The The Making of Crime Predictions: Sociotechnical Assemblages and the Controversies of Governing Future Crime

IF 1.6 Q2 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY Surveillance & Society Pub Date : 2021-06-25 DOI:10.24908/ss.v19i2.14261
Daniel Edler Duarte
{"title":"The The Making of Crime Predictions: Sociotechnical Assemblages and the Controversies of Governing Future Crime","authors":"Daniel Edler Duarte","doi":"10.24908/ss.v19i2.14261","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We are witnessing an upsurge in crime forecasting software, which supposedly draws predictive knowledge from data on past crime. Although prevention and anticipation are already embedded in the apparatuses of government, going beyond a mere abstract aspiration, the latest innovations hold out the promise of replacing police officers’ “gut feelings” and discretionary risk assessments with algorithmic-powered, quantified analyses of risk scores. While police departments and private companies praise such innovations for their cost-effective rationale, critics raise concerns regarding their potential for discriminating against poor, black, and migrant communities. In this article, I address such controversies by telling the story of the making of CrimeRadar, an app developed by a Rio de Janeiro-based think tank in partnership with private associates and local police authorities. Drawing mostly on Latour’s contributions to the emerging literature on security assemblages, I argue that we gain explanatory and critical leverage by looking into the mundane practices of making and unmaking sociotechnical arrangements. That is, I address the chain of translations through which crime data are collected, organized, and transformed into risk scores. In every step, new ways of seeing and presenting crime are produced, with a significant impact on how we experience and act upon (in)security.","PeriodicalId":47078,"journal":{"name":"Surveillance & Society","volume":"26 4","pages":"199-215"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Surveillance & Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.24908/ss.v19i2.14261","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

We are witnessing an upsurge in crime forecasting software, which supposedly draws predictive knowledge from data on past crime. Although prevention and anticipation are already embedded in the apparatuses of government, going beyond a mere abstract aspiration, the latest innovations hold out the promise of replacing police officers’ “gut feelings” and discretionary risk assessments with algorithmic-powered, quantified analyses of risk scores. While police departments and private companies praise such innovations for their cost-effective rationale, critics raise concerns regarding their potential for discriminating against poor, black, and migrant communities. In this article, I address such controversies by telling the story of the making of CrimeRadar, an app developed by a Rio de Janeiro-based think tank in partnership with private associates and local police authorities. Drawing mostly on Latour’s contributions to the emerging literature on security assemblages, I argue that we gain explanatory and critical leverage by looking into the mundane practices of making and unmaking sociotechnical arrangements. That is, I address the chain of translations through which crime data are collected, organized, and transformed into risk scores. In every step, new ways of seeing and presenting crime are produced, with a significant impact on how we experience and act upon (in)security.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
犯罪预测的制定:社会技术组合与治理未来犯罪的争议
我们正在目睹犯罪预测软件的激增,据说这种软件可以从过去的犯罪数据中提取预测性知识。尽管预防和预测已经嵌入到政府机构中,而不仅仅是一个抽象的愿望,但最新的创新带来了希望,用算法驱动的、量化的风险评分分析取代警察的“直觉”和自由裁量的风险评估。虽然警察部门和私营公司称赞这些创新具有成本效益,但批评者担心它们可能歧视穷人、黑人和移民社区。在这篇文章中,我通过讲述CrimeRadar的制作故事来解决这些争议,CrimeRadar是一款由里约热内卢的一家智库与私人合伙人和当地警方合作开发的应用程序。我主要借鉴拉图尔对新兴安全组合文献的贡献,认为我们通过研究制定和取消社会技术安排的世俗实践,获得了解释性和批判性的杠杆作用。也就是说,我讨论了犯罪数据被收集、组织和转化为风险评分的一系列翻译。在每一步中,都产生了新的看待和呈现犯罪的方式,对我们如何体验和应对安全产生了重大影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Surveillance & Society
Surveillance & Society SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
20.00%
发文量
42
审稿时长
26 weeks
期刊最新文献
Flock of Rogue Drones Surveillance Stories: Imagining Surveillance Futures Ten-Four Asian Embodiment as Victim and Survivor: Surveillance, Racism, and Race during COVID 2020
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1