美国刑事司法政策与实证研究 体制，成效，困惑和期待 何霓 博士 副院长 犯罪学与刑事司法学院 东北大学 波士顿 美国

2. 美国刑事司法政策与实证研究体制，成效，困惑和期待何霓 博士 副院长犯罪学与刑事司法学院东北大学 波士顿 美国

3. 第一节美国刑事司法实证研究体制长春 国家检察官学院分院2011年暑期研讨会讲稿

4. 蕴含公平/公正 • 科学方法的发展和运用 • 对宗教信仰的挑战 • 把对客观事实的重视当作民主意识的体现 • 在法治国家里单依个人主观意识/信仰/价值观来制定政策无法自圆其说 • 维护政府/政策合法性的需要：被视为中立的客观数据可以用来指导实践和帮助决策者应对立法执法不公的指责 • 社会本身变成了可统计的变量，比如： • 各项衡量社会/社区的指标 （经济状况；人口/种族分布；选区规划；议员名额；政府各项拨款等等）相互关联 • 对犯罪和自杀的简单统计曾被用来衡量“社会道德失范” • 西方对犯罪率（1830起）和失业率（1900起）的计算/计录将相对孤立的个人不幸置于社会公责的考虑范畴 • 以资源（广义）分配来衡量公平正义 西方国家为何重视实证科学？

5. 鉴定是否科学实证的基本要件：测量（概念），检验（理论），证伪（结果）鉴定是否科学实证的基本要件：测量（概念），检验（理论），证伪（结果） • 对科学实证过程的描述： • “It may be defined as a systematic search for the most accurate and complete description and explanation of events, relying on the principles of empiricism, objectivity, tentativeness, skepticism, ethical neutrality, parsimony, and at least a modified determinism as guides.” • 实证研究主要方法：问卷、观察、访谈、文件分析，案例、试验，综合统计分析 （通常需要多种方法并用） 如何科学实证？（1）

6. 如何科学实证？图释（2）

7. 一位中国法学教授2010年访美时的个人总结： • 中国法学界对实证研究的认识：已觉醒但未觉悟 • 主要不足之处： • 知识结构单一。专业知识片面，缺乏整体刑事法的概念； • 方法论的单一。仅注重规范分析和价值拷问，对命题的纯粹论证等等； • 发现问题的意识培养不够； • 实务实践参与太少，书本的背诵和闭门造车。 • 我加一句： • 研究体制和高水准实证研究人才的缺乏 • 法学教育中科学的成分不足 如何科学实证？（3）

8. (大)犯罪学研究范畴包括： making of law(立法); breaking of law(小犯罪学主要研究违法/犯罪); and reacting to the breaking of law(执法)。 因犯罪学与刑事司法紧密相连,美国许多（非法学）院系以两者共同命名，并成为集社会学,法学,政治学,经济学,哲学,心理学和生理学等多学科的专业。 美国的犯罪学与刑事司法作为独立的领域始于60年代末。曾饱受社会学与法学专业人士的排挤。 美国现有近千个犯罪学与/或刑事司法本科项目，近五百个硕士项目，近五十个博士授予点。 美国东北大学犯罪学与刑事司法研究生院以犯罪学与司法政策研究为主旨。暂时与宾大，佛罗里达大学，亚利桑纳州大并列全国第十二名。 犯罪学与刑事司法:实证研究专业人才的摇篮（1）

9. 与欧洲大陆法系的国家不同，美国的犯罪学/刑事司法专业独立于法学院之外。两者课程设置与就业目标大相径庭。法学院一般不教授实证研究方法。犯罪学/刑事司法专业从本科到博士都将实证研究方法列为必修课之一。不过一些美国法学院会雇用统计专家以助师生研究所需。也有不少JD/PhD双料法学或刑事司法教授。与欧洲大陆法系的国家不同，美国的犯罪学/刑事司法专业独立于法学院之外。两者课程设置与就业目标大相径庭。法学院一般不教授实证研究方法。犯罪学/刑事司法专业从本科到博士都将实证研究方法列为必修课之一。不过一些美国法学院会雇用统计专家以助师生研究所需。也有不少JD/PhD双料法学或刑事司法教授。 • 个人观点：北美，西欧，北欧，东欧，澳洲的犯罪学基本上以社会学为主流。南欧学者对以心理学和生理学为主的犯罪学依然保留较大兴趣。亚洲的犯罪学方兴未艾。非洲与南美则是落在亚洲之后。 • 全职犯罪学家：美国（3000以上), 英国（900左右), 其他欧洲国家50-400不等。美籍/旅美中国犯罪学家: 大约30-40人 犯罪学与刑事司法: 实证研究专业人才的摇篮（2）

10. 犯罪/司法/从业人员统计数据收集（1） • 联邦司法部 （Department of Justice/Office of Justice Programs) • -BureauofJusticeStatistics(司法数据署):collection,analyze,publish,anddisseminate“crime/offender/victim/operationofjusticesystemrelated”statisticalinformation • 地方警察机构年度数据汇总于FBI：Uniform Crime Report (UCR) • 司法部年度犯罪受害人问卷数据收集: National Crime Victimization Survey(NCVS) • 司法部根据需要不定期特项数据收集 • -NationalInstituteofJustice(国家司法研究中心)：research,development,andevaluation • 联合研究机构收集专项数据：NationalCenter for State Courts 联邦政府专职机构: 司法实证研究的主要数据来源

11. 犯罪/司法/从业人员统计数据收集（2） • 非政府职业研究机构收集专项数据:VeraInstitute，RandCorporation, NORC, GSS, WVS • 职业协会自行数据收集：ABA • 政府/基金会赞助研究者个人收集数据 • 科研经费来源： • 美国科学基金会 (National Science Foundation) • 美国国家健康中心 (National Institute of Health) • 美国国家精神健康中心 (National Institute of Mental Health) • 各大基金会 • 世界最大社科数据库：ICPSR* 国家司法数据库：NACJD* • *需交机构会员年费才能享用全部数据。数据来自世界各地。 联邦政府专职机构: 司法实证研究的主要数据来源

12. 美国司法部新任数据署和司法研究中心主任的期望 （1）数据署主任JamesLynch博士（原美国大学刑事司法学教授）- 联邦数据署的职责：“tobuild,maintain,andutilizestatisticalsystemsthatdescribetheextentandcharacteristicsofcrimeinournationandthestatusandresponseofthejusticesystem.”-任职间的主要目标：1)restoringandredesigningtheNationalCrimeVictimizationSurvey(NCVS);2)buildingthecapabilitytouseoperationaldataforstatisticalpurposes;3)improvingprosecutionandadjudicationstatistics;and4)improvingstatisticsonsupervisionandtheflowofpersonsbetweencorrectionalinstitutionsandsociety.-数据署主任任期六年。直接向司法部长负责。-三个挑战：如何保持中立；如何保护数据中涉及个人的隐私；如何加强署内数据分析人员的科研能力以服务于司法部及其他联邦行政部门。

13. 美国司法部新任数据署和司法研究中心主任的期望 （2）司法研究中心主任John Laub博士*（原美国东北大学刑事司法学教授）- 司法研究中心的职责：“The National Institute of Justice — the research, development and evaluation agency of the U.S. Department of Justice — is dedicated to improving knowledge and understanding of crime and justice issues through science. NIJ provides objective and independentknowledge and tools to reduce crime and promote justice, particularly at the state and local levels. ”- 主要目标：1）establishNIJastheleaderinscientificallybasedresearchoncrimeandjustice;2)createanorganizationalculturegroundedinscienceandresearch;3)obtainmorefundingforsocialscienceresearch;4)developaninnovative,cutting-edgeresearchagenda;5)reachouttoallstakeholders;and6)improvethediffusionofscientificknowledge.*2009年10月由Obama总统提名，2010年六月上任；历史上首位具有刑事司法学博士学位的联邦司法研究中心主任。

14. 美国司法部和政府责任办公室如何对地方司法实践进行实证评估？（1）司法部评估要点- 联邦政府每年为地方司法机构提供30亿美元的资助以控制/预防犯罪- 马理兰大学中标为司法部赞助的500个地方项目进行科学评估- 最终报告命名为“PreventingCrime:WhatWorks,WhatDoesn’t, What’sPromising”。 结果长达几百页，但值得一读。一些欧洲国家经常能扬长避短，最合理的利用来自于美国司法界的经验教训。- 接受评估的犯罪防治项目包括以下主要模式：社区，家庭，学校，劳务市场，公共场所，警察，其他司法机构-评估标准：1）各项目的独立效应；2）（相对）投资回报率；3）何时，何地，如何使某项目更有效的特定条件

15. 美国司法部和政府责任办公室如何对地方司法实践进行实证评估？（2）政府责任办公室司法评估要点- 是对受政府资助的评估者的研究设计与执行的评估-从1992到2002十年间96个项目中（共值三千七百万美金）分类随机抽出15个（共值一千五百万美金）进行分析。-结果如下：1）全优项目5个（占经费的48%）；2）设计优良，但执行有误的项目6个（占经费的21%）；3）设计有问题的项目4个（占经费的30%）-评估结果的效应：科研申请门槛提高；项目执行期间监督加严；项目终结后数据入库的限时要求。

16. Sense and Sensibility in American Penal Culture (Tonry, 2004; OUP) Senator Jim Webb (2009) Criminal Justice Reform Bill: Imprisonment: An American dilemma- “the cyclical effects of steeply rising and then sharply falling crime rates on prevailing sensibilities, and through them on American penal culture and policies, produced the criminal justice system Americans have now”- “popularist style of politics renders American politicians more susceptible to shifts in public sentiment.”

17. Lack of Emphasis on Theories of Criminal Justice (1)Explicit attention to theorizing in the field of CJ is infrequent and unreflectivePreoccupation with criminal justice effectiveness (which is treated as one of the independent variables to predict crime/disorder/fear, for example) is one of the problems.

18. Lack of Emphasis on Theories of Criminal Justice (2)Criminal justice and criminology refer to different phenomena, although closely related to each other.Criminology: scientific study of crime and criminal behavior; study of law breaking.Criminal justice science: study of governmental social control premised on punishment or blameworthiness; study of the domains of lawmaking and law enforcing.

19. Lack of Emphasis on Theories of Criminal Justice (3)The boundaries of formal and informal social control are changing rapidly.ABA survey of the administration of justice in the 50s and President’s commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice in 1967, led to the “system diagram”-connecting police, court and correction in a system of social control. http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/justsys.cfm

20. Lack of Emphasis on Theories of Criminal Justice (4)In criminal justice theory, criminal justice variables (e.g., decisions/attitudes/styles of behaviors by CJ officials, or the structural and procedural changes in CJ organizations; or development and changes in substantive criminal law by legislature) are treated as dependent variables.

21. Criminal Justice Wedding Cake (Walker): The top layer: celebrated cases (like the O.J. Simpson trial) which involve the full criminal process and an enormous amount of publicityThe second and third layer: serious felonies which are defined by 1) the nature of the crime; 2) the suspect's prior record; and 3) the relationship between the victim and the offenderThe fourth layer: misdemeanors (not viewed as real threats to public safety); Due process rule not always followed;

22. 第二节美国司法实证研究的理论和实践爱尔兰共和国司法部高级管理人员（2005-2008）年度暑期实证研究培训班讲稿节选第二节美国司法实证研究的理论和实践爱尔兰共和国司法部高级管理人员（2005-2008）年度暑期实证研究培训班讲稿节选

23. 实证依据与价值取向的博弈 • Fact: • Nature and magnitude of the problem • Effectiveness of current policy • Effectiveness of alternative policies • Value: • Values and value conflicts (e.g., due process & crime control) • Value choices: prioritizing and balancing values Evidence-based Policy (1): 以实证依据为基础的政策制定

24. Policy-making Process • Policy choices are heavily value-laden • Often developed in the context of crisis (“moral panic”) with simplistic solutions • Not very well grounded in research or evaluation results • Consequences: reactive, poorly planned, ineffective, costly, and even harmful (e.g., Three-Strikes law, Boot Camps, Scared Straight, D.A.R.E.) Evidence-based Policy (2): 偏离实证而制定政策的可能危害

25. Policy Implementation and Institutional Change • Institutional apparatus ultimately decide whether/how/when policies are implemented • How to maximize policy implementation? • Change resistance and support • Identify stakeholders • Build coalitions • Dynamics in institutional change (e.g., COP-ring theory; Sentencing Guidelines) Evidence-based Policy (3): 政策实施与机构变革

26. Recommendations on Evidence-based Policy • Seeking a middle ground by balancing social choices with evidence-based models of policy-making • From “muddling through” to creating “useable knowledge”, to assessing policy impacts that can inform future reforms • New standards: empirical evidence, rigorous research design, and requirement of replication Evidence-based Policy (4): 几点建议

27. How Do We Evaluate a “Good” Theory? • Internal logical consistency • Scope • Parsimony • Testability • Empirical validity • Policy implication Theory-Policy-Evaluation (1): 如何识别好的理论

28. Basic Assumptions in Theory-guided Policy • All major criminological theories have implications for CJ policy and practice • The better the theory explains the problem, the better it is able to help solve the problem • However, theoretical plausibility should not be the only consideration for policy-making • Ethical, legal, moral standards: humanity, fairness, equity, due process • effectiveness and efficiency Theory-Policy-Evaluation (2):理论是制定政策的依据

29. The Reality of Policy-making • The underlying theoretical notions are ill-stated and vaguely understood( 政策的理论依据不详不足) • Policy often adopted for political, economic, or bureaucratic reasons first, then a “theory” is fitted to justify the policy(本末倒置) • Competing demands: • Scientific demands for strong causal reasoning based on theory • Policy demands for quick answers Theory-Policy-Evaluation (3): 政策制定的客观现实

30. Summary • Theories inform CJ policy choices • -Identify potential cause of a problem before adopting policies to address them • Theoretical assumptions influence both the choice of target and the nature of intervention • Sound evaluations • -Assess whether policy affected the target group in the manner intended, and the extent to which it achieved overall longer-term goals • -Provide credible information for future program and policy development Theory-Policy-Evaluation (4)

31. Evaluation • Use of social science methods to systematically investigate the effectiveness of social intervention programs in ways that are adapted to their political and organizational environments and are designed to inform social action in ways that improve social condition Theory-based Evaluation (1): 以理论为指导的项目评估

32. Formative evaluation（以改进项目执行为目的的评估） • Furnish information for guiding program improvement • Summative evaluation（以总结成果为目的评估） • Render a summary judgment on the program’s performance Theory-based Evaluation (2)

33. Evaluation Hierarchy（评估的目标和种类） • Assessment of Need for the program • Assessment of Program Design and Theory • Assessment of Program Process and Implementation • Assessment of Program Outcome/Impact • Assessment of Program Efficiency Theory-based Evaluation (3)

34. Evaluation Hierarchy（项目的必要性） • Assessment of Need for the program • Diagnose problems (what/where/when/how big?) • Based on existing data sources (e.g., social indicators; agency records, surveys, censuses, forecasts) • Identify targets of intervention • Individuals, families, organizations, geographically and politically defined communities • Example: gang definitions and intervention Theory-based Evaluation (4)

35. Evaluation Hierarchy（项目设计与理论） • Assessment of Program Design and Theory • Use theory to • Describe cause-and-effect sequences • Identify target and explain why the target can be affected through the program • Define program goals and objectives • Formulate and prioritize evaluation questions • Design evaluation research • Interpret evaluation findings Theory-based Evaluation (5)

36. Evaluation Hierarchy（项目的实施） • Assessment of Program Process and Implementation • Setting criteria for judging program process (key words: accessibility, appropriate, adequate, satisfactory, reasonable, intended) • Process monitoring from multiple perspectives (evaluator, management and accountability) • Conformity of the program to its design • Coverage and bias (e.g., delivery, eligibles, dropouts, site variations) Theory-based Evaluation (6)

37. Evaluation Hierarchy（项目的最终结果/成效） • Assessment of Program Outcome/Impact • Stakeholder perspectives • Program impact (distinguish theory failure or implementation failure) • Measurement • Reliability • Validity • Prior research • Unintended outcomes Theory-based Evaluation (7)

38. Evaluation Hierarchy • Assessment of Program Outcome/Impact (cont.) • Classical Experimental Design (“randomized field experiment”, or “gold standard”) （试验设计的主要成分） • Treatment group • Control group • Random assignment • Treatment • Pretest • Posttest • Quasi-experimental Design Theory-based Evaluation (8)

39. The Fundamental Advantage of the Randomized Experiment • High internal validity • Allows research to disentangle the effect of treatment from the confounding effects of other factors • Threats to Internal Validity • Examples: history, maturation, statistical regression to the mean, selection bias, testing effect Theory-based Evaluation (9)

40. Disadvantages of Randomized Experiment: • Too rigid (to be flexible to complex reality) • Cost (high) • Timing (possible delayed effect) • Ethics (equity, fairness) • Integrity of design easily violated (e.g., equivalence in groups, treatment delivery-dilution, migration) • External validity (due to self-selection in participation) • Political barriers Theory-based Evaluation (10)

41. Conditions Favorable to Experimental Design • （如何增加司法改革试验成功的机率？） • When interventions involve addition of resources • When interventions represent less serious threats to community safety • When test CJ sanctions that are more lenient • When public visibility is lower • When interventions do not significantly reduce discretion of CJ agents • When there is a high degree of hierarchical control • When treatment is not unduly complex, expensive and cumbersome Theory-based Evaluation (11)

42. How to Make Better Use of Quasi-experimental Design? • Constructing control group by matching • Equating groups by statistical procedures • Regression-discontinuity design (cutting-point design) • Comment: strong quasi-experimental design can be an effective alternative when random assignment is not feasible Theory-based Evaluation (12)

43. Evaluation Hierarchy（项目的实效性） • Assessment of Program Efficiency • Two components • Cost-benefit analysis • Cost-effectiveness analysis (especially when human services are the outcome) • Cost of achieving a given result • Useful for comparing the efficiency of different programs • Efficiency analysis determines whether a social program should be continued, expanded, or terminated Theory-based Evaluation (13)

44. 第三节美国刑事司法/犯罪学实证研究范例

45. 美国州际法院刑事审判研究模式一例John Kramer and Jeffery Ulmer （2009）宾州量刑规范化改革成效的实证研究理论框架 （由远至近）研究者试图用以下要件来解释量刑结果的差异：- 社会因素：司法政策大趋势；人口/种族/性别分布及变化速度；经济实力；犯罪率的升降- 州级因素：州立量刑指导意见；州际刑事司法政策；州司法（监狱）资源- 市/郡因素：政治，社会文化环境；地方监狱/看守所资源- 法庭因素：法庭内亚文化；法官个人政治倾向；法庭结构及案件数量- 其他焦点因素：对被告应负罪责的看法；社区保护的需要；其他实际制约因素

46. 美国州际法院刑事审判研究模式一例（续）数据收集/分析：量刑结果：刑种-监禁/社区矫治/缓刑；服役地点；刑期长短影响量刑结果的AB两级因素：A B-辩诉交易或陪审团决定 -本地法庭年平均案件量-定罪罪名 -本地陪审团审判使用率-罪行严重程度 -本地监狱空缺率-前科纪录 -少数民族公民比例-最低法定刑期 -本地犯罪率-武器使用 -法庭规模大小-种族，性别，年龄 -共和/民主党派比例统计分析+法官/检察官面谈纪录美国州际法院刑事审判研究模式一例（续）数据收集/分析：量刑结果：刑种-监禁/社区矫治/缓刑；服役地点；刑期长短影响量刑结果的AB两级因素：A B-辩诉交易或陪审团决定 -本地法庭年平均案件量-定罪罪名 -本地陪审团审判使用率-罪行严重程度 -本地监狱空缺率-前科纪录 -少数民族公民比例-最低法定刑期 -本地犯罪率-武器使用 -法庭规模大小-种族，性别，年龄 -共和/民主党派比例统计分析+法官/检察官面谈纪录

47. National Survey of Prosecutors (2001)Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S. Department of Justice and the National Opinion Research Center (NORC) jointly conducted this surveySurvey includes the following main question areas:- Staffing- Funding- Special Categories of Felony Prosecutors- Caseload- Juvenile Matters- Work-related Threats or Assaults- DNA evidence

48. American Sentencing Reform Movement: Major GoalsSentencing Reforms: 1) sentencing guidelines; 2) mandatory minimum sentencing statutes; 3) three-strikes laws; and 4) truth-in-sentencing lawsThree intended goals by the reformers: - More punitive- More effective- Fairer sentence outcomes

49. American Sentencing Reform Movement: Major Outcomes (1)- yes, it does appear that sentences are more punitive today than they were in the past; however, more punitiveness has not produced the predicted reduction in crime.- yes, most studies of sentences imposed under federal/state guidelines suggest that they are more uniform and less disparate.- lack of longitudinal research comparing the effect of offender characteristics on sentence outcomes before and after the implementation of guidelines.

50. American Sentencing Reform Movement: Major Outcomes (2)Unwarranted disparities in sentencing:- racial minorities and women were sentenced differently than whites and men- harsher sentences to black and Hispanic offenders- more lenient sentences on females- the unemployed and less educated reserved harsher sentencesCosts of Incarceration : 2008 $75 Billion (Schmidt, Warner Gupta 2010)