COVID-19 and European carcerality: Do national prison policies converge when faced with a pandemic?

Olga Zeveleva, José Ignacio Nazif-Munoz
{"title":"COVID-19 and European carcerality: Do national prison policies converge when faced with a pandemic?","authors":"Olga Zeveleva,&nbsp;José Ignacio Nazif-Munoz","doi":"10.1177/14624745211002011","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The article analyses an original dataset on policies adopted in 47 European countries between December 2019 and June 2020 to prevent coronavirus from spreading to prisons, applying event-history analysis. We answer two questions: 1) Do European countries adopt similar policies when tackling the COVID-19 pandemic in prisons? 2) What factors are associated with prison policy convergence or divergence? We analyze two policies we identified as common responses across prisons around the world: limitations on visitation rights for prisoners, and early releases of prisoners. We found that all states in our sample implemented bans on visits, showing policy convergence. Fewer countries (16) opted for early releases. Compared to the banning of visitation, early releases took longer to enact. We found that countries with prison overcrowding problems were quicker to release or pardon prisoners. When prisons were not overcrowded, countries with higher proportions of local nationals in their prisons were much faster to limit visits relative to prisons in which the foreign population was high. This research broadens our comparative understanding of European carcerality by moving the comparative line further East, taking into account multi-level governance of penality, and analyzing variables that emphasize the 'society' element of the 'punishment and society' nexus.</p>","PeriodicalId":74620,"journal":{"name":"Punishment & society","volume":"24 4","pages":"642-666"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/14624745211002011","citationCount":"7","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Punishment & society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14624745211002011","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

Abstract

The article analyses an original dataset on policies adopted in 47 European countries between December 2019 and June 2020 to prevent coronavirus from spreading to prisons, applying event-history analysis. We answer two questions: 1) Do European countries adopt similar policies when tackling the COVID-19 pandemic in prisons? 2) What factors are associated with prison policy convergence or divergence? We analyze two policies we identified as common responses across prisons around the world: limitations on visitation rights for prisoners, and early releases of prisoners. We found that all states in our sample implemented bans on visits, showing policy convergence. Fewer countries (16) opted for early releases. Compared to the banning of visitation, early releases took longer to enact. We found that countries with prison overcrowding problems were quicker to release or pardon prisoners. When prisons were not overcrowded, countries with higher proportions of local nationals in their prisons were much faster to limit visits relative to prisons in which the foreign population was high. This research broadens our comparative understanding of European carcerality by moving the comparative line further East, taking into account multi-level governance of penality, and analyzing variables that emphasize the 'society' element of the 'punishment and society' nexus.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
COVID-19与欧洲癌症:面对大流行,各国监狱政策是否趋同?
本文采用事件历史分析方法,分析了2019年12月至2020年6月期间欧洲47个国家为防止新冠病毒在监狱传播而采取的政策的原始数据集。我们回答两个问题:1)欧洲国家在监狱应对COVID-19大流行时是否采取类似政策?2)哪些因素与监狱政策趋同或分化有关?我们分析了我们确定为世界各地监狱共同应对的两项政策:限制囚犯探视权和提前释放囚犯。我们发现样本中的所有州都实施了禁止访问,显示出政策趋同。更少的国家(16个)选择提前发行。与禁止探视相比,提前释放需要更长的时间才能生效。我们发现,存在监狱过度拥挤问题的国家释放或赦免囚犯的速度更快。在监狱没有过度拥挤的情况下,监狱中当地国民比例较高的国家比外国人口较多的监狱更快地限制探视。本研究通过将比较线进一步向东移动,考虑到刑罚的多层次治理,并分析强调“刑罚与社会”关系中的“社会”因素的变量,拓宽了我们对欧洲刑罚的比较理解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Parole as a boxing match: Lifers, prosecution, and the adversarial making of parole hearings Book Review: Why Punish Perpetrators of Mass Atrocities? Purposes of Punishment in International Criminal Law by Florian Jeßberger and Julia Geneuss Book review: Parole on Probation: Parole Decision-Making, Public Opinion and Public Confidence by Robin Fitzgerald, Arie Freiberg, Shannon Dodd and Lorana Bartels Book review: Penality in the Underground: The IRA’s Pursuit of Informers by Ron Dudai Regulating criminal justice: The role of procedural justice and legitimacy in the inspection of probation in England and Wales
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1