Administrative co-evolution: Penality and welfare in Colombia's child protection system

This article examines the administrative co-evolution of penal and welfare logics in Colombia's child protection system. Moving beyond Northern narratives of rupture and hybridity, it conceptualises penality and welfare as mutually reinforcing logics that developed together through an expanding administrative apparatus. Within this framework, welfare provision generates surveillance infrastructure while coercive oversight becomes legitimised as necessary protection. By framing risks and harms as products of individual responsibility, this administrative model justifies expansive intervention while evading structural transformations. Despite shifting from judicial to administrative procedures, the system has retained and expanded its coercive foundations. Most paradoxically, human rights discourses since the 1990s have further intensified administrative coercion by recasting systemic failures as individual rights violations requiring prolonged surveillance and institutionalisation.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Theoretical Criminology
Published
2025-10-17
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/13624806251372168
Primary Topic
Criminal Justice and Corrections Analysis
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Administrative co-evolution: Penality and welfare in Colombia's child protection system

Valeria Ruiz Pérez
Theoretical Criminology
Criminal Justice and Corrections Analysis
article

Administrative co-evolution: Penality and welfare in Colombia's child protection system

Valeria Ruiz Pérez
article en

Abstract

This article examines the administrative co-evolution of penal and welfare logics in Colombia's child protection system. Moving beyond Northern narratives of rupture and hybridity, it conceptualises penality and welfare as mutually reinforcing logics that developed together through an expanding administrative apparatus. Within this framework, welfare provision generates surveillance infrastructure while coercive oversight becomes legitimised as necessary protection. By framing risks and harms as products of individual responsibility, this administrative model justifies expansive intervention while evading structural transformations. Despite shifting from judicial to administrative procedures, the system has retained and expanded its coercive foundations. Most paradoxically, human rights discourses since the 1990s have further intensified administrative coercion by recasting systemic failures as individual rights violations requiring prolonged surveillance and institutionalisation.

Theoretical Criminology
University of Nottingham (GB)
Openalex Percentile: Top 61%
Criminal Justice and Corrections Analysis
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Administrative co-evolution: Penality and welfare in Colombia's child protection system — Valeria Ruiz Pérez · Theoretical Criminology (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS