Typically at NCPC, we focus on law-abiding citizens using common sense and proven strategies to prevent crime in their homes and neighborhoods. However, as recidivism data indicate, we as a community need to remember that crime prevention does not stop with an arrest. Jail time does not necessarily deter later crime; indeed, as often cited here, many prisoners are rearrested within three years of their release.
Two economists bring yet more information to the discussion of prisons' effects on crime. In "Does Prison Harden Inmates?" (PDF) M. Keith Chen and Jesse M. Shapiro study the effects of prison conditions on recidivism, investigating specifically whether harsh conditions (such as those found in maximum security lockups) lead to higher rates of recidivism. Unsurprisingly, they find that "harsher prison conditions cause higher rates of post-release criminal behavior, behavior which is also measurably more violent." The study, unfortunately, cannot definitively speak to why this is—harsher prison time could hurt future job prospects (and thus, reintegration); encourage "a taste for violence"; or help "inmates acquire skills, learn of new prospects, or develop criminal contacts."
The implications for prevention practitioners are obvious. It is intolerable that punishment should lead to more crime. We need to extend prevention efforts to prisons and sentencing, too. Foremost, it would be helpful to know what about prison life promotes later violence so that we can effectively target efforts and resources. More fundamentally though, we must continue to argue for a reasonable discussion of prison and punishment generally, taking it beyond simple arguments about warehousing and "just desserts." If we are going to spend $37 billion on incarceration, we should demand a return on that investment, which we can measure in lower rates of recidivism and less crime overall.
Hat tip to Marginal Revolution.
Comments