment: Public Opinion And Political Law-And-Order Rhetoric In Europe 1996–2019," The British Journal of Criminology, Centre for Crime and Justice Studies, vol. 62(5), pages 1116-1135.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:crimin:v:62:y:2022:i:5:p:1116-1135.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/bjc/azac040
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. James Adams & Michael Clark & Lawrence Ezrow & Garrett Glasgow, 2006. "Are Niche Parties Fundamentally Different from Mainstream Parties? The Causes and the Electoral Consequences of Western European Parties' Policy Shifts, 1976–1998," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 50(3), pages 513-529, July.
    2. Peter K Enns & Jacob Harris & John Kenny & Andra Roescu & Will Jennings, 2022. "Public Responsiveness to Declining Crime Rates in the United States and England and Wales," The British Journal of Criminology, Centre for Crime and Justice Studies, vol. 62(5), pages 1093-1115.
    3. Adams, James & Clark, Michael & Ezrow, Lawrence & Glasgow, Garrett, 2004. "Understanding Change and Stability in Party Ideologies: Do Parties Respond to Public Opinion or to Past Election Results?," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 34(4), pages 589-610, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Christopher J Williams, 2016. "Issuing reasoned opinions: The effect of public attitudes towards the European Union on the usage of the 'Early Warning System'," European Union Politics, , vol. 17(3), pages 504-521, September.
    2. Adam, Antonis & Ftergioti, Stamatia, 2019. "Neighbors and friends: How do European political parties respond to globalization?," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 369-384.
    3. Jae-Jae Spoon, 2012. "How salient is Europe? An analysis of European election manifestos, 1979–2004," European Union Politics, , vol. 13(4), pages 558-579, December.
    4. Nguyen, Hung & Breznau, Nate & Heukamp, Lisa, 2021. "Locked Down or Locked In? Institutionalized Public Preferences and Pandemic Policy Feedback in 32 Countries," SocArXiv 7swqe, Center for Open Science.
    5. Edoardo Cefalà, 2022. "The political consequences of mass repatriation," Discussion Papers 2022-05, University of Nottingham, GEP.
    6. Christopher Williams & Jae-Jae Spoon, 2015. "Differentiated party response: The effect of Euroskeptic public opinion on party positions," European Union Politics, , vol. 16(2), pages 176-193, June.
    7. Gaetan Fournier & Alberto Grillo & Yevgeny Tsodikovich, 2023. "Strategic flip-flopping in political competition," Papers 2305.02834, arXiv.org.
    8. Brusco, Sandro & Roy, Jaideep, 2016. "Cycles in public opinion and the dynamics of stable party systems," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 413-430.
    9. Samuel Merrill & Bernard Grofman, 2019. "What are the effects of entry of new extremist parties on the policy platforms of mainstream parties?," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 31(3), pages 453-473, July.
    10. Jelle Koedam, 2021. "Avoidance, ambiguity, alternation: Position blurring strategies in multidimensional party competition," European Union Politics, , vol. 22(4), pages 655-675, December.
    11. Fernando Albornoz & Antonio Cabrales, 2010. "Fiscal Centralization and the Political Process," Working Papers 2010-02, FEDEA.
    12. Benjamin Michallet & Giuseppe Lucio Gaeta & François Facchini, 2015. "Greening Up or Not? The Determinants Political Parties’ Environmental Concern: An Empirical Analysis Based on European Data (1970-2008)," Working Papers 2015.25, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    13. Niklas Potrafke & Marina Riem & Christoph Schinke, 2016. "Debt Brakes in the German States: Governments’ Rhetoric and Actions," German Economic Review, Verein für Socialpolitik, vol. 17(2), pages 253-275, May.
    14. Benjamin Michallet & Giuseppe Gaeta & François Facchini, 2015. "Greening up or not? The determinants of political parties' environmental concern: an empirical analysis based on European data (1970-2008)," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) halshs-01154006, HAL.
    15. Kirill Zhirkov, 2014. "New Political Issues, Niche Parties, And Spatial Voting In Multiparty Systems: Immigration As A Dimension Of Electoral Competition In Scandinavia," HSE Working papers WP BRP 12/PS/2014, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    16. Selim Jürgen Ergun, 2015. "Centrist’S Curse? An Electoral Competition Model With Credibility Constraints," The Singapore Economic Review (SER), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 60(05), pages 1-18, December.
    17. Nam, Hoseok & Konishi, Satoshi & Nam, Ki-Woo, 2021. "Comparative analysis of decision making regarding nuclear policy after the Fukushima Dai-ichi Nuclear Power Plant Accident: Case study in Germany and Japan," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    18. Göhrs, Max & Hubo, Christiane & Krott, Max, 2021. "Partisan theory in forest nature conservation policy: Empirical evidence based on four German conflict issues," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    19. Luigi Curini, 2015. "Explaining party ideological stances," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 162(1), pages 79-96, January.
    20. Apostoaie Constantin-Marius, 2016. "Relevant Determinants of the Political Parties’ Environmental Preference," Scientific Annals of Economics and Business, Sciendo, vol. 63(s1), pages 51-69, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:crimin:v:62:y:2022:i:5:p:1116-1135.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/bjc .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.