The interest in crime prevention on the part of international organizations raises important questions about the usefulness of criminological knowledge in the policy-making context. Two models can be identified: the evidence-based model, advocated by the Campbell Collaboration, and the reflexive model, envisioned by George Soros’s Open Society foundations network. Although both models reference ideas of Karl Popper, neither makes full use of his social philosophy. Popper has more to offer criminology than the idea of falsification. His concepts of social situation, social tinkering, and open society emphasize the important methodological principle of learning from mistakes. If policy makers, and the criminologists who hope to advise them, are interested in pursuing crime prevention within a multinational open society, they should take into account the self-organizing aspect of science, the normality of accidents in social affairs, and the politics of social science research.
Akpokodje, J., Bowles, R., & Tigere, E. (2002). Evidence-based approaches to crime prevention in developing countries. London: Department for International Development.
2.
Belina, B., & Helms, G. (2003). Zero tolerance for the industrial past and other threats: Policing and the urban entrepreneurialism in Britain and Germany. Urban Studies, 40, 1845-1867.
3.
Bennett, T. (1991). The effectiveness of a police initiated fear reduction strategy. British Journal of Criminology, 31, 1-14.
4.
Bennett, T. (1996). What’s new in evaluation research?British Journal of Criminology, 36, 567-573.
5.
Borger, J. (2003, November 12). Financier George Soros puts millions into ousting Bush. The Guardian, p.6.
6.
Bratton, W. (1997). Crime is down in New York City: Blame the police. In N. Dennis (Ed.), Zero tolerance: Policing a free society (pp. 29-43). London: Institute of Economic Affairs.
7.
Chmielewski, A., & Popper, K. (1999). The future is open: A conversation. In I. Jarvie & S. Pralong (Eds.), Popper’s open society after fifty years (pp. 28-37). London: Routledge.
8.
Christie, N. (2000). Crime control as industry. London: Routledge.
9.
D’Amico, R. (1990-1991). Karl Popper and the Frankfurt School. Telos, 86, 33-49.
10.
de Waard, J. (2002). The European Crime Prevention Network (EUCPN). Brussels, Belgium: Directorate-General Justice and Home Affairs.
11.
Dickersin, K., & Manheimer, E. (1998). The Cochrane Collaboration: Evaluation of the health care and services using systematic reviews of the results of randomized trials. Clinical Obstetrics and Gynecology, 41, 315-331.
12.
Farrington, D. (1999). A criminological research agenda for the next millennium. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 43, 154-167.
13.
Farrington, D. (2000). Explaining and preventing crime: The globalization of knowledge. Criminology, 38, 1-24.
14.
Farrington, D., & Petrosino, A. (2001). The Campbell Collaboration Crime and Justice Group. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 578, 35-49.
15.
Feder, L., & Boruch, R. (2000). The need for experiments in criminal justice settings. Crime & Delinquency, 46, 291-294.
16.
Gant, F., & Grabosky, P. (2000). The promise of crime prevention. Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology.
17.
Garland, D. (2001). The culture of control. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
18.
Giddens, A. (1998). The third way: The renewal of social democracy. Cambridge, UK: Polity.
19.
Giddens, A. (2000). The third way and its critics. Cambridge, UK: Polity.
20.
Gombrich, E. (1999). Personal recollections on the publication of The Open Society. In I. Jarvie & S. Pralong (Eds.), Popper’s open society after fifty years (pp. 17-27). London: Routledge.
21.
Griggs, R. (2002). Lessons from local crime prevention. Newlands, New Zealand: Open Society Foundation for South Africa.
22.
Hacohen, M. (1996). Karl Popper in exile: The Viennese progressive imagination in the making of The Open Society. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 26, 452-492.
23.
Hacohen, M. (1998). Karl Popper, the Vienna circle, and Red Vienna. Journal of the History of Ideas, 59, 711-734.
24.
Hacohen, M. (2000). Karl Popper: The formative years, 1902-1945. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
25.
Heilman, U. (2003, November 28). The sound and the fury. Jerusalem Post, p.15.
26.
Hunsley, T. (2002). Crime prevention in an age of insecurity. Montreal, Quebec, Canada: International Centre for the Prevention of Crime.
27.
Jarvie, I. (2001). The republic of science: The emergence of Karl Popper’s social view of science. Amsterdam: Rodopi.
28.
Karstedt, S. (2002). Durkheim, Tarde and beyond: The global travel of crime policies. Criminal Justice, 2, 111-123.
29.
Kaufman, M. (2002). Soros: The life and times of a messianic billionaire. New York: Knopf.
30.
King, M. (1989). Social crime prevention a la Thatcher. Howard Journal of Criminal Justice, 28, 291-312.
31.
King, M. (2000). Do British criminologists really “lose their critical faculties?” A reply to Adam Crawford. Social Work in Europe, 7, 55-58.
32.
Laycock, G., & Clarke, R. (2001). Crime prevention policy and government research: A comparison of the United States and United Kingdom. International Journal of Comparative Sociology, 42, 235-255.
33.
Milner, M. (2002, December 21). Soros £1.4 million fine for insider trading. The Guardian, pp. 3-4.
34.
Notturno, M. (1998). Truth, rationality, and the situation. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 2, 400-421.
35.
Notturno, M. (1999). The open society and its enemies: Authority, community, and bureaucracy. In I. Jarvie & S. Pralong (Eds.), Popper’s open society after fifty years (pp. 41-55). London: Routledge.
36.
Nuttall, C., Goldblatt, P., & Lewis, C. (1998). Reducing offending: An assessment of research evidence on ways of dealing with offending behaviour. London: Home Office.
37.
Oakley, A. (1999). Economics and the origin of Popper’s situational analysis. History of Economics Review, 30, 25-40.
38.
Orleans, M. (1995). The Cochrane Collaboration. Public Health Reports, 110, 633-634.
39.
Pawson, R., & Tilley, N. (1994). What works in evaluation research?British Journal of Criminology, 34, 291-306.
40.
Pawson, R., & Tilley, N. (1996). What’s crucial in evaluation research: A reply to Bennett. British Journal of Criminology, 36, 574-578.
41.
Pawson, R., & Tilley, N. (1997). Realistic evaluation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
42.
Petrosino, A., Boruch, R., Soydan, H., Duggan, L., & Sanchez-Meca, J. (2001). Meeting the challenges of evidence-based policy: The Campbell Collaboration. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 578, 14-34.
43.
Popper, K. (1945). The open society and its enemies. London: Routledge.
44.
Popper, K. (1960). The poverty of historicism. London: Routledge.
45.
Popper, K. (1983). Piecemeal social engineering. In D. Miller (Ed.), A pocket Popper (pp. 304-318). London: Fontana.
46.
Popper, K. (1992). In the search of a better world: Lectures and essays from thirty years. London: Routledge.
47.
Popper, K. (1994). The myth of the framework: In defense of science and rationality. London: Routledge.
48.
Science and technology: Try it and see. (2002, February 28). The Economist, p.9.
49.
Sherman, L., Farrington, D., MacKenzie, D., & Welsh, B. (Eds.). (2002). Evidence-based crime prevention. London: Routledge.
50.
Sherman, L., Gottfredson, D., MacKenzie, D., Eck, J., Reuter, P., & Bushway, S. (1998). Preventing crime: What works, what doesn’t, what’s promising. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.
51.
Soros, G. (1995). Soros on Soros: Staying ahead of the curve. New York: John Wiley.
52.
Soros, G. (1997). The capitalist threat. Atlantic Monthly, 279, 45-58.
53.
Soros, G. (1998). Toward a global open society. Atlantic Monthly, 281, 20-24.
54.
Soros, G. (2002). Open society: Reforming global capitalism. London: Little, Brown.
55.
Sparks, R., & Newburn, T. (2002). How does crime policy travel?Criminal Justice, 2, 107-109.
56.
Stewart-Clark, J. (1997). Crime prevention in the European Union. European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research, 5, 43-48.
57.
Stokes, G. (1997). Karl Popper’s political philosophy of social science. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 27, 56-79.
58.
Stokes, G. (1998). Popper: Philosophy, politics, and scientific method. Cambridge, UK: Polity.
59.
Sutton, A., & Cherney, A. (2002). Prevention without politics? The cyclical process of crime prevention in an Australian state. Criminal Justice, 2, 325-344.
60.
Tilley, N. (2000). Experimentation and criminal justice policies in the United Kingdom. Crime & Delinquency, 46, 194-213.
61.
Tilley, N. (2002). The rediscovery of learning: Crime prevention and scientific realism. In G. Hughes & A. Edwards (Eds.), Crime control and community: The new politics of public safety (pp. 63-85). Cullompton, UK: Willan.
62.
Tilley, N. (2004). Karl Popper: A philosopher for Ronald Clarke’s situational crime prevention? In S. G. Shoham & P. Knepper (Eds.), Tradition and innovation in Israeli criminal justice: Israel studies in criminology (Vol. 8, pp. 39-56). Toronto, Ontario, Canada: de Sitter.
63.
Vaughan, D. (1996). The Challenger launch decision. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
64.
Visher, C., & Weisburd, D. (1998). Identifying what works: Recent trends in crime prevention strategies. Crime, Law and Social Change, 28, 223-242.
65.
Waller, I., & Sansfaçon, D. (2000). Investing wisely in crime prevention: International experiences. Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Assistance.
66.
Watkins, J. (1972). Social knowledge and the public interest. In W. A. Robson (Ed.), Man and the social sciences (pp. 175-196). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
67.
Weisburd, D. (2000). Randomized experiments in criminal justice policy: Prospects and problems. Crime & Delinquency, 46, 181-193.
68.
Welsh, B., & Farrington, D. (2001). Toward an evidence-based approach to preventing crime. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 578, 158-173.
69.
Zedner, L. (2003). Useful knowledge? Debating the role of criminology in post-war Britain. In L. Zedner & A. Ashworth (Eds.), The criminological foundations of penal policy (pp. 197-235). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
