What motivated your choice for the areas of Economics and Criminology? What were the key milestones in your academic and scientific career?
I often say that I’m in my second academic and scientific life, which began around fifteen years ago. The first life was about thirty years ago. First in Economics and now in Criminology. My academic and scientific journey has been driven by a desire of understanding decision-making, what determines it, and its impact on ourselves, the groups we belong to, and the people and institutions with which we interact, both directly and indirectly. Additionally, I have a strong interest in evaluating interventions in the justice and security systems. In my 'first life,' my attention was focused on decision-making in the context of scarcity. In my 'second life,' I’m more concentrated on decisions regarding behaviors that cause harm to others or to the environment. In Economics, my interests initially revolved around macroeconomic issues, particularly monetary policy, although increasingly focusing on explaining individual and group decision-making and how these decisions impact larger macroeconomic aggregates. In Criminology, my interests have solidified around evaluating justice and security intervention programs, costs of crime, financial crime, and modeling interactions among individuals in planning, executing, and concealing criminal activity within organized crime groups. Despite referring to these as two distinct lives, they are, in fact, a path of strong continuity based on common elements: human decision-making, the use of scientific methods, statistical analysis, and the application of quantitative tools borrowed from mathematics, such as game theory or network analysis, to examine interactions among agents.

Has there been any moment or experience throughout your scientific career that has redefined your perspective on these areas of study? Could you share that experience with us?
I wouldn’t say that my perspective on the fields of Economics and Criminology has changed, but rather that the way I work within theoretical frameworks has evolved. In the early years, I simply tried to discuss how empirical data could confirm or refute the predictions made by theoretical models. Today, however, I find myself increasingly questioning the assumptions underlying these theoretical models, which often do not align with actual data. This shift has led me to contribute to the redefinition of these frameworks. I believe this is a natural evolution after gaining more experience over time, coupled with extensive readings and exposure to insightful colleagues from interdisciplinary fields. I’ve been very fortunate to interact with or collaborate on projects with these colleagues, yielding increasingly interesting results, especially in the domain of deviant behavior and societal responses to such behavior.

Some of your current research interests intersect Criminology with Economic Analysis of Law. Could you share with the U.Porto scientific community how you foresee the evolution of these study areas in the near future, particularly in terms of methodologies and emerging topics?
Economic Analysis of Law applies economic principles to the evaluation of laws and the impact of legislative changes, focusing on efficiency analysis and the creation of incentives that influence individual and group behavior. It intersects with Criminology when the focus is on crime, its agents, and the corresponding societal response. This approach can be applied when analyzing the efficiency of alternative deterrence methods, estimating the effects of intervention programs in the justice and security systems, or assessing crime costs. There is significant potential for growth in combining Economic Analysis of Law with Criminology, particularly in studying interactions between individuals and formal control systems, as well as among individuals who regularly and systematically plan, execute, and conceal crimes, especially in online environments like the Internet or Darknet. The research becomes even more compelling when considering artificial intelligence, where certain actions on the network are carried by bots, rather than directly by humans. In this more complex framework, treating machines as optimizing agents is essential for studying the efficacy and efficiency of better crime-fighting strategies. (The term ‘bot’ refers to a software application that performs automated tasks, primarily on the Internet).

How can scientific research in these social sciences fields contribute to creating more effective and equitable public policies, while promoting social justice?
The implementation of public policy is always an intervention in how individuals interact within society. Therefore, it's crucial to understand how people will perceive and react to it. It is important to predict whether the policy shock will trigger delinquent behaviors or exacerbate existing ones, or whether, ideally, we can block or minimize certain criminal phenomena. It is also essential to assess whether society will benefit from a net welfare gain that includes the promotion of social justice. Using empirical data collection, insights from Criminology, and tools from Economic Analysis of Law, along with both quantitative and qualitative data analysis, we can scientifically evaluate programs, such as victim protection initiatives for specific crimes. This approach allows us to propose evidence-based policies to decision-makers. The School of Criminology has conducted studies of this nature, responding to requests from the community and from entities in the justice and security sectors. This integrated approach not only promotes public sector efficiency but also contribute to social justice and the equitable treatment of individuals in particularly vulnerable circumstances. Indeed, this is a goal that greatly values the work that can be done in Criminology, which should be better known, especially now when this area of knowledge deserves more recognition in our country.

Could you share with us a project that is particularly dear to you and that has had, or you expect to have, a significant impact both in the scientific community and in society?
I would like to highlight three projects. One area of Criminology research we have participated in, and where the School of Criminology has begun to accumulate experience, involves analysing judicial responses to certain types of crime. In this context, one of the projects involved examining judicial decisions on the crime of domestic violence. This included analyzing the agents (the victim and the presumed aggressor), the crime and its circumstances, the judicial decision itself, and the factors -explicitly or implicitly considered in the law - that were revealed through data analysis to be determinant in that decision. Recommendations were made to enhance the scientific training of judges, which could even lead to proposals for changes to the law, benefiting society. In the context of decision-making studies, I would like to highlight a project focused on developing a theoretical decision-making model. This project aimed to analyze, comparatively, the effectiveness of deterrence tools in the context of environmental crimes, specifically in fisheries. The theoretical model has been completed, and its conclusions now require empirical validation. Finally, in another area of Criminology, we developed a project focused on dishonest behavior in entrepreneurship. In this project, we created a scale to measure this type of behavior, identified personal and contextual risk factors, and produced a manual of best practices based on criminological and organizational knowledge to be applied in the incubation of entrepreneurial initiatives, benefiting the entire entrepreneurial ecosystem.

Currently, you are the Director of the Criminology School at FDUP. What key areas of research are especially prominent in criminology today? Are there any topics, you believe, deserve special attention?
Criminal phenomena are diverse, making it impossible to highlight just one theme. The School of Criminology aims to continue establishing itself as the center for the study of deviant behavior in Portugal and is, therefore, attentive to the most recent challenges society faces, where scientifically grounded responses are required. For this reason, we are highly focused on the criminal activities occurring in the vast space of the Internet, where a significant number of people now move. Beyond understanding the various illicit practices that take place in this context, attention must also be paid to the actors involved, their modus operandi, victimization patterns, and risk and avoidance behaviors. We emphasise identifying patterns in how offenders interact with their environment, peers, and the minimally existing formal control system, extending to the new challenges posed by artificial intelligence and big data. This focus, however, does not detract from our ongoing commitment to evaluating interventions with offenders, victims, and other particularly vulnerable populations, as well as other interventions in the justice and security systems. Reintegration into society after incarceration, addictive behaviors and their relationship with criminal acts, environmental crimes, white-collar crimes, organized crime, and criminal networks - whether in physical or cyber contexts - remain high priorities for us.

Internationally, you have worked with the Executive Council of the European Society of Criminology and remain an active member. In your opinion, what can Portugal learn or perhaps implement based on the best international practices?
From my perspective, knowledge creation should aim to address societal problems and needs. But this requires that society, or its political representatives, seek to apply this knowledge for the benefit of all, especially since much scientific activity is publicly funded. I believe this is the core issue, and few states manage it well. Therefore, I won’t talk about “best international practices” but rather universal ones. Let’s consider an example. Suppose researchers conduct a scientific evaluation of an intervention practice with victims or a particularly vulnerable group in society. Data is collected, and a study is produced. The conclusion might indicate that part of the intervention is positive, but urgent changes are needed in other areas, calling for public-interest measures. Technical reports are produced and sent to policymakers, highlighting the need for intervention. A public presentation of the study is made, and it garners media coverage. International scientific publications and citations are achieved, but when we seek to leverage the findings for public benefit, often nothing happens. I am particularly critical of this situation. I believe there is still a lack of scientific literacy among public decision-makers, partly due to an occasional lack of skill in communicating scientific results, but there is also a clear, narrow perspective regarding public intervention, which tends to undervalue the long-term benefits of changes that could be implemented today based on scientific knowledge.

To conclude, we’d like to explore a more personal side. Beyond your teaching and research roles (which also include various other responsibilities and affiliations), what helps you navigate such a busy academic career? Do you maintain any hobbies, for instance?
Scientific activity, along with participating in research groups and working on various projects — some of which are very demanding in terms of time and attention — has been absorbing. My academic role is also  split between preparing for classes, supporting and supervising students, and engaging in academic management. This latter role is divided between leading the School of Criminology and participating in various management bodies within the Faculty. As a result, the little free time I have is reserved for addressing family needs, which are often impacted by my professional life. This professional life quickly tends to blur into personal life, surpassing the temporal, spatial, and mental boundaries that would naturally be set by a conventional employment contract.

You can find more information on the professor and researcher here.