University of Sydney – CRIM2601: Criminology Assessment Task 2

Sociological research indicates that digital monitoring often erodes the fundamental social contract between the state and the citizen. Modern urban environments now feature pervasive data collection mechanisms that redefine privacy as a luxury rather than a right. Communities experiencing high levels of surveillance frequently report a decrease in collective efficacy and mutual trust.

Case Study Analysis: Digital Surveillance and Social Control

In this second assessment task, you will apply criminological theory to a contemporary case study involving surveillance technology. This 1,500-word analysis requires you to move beyond description and engage in a critical evaluation of how technology reshapes social boundaries and institutional power.

Assignment Instructions

Select one of the three approved case studies provided on the Canvas module (Biometric Policing in London, Predictive Policing in Los Angeles, or Social Credit Systems). Your report must address the following requirements:

1. Theoretical Framework

• Identify and define one primary criminological or sociological theory (e.g., Foucault’s Panopticism, Agnew’s General Strain Theory, or Cohen’s Social Control).
• Explain how this theory accounts for the implementation of the chosen technology.
• Analyze the power dynamics between the governing body and the monitored population.

2. Empirical Evidence and Impact

1. Community Impact: Discuss how surveillance affects the targeted community’s perception of safety and legitimacy.
2. Data Validity: Critically assess the “neutrality” of the algorithms or data used in your case study.
3. Unintended Consequences: Identify at least two secondary effects, such as displacement of crime or increased social stratification.

3. Ethical and Policy Recommendations

Provide a brief set of recommendations for policy reform. These must be grounded in the “human rights-based approach” to policing and address the balance between public security and individual liberty.

Assessment Guidelines and Marking Criteria

Criteria	High Distinction (85-100%)	Credit/Distinction (65-84%)	Pass (50-64%)
Application of Theory	Exceptional integration of theory with case facts; highly nuanced analysis.	Clear application of theory to the case with minor analytical gaps.	Descriptive use of theory; lacks deep integration with case facts.
Critical Analysis	Rigorous evaluation of data bias and social implications.	Sound analysis of social impacts with evidence support.	Basic identification of impacts without critical depth.
Academic Communication	Perfect Harvard referencing; professional, concise, and logical flow.	Occasional minor errors in referencing; clear structure.	Referencing present but inconsistent; structure is functional.

Learning Materials and Resources

• Brayne, S. (2020). Predict-and-Surveil: Data, Algorithms, and the Future of Policing. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190684099.001.0001
• Lyon, D. (2022). Pandemic Surveillance. Cambridge: Polity Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009083311
• Kaufmann, M., Egbert, S., and Leese, M. (2021). Predictive policing and the politics of patterns. British Journal of Criminology, 61(3), pp. 664-681. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjc/azaa089
• Zuboff, S. (2019). The Age of Surveillance Capitalism: The Fight for a Human Future at the New Frontier of Power. London: Profile Books.