自由的对比:比较英格兰、威尔士和挪威的开放式和封闭式监狱的监禁经历

IF 2 3区 社会学 Q1 CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY European Journal of Criminology Pub Date : 2021-12-31 DOI:10.1177/14773708211065905
Kristian Mjåland, Julie Laursen, Anna Schliehe, Simon R. Larmour
{"title":"自由的对比:比较英格兰、威尔士和挪威的开放式和封闭式监狱的监禁经历","authors":"Kristian Mjåland, Julie Laursen, Anna Schliehe, Simon R. Larmour","doi":"10.1177/14773708211065905","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Open prisons are portrayed as less harmful custodial institutions than closed prisons, and prison systems that rely more heavily on low security imprisonment are typically considered to have a more humane and less punitive approach to punishment. However, few studies have systematically compared the subjective experiences of prisoners held in open and closed prisons, and no study has yet compared the role and function of open prisons across jurisdictions. Drawing on a survey conducted with prisoners (N = 1082) in 13 prisons in England and Wales and Norway, we provide the first comparative analysis of experiences of imprisonment in closed and open prisons, conducted in countries with diverging penal philosophies (‘neoliberal’ vs. ‘social democratic’). The article documents that open prisons play a much more significant role in Norway than in England and Wales; that prisoners in both countries rate their experience significantly more positively in open compared to closed prisons; and that while imprisonment seems to produce similar kinds of pains in both types of prisons, they are perceived as less severe and more manageable in open prisons. These findings suggest important implications for comparative penology, penal policy, and prison reform.","PeriodicalId":51475,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Criminology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"8","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Contrasts in freedom: Comparing the experiences of imprisonment in open and closed prisons in England and Wales and Norway\",\"authors\":\"Kristian Mjåland, Julie Laursen, Anna Schliehe, Simon R. Larmour\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/14773708211065905\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Open prisons are portrayed as less harmful custodial institutions than closed prisons, and prison systems that rely more heavily on low security imprisonment are typically considered to have a more humane and less punitive approach to punishment. However, few studies have systematically compared the subjective experiences of prisoners held in open and closed prisons, and no study has yet compared the role and function of open prisons across jurisdictions. Drawing on a survey conducted with prisoners (N = 1082) in 13 prisons in England and Wales and Norway, we provide the first comparative analysis of experiences of imprisonment in closed and open prisons, conducted in countries with diverging penal philosophies (‘neoliberal’ vs. ‘social democratic’). The article documents that open prisons play a much more significant role in Norway than in England and Wales; that prisoners in both countries rate their experience significantly more positively in open compared to closed prisons; and that while imprisonment seems to produce similar kinds of pains in both types of prisons, they are perceived as less severe and more manageable in open prisons. These findings suggest important implications for comparative penology, penal policy, and prison reform.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51475,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Criminology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-12-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"8\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Criminology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/14773708211065905\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Criminology","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14773708211065905","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

摘要

与封闭式监狱相比,开放式监狱被描述为危害较小的监禁机构,而更严重依赖低安全性监禁的监狱系统通常被认为具有更人道和更少惩罚性的惩罚方法。然而,很少有研究系统地比较开放和封闭监狱中囚犯的主观体验,也没有研究比较不同司法管辖区开放监狱的作用和功能。根据对英格兰、威尔士和挪威13所监狱的囚犯(N = 1082)进行的一项调查,我们首次对在刑罚理念(“新自由主义”与“社会民主主义”)不同的国家进行的封闭式和开放式监狱的监禁经验进行了比较分析。这篇文章证明,开放式监狱在挪威比在英格兰和威尔士发挥更重要的作用;两国的囚犯对他们在开放监狱的经历的评价明显高于封闭监狱;尽管两种类型监狱的监禁似乎产生了相似的痛苦,但在开放式监狱中,这种痛苦被认为没有那么严重,也更容易控制。这些发现对比较刑罚学、刑罚政策和监狱改革具有重要意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Contrasts in freedom: Comparing the experiences of imprisonment in open and closed prisons in England and Wales and Norway
Open prisons are portrayed as less harmful custodial institutions than closed prisons, and prison systems that rely more heavily on low security imprisonment are typically considered to have a more humane and less punitive approach to punishment. However, few studies have systematically compared the subjective experiences of prisoners held in open and closed prisons, and no study has yet compared the role and function of open prisons across jurisdictions. Drawing on a survey conducted with prisoners (N = 1082) in 13 prisons in England and Wales and Norway, we provide the first comparative analysis of experiences of imprisonment in closed and open prisons, conducted in countries with diverging penal philosophies (‘neoliberal’ vs. ‘social democratic’). The article documents that open prisons play a much more significant role in Norway than in England and Wales; that prisoners in both countries rate their experience significantly more positively in open compared to closed prisons; and that while imprisonment seems to produce similar kinds of pains in both types of prisons, they are perceived as less severe and more manageable in open prisons. These findings suggest important implications for comparative penology, penal policy, and prison reform.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
European Journal of Criminology
European Journal of Criminology CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY-
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
5.30%
发文量
28
期刊介绍: The European Journal of Criminology is a refereed journal published by SAGE publications and the European Society of Criminology. It provides a forum for research and scholarship on crime and criminal justice institutions. The journal published high quality articles using varied approaches, including discussion of theory, analysis of quantitative data, comparative studies, systematic evaluation of interventions, and study of institutions of political process. The journal also covers analysis of policy, but not description of policy developments. Priority is given to articles that are relevant to the wider Europe (within and beyond the EU) although findings may be drawn from other parts of the world.
期刊最新文献
A meta-evaluative synthesis of the effects of custodial and community-based offender rehabilitation Punitiveness of society and criminal policy in six Central European countries Non-consensual intimate image distribution: Nature, removal, and implications for the Online Safety Act Self-legitimacy of prison workers: A comparative study in Slovenian prisons Exploring the factors influencing prison incentive scheme status among adult males: A prospective longitudinal study
×
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