Inclusive Criminology and Academic Diversity

In 2021, Kwan began to integrate several aspects of his work in diversifying academic criminology, criminal justice agencies, and policymaking in terms of demography, epistemology, experience, and ideology under the banner of “inclusive criminology.”

Studies bear out that African Americans are drastically underrepresented in criminology and criminal justice doctoral programs and that, once admitted, they have lower-than-average rates of completion. On average, throughout their careers, African Americans are less likely to secure positions in the most prestigious programs; publish in the most highly regarded journals; or receive tenure, promotion, and compensation commensurate with their European American colleagues. One explanation is that the academy espouses ideals that disadvantage those from a Black cultural background. Through auto-ethnographic narratives, this article explores the ways in which criminology and criminal justice have adopted and reinforced a professional culture that may be incongruent with that of most Black academics. Borrowing from the tenets of critical race theory, we examine the ways in which the field imposes criteria for success counter to the cultural orientation of many African Americans. Finally, we argue the need for field-wide self-assessment and proactive measures to increase receptiveness to, and inclusion of, scholars who bring broader methodological and cultural lenses to both the academic discipline and the practical administration of justice.

Trends seemingly signal the decay of White heterosexual male hegemony in academia. Still, while changes have addressed lack of access to an academic system whose benefits are assumed, critical literature calls into question Western-based theory and traditionally Eurocentric ways of knowledge production. An important programmatic component of decolonizing knowledge production consists of arguing for increased inclusivity and diversity among scholars. The present study is inscribed in these decolonial tendencies and focuses on the experience of otherness inside academia. Using collaborative autoethnography, we set side-by-side the academic and professional experiences and epistemological reflections of two criminal justice and criminology scholars: an Arab European scholar of politico-ideological violence and a Black American scholar of identity and the psychology of justice. We explore otherness as a 'social fact' and identify three dimensions, namely (1) otherness as a lens to read coloniality, (2) feeling and coping with otherness, and (3) otherness as connection. We suggest that promoting the "othered lens" in academia, especially criminology, may not only be healthy and necessary for diversifying views and perspectives but may also be epistemologically and methodologically vital for how criminology engages with the socially deviant or harmed Other who it is, by its very essence, preoccupied with.