Crime and Justice International Magazine - Sam Houston State University

History of Criminology in China

There are three developmental stages of criminology in China: the first stage before 1949; the second stage between 1949 and 1978; and the third stage after 1978.

The First Stage-Before 1949

The earliest criminological studies available in China can be traced back to the 1920s (Broadhurst & Liu, 2004); Lombroso’s work was translated into Chinese and published in 1922. The first Chinese textbook on criminology was published in 1932 (Cao, 2003). In the 1920s and 1930s, after the Qing Dynasty was overthrown in 1911, China was in turmoil and mired in wars between warlords; social problems like poverty and crime were rampant. While political activists were ardent in their support for new ideologies like utilitarianism, anarchism, and communism, some scholars tried to find alternative approaches to the ills of society. Chinese scholars began research in the fields of criminology, sociology, and anthropology. These Chinese pioneers and their works had great influence at that time, and even now. For example, Dr. Ching-Yeh Yen conducted his field work in prisons in Beijing and produced a Ph.D. dissertation entitled, “Crime in Relation to Social Change in China.” He earned a doctorate from the Department of Sociology at the University of Chicago in 1934. After he passed away, his wife, Ms. Jieqiong Lei, who was a sociologist at Beijing University and one-time vice chairperson of China’s National People’s Congress, acted as adviser to China’s Society of Criminology.

The Second Stage-Between 1949 and 1978

The Chinese Communism Party under the leadership of Mao Zedong, and the victory of the Communist revolution culminating in the founding of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) in 1949 greatly changed Chinese society, human morality, and behavior. In order to consolidate the new regime, the Chinese Communist Party mobilized anti-crime campaigns, targeting so-called counterrevolutionary crime such as sabotage, armed riots, plundering, and underground cults. Meanwhile, the Chinese government adopted measures to extinguish social pathological problems like opiate addiction, gambling, and prostitution.

Table 1 shows crime rates from 1950 to 2002 in China. Since the founding of PRC there have been five crime waves as studied by Chinese scholars (Kang, 2003). Among these five crime waves, two occurred in this second stage of development. One wave started in 1950 when 93 cases per 100,000 people were registered. After the swift and hard anti-crime campaign in the early 1950s, the crime rate tended to decrease until 1961 when the second crime wave appeared. Despite these crime waves, criminology, along with other social sciences like sociology and political science, was discontinued at universities and colleges in China. This was a time of adjustment of the Chinese higher education system in the early 1950s, which strengthened disciplines of technology in the higher education system, but undermined liberal and social sciences. Sociology and political science were labeled as capitalist disciplines, and Chinese leaders believed that social issues should be studied from the perspective of Marxism, which was the only source of truth. By 1953, more than 20 departments of sociology in various universities were completely shut down. Dr. Fei Xiaotong, who was a student in the 1930s of the leading authority in anthropology, Bronislaw Malinovski, became a leading sociologist in China. During a meeting with Mao Zedong, Dr. Fei beseeched Mao to retain the study of sociology in China. Mao firmly replied without reservation that it would be discontinued. Sociologists and political scientists were not allowed to conduct research in their own fields and were reassigned to other departments like geography or foreign languages. Under this circumstance, criminology also suffered. Facing these crime waves, crime studies were conducted, but they were meant to meet specific needs of investigation, punishment, and correction. There were no truly criminological studies at this time.

The Third Stage-After 1978

China adopted the Open Door Policy and undertook reform measures beginning in 1978. New policies referred to not only the sphere of economic development, but also the sphere of broadly-defined cultural civilization, of which social sciences were a part. Deng Xiaoping, the architect of the new policies in China, ordered in 1979 that disciplines like legal studies, sociology, and political science should be formed. Dr. Fei Xiaotong, nearly seventy years old, was given the responsibility to reestablish the discipline of sociology in China.

The attitudes of Chinese leaders towards social sciences redefined the nature of the disciplines of sociology and political science. The label of capitalist discipline was removed, which made the general atmosphere toward criminology more agreeable. Specifically, the reestablishment of sociology and law studies broke through obstacles to criminology, probed many issues setting the research agenda for criminology, and laid knowledge foundations for criminology.

On the other hand, the powerful driving force behind the rebirth of criminology was the grave situation caused by the third and fourth crime waves in 1979 and 1981, respectively. Reform measures and the Open Door Policy spurred new behaviors, and more and more people started seeking opportunities to make money, as the government-controlled media propagandized the new orientation, “To Get Rich is Glorious.” While traditional and tight social control was gradually eased, crime began skyrocketing. The crime rate reached 65.2 in 1979 and 89.4 in 1981. One distinct characteristic of these two crime waves was that many offenses were perpetrated by youth, ages 14 to 25, particularly by juveniles between 14 and 18. Youth delinquency accounted for 47.6% of the total crime cases in 1979, and then soared to 64.0% in 1981, while juvenile delinquency accounted for 3.3% of total crime in 1979, then swiftly jumped to 13.3% in 1981 (see Table 2). Theft, homicide, rape, fraud, assault, and robbery accounted for the majority of these offences.

Chinese media traditionally described the youth as “the flower of the home country,” but the serious youth and juvenile delinquency signaled the imperative to cope with social problems and the maintenance of public order in the new era. In August 1979, the Chinese Communist Party announced an official document requesting the attention to juvenile delinquency. Such documents addressing juvenile delinquency had never been issued before in the history of CCP. This call paved the way for crime studies, especially juvenile delinquency.

In March 1980, the National People’s Congress of China, in cooperation with the Central Committee of the Communist Youth League of China, sponsored a symposium on the drafting of the Juvenile Protection Law, which was the major effort to deal with the problem. In the same year, the Division of the Study of Juvenile Delinquency was set up in the Institute of Youth Studies of China’s Academy of Social Sciences, which is the principal think tank for the government. The division was the first research entity specializing in juvenile delinquency since the founding of the PRC. Later the same year this division founded the Bulletin of Juvenile Delinquency Studies, later renamed Study of Juvenile Delinquency, which was the first academic journal of a criminological nature. In the summer of 1981, the National Planning Conference on Juvenile Delinquency Studies was hosted in Qingdao City, China. This conference promoted the study of juvenile delinquency in many places in China. Then regional conferences were followed by the June 1982 First Symposium on the Study of Juvenile Delinquency held in Nanning City, Guangxi Province. The Society of Juvenile Delinquency Research of China was formally founded at this symposium. It was the first academic meeting specifically addressing research issues pertaining to crime. This symposium and the founding of the society symbolized the commencement of criminology in China.

According to official data, Chinese crime rates are lower than those in most countries (Bakken, 1993). While comparative studies may be useless due to different definitions by laws and reliability of data, longitudinal studies of crime rates in China demonstrate that the trend of crime rates has been in an upward direction since the late 1970s. Furthermore, patterns of crime have diversified. New patterns of crime have emerged out of the imagination of people in the command economy. Economic crimes like stock speculation, intellectual piracy, and crimes endangering public order and morality, such as organized crime, drug trafficking, and prostitution, all burst onto the scene in China. For example, in the 1979 Criminal Law, there were less than twenty official charges relating to economic crime. But there were more than one hundred charges relating to economic crime stipulated by the Criminal Law revised in 1997.

The more dramatic development was crime involving illegal drugs, gambling and prostitution. In the early 1950s, the Chinese government adopted resolute measures to sweep away these social evils. Premier Zhou Enlai promulgated the State Council Directive on Banning Opiate Products in February 1950. Meanwhile, whore houses were closed and prostitutes were educated and trained for new employment. China, once claiming to be free of these plagues, was facing great challenges by these re-emerging problems.

Under these circumstances, the Chinese Society of Criminology was founded in 1992. This society signified the new development of criminology in China.

Institutions

In China, there are a couple of organizations involving criminological research. The two largest professional organizations are the Chinese Society of Criminology and the Society of Juvenile Delinquency Research of China.

As mentioned above, the Chinese Society of Criminology was founded in 1992. It’s a national organization to promote criminology in China. Prof. Shuhua Kang of Beijing University was the past president from 1992 to 2002. The successor of Prof. Kang is Prof. Mu Wang of China University of Politics and Law in Beijing. The adviser to this society is Ms. Jieqiong Lei. There are more than 2,200 active members of the society; most of them are scholars of Chinese universities or practitioners of Chinese criminal justice systems, which are made up of the systems of public security, people’s procurate, people’s court, and justice. The standing executive branch of this society is hosted by the National College for Public Procurators in Beijing, which is affiliated with the Supreme People’s Procurate of the PRC. Under the umbrella of the society are seven subcommittees of crime prevention, criminological sociology, psychology of crime and therapy, countermeasure studies of crime in frontier regions, corrections and juvenile legal education, and public official crime prevention. The objective of the society is to foster criminology study, research, and education in China and to provide academic services for legislation, law enforcement and judicial entities. In the past decade, the society has undertaken projects to explore the etiology, prevention, and control of crime and delinquency, and correction of criminals and juveniles. There is no official journal or website of the society, but the society has sponsored the publication of the Criminology Series and Bulletin of the Society, and has organized fourteen annual conferences since 1992. The society encourages domestic and international exchanges. The society prioritizes the participation in legislation and played an important role in making the Law on the Prevention of Juvenile Delinquency of the PRC.

The Society of Juvenile Delinquency Research of China is another professional organization concerned with juvenile delinquency in China. As a national organization funded in 1982, this society has the standing agency embracing the Secretariat, Academic Committee, Editorial Committee, Research Grant Management Committee, Training Department, Membership Department, and the Editorial Office of the Study of Juvenile Delinquency, the official journal of the society. Aligned with these standing establishments are the specialized committees of Crime Countermeasure Studies, Crime Forecasting and Prevention Studies, Juvenile Legal Protection, Juvenile Justice Studies, Youth Deviance and Prevention Studies, Studies of Crime in Hong Kong, Macau, and Taiwan, Criminological Sociology, Comparative Criminology, Recidivism Studies, and Community Control Studies. There are about 2,000 members of this society.

Besides the above two organizations, there are research institutes affiliated with different universities or government agencies. They include the Crime Prevention and Corrections Research Institute affiliated with the Ministry of Justice of the PRC, the Public Security (Fourth) Research Institute affiliated with the Ministry of Public Security of the PRC, the Criminology Institute of China University of Politics and Law, the Crime Problem Research Center of Beijing University, and the Juvenile Delinquency Research Institute of East China University of Politics and Law in Shanghai. The Department of Criminology of the Chinese People’s Public Security University affiliated with the Ministry of Public Security of the PRC is the only four-year program accredited by the Ministry of Education of the PRC. However, law schools of Jilin University, Beijing University, and the College of Criminal Justice of China University of Politics and Law have masters and doctoral minors of criminology within the major of criminal law.

Criminological Research: Fundamental Issues and Challenges

There is increasing attention from overseas scholars on the crime problem in China. Chinese scholars themselves and overseas scholars have contributed papers about crime in China to English literature. Among them, Broadhurst and Liu sketch the development of criminological knowledge under the circumstances of social change and point out several challenges that criminologists in China are facing (Broadhurst and Liu, 2004). More detailed exploration of crime in China is made by Friday and Bakken (Friday 1998; Bakken 1993). Friday addresses the importance of the integration of social resources into crime prevention in China, while the Chinese government prioritizes a severe strike policy to deter crime. Bakken undertakes an explanation of the deterrence measure to crime by the Chinese criminal justice systems. Based on his comparative study of the crime rate in China and in other countries, he questions the rationality and effectiveness of the harsh reaction to crime in China. His conclusion is reasonable, but his argumentation based on official data from Chinese government sources should be aware of the pitfalls of Chinese official data (He & Marshall, 1997). There are a couple of hot topics relating crime in China studied by Chinese and overseas scholars, we will address fundamental issues in detail, which are highly pertinent to the development of criminology in China.

The first issue is about the relationship between criminology and criminal law. The majority of Chinese scholars hold that criminology is a secondary discipline of criminal law. In fact, many Chinese scholars and practitioners who research criminology and are members of the China Society of Criminology are affiliated with a law school and/or have a background in criminal law. This view is also entrenched by the fact that Chinese authorities are concerned about more the instrumental utility than the expressive theory of a discipline. As we stated earlier, Chinese criminology has been forced to develop by the serious crime situation in the country. But the myopia of seeking a panacea for crime can contribute to the salience of criminal law. However, the severe punishment policy, like the hard strike campaign prescribed by practitioners of criminal law, is questionable (Liang, 2005).

Beyond the reason why criminology is considered to be attached to the discipline of criminal law in China, some scholars are concerned with the independence of criminology. They try to differentiate criminology from criminal law and pave the way for the independence of criminology. Prof. Wang traces the nexus between criminology and criminal law to the history of criminal law and criminology. In his paper, he begins the exploration with two controversial connections: one is that scholars of criminal law and some criminologists recognize Cesare Beccaria as the father of the discipline, while many criminologists accept Cesare Lombroso as the father of criminology. Another controversial connection is that both criminal law and criminology identify the debates between the classical school and the positivist school as the different approaches in their own fields. From these nexuses, Prof. Wang attempts to explain the blurred boundary between criminal law and criminology in the context of the development of criminal law and criminology. He delineates the differences between these two disciplines: criminal law is a subject based on penalty which deals with specific patterns of human behavior defined as crime by laws whereas criminology is a discipline to find the rules and the truth in the phenomenon of crime, which is selected not by the definition of laws, but by the fact that the phenomenon of crime is a part of social life. The necessity to differentiate between criminal law and criminology contributes to the urgency to liberate criminology from being encroached upon by criminal law. Wang states that even if criminology is considered as a discipline, it is considered at most as “the servant” of criminal law; criminology, in many places where this discipline is underdeveloped, has to pull itself forward in the shadow of criminal law (Wang, 1998).

After making the distinction between criminal law and criminology, Prof. Wang further explores another relevant issue that Chinese criminologists need to think about and that is the goal of criminology.

In the past decade, Chinese scholars have contributed many works exploring the causation, etiology, control, prevention, and correction of crime (Kang, 1992; Ying, 1997; Chu & Xu, 1997; Zhou, 2004). But this composition of criminology has been questioned. Prof. Wang argues that the research on etiology should be merely the logical starting point of criminological exploration, not the focus of criminological exploration. As a social phenomenon, crime is too complicated to be attributed to any one factor. It’s impossible to find a complete picture of causation of crime. In the past century, criminologists have brought forth various theories to explain the causation of crime such as theories focusing on personality, social structure, and social process. But neither of these theories is generalized to the extent that it can explain any type of crime, whereas some other approaches are too concrete to be considered theory. Some scholars believe that the research focus on causation should be given up. Prof. Wang points out that the fascination with the causation of crime is institutionalized in criminology because the commencement of criminology was under circumstances when crime was rampant and there was an impulsive need for countermeasures to fight crime in the wake of the Industrial Revolution in Europe. According to Prof. Wang, the tendency on causation of crime is induced by the wrong premise that crime shouldn’t exist and should be rooted out. Without moral burden like this, economists can easily research human behaviors on the market, and political scientists are not necessarily ardent at explaining why people participate in political activities. Therefore, in order to make criminology become a social science, the reconstruction of the research goal for criminology is necessary. As economists and social scientists do in their own fields, criminologists should research the whole phenomenon of crime, more than the causation of crime (Wang, 2002).

Prof. Wang’s research on these fundamental issues is very important for criminology in China, since the discipline is still in its infancy. Unless these fundamental issues are made clear, advancement of criminology will be hampered.

Nevertheless, the challenges for criminology in China have to be faced.

The first challenge lies in the ideological confinement. From the Marxist perspective, the Chinese government traditionally holds that people liberated from the oppression of the reactionary ruling class should be free from crime and that crime can and should be completely eradicated. A society led by the leadership of the Communist Party will enter into the Communist heaven where there is no crime, no exploitation, and no inequality. The State Council Directive on Banning Opiate Products promulgated in 1950 started with the following statement:

Since the imperialist invasion in our country, opium has been imposed on and afflicted our nation for more than one hundred years. In the reactionary regime, bureaucratic warlords and feudal compradors led their wanton, flagitious, and corrupted lifestyles. They didn’t forbid the cultivation of opiate products; on the contrary, they forced people to cultivate them. Especially during the invasion of the Japanese imperialists, they systematically poisoned Chinese and caused countless losses of Chinese human life and property. Now our people have been liberated. In order to insure the public health, recover and develop the productivity, this directive is promulgated to ban opium and other opiate products.1

Owing to the resolute measures introduced by these regulations and laws, illegal drug use, gambling, prostitution, and other vices were allegedly swept away. Edgar Snow, author of Red Star Over China, was invited to visit China in 1960 by his friends, Mao Zedong and Zhou Enlai. Snow wrote:

Goodbye to all the night life: the gilded singing girl in her enameled hair-do, her stage makeup, her tight-fitting gown with its slit skirt breaking at the silk-clad hip…the hundred dance halls and the thousands of taxi dollars; the opium dens and gambling halls…the sailors in their smelly bars and friendly brothels on Sichuan Road; the myriad short-time whores and pimps busily darting in and out of the alleyways…gone the wickedest and most colorful city of the old Orient: goodbye to all that.2

The Chinese government was proud of the achievements to purify Chinese social life. But when China adopted the Open Door Policy in the late 1970s, crime and other social problems soon became prevalent. At that time, Deng Xiaoping, the architect of the policy, said that after the windows were opened, fresh air would enter in, some flies would also come in. Deng repeated this argument in his well-known speeches during his inspection tour to South China in 1992. He said:

Since China opened its doors to the outside world, decadent things have come in along with the others, and evils such as drug abuse, prostitution, and economic crimes have emerged in some areas. Special attention must be paid to these evils, and resolute measures must be taken to stamp them out and prevent them from spreading. After the founding of New China, it took only three years to wipe these things out. Who in this world has ever been able to eliminate the abuse of opium and heroin? Neither the Kuomintang nor the capitalist countries. But facts have shown that the Communist Party was able to do it.3

This approach of blaming outside factors is not useful for finding the way to prevent and control crime in China. The ideological confinement makes it difficult for the Chinese government to face up to the crime situation and acknowledge that crime is an indogenous social problem; there is no society without crime, past, present, or future. Under these circumstances, Prof. Wang’s assertion that the phenomenon of crime, not the causation of crime, should be the object of criminology is a theoretical endeavor to depoliticize criminological studies.

Nevertheless, the breakthrough in ideological considerations and the depoliticizing of criminological studies need bring about further responses to other challenges: the independence of criminology, education for criminologists, research resources, and methodology.

Criminology in China is not fully independent, in fact, it’s dependent in terms of its knowledge, orientation, and a specific group of agents named as criminologists.

(1) Criminologists tend to consent to the multidisciplinary nature of criminology. Considering the multidisciplinary knowledge bases of criminology, this view is right. But the multidisciplinary nature of criminology cannot cancel the specific traits of criminology as a discipline. In contemporary China, experts of criminal law attempt to abrogate the domain of criminology by claiming that criminology is the secondary subject of criminal law. Without concepts, theories, and paradigms differentiating from other disciplines, it is very hard to acknowledge criminology as an independent discipline. Unless the goal of study is constant and free from any other expediency, concepts, theories, and paradigms cannot be developed for the discipline. Prof. Wang argues in his paper that the study of the phenomenon of crime itself should be the goal of criminology. This principle can differentiate criminology from criminal law and others, and can practically adjust the development of criminological knowledge from the current situation, which looks like the endnote of government policies, to a sustainable, autonomous, and independent pathway.

(2) The orientation of criminology in China is problematic. Since the reestablishment of criminology in China was due to the sponsorship of the government facing grave crime problems in the 1980s, Chinese scholars highlighted the pragmatic aspects of criminology more than theoretical exploration. In other words, scholars are eager to indicate the usefulness of criminology by addressing the causation of crime and thereafter countermeasures. It seems that without prompt demonstration of the usefulness of criminology, they will lose the strength and resources to develop criminology in China. In order to keep scarce resources allocated from government sources, scholars are more eager to undertake research projects relevant to policy development. However, in the long run, this orientation severely hampers the advancement of criminology in China, while neglecting purely theoretical endeavors.

(3) The lack of a group of criminologists exemplifies the current situation of criminology in China. Criminology needs generations of professional groups whose mission is to develop and promote criminological knowledge. The carriers of criminological knowledge are called criminologists. As we stated above, most senior members of the Chinese Society of Criminology are affiliated with law schools or criminal justice systems. They were trained or educated in the field of criminal law or in disciplines other than criminology. Only a few junior members have backgrounds in education or training in the field of criminology. The lack of criminologists and the relatively low level of their professional caliber result in the narrow spectrum of research. Most criminological works in Chinese focus on introductory topics and bear no great differences in terms of the framework or viewpoint (Cao, 2004).

Another challenge is the lack of evidence-based research. Since the mid-1980s, criminological research in China has touched topics such as crime phenomenon, victimization, criminal causation, crime prevention and control, and juvenile delinquency. There are at least ten Chinese journals or series focusing on crime or juvenile delinquency such as Criminology Series sponsored by the Chinese Society of Criminology, Study of Juvenile Delinquency, Research on Crime, Problems of Juvenile Delinquency, Crime and Countermeasures, and Research on Labor and Correction. In addition, there is Research on Public Security and journals of provincial public security colleges and of the Chinese People’s Public Security University; they are all sponsored by the Chinese public security system. Quantitative research is rare in China (Broadhurst & Liu, 2004). The scarcity of quantitative research is related to: 1) The unwillingness of the government to publicize crime statistics or policing issues (Wong, 2002). When crime issues are politicized, crime statistics tend to be considered by officials as reflecting the “dark side” of society (Broadhurst & Liu, 2004). In the context of Chinese bureaucracy, the disclosure of crime statistics on rising crime rates may influence the promotion of involved officials. Even if the data is available, there is no other resource to verify the reliability of the data. 2) The deficiency of the knowledge. Many senior Chinese criminologists were educated in the field of criminal law or liberal arts; the curriculum of the new departments of criminology is skewed toward courses other than statistics or research methods. Therefore, there is a general skeptical view of quantitative research. 3) Unavailability of research funding. Quantitative research usually involves more inputs of resources in terms of money and time. In terms of money, the amount of research grants cannot support substantial activities for quantitative research. The availability of research grants in the amount of RMB50,000 (about USD6,000) or more is limited and competitive. In terms of time, quantitative research may be costly for junior scholars experiencing the pressure for promotion to higher teaching positions. The same amount of time input can generate more qualitative papers. Therefore, the attractiveness of qualitative papers outweighs quantitative ones.

Conclusions

As a discipline, criminology in China was burgeoning in the era of Chinese reform as crime rates have kept rising, and the implications have drawn wide attention and sincere anxiety from the government and the public. Criminology in China has achieved a lot and is working its way through the difficult stage of its infancy. Nevertheless, facing many ideological, institutional, and other constraints, criminology in China needs to experience a fundamental breakthrough. Key issues have been raised and the future evolution of criminology is promising.

Jianming Mei is Associate Professor and Police Superintendent at the Chinese People’s Public Security University in Beijing. Mu Wang is Professor at the Chinese University of Political Science and Law in Beijing, and President of the Chinese Society of Criminology. Email: This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it

Bibliography

Bakken, B. (1993). Crime, juvenile delinquency and deterrence policy in China. Australia Journal of Chinese Affairs, 30, 29-58.

Bakken, B. (1995). Editor’s introduction: Juvenile crime during the reforms. Chinese Sociology and Anthropology, 27 (3), 3-18.

Broadhurst, R. & Liu, J. (2004). Introduction: Crime, law, and criminology in China. The Australian and New Zealand Journal of Criminology, 37, 1-12.

Cao, L. (2004). The state of criminology in China. The Criminologist, 29 (4), 1-5.

Chu, H. & Xu, Z. (1997). Criminology. Lalv Publishing House.

Friday, P. C. (1998). Crime and crime prevention in China: A challenge to the development-crime nexus. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 14(3), 296-314.

He, N. & Marshall, I. H. (1997). Social production of crime data: A critical examination of Chinese crime statistics. International Criminal Justice Review, 7, 46-64.

Kang, S. (ed.). (1992). Introduction to criminology. Beijing University Publishing House (in Chinese).

Liang, B. (2005). Severe strike campaign in transitional China. Journal of Criminal Justice, 33, 387-399.

Wang, M. (1998). Discipline establishment and advancement of criminology. Faxue Yanjiu (Law Studies, in Chinese).

----- (2002). Fundamental error: Critical study of premises of criminology. Zhongguo Faxue (China Law Studies, in Chinese).

----- (2004). Discipline boundary between criminology and criminal law. Zhongguo Faxue (China Law Studies, in Chinese).

Wong, K. C. (2002). Policing in the People’s Republic of China: The road to reform in the 1990s. British Journal of Criminology, 42, 281-316.

Yin, J. (1997). Review of criminological studies in contemporary China. Minzhu and Fazhi Publishing House (in Chinese).

Zhou, L. (ed.) (2004). Updated edition of contemporary empirical criminology. Renmin Fayuan Publishing House.

Notes

1. http://news.xinhuanet.com/ziliao/2004-12/14/content_2332921.htm

2. http://members.tripod.com/~orgcrime/darkside.htm

3. http://216.239.51.104/search?q=cache:rnbi8yMWHaQJ:www.olemiss.edu/courses/pol324/dengxp92.htm+Deng+Xiaoping++1992+prostitution&hl=zh-CN&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=1