4 results
Working together to increase Australian children’s liking of vegetables: a position statement by the Vegetable Intake Strategic Alliance (VISA)
- David Nicholas Cox, Karen J Campbell, Lynne Cobiac, Claire Gardner, Lucinda Hancock, Gilly A Hendrie, Amber Kelaart, Michelle Lausen, Astrid AAM Poelman, Ros Sambell, Kim M Tikellis, Bonnie Wiggins
-
- Journal:
- Public Health Nutrition / Volume 26 / Issue 11 / November 2023
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 31 July 2023, pp. 2271-2275
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Open access
- HTML
- Export citation
-
Children need to be repeatedly and consistently exposed to a variety of vegetables from an early age to achieve an increase in vegetable intake. A focus on enjoyment and learning to like eating vegetables at an early age is critical to forming favourable lifelong eating habits. Coordinated work is needed to ensure vegetables are available and promoted in a range of settings, using evidence-based initiatives, to create an environment that will support children’s acceptance of vegetables. This will help to facilitate increased intake and ultimately realise the associated health benefits. The challenges and evidence base for a new approach are described.
six - Beyond the penal state: advanced marginality, social policy and anti-welfarism
- Edited by Peter Squires, John Lea, University of Leicester
-
- Book:
- Criminalisation and Advanced Marginality
- Published by:
- Bristol University Press
- Published online:
- 01 September 2022
- Print publication:
- 09 May 2012, pp 107-128
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
Introduction
Loïc Wacquant's extraordinarily extensive writing over recent years has sparked widespread commentary across a range of academic disciplines but notably, for our purposes, in criminology, social policy and urban studies. Many of those commentating on Urban outcasts (2008), Punishing the poor (2009a) and Prisons of poverty (2009b) in the UK and Europe express support for Wacquant's overall analysis and the contributions his insights make to the way we assess and conceptualise neoliberal state-craft, penality, the restructuring of welfare and its implications. In this vein, writers have sought to extend, modify and qualify Wacquant's analysis in the light of empirical observations in a variety of settings, further comparative analysis and theoretical fine-tuning within an overall appreciative framework. We adopt the same kind of stance in this chapter. The themes we explore focus on Wacquant's (2008) work on ‘advanced marginality’, what this means in the contemporary UK and the role of territorial stigmatisation in the production of marginality. This occupies an important position within his overall approach which arguably has not received the same level of attention as some of his other concepts.
Wacquant has placed important emphasis on the interrelationships between social welfare and criminal justice. We explore a number of aspects which are somewhat overlooked by Wacquant – in particular, we highlight that representations of ‘the urban poor’ as a ‘problem’ category in the population (both historically and contemporarily) are significant aspects not only of advanced marginality but also of social policy interventions (understood in their broadest sense). Further, advanced marginality and the construction of particular disadvantaged populations as problematic are also enabled and reinforced by what is increasingly being referred to as ‘poverty porn’ and ‘penal pornography’. Wacquant has given some attention to the latter (2009a, p xii). He observes that:
… [t]he law-and-order merry-go-round is to criminality what pornography is to amorous relations: a mirror deforming reality to the point of the grotesque that artificially extracts delinquent behaviours from the fabric of social relations in which they take root and make sense, deliberately ignores their causes and their meanings, and reduces their treatment to a series of conspicuous position-takings, often acrobatic, sometimes properly unreal, pertaining to the cult of ideal performance rather than to the pragmatic attention to the real. (Wacquant, 2009a, pp xii-xiii)
four - Is urban regeneration criminogenic?
-
- By Lynn Hancock
- Edited by Rowland Atkinson, University of Sheffield, Gesa Helms, University of Glasgow
-
- Book:
- Securing an Urban Renaissance
- Published by:
- Bristol University Press
- Published online:
- 15 September 2022
- Print publication:
- 11 July 2007, pp 57-70
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
This chapter examines some of the taken-for-granted assumptions in the relationship between urban regeneration and crime and disorder reduction and opens them up to critical scrutiny. Against a backdrop where public–private partnerships are vigorously marketing their localities in efforts to secure inward investment, the place of crime and disorder in these imaginaries are outlined. The chapter comments on the assumptions underpinning neighbourhood regeneration and in particular their relationships with crime and disorder reduction strategies in the contemporary setting. It shows how initiatives, which have the ostensible aim of addressing the problems of social exclusion and urban crime and disorder in a ‘holistic’ way, are nevertheless exacerbating, rather than ameliorating, ‘social injustice’ in a range of ways in the contemporary setting with the consequences bearing down disproportionately on the most marginal groups. Indeed, urban regeneration strategies and policies are beset with irresolvable tensions that arise from attempting to marry neoliberal economic policies with a moral communitarian social project. The chapter draws on and applies recent criminological insights, informed by empirical observations from Merseyside, UK, and studies conducted in city-regions elsewhere, to support the view that urban regeneration has both criminogenic and criminalising consequences under current frameworks.
Social inclusion and ‘radical urban policy’
A number of writers have advocated the development of radical urban policies to prevent crime by addressing social injustice, economic exclusion, and political marginality, which lead to crime and victimisation (Donnison, 1995; Hope, 1995). They observed that reliance on the private market for the distribution of goods and services, particularly housing, has meant that those suffering the greatest economic and social hardships increasingly live in close proximity to each other, in the poorest quality housing stock, the concentration of crime closely reflecting poverty and disadvantage (Hope, 1998). The gap between the most disadvantaged and most affluent areas within cities widened between the 1981 and 2001 Censuses. Over these decades, wider social, economic, and political shifts brought in their wake chronic shortages of decent employment opportunities for economically disadvantaged groups and reductions in the value of welfare benefits that further impacted the living conditions of those living in already distressed localities.
thirteen - Community safety and social exclusion
-
- By Lynn Hancock
- Edited by Peter Squires
-
- Book:
- Community Safety
- Published by:
- Bristol University Press
- Published online:
- 15 January 2022
- Print publication:
- 05 July 2006, pp 201-218
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
The links between the risk of criminal victimisation and urban social divisions have been clearly demonstrated using British Crime Survey (BCS) data (Hope, 1996, 1997, 1998, 2001a, 2001b) and other analyses integrating a range of population data with recorded crime statistics, as well as spatially referenced data sources over recent years (Hirschfield et al, 1995). While the relations between disadvantage and victimisation are neither simple nor mechanical, and these data have their limitations, the finding that the most disadvantaged groups are also the most likely to suffer higher levels of property and personal crimes has been firmly established. That more affluent groups in some urban areas (Hope, 2000, 2001b), particularly in inner-city, gentrifying areas (Hirschfield and Bowers, 1995, 1997), also face greater risk than the general population means that New Labour's emphasis on ‘community safety’ and being ‘tough on crime’ and its ‘causes’ resonates with the experience of victimisation for more affluent as well as disadvantaged social groups, alongside the fears of those who face considerably less risk.
The ‘promise’ of ‘community safety’ was attractive to the electorate and many critical commentators. For them, the possibility of addressing a range of harms experienced disproportionately by the less well-off was opened up. However, worries about the narrow, managerial, ‘what works’ agenda, with its focus on ‘crime and disorder reduction’ at the expense of more progressive ideas that align, potentially at least, with ‘community safety’ (Hughes, 2002), emerged with the Crime and Disorder Bill. Nevertheless, the promise of ‘joined-up’ government and the emergence of strategies to address the range of problems faced by disadvantaged communities in the government's commitment to tackle ‘social exclusion’, crystallised in its National Strategy for Neighbourhood Renewal, offered the opportunity to address a range of urban social problems, including crime, ‘holistically’. Some commentators, however, had already expressed concerns about the ‘criminalisation of social policy’ (Squires, 1990; Carlen, 1996), which flowed from the way welfare agencies were increasingly involved in community safety under earlier urban policy frameworks. They observed that, in these circumstances, social exclusion and disadvantage were becoming less important issues in themselves. More and more they were the focus of intervention because of their implications for social disorder and crime (Crawford, 1997; Gilling and Barton, 1997). Others felt that crime-centred policies alone would not address the ‘root causes’ of crime and a focus on the range of urban social problems was, potentially at least, regarded as a gain maker and a step towards ‘social justice’ (Hope, 2001a, pp 435-6).