The "Desert" Model for Sentencing: Its Influence, Prospects, and Alternatives
Explores the choice of sentencing rationale that ought to follow as the influence of penal rehabilitation has diminished in sentencing theory, seeking to link that choice to the larger normative aspirations to be pursued for sentencing reform. Focus is on the proportionalist or "desert" mo...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Social research 2007-06, Vol.74 (2), p.413-434 |
---|---|
1. Verfasser: | |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 434 |
---|---|
container_issue | 2 |
container_start_page | 413 |
container_title | Social research |
container_volume | 74 |
creator | von Hirsch, Andrew |
description | Explores the choice of sentencing rationale that ought to follow as the influence of penal rehabilitation has diminished in sentencing theory, seeking to link that choice to the larger normative aspirations to be pursued for sentencing reform. Focus is on the proportionalist or "desert" model of sentencing that gained traction in the late 1970s-1980s US & Western Europe. The origins of the desert model are traced, touching on objections to traditional versions of retributive punishment, & the centrality of the principle of proportionality to the model is noted. The desert model's implementation is discussed; it is stated that while influential among academics, the model's implementation is limited, with many US & European jurisdictions sticking with traditional discretionary sentencing schemes. However, proportionalist sentencing has persisted; reasons behind its attractiveness are examined. Attention then turns to Michael Tonry's (2007) assertion that proportionalist sentencing schemes are unsustainable, & an effort is made to discover where the problems lie & why. Tonry's suggestion for a revised normative framework to replace the desert model are assessed in terms of whether it satisfies a trio of aspirations for sentencing reform centered on the primary importance of justice, the moderation of sanction severity, & adequate & principled guidance. References. D. Edelman |
doi_str_mv | 10.1353/sor.2007.0040 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>gale_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_61684736</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A168397559</galeid><jstor_id>40971938</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>A168397559</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c702t-601b038c24040c7d48a6cb490cf78ce49f271bac21f578058da33afefeafc28e3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNk9GLEzEQxhdRsJ4--igsBQXhtk422U1yb7VqLfQ8oSfcW0jTSd2S7tYkFf3vzdLT46RwJQ-B8PtmJjPfZNlLAiNCK_oudH5UAvARAINH2YBIxgpei5vH2QCA8oILevM0exbCBgCIADnILq-_Yz78gAF9HOaX3QpdbjufL7CN2JqmXV_ksxjyWWvdPj3gef7Vd2GHJobzXLerfOwi-lbH5ieG59kTq13AF7f3Wfbt08fryedifjWdTcbzwnAoY1EDWQIVpmSpUMNXTOjaLJkEY7kwyKQtOVlqUxJbcQGVWGlKtUWL2ppSID3L3hzi7nz3Y48hqm0TDDqnW-z2QdWkFozT-mEQaAm8EieARHIq-INgxaHikvXg8D9w0-1To1xQJciaAxd9fcUBWmuHqmltF702a2zRa9e1aJv0PE6_oZJXlUz86Aifzgq3jTkqeHtPkJiIv-Ja70NQs8WX09n305NZMZ3fZ4tjrOmcwzWq5IzJ1VHeJKcFj1btfLPV_rcioHqnq-R01Ttd9U5P_OvbTutgtLNeJ-OGO5EERlLLE8f-TWSTDLzdB7wbSlXyqmRq0W9NvzTAUwaQJMleHWSbEFPev2EZSE4kFfQPE4wROw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>209670786</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>The "Desert" Model for Sentencing: Its Influence, Prospects, and Alternatives</title><source>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</source><source>Business Source Complete</source><source>Sociological Abstracts</source><source>Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA)</source><source>Jstor Complete Legacy</source><source>Political Science Complete</source><creator>von Hirsch, Andrew</creator><creatorcontrib>von Hirsch, Andrew</creatorcontrib><description><![CDATA[Explores the choice of sentencing rationale that ought to follow as the influence of penal rehabilitation has diminished in sentencing theory, seeking to link that choice to the larger normative aspirations to be pursued for sentencing reform. Focus is on the proportionalist or "desert" model of sentencing that gained traction in the late 1970s-1980s US & Western Europe. The origins of the desert model are traced, touching on objections to traditional versions of retributive punishment, & the centrality of the principle of proportionality to the model is noted. The desert model's implementation is discussed; it is stated that while influential among academics, the model's implementation is limited, with many US & European jurisdictions sticking with traditional discretionary sentencing schemes. However, proportionalist sentencing has persisted; reasons behind its attractiveness are examined. Attention then turns to Michael Tonry's (2007) assertion that proportionalist sentencing schemes are unsustainable, & an effort is made to discover where the problems lie & why. Tonry's suggestion for a revised normative framework to replace the desert model are assessed in terms of whether it satisfies a trio of aspirations for sentencing reform centered on the primary importance of justice, the moderation of sanction severity, & adequate & principled guidance. References. D. Edelman]]></description><identifier>ISSN: 0037-783X</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1944-768X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1944-768X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1353/sor.2007.0040</identifier><identifier>CODEN: SORSAT</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York, NY: Graduate Faculty of Political and Social Science, New School for Social Research</publisher><subject>Administration of justice ; Arid zones ; Case law ; Censure ; Corrective justice ; Crime ; Criminal justice ; Criminal law ; Criminal punishment ; Criminal records ; Criminal sentences ; Criminal sentencing ; Criminal sociology. Police. Delinquency. Deviance. Suicide ; Criminals ; Deviance ; Europe ; Evaluation ; Fines & penalties ; Government regulation ; Hirsch, Julian ; Imprisonment ; Jurisdiction ; Justice ; Justice, Administration of ; Laws, regulations and rules ; Mandatory minimum sentences ; Medical treatment ; Negotiation ; Politics ; Principles ; Prison sentences ; Punishment ; Rationality ; Roberts, Anthony ; Sanctions ; Sentencing ; Sentencing guidelines ; Social research ; Sociology ; Sociology of law and criminology ; Sociology of law and justice ; States ; Traditions ; United States ; United States of America ; USA ; von Hirsch, Andrew ; What and How We Punish: Law, Justice, and Punishment</subject><ispartof>Social research, 2007-06, Vol.74 (2), p.413-434</ispartof><rights>Copyright 2007 The New School</rights><rights>Copyright © New School University</rights><rights>2008 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>COPYRIGHT 2007 New School for Social Research</rights><rights>Copyright New School for Social Research, Graduate Faculty Summer 2007</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c702t-601b038c24040c7d48a6cb490cf78ce49f271bac21f578058da33afefeafc28e3</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/40971938$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/40971938$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>309,310,314,778,782,787,788,801,12832,23917,23918,25127,27331,27911,27912,30987,33761,33762,58004,58237</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=19041209$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>von Hirsch, Andrew</creatorcontrib><title>The "Desert" Model for Sentencing: Its Influence, Prospects, and Alternatives</title><title>Social research</title><addtitle>Social Research</addtitle><description><![CDATA[Explores the choice of sentencing rationale that ought to follow as the influence of penal rehabilitation has diminished in sentencing theory, seeking to link that choice to the larger normative aspirations to be pursued for sentencing reform. Focus is on the proportionalist or "desert" model of sentencing that gained traction in the late 1970s-1980s US & Western Europe. The origins of the desert model are traced, touching on objections to traditional versions of retributive punishment, & the centrality of the principle of proportionality to the model is noted. The desert model's implementation is discussed; it is stated that while influential among academics, the model's implementation is limited, with many US & European jurisdictions sticking with traditional discretionary sentencing schemes. However, proportionalist sentencing has persisted; reasons behind its attractiveness are examined. Attention then turns to Michael Tonry's (2007) assertion that proportionalist sentencing schemes are unsustainable, & an effort is made to discover where the problems lie & why. Tonry's suggestion for a revised normative framework to replace the desert model are assessed in terms of whether it satisfies a trio of aspirations for sentencing reform centered on the primary importance of justice, the moderation of sanction severity, & adequate & principled guidance. References. D. Edelman]]></description><subject>Administration of justice</subject><subject>Arid zones</subject><subject>Case law</subject><subject>Censure</subject><subject>Corrective justice</subject><subject>Crime</subject><subject>Criminal justice</subject><subject>Criminal law</subject><subject>Criminal punishment</subject><subject>Criminal records</subject><subject>Criminal sentences</subject><subject>Criminal sentencing</subject><subject>Criminal sociology. Police. Delinquency. Deviance. Suicide</subject><subject>Criminals</subject><subject>Deviance</subject><subject>Europe</subject><subject>Evaluation</subject><subject>Fines & penalties</subject><subject>Government regulation</subject><subject>Hirsch, Julian</subject><subject>Imprisonment</subject><subject>Jurisdiction</subject><subject>Justice</subject><subject>Justice, Administration of</subject><subject>Laws, regulations and rules</subject><subject>Mandatory minimum sentences</subject><subject>Medical treatment</subject><subject>Negotiation</subject><subject>Politics</subject><subject>Principles</subject><subject>Prison sentences</subject><subject>Punishment</subject><subject>Rationality</subject><subject>Roberts, Anthony</subject><subject>Sanctions</subject><subject>Sentencing</subject><subject>Sentencing guidelines</subject><subject>Social research</subject><subject>Sociology</subject><subject>Sociology of law and criminology</subject><subject>Sociology of law and justice</subject><subject>States</subject><subject>Traditions</subject><subject>United States</subject><subject>United States of America</subject><subject>USA</subject><subject>von Hirsch, Andrew</subject><subject>What and How We Punish: Law, Justice, and Punishment</subject><issn>0037-783X</issn><issn>1944-768X</issn><issn>1944-768X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2007</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7UB</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AIMQZ</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>BHHNA</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><sourceid>7QJ</sourceid><recordid>eNqNk9GLEzEQxhdRsJ4--igsBQXhtk422U1yb7VqLfQ8oSfcW0jTSd2S7tYkFf3vzdLT46RwJQ-B8PtmJjPfZNlLAiNCK_oudH5UAvARAINH2YBIxgpei5vH2QCA8oILevM0exbCBgCIADnILq-_Yz78gAF9HOaX3QpdbjufL7CN2JqmXV_ksxjyWWvdPj3gef7Vd2GHJobzXLerfOwi-lbH5ieG59kTq13AF7f3Wfbt08fryedifjWdTcbzwnAoY1EDWQIVpmSpUMNXTOjaLJkEY7kwyKQtOVlqUxJbcQGVWGlKtUWL2ppSID3L3hzi7nz3Y48hqm0TDDqnW-z2QdWkFozT-mEQaAm8EieARHIq-INgxaHikvXg8D9w0-1To1xQJciaAxd9fcUBWmuHqmltF702a2zRa9e1aJv0PE6_oZJXlUz86Aifzgq3jTkqeHtPkJiIv-Ja70NQs8WX09n305NZMZ3fZ4tjrOmcwzWq5IzJ1VHeJKcFj1btfLPV_rcioHqnq-R01Ttd9U5P_OvbTutgtLNeJ-OGO5EERlLLE8f-TWSTDLzdB7wbSlXyqmRq0W9NvzTAUwaQJMleHWSbEFPev2EZSE4kFfQPE4wROw</recordid><startdate>20070622</startdate><enddate>20070622</enddate><creator>von Hirsch, Andrew</creator><general>Graduate Faculty of Political and Social Science, New School for Social Research</general><general>Johns Hopkins University Press</general><general>New School University</general><general>New School for Social Research</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>8GL</scope><scope>IBG</scope><scope>ISN</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>4U-</scope><scope>7U4</scope><scope>7UB</scope><scope>7WY</scope><scope>7WZ</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>8AF</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AIMQZ</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BEZIV</scope><scope>BHHNA</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DPSOV</scope><scope>DWI</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>F~G</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>HEHIP</scope><scope>K6~</scope><scope>KC-</scope><scope>L.-</scope><scope>LIQON</scope><scope>M0C</scope><scope>M2L</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>M2R</scope><scope>M2S</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PQBIZ</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>S0X</scope><scope>WZK</scope><scope>7QJ</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20070622</creationdate><title>The "Desert" Model for Sentencing: Its Influence, Prospects, and Alternatives</title><author>von Hirsch, Andrew</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c702t-601b038c24040c7d48a6cb490cf78ce49f271bac21f578058da33afefeafc28e3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2007</creationdate><topic>Administration of justice</topic><topic>Arid zones</topic><topic>Case law</topic><topic>Censure</topic><topic>Corrective justice</topic><topic>Crime</topic><topic>Criminal justice</topic><topic>Criminal law</topic><topic>Criminal punishment</topic><topic>Criminal records</topic><topic>Criminal sentences</topic><topic>Criminal sentencing</topic><topic>Criminal sociology. Police. Delinquency. Deviance. Suicide</topic><topic>Criminals</topic><topic>Deviance</topic><topic>Europe</topic><topic>Evaluation</topic><topic>Fines & penalties</topic><topic>Government regulation</topic><topic>Hirsch, Julian</topic><topic>Imprisonment</topic><topic>Jurisdiction</topic><topic>Justice</topic><topic>Justice, Administration of</topic><topic>Laws, regulations and rules</topic><topic>Mandatory minimum sentences</topic><topic>Medical treatment</topic><topic>Negotiation</topic><topic>Politics</topic><topic>Principles</topic><topic>Prison sentences</topic><topic>Punishment</topic><topic>Rationality</topic><topic>Roberts, Anthony</topic><topic>Sanctions</topic><topic>Sentencing</topic><topic>Sentencing guidelines</topic><topic>Social research</topic><topic>Sociology</topic><topic>Sociology of law and criminology</topic><topic>Sociology of law and justice</topic><topic>States</topic><topic>Traditions</topic><topic>United States</topic><topic>United States of America</topic><topic>USA</topic><topic>von Hirsch, Andrew</topic><topic>What and How We Punish: Law, Justice, and Punishment</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>von Hirsch, Andrew</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Gale In Context: High School</collection><collection>Gale In Context: Biography</collection><collection>Gale In Context: Canada</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>University Readers</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (pre-2017)</collection><collection>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (PDF only)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>STEM Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest One Literature</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>eLibrary</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Politics Collection</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>Sociology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Politics Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Advanced</collection><collection>ProQuest One Literature - U.S. Customers Only</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global</collection><collection>Political Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Science Database</collection><collection>Social Science Database</collection><collection>Sociology Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>SIRS Editorial</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (Ovid)</collection><collection>Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA)</collection><jtitle>Social research</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>von Hirsch, Andrew</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>The "Desert" Model for Sentencing: Its Influence, Prospects, and Alternatives</atitle><jtitle>Social research</jtitle><addtitle>Social Research</addtitle><date>2007-06-22</date><risdate>2007</risdate><volume>74</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>413</spage><epage>434</epage><pages>413-434</pages><issn>0037-783X</issn><issn>1944-768X</issn><eissn>1944-768X</eissn><coden>SORSAT</coden><abstract><![CDATA[Explores the choice of sentencing rationale that ought to follow as the influence of penal rehabilitation has diminished in sentencing theory, seeking to link that choice to the larger normative aspirations to be pursued for sentencing reform. Focus is on the proportionalist or "desert" model of sentencing that gained traction in the late 1970s-1980s US & Western Europe. The origins of the desert model are traced, touching on objections to traditional versions of retributive punishment, & the centrality of the principle of proportionality to the model is noted. The desert model's implementation is discussed; it is stated that while influential among academics, the model's implementation is limited, with many US & European jurisdictions sticking with traditional discretionary sentencing schemes. However, proportionalist sentencing has persisted; reasons behind its attractiveness are examined. Attention then turns to Michael Tonry's (2007) assertion that proportionalist sentencing schemes are unsustainable, & an effort is made to discover where the problems lie & why. Tonry's suggestion for a revised normative framework to replace the desert model are assessed in terms of whether it satisfies a trio of aspirations for sentencing reform centered on the primary importance of justice, the moderation of sanction severity, & adequate & principled guidance. References. D. Edelman]]></abstract><cop>New York, NY</cop><pub>Graduate Faculty of Political and Social Science, New School for Social Research</pub><doi>10.1353/sor.2007.0040</doi><tpages>22</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0037-783X |
ispartof | Social research, 2007-06, Vol.74 (2), p.413-434 |
issn | 0037-783X 1944-768X 1944-768X |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_61684736 |
source | Worldwide Political Science Abstracts; Business Source Complete; Sociological Abstracts; Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA); Jstor Complete Legacy; Political Science Complete |
subjects | Administration of justice Arid zones Case law Censure Corrective justice Crime Criminal justice Criminal law Criminal punishment Criminal records Criminal sentences Criminal sentencing Criminal sociology. Police. Delinquency. Deviance. Suicide Criminals Deviance Europe Evaluation Fines & penalties Government regulation Hirsch, Julian Imprisonment Jurisdiction Justice Justice, Administration of Laws, regulations and rules Mandatory minimum sentences Medical treatment Negotiation Politics Principles Prison sentences Punishment Rationality Roberts, Anthony Sanctions Sentencing Sentencing guidelines Social research Sociology Sociology of law and criminology Sociology of law and justice States Traditions United States United States of America USA von Hirsch, Andrew What and How We Punish: Law, Justice, and Punishment |
title | The "Desert" Model for Sentencing: Its Influence, Prospects, and Alternatives |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-15T18%3A38%3A28IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The%20%22Desert%22%20Model%20for%20Sentencing:%20Its%20Influence,%20Prospects,%20and%20Alternatives&rft.jtitle=Social%20research&rft.au=von%20Hirsch,%20Andrew&rft.date=2007-06-22&rft.volume=74&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=413&rft.epage=434&rft.pages=413-434&rft.issn=0037-783X&rft.eissn=1944-768X&rft.coden=SORSAT&rft_id=info:doi/10.1353/sor.2007.0040&rft_dat=%3Cgale_proqu%3EA168397559%3C/gale_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=209670786&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_galeid=A168397559&rft_jstor_id=40971938&rfr_iscdi=true |