Trendwatching is a tool to get a better grip on what happens next and as such it is used by the Dutch Financial and Fiscal Investigation Service (FIOD) to explore possible futures of financial crime with a time lap of two years. The author describes how trendwatching works. In this case a platform Trends4fi (www.trends4fi.org) was created with a website, a mobile app and trend groups to generate foresights in cooperation with connected networks from public and private organisations. This is called network trendwatching, in fact a social intelligence tool designed to generate as much new information and new insights on developments which might have an impact on financial crime and the fight against it.

Threats, vulnerabilities, and new forms of attack within the cyber domain develop rapidly. To keep up with and respond to these trends, cyber security professionals must demonstrate reaction velocity, accuracy and a high tolerance for complexity. Publicly available information (PAI) can serve as an important aid to personnel engaged in cyber security analysis. However, evaluation of cyber analytical capacity – a pre-requisite for any measurement of quality or improvement – is still inchoate. This article covers the concept and design of an initial phase of research begun in October 2018 in The Netherlands to measure and improve cyber analysis techniques. The research program features a forecasting tournament to record participants’ probabilistic estimates on future cyber outcomes based exclusively on PAI knowledge acquisition. This phase of research seeks to address whether analysts’ predictions are more accurate in certain subjects within the cyber domain than in others and to assess how predictive accuracy in the cyber domain compares to accuracy in other domains in which forecasting tournaments have been organized.

This article focusses on the question whether quantitative modelling and simulation is useful for judicial forecasting, ex-ante testing of judicial policies, and (re)designing chains of organisations like the judicial chain. Specific attention is given to methods that can be used in the face of complexity and deep uncertainty. That is, when facing many substantial uncertainties. Complexity and uncertainty are first of all focused on. Subsequently, modelling methods for dealing with complexity and uncertainty are discussed in more detail, examples are given, and the process needed to build such models in a participatory way is discussed.

In the field of policymaking, there is a growing need to take advantage of the opportunities that big data predictions offer. A strong point of big data is that the large amounts of data that are collected nowadays can be re-used to find new insights. However, for effective use in policymaking it is also important to take into account the relating limitations and challenges. For example, the quality of the data used can be a problem. Outdated data and data of which the semantics have changed, may result in predictions that are no longer correct. In addition, it is difficult to apply predictions to individual cases or people. In this article authors provide various practical recommendations for dealing with these problems. As long as people are aware of the limitations and handle the results with care, big data models can be a useful addition to traditional methods in the field of policymaking.

What are the most important threats for national security in the following years? What do we foresee for the longer term? How are threats interrelated? In this article, we discuss the work of the Dutch Network of Safety and Security Analysts (ANV), which deals with this type of questions since 2011. The main task of this multidisciplinary network is to provide input for the National Security Strategy. It does so by providing an Integrated Risk analysis and a Horizon scan National Security. The authors discuss the foresight-methods used by the network (scenario studies and horizon scanning techniques), as well as the most important conclusions from both studies.

This is a review of the book Met de kennis van morgen. Toekomst verkennen voor de Nederlandse overheid (‘With the knowledge of tomorrow. Exploring the future for the Dutch government’), published at the end of 2018. The bundle contains ten contributions written by authors working at various Dutch advisory boards and planning agencies. The articles do not discuss subjects belonging to the Justice and Security domain. But they are certainly relevant in terms of methods and approach.

In Circles of Support and Accountability (COSA) a group of trained and supervised volunteers support a medium to high-risk sex offender in his process of re-entry after detention. Sex offenders participate on a voluntary basis. Circles have a double aim: the prevention of new sexual offences and the rehabilitation of the sex offender. Circles offer social inclusion and support for behavior change, and monitor risk. They are embedded in the professional network of sex offender after care. Through a professional circle coordinator relevant information is circulated between the circle and professional agencies, to enable adequate support and interventions. Effect studies show that COSA contributes to a reduced risk of reoffending. The model was developed in Canada almost 25 years ago and has been picked up by a growing number of countries in Europe, the America’s, Asia, as well as Australia and New Zealand. Variations in the model become apparent and raise questions about the essentials of COSA.

Dutch legal scholars have expressed their concern over an increase in (the relevance of) supervision as part of the criminal sanction system. They endorse the need for a more fundamental research on the nature and position of supervision within the Dutch criminal sanction system. This article discusses some fundamental issues: the meaning of autonomy and the position of the autonomous person as an object of supervision, the possible consequences of supervision for and the various purposes of supervision within the criminal sanction system.

How can technological tools contribute to supervising and reintegrating offenders in society? Globally, technological tools for supervision are broken down into so-called first generation (GPS tracking) and second generation (smartphone and sensor technology). An overview is given of what is globally known about the effectiveness and assumed mechanisms of action of first-generation technical tools. Then it is explored what added value second-generation technical aids can have and to which working mechanisms they could connect. Smartphone and sensor technology have the potential to contribute to the rehabilitation functions of the supervision, inter alia because they offer possibilities for more personalized supervision and for the combination of supervision and treatment. Although initiatives have been started in this regard and research is ongoing, hardly anything is known yet about the effectiveness of these new technological applications. The reliability and safety of IT, as well as ethical and legal aspects also require attention.

The decision to revoke or recall a conditional sanction is barely researched in criminal justice research, despite the interests involved for the offender as well as society. This article reflects on some results from a comparative research project on breach decision-making (COST Action on Offender Supervision in Europe). Using Hawkins’ concept of serial decision-making, the interdependence of early stage and final stage decision makers is highlighted. The significant power exercised by early stage actors raises the issue of the need to ensure credibility of community sanctions and appropriate due process protections, without reducing their discretion so much that they cannot perform their role of supporting the offender to complete the supervisory order successfully.

Little is known about how ex-prisoners’ parole supervision experiences relate to desistance. The aim of this article therefore is to gain insight into the nature of release conditions and parole supervision of ex-prisoners and parolees’ perceptions of their supervision related to the desistance process. A total of 23 Dutch parolees were interviewed in depth at three waves starting in prison up to one year after their release, and the 69 interviews were combined with their parole files containing information about conditions, violations and sanctions. Parole files revealed the practice of highly engaged parole officers, who worked with parolees to strengthen factors known to foster desistance. However, the interviews showed that most parolees found their parole experience predominantly surveillance-oriented and not very helpful for desistance. Parole was experienced as most beneficial when parole officers used their discretionary power to adjust conditions creating ‘space’ for trial-and-error.

In this article the author asserts, based on his own experiences in this field, that the independence of research and researchers is not a given, but must always be conquered and defended. He relates the necessity of doing commissioned research to developments in Dutch legal academia and describes its strengths and weaknesses. He then makes the comparison with ‘pure’ academic research. He shows that most lecturers must fight and defend their independence against all sorts of developments within the modern university. There is not much room anymore to do one’s own free research. He concludes that neither academic nor commissioned research takes place in a vacuum without power relations.

Those who commission scientific research sometimes try to influence what and how the researcher executes the project, or to influence the outcomes. The scientific community utterly rejects such practices. The author discusses the diametrically different opinions on what is acceptable in the relation between those who commission scientific research and those that accept such a commission.