Edinburgh Napier University

  This article is a novel use of the ‘agonistic framework’ – a theory of penal change developed in the US, which emphasises the role of hidden conflict – to analyse recent organisational reforms to probation in Scotland. It begins by drawing on recent empirical data to analyse the role of conflict between centralising and localist interests in driving these reforms. This is contrasted with a Scottish policy consensus over decarceration through diversion to community penalties, which despite broad support has been unsuccessful. To explain this contradictory situation, the article builds on recent agonistic literature on the exclusion of some conflicts from penal fields, adding new insights about the circumscription of smaller penal fields. It argues that together these factors serve to ‘crowd out’ debates necessary for substantive change. This new development of the agonistic framework helps explain Scotland’s lack of progress towards decarceration, with policy relevance for other smaller jurisdictions.