Regulating the social impacts of studentification: A Loughborough case study

Now a recognised phenomenon in many British cities, studentification is the process by which specific neighbourhoods become dominated by student residential occupation. Outlining the causes and consequences of this process, this paper suggests that studentification raises important questions about community cohesiveness and that intervention may be required by local authorities if social and cultural conflicts are to be avoided. Detailing the social impacts of studentification in Loughborough, a market town in the English East Midlands, the paper accordingly considers recent housing policies designed to prevent the formation of exclusive 'student ghettos. The paper concludes by suggesting that the type of 'threshold analysis' utilised in Loughborough may well spread students more thinly across a city, but that the relationship between students and the wider community requires other forms of regulation if town-university tensions are to be effectively managed. Throughout, comparison is made between the Loughborough and other UK university towns where the challenges and opportunities associated with studentification have been differently addressed

Intersectionality, rural criminology, and re-imaging the boundaries of critical criminology

One of the significant shortcomings of the criminological canon, including its critical strands – feminist, cultural and green – has been its urbancentric bias. In this theoretical model, rural communities are idealised as conforming to the typical small-scale traditional societies based on cohesive organic forms of solidarity and close density acquaintance networks. This article challenges the myth that rural communities are relatively crime free places of ‘moral virtue’ with no need for a closer scrutiny of rural context, rural places, and rural peoples about crime and other social problems. This challenge is likewise woven into the conceptual and empirical narratives of the other articles in this Special Edition, which we argue constitute an important body of innovative work, not just for reinvigorating debates in rural criminology, but also critical criminology. For without a critical perspective of place, the realities of context are too easily overlooked. A new criminology of crime and place will help keep both critical criminology and rural criminology firmly anchored in the sociological and the criminological imagination. We argue that intersectionality, a framework that resists privileging any particular social structural category of analysis, but is cognisant of the power effects of colonialism, class, race and gender, can provide the theoretical scaffolding to further develop such a project

Man to man violence: how masculinity may work as a dynamic risk factor

This article presents masculinity as a dynamic risk factor in offences of violence between men. It argues that existing interventions into such violence, in prison, hospital and community settings may be enhanced by incorporating masculinity as a dynamic risk factor alongside other dynamic risk factors such as difficulties in anger management, social skills deficits or problems in moral reasoning. Masculinity is defined as a common denominator of men, as men, across social divisions, as opposed to existing approaches to men's identity, as men, which employ the concept of different 'masculinities' being produced by men in different social positions. The latter approach, while useful in terms of discovering men's personal identity, may be less useful in terms of explaining commonality between men, across other axes of social identity, and consequent broad patterns of violence between men. The development of masculinity as a dynamic risk factor depends on isolating masculinity from other axes of men's identity. It is argued that the individual man may demonstrate his masculinity by two categories of violence to other men: violence which includes victims in the category 'man' as worthy rivals and violence which excludes victims from the category 'man' as unworthy of being there. Masculinity as a dynamic risk factor in man to man violence is developed with particular reference to racism and homophobia