Research Policies and Their Importance in the Field of Criminal Justice

Research Policies and Their Importance in The Field of Criminal Justice

Name:

Institutional Affiliation:

Research policy development in criminal justice

Policies regarding research in criminal justice seek to provide an evaluation and analysis of crime in the pursuit of providing strategies for its mitigation. Researchers have come up with journals, books, and reviews that show policy analysis in criminal justice and criminology as a whole. The criminal justice system comprises various parts that involve laws and policies which police and other law enforcers implement from the perspectives of juvenile and adult offenders. Using the United States as an example, a recent research examined the practices involved in the criminal justice policy and found out that most of the actions operate under the broad umbrella of criminal justice and occur in realms governed by various sets of policies which are shaped by various factors. This paper transcends into discussing the importance of research and how it contributes to the development of policies in criminal justice in terms of describing these policies, their relationship with research, and so forth.

Purpose and types of policies in criminal justice

        I tend to concur with Bachman & Schutt (2013) who pointed out that there has been an increased level of crime in the United States since the 1980s thereby forming a popular topic in social science research regarding the development of stronger policies. One purpose of these policies is to govern every phenomenon related to crime after researchers develop an explanation for that crime. In the United States, law breakage is often accompanied by imprisonment with more forms of punishments that are more severe than in other nations based on the policies followed. While incarceration may be punitive in the criminal justice system, it is worth noting that this method only captures a single aspect of crime policy without putting much consideration on other policies that could involve the use of death penalty, juvenile treatment and other conditions of imprisonment.

Carp & Stidham (2001) identify various policies that can be used to shape the criminal justice system. These policies include sex offenders policy, drug policy, juvenile justice and so forth. Nevertheless, a variety of factors could be the major influence of these policies, and they may include, minority size, percentage of high school graduates, violent and property crime rates among other factors.

The relationship between research and development of policies.

        Based on how policies evolve, it is worth mentioning that there is need to conduct research periodically to get updated with the new policies. Practically and from an analytical perception, external and internal research, collection of data and policy development have been noted to occur simultaneously and are closely related (National Research Council (U.S.)., 2008). Research has a role to play in policy development while from another perspective policy development also influences research. Researchers interpret research messages into policies and practices with the aim of providing improvement. Nevertheless, the relationship between these two processes still seems to be complex. Policy makers often want clarity in the research messages, relevancy and unequivocal that tend to concur with impending priorities. Since a sound research should take note of social factors, there is need to mirror the complexities and other implications that may come with any research practice as this may hamper effective interpretation of the findings. Most frequently, research is viewed as retrospective and looks back into the entire system together with the outcomes and interventions of the program involved.

        Every office has an input to the process of policy making. Timeliness is critical if the input is to be considered (Hyder et al., 2010). For instance, if a decision has to follow timeliness then it becomes difficult to develop new information to follow an ideal plan. Instead, policymakers summarize already existing information and maybe analyze it in new ways before coming up with a decision. This, therefore implies that policy makers can only use already available research from time to time to make decisions regarding policies. Research informs policy through shaping a common knowledge in the pursuit of coping with an issue.

How research can assist policymakers in decision-making

        It is worth mentioning that policy makers view research as a linear fashion implying that research follows linearity to come up with findings that policy makers can use. This can be referred to as instrumental use of research. Taking a typical example of social care research, some commissioning is often done for the government departments to obtain evidence before finalizing a policy. Many services are paid for since they shape the policy in one way or another. The groups involved in commissioning the research pave the way for a new thought regarding ways in which the evidence can be controlled and shaped to fit the social world. Control in this way is enhanced in three ways that include funding, weight of the content that meets publishing and findings the strongest voice in the evidence being considered. Researchers have a role of advocacy in a way that can influence the formal and informal policies developed by the policy makers (Neocleous, 2000).

        Research clearly addresses a problem and the methods a researcher recommends for addressing the problem should augur well with success required. In a case where this ideal fails to be realized then it turns out that a persuasive approach is required but not in a way that is likely to show that the research is appearing to be compelling.

Policies developed in the past 10 years due to research in criminal justice

        The court has developed policies that in one way or another have impacted the public policy in the field of criminal justice. For instance, the Mapp v. Ohio rule which focused on exclusions had been applied to the state government for a long time. The rule required courts to exclude evidence acquired illegally by police. The police force administrators in most cases and particularly in the urban areas have attempted developing some specific guidelines that their officers can follow to obtain evidence although the efforts have turned out to lack universalness in the application. The different variations in the practices the police follow and the interpretations that differ in courts constitute search of seizure and an implementation that has not yet proven to be successful in the entire United States due to inconsistency (Hyder et al., 2010).