A case for a public pacific criminology?

This chapter discusses the potential for a public Pacific criminology, not, as Loader and Sparks would say, as the latest �shiny criminological brand,� but as an important intellectual and practical agenda. In a region characterized by regulatory pluralism and local justice innovation, one meaningful contribution such an agenda could make is to reorient debates on crime, violence, and justice towards the contributions to security made by state and nonstate institutions. The chapter develops three examples of these, komitis in urban Papua New Guinea (PNG), private policing in PNG, and community by-laws in Vanuatu. We also outline some of the main challenges to such an agenda, including the benefits and drawbacks of a regional framing, noting the importance of context and nuance as well as problems with agendas of exceptionalism. In sum, we conclude that a public Pacific criminology, were one to eventuate, would need to be interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary, have a strong ethical foundation, be founded on an awareness of plurality and recognition of the dynamic and varied configuration of different actors in the security and justice landscape, and involve greater support for Pacific island research institutions and researchers.