Divergent mind-sets, convergent policies: Policing models against organized crime in Italy and in England within international frameworks

The fight against organized crime is a very fertile ground for policymaking at various levels. On one side, because of the perceived transnationality of the phenomenon, national states are inclined to develop harmonized responses within the European or international law frameworks. On the other side, national conceptualizations and manifestations of organized crime often make these harmonizations quite challenging. This paper shares the findings of a socio-legal investigation carried out in England and in Italy through interviews and document analysis, comparing the two national models against organized crime. The paper presents these two models ? the Italian Structure Model and the English Activity Model, which are very different in many ways ? in order to identify divergences and convergences of policies and practices. This comparative exercise not only improves our understanding of national approaches, beyond cultural, linguistic and legal boundaries, but also improves the dialogue towards concerted efforts at the international level. Nevertheless, the globalization of criminal markets and the internationalization of policies have influenced perceptions of organized crime and related policing tactics at national levels too. This paper will briefly look at international perspectives to assess to what extent divergent and convergent areas between the two models are also areas of interest and focus at the international level, in order to conclude with an enhanced understanding of both models before drawing conclusions

The Politics of ‘Transnational Organized Crime’: Discourse, Reflexivity and the Narration of ‘Threat’

Over the past decade the perceived 'threat' of transnational organised crime (TOC) to the security of western political economies has become a principal issue on the agendas of key international forums such as the United Nations, G7/8 elite industrial countries and the Council of Europe. The intense policy activity around this threat is indicative of a key trend in post-Cold War international relations, that is, the reorientation of western security, intelligence and defence agencies toward crime control. Risk assessments and research evidence provided by international relations departments in higher education institutions, especially in the USA, have been particularly influential in providing the rationale for this reorientation. It is argued here, however, that there is a danger of intellectuals being drawn into the legitimisation of policies the terms of which are defined for them rather than by them. This jeopardises the critical contribution which academic research can make to policy change and learning, in particular it precludes a more reflexive approach to 'evidence-based' government. The paper draws upon discourse analysis and the study of 'governmentality' to develop a more reflexive interrogation of the assumptions underpinning this policy-shift in post-Cold War international relations. This is exemplified through an analysis of the two principal competing discourses on the threat of TOC and these are distinguished in terms of their focus on 'criminologies of the other' and 'criminologies of the self'. The former narrates threats to security in terms of external, nationally and ethnically defined, pressures. The later perceive threats more in terms of the internal challenges now facing 'sovereign' governments struggling to command highly diverse, dynamic and complex social-political problems like organised crime. The ways in which these competing discourses constrain and enable alternative policy responses to TOC are examined