Skip to main content
Log in

Credit Scoring as a Carceral Practice: An Abolitionist Framework

  • Published:
Race and Social Problems Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The practice of credit scoring is ubiquitous in today’s economy. Three-digit credit scores or their underlying data are applied well beyond the lending decisions for which they were originally designed and are routinely used in the contexts of employment, housing, and more. Drawing on carceral logics and abolitionist politics, we develop a framework to critically interpret the practice of credit scoring. We theorize credit scoring as a carceral practice and technology in the afterlife of slavery that expands anti-black discipline and punishment. We suggest that credit scoring is incapable of objectively assessing risk and that claims of objectivity legitimize an exploitative system of evaluation that mediates people’s access to the means of survival. Moreover, credit scoring expands the scope of how people are conscripted into consumerism and disciplined and punished under racial capitalism. We review research literature on credit scoring as a step toward applying this framework and demonstrate how research provides an alibi for anti-black racism embedded in contemporary credit scores. We conclude with a call to abolish the practice of credit scoring and imagine new, abolitionist alternatives for people to live safely and with dignity.

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

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. We note differences between related yet distinct products in the context of credit and offer definitions. A credit report is a statement that contains information about a person’s credit activities, such as histories of loan payments, status of credit accounts, and property liens and bankruptcies. A credit score is a three-digit numerical ordering produced by algorithmic processing of data from a person’s credit bureau files. The algorithms used to produce a person’s credit score can be different depending on the context, such as in rendering decisions about insurance versus lending products. The distinctions between a credit report and credit score can matter for identifying precise harms. We attempt to use the appropriate term for discussing the precise product at hand throughout our paper, where these terms appear. At the same time, we also deploy the phrase “the practice of credit scoring” to consider this set of related products in the context of credit.

  2. During slavery, White women had owned enslaved black people, independent from their husbands or family estates, and they leveraged human chattel for accessing credit and taking out loans (Jones-Rogers, 2020).

  3. We recognize the longer and more nuanced histories in the transitions from slave patrols to policing and present-day mass incarceration; though, we simplify this history here due to space limitations.

  4. Data on race or ethnicity are not routinely available outside of the context of mortgage lending. This is because the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA) requires lenders to collect this demographic information, yet protections under the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA) prohibit lenders from collecting racial demographic information.

  5. The text of congressional legislation H.R. 3621 is available here: https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/3621.

References

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors thank the Abolitionist Social Change Collective (ASCC) and participants of the University of California Washington Center’s Abolitions Conference for their valuable feedback on early drafts of this paper. We also thank participants for their comments during a convening sponsored by The New School’s Institute on Race, Power, and Political Economy, including Drs. Darrick Hamilton, Grieve Chelwa, and Suparna Bhaskaran.

Funding

The authors did not receive funding for this work.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Terri Friedline.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Friedline, T., Stewart, K., Bolinger, C. et al. Credit Scoring as a Carceral Practice: An Abolitionist Framework. Race Soc Probl 16, 230–248 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12552-023-09406-6

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12552-023-09406-6

Keywords

Navigation