A response to Farrell

This article responds directly to an article published in this journal in February 2010 by Graham Farrell entitled ‘Situational crime prevention and its discontents: rational choice and harm reduction versus “cultural criminology” ’. (Farrell's article, in turn, was a rejoinder to my original 2007 article ‘Situational crime prevention and its discontents: rational choice theory versus the “culture of now” ’). In his article, Farrell sets out a case for the role of ‘harm reduction’ and rational choice theory as tools to reduce the contemporary crime problem, concluding that ‘Cultural criminology seems to offer little, if anything, useful to inform crime reduction efforts’. This article rejects this statement and offers a counter critique of the instrumental approach promoted by Farrell. Importantly, this response article is not intended as an outright critique of situational crime prevention per se, rather it is an assessment of Farrell's specific critical logic and the various shortcomings associated with his argument.