COUV ACTES - Psychologie communautaire

Community Psychology: Common Values, Diverse Practicesthese are given little consideration during risk assessment. Yet, the language of risk has “replace[d] need as thecore principle of social policy formation and welfare delivery” (Kemshall, 2002, p. 1).Criminal justice‘Risk behaviours’ are often re-conceptualised as anti-social/criminal behaviour; the context is overlooked resultingin a rise in exclusion, intolerance and excuses for inequality; behaviour is seen as typical of ‘that kind of person’,resulting in an increasingly punitive society. Criminal justice interventions tends to individualise; there is nomechanism to address collective and accumulating harm in a community, even though ‘risk behaviours’ areassociated with a lack of social capital and community cohesion. Alongside this, crime prevention is prioritisedover poverty prevention, leading to the ‘justice gap’. The ‘justice gap’ refers to the focus on criminal justice, ratherthan social justice, although the relationship between youth risk and criminal behaviour, and increased inequalityand social exclusion is well known (Squires & Stephen, 2005).Law and order is a key political platform in Western politics. A focus on youth risk and/or criminal behaviourserves several purposes. It allows the construction of an ‘other’ to exclude, allowing a contrasting perception ofsocial inclusion to result; it allows politicians to be seen to address a community concern, and it shifts attentionfrom underlying issues such as poverty and inequality (Burney, 2005; Coleman & Hagell, 2007).It would appear that the impact (and possibly the intent) of interventions for ‘at risk’ youth is to constrain them andlimit their choices/power. The literature is preoccupied with ‘chaotic’ families and communities (Chichetti, Toth, &Rogosch, 2000; Wyman, Sandler, Wolchik, & Nelson, 2000) with the implication that control is lacking, resultingin calls for ‘boot camps’ and harsher penalties for youth offenders. When powerlessness is discussed, it is interms of individual psychological states such as reduced coping, self-esteem, anxiety and depression, with thecorollary that the onus is on the individual to overcome these states; the socio-political realities that underpinthese are often ignored.New research: First findingsThis project is the first phase of what is intended to be a long-term study. The over-arching aim of this phase is toreview how policy in the youth development field is put into practice, through interviews with key informants andstakeholders, including service providers, funders, and people working with youth. Qualitative, semi-structuredinterviews are being undertaken with stakeholders. At this point, interviews with policy-makers have beencompleted.A key new social policy has recently been launched, with much fanfare: ‘Fresh Start’, incorporating boot campsand parental education. The key finding from initial interviews is that conceptualisations of youth risk varymarkedly, particularly in regard to this new policy. On the one hand, participants in justice-related positionsrespond to questions with rhetoric about the need for a ‘short, sharp shock’, and parents as drivers of crime, while295