The use of algorithms to predict behaviour is becoming the gold standard in criminal justice in various countries. This article critically analyses the algorithm-driven risk assessment tools used in predictive policing and predictive justice. First, we propose to see algorithms as essentially bureaucratic instruments. They are the digital offspring of the classic bureaucratic procedure, creating classification through standardised and impersonal decision-making. Second, we argue that the application of algorithms in criminal justice expands the bureaucratic field to areas previously understood as bulwarks of professional judgement. Third, we analyse the shift in purpose of algorithmic decision-making: instead of determining a citizen’s status of beneficiary or obligate, we now see algorithmic anticipation of behaviour. This shifts the logic of decision-making over investigations, probations, and sentencing from individual judgement to bureaucratic classification based on the algorithms that are designed into risk assessments tools. This article is both a bureaucratic critique of algorithm-driven risk assessment tools in criminal justice and a call to rethink bureaucracy and bureaucratisation beyond the boundaries of public administration.
Acar,W. & Aupperle,K.E. (1984). Bureaucracy as organizational pathology. Systems Research, 1, 157-166.
2.
Adler,P.S. (2012). The Sociological Ambivalence of Bureaucracy: From Weber via Gouldner to Marx. Organization Science, 23(1), 244-266.
3.
Alvesson,M. & Thompson,P. (2006). Post-bureaucracy?. In S. Ackroyd, R. Batt, P. Thompson & P.S. Tolbert (eds.). The Oxford Handbook of Work and Organization (pp. 485-507). New York: Oxford University Press.
4.
Asquer,A. (2014). Big Data and Innovation in the Delivery of Public Services: The Case of Predictive Policing in Kent. Retrieved from https://ssrn.com/abstract=2429395.
5.
Baehr,P. (2001). The ‘Iron Cage’ and the ‘Shell as Hard as Steel’: Parsons, Weber, and the Stahlhartes Gehäuse Metaphor in the Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism. History and Theory, 40(2), 153-169.
6.
Beck,U. (1986). Risikogesellschaft. Auf dem Weg in eine andere Moderne. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.
7.
Beck,U.Giddens,A. & Lash,S. (1994). Reflexive Modernization. Politics, Tradition and Aesthetics in the Modern Social Order. Oxford: Polity Press.
8.
Bendler,J.Brandt,T.Wagner,S. & Neumann,D. (2014). Investigating Crime-to-Twitter Relationships in Urban Environments – Facilitating a Virtual Neighbourhood Watch. Proceedings of the European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS), Tel Aviv, June 9–11.
9.
Bennett Moses,L. & Chan,J. (2016). Algorithmic Prediction in Policing: Assumptions, Evaluation, and Accountability. Policing and Society: An International Journal of Research and Policy, DOI: 10.1080/10439463.2016.1253695.
10.
Berk,R.A. (2012). Criminal Justice Forecasts of Risk: A Machine Learning Approach. New York: Springer.
11.
Berk,R.A. & Bleich,J. (2013). Statistical Procedures for Forecasting Criminal Behavior. Criminology & Public Policy, 12, 513-544.
12.
Bourdieu,P.Wacquant,L. & Farage,S. (1994). Rethinking the State: Genesis and Structure of the Bureaucratic Field. Sociological Theory, 12(1), 1-18.
13.
Bovens,M. & Zouridis,S. (2002). From Street-Level to System-Level Bureaucracies: How Information and Communication Technology Is Transforming Administrative Discretion and Constitutional Control. Public Administration Review, 62(2), 174-184.
14.
Brucato,B. (2015). Policing Made Visible: Mobile Technologies and the Importance of Point of View. Surveillance & Society, 13, 455-73.
15.
Christin,A.Rosenblat,A. & Boyd,D. (2015). Courts and predictive algorithms. Data & Society. Retrieved from www.datacivilrights.org (consulted: 7-9-2017).
16.
Clear,T.R. & Frost,N.A. (2014). The Punishment Imperative: The Rise and Failure of Mass Incarceration in America. New York: NYU Press.
17.
Clegg,S. & Baumeler,C. (2010). Essai: From Iron Cages to Liquid Modernity in Organization Analysis. Organization Studies, 31(12), 1713-1733.
18.
Clegg,S. & Lounsbury,M. (2009). Weber: Sintering the Iron Cage. Translation, Domination, and Rationality. In P. Adler (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Sociology and Organization Studies: Classical Foundations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
19.
Cordella,A. & Tempini,N. (2015). E-government and organizational change: Reappraising the role of ICT and bureaucracy in public service delivery. Government Information Quarterly, 32(3), 279-286.
20.
Courpasson,D. (2000). Managerial strategies of domination: Power in soft bureaucracies. Organization Studies, 21(1), 141-161.
21.
Courpasson,D. & Clegg,S. (2006). Dissolving the Iron Cages? Tocqueville, Michels, Bureaucracy and the Perpetuation of Elite Power. Organization, 13(3), 319-343.
22.
Crawford,K. (2014). The Anxieties of Big Data. The New Inquiry, 30 May 2014.
23.
Crozier,M. (2010 [1964]). The Bureaucratic Phenomenon. New Brunswick & London: Transaction Publishers.
24.
Dixon,P. & Gellman,R. (2014). The Scoring of America: How Secret Consumer Scores Threaten Your Privacy and Your Future. World Privacy Forum, April 2 2014.
25.
Douglas,T.Pugh,J.Singh,I.Savulescu,J. & Fazel,S. (2017). Risk assessment tools in criminal justice and forensic psychiatry: The need for better data. European Psychiatry, 42, 134-137.
26.
Downs,A. (1967). Inside bureaucracy. New York: Harper Collins Publishers.
27.
Fitzgibbon,D.W. (2008). Fit for purpose? OASys assessments and parole decisions. Probation Journal, 55(1), 55-69.
28.
Gajduschek,G. (2003). Bureaucracy: Is It Efficient? Is It Not? Is That the Question? Uncertainty Reduction: An Ignored Element of Bureaucratic Rationality. Administration & Society, 34(6), 700-723.
29.
Garland,D. (2001). The Culture of Control: Crime and Social Order in Contemporary Society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
30.
Goel,S.Rao,J.M. & Shroff,R. (2016). Personalized Risk Assessments in the Criminal Justice System. American Economic Review: Papers & Proceedings, 106(5), 119-123.
31.
Gouldner,A.W. (1954). Patterns of Industrial Bureaucracy. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.
32.
Habermas,J. (1987). The Theory of Communicative Action. Volume II: Lifeworld and system: A Critique of Functionalist Reason. Cambridge: Polity Press.
33.
Hamilton,M. (2015). Adventures in Risk: Predicting Violent and Sexual Recidivism in Sentencing Law. Arizona State Law Journal, 47(1), 1-62.
Harcourt,B.E. (2005). Against Prediction: Sentencing, Policing, and Punishing in an Actuarial Age. Paper presented at the Criminal Justice Roundtable, Harvard Law School, May 13, 2015.
36.
Harcourt,B.E. (2007). Against Prediction: Profiling, Policing, and Punishing in an Actuarial Age. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
37.
Harcourt,B.E. (2015). Exposed. Desire and Disobedience in the Digital Age. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
38.
Heckscher,C. & Donnellon,A. (eds.) (1994). The Post Bureaucratic Organization: New Perspectives on Organizational Change. London: Sage.
39.
Hodgson,D.E. (2004). Project Work: The Legacy of Bureaucratic Control in the Post-Bureaucratic Organization. Organization, 11(1), 81-100.
40.
Hoogenboom,M. & Ossewaarde,R. (2005). From Iron Cage to Pigeon House: The Birth of Reflexive Authority. Organization Studies, 26(4), 601-619.
41.
Kallinikos,J. (2005). The order of technology: Complexity and control in a connected world. Information and Organization, 15(3), 185-202.
42.
Klagge,J. (1997). Approaches to the Iron Cage: Restructuring the Bars of Weber’s Metaphor. Administration & Society, 29(1), 63-77.
43.
Kleiman,M.Ostrom,B.J. & Cheeman II,F.L. (2007). Using risk assessment to inform sentencing decisions for nonviolent offenders in Virginia. Crime & Delinquency, 53(1), 1-27.
44.
Landsbergen,D. (2004). Screen level bureaucracy: Databases as public records. Government Information Quarterly, 21(1), 24-50.
45.
La Porte,T.M.Demchak,C.C. & Jong,M. de (2002). Democracy and Bureaucracy in the Age of the Web. Administration & Society, 34(4), 411-446.
46.
Malleson,N. & Andresen,M. (2015). The Impact of Using Social Media Data in Crime Rate Calculations: Shifting Hot Spots and Changing Spatial Patterns. Cartography and Geographic Information Science, 42(2), 112-21.
47.
March,J.G. & Olsen,J.P. (1989). Rediscovering Institutions. The organizational basis of politics. New York: Free Press.
48.
Margetts,H. (1999). Information Technology in Government: Britain and America. London: Routledge.
49.
Mayer-Schoenberger,V. & Cukier,K. (2013). Big Data: A Revolution that will transform how we live, work, and think. London: John Murray Publishers.
50.
Meier,K.J. & Hill,G.C. (2007). Bureaucracy in the Twenty-First Century. In: E. Ferlie, L-E. Lynn Jr. & C. Pollitt, The Oxford Handbook of Public Management (pp. 61-71). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
51.
Merton,R.K. (1940). Bureaucratic Structure and Personality. Social Forces, 18(4), 560-568.
52.
Nilsson,T.Munthe,C.Gustavson,C.Forsman,A. & Anckarsäter,H. (2009). The precarious practice of forensic psychiatric risk assessments. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 32(6), 400-407.
53.
OECD (2005). E-Government for better government. Paris: OECD.
54.
O’Malley,P. (2010). Simulated Justice: Risk, Money and Telemetric Policing. The British Journal of Criminology, 50(5), 795-807.
55.
Peeters,R. (2013). The Preventive Gaze: How Prevention Transforms Our Understanding of the State. The Hague: Eleven International Publishing.
56.
Peters,B.G. (2001). The Politics of Bureaucracy: An Introduction to Comparative Public Administration. London & New York: Routledge.
57.
Peters,B.G. (2003). Dismantling and Rebuilding the Weberian State. In J. Hayward & A. Menon, Governing Europe (pp. 113-127). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
58.
Perry,W.L.McInnis,B.Price,C.C.Smith,S.C. & Hollywood,J.S. (2013). Predictive Policing: The Role of Crime Forecasting In Law Enforcement Operations. Santa Monica: RAND Corporation.
Schuilenburg,M. (2015). The Securitization of Society: Crime, Risk, and Social Order. New York: New York University Press.
64.
Schuilenburg,M. (2016). Predictive policing: de opkomst van een gedachtenpolitie? Ars Aequi, 65(12), 931-936.
65.
Schuilenburg,M. & Peeters,R. (2017). Gift Politics: Exposure and Surveillance in the Anthropocene. Crime, Law, and Social Change, 5(68), 563-578.
66.
Simon,J. (1988). The ideological effects of actuarial practices. Law and Society Review, 22(4), 771-800.
67.
Sjöstedt,G. & Grann,M. (2002). Risk Assessment: What is Being Predicted by Actuarial Prediction Instruments? International Journal of Forensic Mental Health, 1(2), 179-183.
68.
Smith,G.J.D.Bennett Moses,L. & Chan,J. (2017). The Challenges of Doing Criminology in the Big Data Era: Towards a Digital and Data-driven Approach. The British Journal of Criminology, 57(2), 259-274.
69.
Smith,G.J.D. & O’Malley,P. (2017). Driving Politics: Data-driven Governance and Resistance. The British Journal of Criminology, 57(2), 275-298.
70.
Tullock,G. (1965). The Politics of Bureaucracy. Washington, DC: Public Affairs Press.
71.
Van Eijk,G. (2017). Socioeconomic marginality in sentencing: The built-in bias in risk assessment tools and the reproduction of social inequality. Punishment & Society, 19(4), 463-481.
72.
Vries,A. de & Smit,S. (2016). Predictive policing: politiewerk aan de hand van voorspellingen. Justitiële verkenningen, 3(42), 9-22.
73.
Wacquant,L. (2004). Pointers on Pierre Bourdieu and Democratic Politics. Constellations, 11(1), 1-15.
74.
Weber,M. (2006a [1921/1922]). Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft. Paderborn: Voltmedia GmbH.
75.
Weber,M. (2006b [1904/1905]). Die protestantische Ethik und der Geist des Kapitalismus. München: Verlag C.H. Beck.
76.
Williams,M.L. & Burnap,P. (2016). Cyberhate on Social Media in the aftermath of Woolwich: A Case Study in Computational Criminology and Big Data. The British Journal of Criminology, 56(2), 211-238.
77.
Williams,M.L.Burnap,P. & Sloan,L. (2017). Crime Sensing With Big Data: The Affordances and Limitations of Using Open-source Communications to Estimate Crime Patterns. British Journal of Criminology, 57(2), 320-340.
78.
Zouridis,S. (2000). Digitale Disciplinering: Over ICT, organisatie, wetgeving en het automatiseren van beschikkingen. Delft: Eburon.
79.
Zuboff,S. (2015). Big other: surveillance capitalism and the prospects of an information civilization. Journal of Information Technology, 30, 75-89.
80.
Zuurmond,A. (1994). De infocratie: een theoretische en empirische heroriëntatie op Weber’s ideaaltype in het informatietijdperk. Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam (diss.).
