Search results

This chapter aims to trace how the theoretical frameworks of actuarialism and managerialism have been slowly introduced into the Latin–American scientific debate, focusing on the Argentinian and Chilean examples. With this objective in mind, we explore the journey of these theories in our region focusing on the work. Additionally, we address other academic contributions that highlight “actuarial techniques” of risk as central features to analyze contemporary penalty, policing tactics, or criminal court outcomes and practices (Hannah-Moffat, 2013a, 2013b; Harcourt, 2007; Marutto & Hannah-Moffat, 2006), even overlapping concepts like actuarialism and managerialism (Barker, 2009; Kohler-Hausmann, 2018). Subsequently, we describe the acclimation of these theories in Argentina and Chile, characterized for a limited impact on the scientific debate. We suggest that the main reason for this little impact is the different stages of the criminal justice system between Global North and Global South countries. While in the first one, actuarialism and managerialism were born to explain especially the field of risk analysis, and secondarily, the role of the new public management; in the case of Latin America, managerialism has been observed through the criminal justice system reform developed in the last three decades. This observation has focused especially on some organizational transformations and, for this reason, the analysis about actuarialism and risk assessment have been marginals. We concluded that although the influence of the literature about actuarialism and managerialism from the Global North in Latin–American is real, it is not possible to extrapolate all its elements to the penal systems in the region.