Abstract
This edited collection explores what has been a high profile area of criminal and social policy in the United Kingdom since the mid-1990s. Under the New Labour administrations, particularly those of Tony Blair, ‘anti-social behaviour’ was problematized with a range of legal and policy technologies introduced to respond to the issue. The Coalition government continued in this vein with the passage of the Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014. A rich body of academic literature has accompanied these developments including a number of edited collections (see, for example, Flint, 2006; Squires, 2008). This book marks an important new addition to this field of work. It hosts a diverse range of contributors who between them explore a wide subject matter; the breadth befitting such a nebulous concept as ‘anti-social behaviour’. The book focuses on two time periods: the contemporary and Victorian. In doing so, it demonstrates that while the current discourse surrounding ‘anti-social behaviour’ may be relatively new, concerns about incivilities, nuisance and disorder have a long history in Britain.
One of the major contributions of the book is that it provides critical insight into the continuities and discontinuities between the Victorian and contemporary eras. This includes the subjectivity of ‘anti-social behaviour’ and the shifting boundaries of (in)tolerance in which it is framed. A major theme to emerge from the book is that those in positions of power (the state, the middle classes, the corporate world) too often define what is acceptable behaviour to the detriment of those who possess the least power in society (including the poor, the young, the homeless, the gypsy and traveller communities and those with disabilities). Several of the chapters challenge the common usage of the label ‘anti-social’ by arguing that it is the actions of government, the police and big business upon which the label should be more appropriately placed. Sarah Pickard, for example, argues that the police behaved ‘anti-socially’ in their use of tactics such as kettling when policing the student protests of 2010.
A related theme is the moralizing force of government rhetoric around ‘anti-social behaviour’ and policy responses that emphasize responsibilization of the individual and the downplaying of social or structural problems. For the Victorian era, a number of contributors identify a classic liberal laissez-faire approach that emphasized individual responsibility and the limits of state intervention. In the contemporary era contributors identify a neo-liberal philosophy as underlying the approach of the New Labour and Coalition governments. Peter Squires makes a particularly strong case for this in his chapter entitled ‘Anti-social behaviour: Marginality, intolerance and the “usual suspects”’. Stuart Waiton challenges this perspective, arguing that while the Victorian era may have been governed by a classic liberal belief in the individual, we currently live in neither a liberal nor a neo-liberal state. He postulates instead that contemporary policy suggests not a belief in autonomous individuals but of a vulnerable public with citizens now demanding not freedom from the state but protection by it.
The regulation of public space within the urban environment both in the Victorian and contemporary periods is another theme which runs through the book. A number of chapters explore how in the Victorian era commercial interests and the sensibilities of the new urban middle classes combined to increase regulation of pathways and highways, by clamping down on traditional working class uses of these spaces. Other chapters explore how in the contemporary era, both the New Labour and Coalition governments introduced laws to govern public space curtailing its use by those deemed undesirable such as young people, the homeless and protestors.
The collection as a whole omits to engage to any great extent with issues surrounding the potential harm that can be and is caused by ‘anti-social behaviour’ including to individuals who may be vulnerable. Readers approaching the subject from a victimology or Left Realist perspective may potentially find themselves disappointed. This omission is probably a product of the book’s explicitly critical focus, though this need not have prevented a critical consideration of these issues. For example, the timing of the book arguably provided an opportunity for analysis of the Coalition’s stated aim in introducing new legislation of ‘putting victims first’ (Brown, forthcoming; Home Office, 2012).
A strength of the collection is its multi-disciplinary approach to the subject matter. There are contributions from disciplines including sociology, criminology, history and politics. This provides a rich multi-dimensional perspective on both the contemporary and Victorian approaches to ‘anti-social behaviour’. One discipline that is arguably under-represented is law. As an academic lawyer, of course, I would say that, and many of the chapters do touch on legal and socio-legal issues. However, given some of the controversial legal innovation associated with the policing of ‘anti-social behaviour’ in both periods of time, the collection would have benefited from greater exploration of these issues.
The title of the book and indeed its front cover (an image of a ripped union flag) suggests a British wide exploration of ‘anti-social behaviour’. However, the vast majority of chapters focus on experiences in England even if this is not made explicit. A notable exception is a fascinating contribution by Sinead Gormally that explores the complexities, contradictions and risks of being ‘anti-social’ in Northern Ireland. Experiences of and approaches to ‘anti-social behaviour’ differ across the four nations of the United Kingdom (Edwards and Hughes, 2008; Scottish Government, 2009) and the book may have more deserved its title and front cover if a greater number of the contributions had explored this.
Overall, this book makes a significant contribution to knowledge and should be of interest to scholars from a broad range of disciplines.