This paper reviews current trends, innovations, and the future of corrections in the United States and abroad. Beginning with a personal perspective on the troubling growth of the U.S. prison population, the paper identifies overcrowding as the central problem driving related issues such as racial disparities, inadequate programming, and the rise of private prisons. It examines the harm reduction model as an alternative policy framework, evaluates privatization through providers like Corrections Corporation of America, and considers trends in juvenile and female incarceration. The paper concludes by analyzing international approaches — particularly in Western Europe — and arguing that the United States should adopt evidence-based alternatives to criminalization before further entrenching mass incarceration.
The paper demonstrates effective use of the literature review as an argumentative tool. Rather than simply summarizing sources, the author weaves citations together to build a cumulative case: overcrowding leads to privatization, privatization entrenches incentives for incarceration, and harm reduction offers an evidence-based exit from this cycle. This technique — using secondary literature to construct a policy argument — is a valuable model for undergraduate research writing in criminal justice and social policy.
The paper follows a problem-solution-evidence structure across six sections. The introduction establishes scope and stakes. The second section diagnoses the core problem (overcrowding and racial disparity). The third section presents the harm reduction model as a remedy. The fourth section evaluates privatization and emerging trends in juvenile and female incarceration. The fifth section surveys international innovations. The conclusion synthesizes findings and issues a policy recommendation. This clear scaffolding makes the argument easy to follow and the paper serves as a useful template for policy-oriented literature reviews.
One of the unfortunate ironies of living in the "Land of the Free" today is the fact that the United States incarcerates more of its citizens than any other country in the world. This paper provides a review of the relevant literature to identify current trends, innovations, and the future of corrections in the United States and in foreign countries. To this end, a personal perspective on the future of corrections in the United States is followed by an overview of the major problems in the current system. A series of recommended actions to resolve these problems is followed by an assessment of future trends and innovations in privatization, parole and probation, community corrections, and approaches to dealing with increasing numbers of juvenile and female offenders, as well as strategies for coping with overcrowded jails and prisons. Finally, an analysis of innovations being used in foreign countries is followed by a summary of the research and important findings in the conclusion.
On the one hand, the future of the corrections industry in the United States appears very robust, and all signs indicate this will continue to be a growth industry well into the 21st century. On the other hand, the fact that the corrections industry is a growth industry is a troubling sign that all is not well in America, and there is no consensus on how best to reverse these trends. After the prison population in the United States topped two million, Hunt (2007) observed, "Not only was this exponential increase in incarceration unusual, but research quickly revealed it to reflect the pernicious questions of race, class, and political disenfranchisement that have animated North American history" (p. 68).
One obvious solution to reversing the current trend toward incarceration would be to simply decriminalize the acts for which the majority of nonviolent offenders are being imprisoned. In other words, since many criminal offenders are being imprisoned for drug-related charges, legalizing drug use and trafficking would eliminate the crime altogether along with the concomitant need for incarceration. Clearly, this is a matter of social choice, and America has made its choices: "As a nation, we have chosen to frame substance use problems in terms of a criminal and medical model. We approach the problems through policies aimed primarily at drug supply reduction and, to a far lesser extent, at drug demand reduction with, perhaps, the belief that the deeper social ills will be healed if we can eliminate all nonmedical drug use" (Brocato & Wagner, 2003).
In fact, some observers suggest that because there has never been a human society that did not use drugs, it is folly to criminalize this behavior and even worse to punish those who do use drugs. As Hunt emphasizes, "Less than 25% of the prison population is there for violent crime, less than one percent for homicide. More than half the population is there for drug-related crimes" (p. 69). This argument can be taken further by considering what would happen if millions of Americans suddenly became criminals subject to imprisonment because they drank coffee (which contains caffeine), smoked or chewed tobacco (which contains nicotine), or owned firearms. Therefore, the argument goes, by making drugs legal, the United States would free up resources currently devoted to prosecuting and incarcerating millions of Americans for drug-related activities — resources that could be better used elsewhere. This approach is commonly known as the harm reduction model. According to Macmaster (2004), "Based on a public health model of social problems, harm reduction seeks to eliminate the negative consequences of phenomena for the members of a society without necessarily eliminating the phenomena" (p. 356).
Inflexible sentencing regimens such as "Three Strikes" also contribute to the existing prison overcrowding problem, and longer sentences mean that private prison providers can look forward to many years of continued growth. For example, in her essay "Sexual Abuse of Women in United States Prisons: A Modern Corollary of Slavery," Smith (2006) reports that:
Prisons have become the primary economic development project in many communities, providing economic growth and stability to economically marginal areas. Private prison concerns such as Wackenhut and Corrections Corporation of America are publicly traded on the New York Stock Exchange and build prisons not just in this country, but around the world. Prisoners are seen as a commodity that these corporate entities house as a service to states. In many states, the most powerful labor unions are police and correctional employee unions. (p. 571)
According to Dolovich (2005), both CCA and Wackenhut became profitable by the late 1980s, and by the mid-1990s these two organizations collectively controlled 75% of the American private prison market, which stood in excess of 90,000 beds. Most people would agree that it would not be reasonable to legalize many existing criminal behaviors simply to avoid incarceration, but it is equally reasonable to suggest that the current inflexible sentencing approaches are causing more problems than they are solving. It is also reasonable to conclude that because the United States incarcerates more of its citizens than any other country, either America is unusually effective at identifying criminal elements in its society, or other countries have adopted more progressive approaches to dealing with the same types of problems — issues discussed further below.
Perhaps the most serious problem facing the current correctional system in the United States is overcrowding. It is reasonable to assert that overcrowding is the basis for many of the other serious problems experienced by the correctional system today. Katz (2007) emphasizes, "While politicians, academics and media analysts debate the significance of that fact, there are very real signs that the burgeoning national prison population is becoming an increasing problem for federal and state detention facilities. At a time when the U.S. has the world's largest prison population, the national debate over prison overcrowding has never been more intense" (p. 3). In this regard, Hunt (2007) reports that, "Not only does the United States have the world's largest prison system, it has the world's highest rate of incarceration, estimated to be the highest rate historically of any society except slave-holding societies. In all, while the United States has 5% of the world's population, it holds roughly 25% of the world's prison population (9.2 million)" (p. 68).
Likewise, Cochrane, Melville, and Marsh (2004) note that despite some recent improvements in conditions in some U.S. prisons, there remains a dearth of constructive and educational activities for the majority of inmates, due in large part to the massive increase in prison population. These authors report, "Many prisoners spend longer alone in their cells and consequently less time working outside of them. Other pressures come from the longer periods served in prison and from the overcrowding consequent on rising numbers — so while many prison cells may be better equipped than in the past, this is perhaps scant consolation if prisoners spend ever-longer periods of time in them" (p. 198). Substandard conditions remain a major issue of concern and controversy, and work against the smooth operation of prisons (Cochrane et al., 2004).
At the federal level, the U.S. Bureau of Prisons (BOP) reported that the inmate population in federal correctional facilities was 201,117 (Quick Facts, 2008). At both the federal and state levels, minorities continue to be disproportionately represented in the prison population (Hunt, 2007). While the incarceration rates for women remain lower than for their male counterparts, this population is also growing in numbers relative to the larger American society (Dolovich, 2005).
Some of the tenets of the harm reduction model could be useful in addressing the alarming overcrowded conditions in the nation's jails and prisons. According to Macmaster (2004), there are five assumptions involved in this approach that must be taken into consideration when formulating new laws dealing with drug use in America:
First, substance use has been and will continue to be part of our world; accepting this reality leads to a focus on reducing drug-related harm rather than reducing drug use itself. Second, abstinence from substances is clearly effective at reducing substance-related harm, but it is only one of many possible objectives of services to substance users. Third, substance use inherently causes harm; however, many of the most harmful consequences of substance use — including HIV/AIDS, hepatitis C, overdoses, and automobile accidents — can be reduced without requiring complete abstinence. Fourth, services to substance users must be relevant and user-friendly if they are to be effective in helping people minimize their substance-related harm. Fifth, substance use must be understood from a broad perspective and not solely as an individual act; accepting this idea moves interventions away from coercion and criminal justice solutions toward a public health or social work perspective (p. 356).
To date, there has been considerable reluctance to adopt a harm reduction approach in the United States for two fundamental reasons. The first stems from the argument that reducing harm for users would result in an increase in the prevalence of drug use and, therefore, increased harm to society in terms of healthcare costs and violent crime. Those taking this position point to evidence that improved automobile safety features have led to increased speeding by drivers. It has also been suggested that because drug users are risk-takers to begin with, they may increase use or risky behavior to compensate for reduced harm, thereby negating any benefit.
The research showed that today, the United States incarcerates more of its citizens than any other nation in the world and these trends show no sign of slowing. Moreover, the research also showed that more women and young people are being incarcerated than ever before, and initiatives such as the "Three Strikes" approach have further exacerbated the situation. In this environment, it is little wonder that private prisons and jails have become a growth industry and that an enormous amount of resources are being devoted to "locking them up and throwing away the key."
You’re 63% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 2 sections.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.