Advertisement

Springer Nature is making SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

The dynamics of unemployment and imprisonment in England and Wales, 1946–1985

  • 34 Accesses

Abstract

This paper explores the dynamic relationship between unemployment and prison admissions in the English criminal justice system. First, by adopting econometric procedures designed to test between alternative forms of dynamic equilibria, it finds that there has been a steady-state growth rate in prison admissions and that unemployment growth has played an important role in determining that equilibrium. Second, by developing a behavioral model of judicial expectations, it argues that judges have used their expectations as heuristic devices for simplifying sentencing decisions and that the unanticipated changes in unemployment have played a key role in determining changes in sentencing patterns. Due to individualized sentencing practices characteristic of English judges, unemployment plays a much larger role in determining prison sentences than warranted under Anglo-American legal traditions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Ashworth, A. (1983).Sentencing and Penal Policy, Weidenfeld and Nicolson, London.

  2. Ashworth, A.,et al. (1984). Sentencing in the Crown Court. Occasional Paper Number 10, Centre for Criminological Research, University of Oxford, Oxford.

  3. Baldock, J. C. (1980). Why the prison population has grown larger and younger.Howard J. Penol. Crime Prevent. 19: 142–155.

  4. Barro, R. J. (1977). Unanticipated money growth and unemployment in the United States.Am. Econ. Rev. 67: 101–115.

  5. Berk, R. A.,et al. (1981). A test of the stability of punishment hypothesis: The case of California, 1851–1970.Am. Social. Rev. 46: 805–829.

  6. Berk, R. A.et al. (1982). A further test of the stability of punishment hypothesis. In Hagan, J. (ed.),Quantitative Criminology: Innovations and Applications, Sage, Beverly Hills, Calif., pp. 39–64.

  7. Berk, R. A.,et al. (1983). Prisons as self-regulating systems: A comparison of historical patterns in California for male and female offenders.Law Soc. Rev. 17: 547–586.

  8. Blumstein, A. (1988). Prison populations: A system out of control? In Tonry, M., and Morris, N. (eds.),Crime and Justice: A Review of Research, Vol. 10, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp. 231–266.

  9. Blumstein, A., and Cohen, J. (1973). A theory of the stability of punishment.J. Crim. Law Criminol. 64: 198–207.

  10. Blumstein, A., Cohen, J., and Nagin, D. (1977). The dynamics of a homeostatic punishment process.J. Crim. Law Criminol. 67: 317–334.

  11. Blumstein, A., Cohen, J., Moitra, S., and Nagin, D. (1981). On testing the stability of punishment hypothesis: A reply.J. Crim. Law Criminol. 72: 1799–1808.

  12. Bottomley, K., and Pease, K. (1986).Crime and Punishment: Interpreting the Data, Open University Press, Milton Keynes.

  13. Bottoms, A. E. (1983). Neglected features of contemporary penal systems. In Garland, D., and Young, P. (eds.),The Power to Punish: Contemporary Penality and Social Analysis, Heinemann, London, pp. 166–202.

  14. Box, S., and Hale, C. (1982). Economic crisis and the rising prisoner population in England and Wales.Crime Soc. Just. 17: 20–35.

  15. Box, S., and Hale, C. (1985). Unemployment, imprisonment and prison overcrowding.Contemp. Crises 9: 209–228.

  16. Braithwaite, J. (1980). The political economy of punishment. In Wheelwright, E. L., and Buckley, K. (eds.),Essays in the Political Economy of Australian Capitalism, ANZ Books, Sydney.

  17. Chiang, A. C. (1974).Fundamental Methods of Mathematical Economics, 2nd ed., McGraw-Hill, New York.

  18. Clarke, R. V., and Cornish, D. B. (1985). Modeling offenders' decisions: A framework for research and policy. In Tonry, M., and Morris, N. (eds.),Crime and Justice: An Annual Review of Research, Vol. 6, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp. 147–186.

  19. Collins, R. (1975).Conflict Sociology: Toward an Explanatory Science, Academic Press, New York.

  20. Cook, P. J. (1980). Research in criminal deterrence: Laying the groundwork for the second decade. In Morris, N., and Tonry, M. (eds.),Crime and Justice: An Annual Review of Research, Vol. 2, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp. 211–268.

  21. Cook, P. J. (1986). The demand and supply of criminal opportunities. In Tonry, M., and Morris, N. (eds.),Crime and Justice: An Annual Review of Research, Vol. 7, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp. 1–28.

  22. Crow, I., and Simon, F. (1987).Unemployment and Magistrates Courts, NACRO, London.

  23. Davidson, J. E.,et al. (1978). Econometric modelling of the aggregate time series between consumers' expenditure and income in the United Kingdom.Econ. J. 88: 661–692.

  24. Farrington, D. P.,et al. (1986). Unemployment, school leaving and crime.Br. J. Criminol. 26: 335–356.

  25. Fitzmaurice, C., and Pease, K. (1986).The Psychology of Judicial Sentencing, Manchester University Press, Manchester.

  26. Garland, D., and Young, P. (1983). Towards a social analysis of penality. In Garland, D., and Young, P. (eds.),The Power to Punish: Contemporary Penality and Social Analysis, Heinemann, London, pp. 1–36.

  27. Gladstone, F. (1979). Crime and the crystal ball.Home Office Res. Unit Res. Bull. 1: 36–41.

  28. Greenberg, D. F. (1977). The dynamics of oscillatory punishment processes.J. Crim. Law Criminol. 68: 643–651.

  29. Hale, C. (1989). Unemployment, imprisonment, and the stability of punishment hypothesis: Some results using cointegration and error correction models.J. Quant. Criminol. 5: 169–186.

  30. Harvey, A. C. (1981).The Econometric Analysis of Time Series, Philip Allan, Oxford.

  31. Hendry, D. F., and Mizon, G. E. (1978). Serial correlation as a convenient simplification, not a nuisance: A comment on a study of the demand for money by the Bank of England.Econ. J. 88: 549–563.

  32. Home Office (1980).The Reduction of Pressure on the Prison System: Observations of the Fifteenth Report from the Expenditure Committee, Cmnd. 7948, HMSO, London.

  33. Inverarity, J., and McCarthy, M. (1986). Punishment and social structure revisited. Presented at the annual Law and Society Association Meetings, Chicago.

  34. Jankovic, I. (1977). Labor markets and imprisonment.Crime Soc. Just. Fall-Winter: 17–31.

  35. Konecni, V. J., and Ebbesen, E. B. (1982). An analysis of the sentencing system. In Konecni, V. J., and Ebbesen, E. B. (eds.),The Criminal Justice System: A Social-Psychological Approach, W. H. Freeman, San Francisco, pp. 293–332.

  36. Kozielecki, J. (1982).Psychological Decision Theory, D. Reidel, Boston.

  37. Laffargue, B., and Godefroy, T. (1987). Economic cycles and punishment: Unemployment and imprisonment. Paper presented to the 39th Annual Meeting of the American Society of Criminology, Montreal, Nov.

  38. Lowman, J., Menzies, R. J., and Palys, T. S. (1987).Transcarceration: Essays in the Sociology of Social Control, Gower, Aldershot.

  39. Keynes, J. M. (1973).The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money, Collected Writings, Vol. VII, Royal Economic Society, Macmillan, London.

  40. McLean, I. (1980).Crown Court: Patterns of Sentencing, Barry Rose, London.

  41. Melossi, D. (1979). Institutions of social control and the capitalist organisation of work. In Fine, B.,et al. (eds.),Capitalism and the Rule of Law, Hutchinson, London.

  42. Melossi, D. (1985). Punishment and social action: Changing vocabularies of punitive motive within a political business cycle.Curr. Perspect. Soc. Theory, 6: 169–197.

  43. Melossi, D. (1987)1 Political business cycles and imprisonment rates in Italy: Report on a work in progress.Rev. Black Polit. 16.

  44. Montgomery, R. (1985). Time series analysis of imprisonment in the context of the conflict-consensus debate on social control.Criminometrica 1: 49–73.

  45. Mott, J. (1985).Adult Prisons and Prisoners in England and Wales, 1970–1982: A Review of the Findings of Social Research, HMSO, London.

  46. Myers, S. L., Jr. (1984). Labor economics, preferences and the rationality assumption: A critical comment on Blau, Dickens and Malveaux. In Darity, W. A., Jr. (ed.),Labor Economics: Modern Views, Kluwer-Nijhoff, Boston, pp. 257–268.

  47. Myers, S. L., Jr., and Sabol, W. J. (1987). Business cycles and racial disparities in punishment.Rev. Black Polit. Econ. 16: 189–210.

  48. Needham, D. (1983).The Economics and Politics of Regulation: A Behavioral Approach, Little, Brown, Boston.

  49. Pindyck, R. S., and Rubinfeld, D. (1981).Econometric Models and Economic Forecasts, 2nd ed., McGraw-Hill, New York.

  50. Rusche, G., and Kirchheimer, O. (1939).Punishment and Social Structure, Columbia University Press, New York.

  51. Shapland, J. (1981).Between Conviction and Sentence, Routledge and Kegan Paul, London.

  52. Simon, H. (1979). Rational decision making in business organizations.Am. Econ. Rev. 69: 493–513.

  53. Sparks, R. (1971). The use of suspended sentences.Crim. Law Rev. 384–401.

  54. Stewart, M. B., and Wallis, K. F. (1981).Introductory Econometrics, 2nd ed., Basil Blackwell, Oxford.

  55. Tarling, R. (1979). Unemployment and crime.Res. Bull. 14: 28–33.

  56. Thomas, D. A. (1979).Principles of Sentencing in the Court of Appeal, Heinemann, London.

  57. Thomas, D. A. (1982)Current Sentencing Practice, Sweet and Maxwell, London.

  58. Walker, N. (1985).Sentencing: Theory, Law and Practice, Butterworths, London.

  59. Yeager, M. G. (1979). Unemployment and imprisonment.J. Crim. Law Criminol. 70: 586–588.

  60. Young, P. (1983). Sociology, the state and penal relations. In Garland, D., and Young, P. (eds.),The Power to Punish, Heinemann, London, pp. 84–100.

Download references

Author information

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Sabol, W.J. The dynamics of unemployment and imprisonment in England and Wales, 1946–1985. J Quant Criminol 5, 147–168 (1989). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01062521

Download citation

Key words

  • unemployment
  • imprisonment
  • steady-state growth
  • unanticipated unemployment
  • judicial expectations