Prison Regulation, for Safer Societies: Participatory, Effective, Efficient?

In May 2019, Dutch courts refused to deport an English suspected drug smuggler, citing the potential for inhuman and degrading treatment at HMP Liverpool. This well publicised judgment illustrates the necessity of my FLF: reconceptualising prison regulation, for safer societies. It seeks to save lives and money, and reduce criminal reoffending.

Over 10.74 million people are imprisoned globally. The growing transnational significance of detention regulation was signalled by the Optional Protocol to the United Nations Convention against Torture/OPCAT. Its 89 signatories, including the UK, must regularly examine treatment and conditions. The quality of prison life affects criminal reoffending rates, so the consequences of unsafe prisons are absorbed by our societies. Prison regulation is more urgent than ever. England and Wales' prisons are now less safe than at any point in recorded history, containing almost 83,000 prisoners: virtually all of whom will be released at some point. In 2016, record prison suicides harmed prisoners, staff and bereaved families, draining ~£385 million from public funds. Record prisoner self-harm was seen in 2017, then again in 2018. Criminal reoffending costs £15 billion annually. Deteriorating prison safety poses a major moral, social, economic and public health threat, attracting growing recognition.

Reconceptualising prison regulation is a difficult multidisciplinary challenge. Regulation includes any activity seeking to steer events in prisons. Effective prison regulation demands academic innovation and sustained collaboration and implementation with practitioners from different sectors (e.g. public, voluntary), regulators, policymakers, and prisoners: from local to (trans)national levels. Citizen participation has become central to realising more democratic, sustainable public services but is not well integrated across theory-policy-practice. I will coproduce prison regulation with partners, including the Prisons and Probation Ombudsman, voluntary organisations Safe Ground and the Prison Reform Trust, and (former) prisoners.

This FLF examines three diverse case study countries: England and Wales, Brazil and Canada, developing multinational implications. This approach is ambitious and risky, but critical for challenging commonsensical beliefs. Interviews, focus groups, observation and creative methodologies will be used. There are three aims, to:
i) theorise the (potential) participatory roles of prisoners and the voluntary sector in prison regulation
ii) appraise the (normative) relationships between multisectoral regulators (e.g. public, voluntary) from local to (trans)national scales
iii) co-produce (with multisectoral regulators), pilot, document and disseminate models of participatory, effective and efficient prison regulation in England and Wales (and beyond) - integrating multisectoral, multiscalar penal overseers and prisoners into regulatory theory and practice.

This is an innovative study. Punishment scholars have paid limited attention to regulation. Participatory networks of (former) prisoners are a relatively new formation but rapidly growing in influence. Nobody has yet considered agencies like the Prisons Inspectorate and Ombudsman alongside voluntary sector organisations and participatory networks, nor their collective influences from local to transnational scales. Nobody has tried to work with all of these agencies to reconceptualise prison regulation and test it in practice.

Findings will be developed, disseminated and implemented internationally. The research team will present findings and engage with diverse stakeholders and decision makers through interactive workshops (Parliament, London, Manchester, Liverpool and Birmingham), and multimedia outputs (e.g. infographics). This FLF has implications for prisons and detention globally, and broader relevance as a case study of participatory regulation of public services and policy translation.

This FLF has developed in direct response to identified needs of i) policymakers, through my engagement with the Parliamentary Justice Committee; ii) regulators, through my work with the Prisons and Probation Ombudsman and Independent Advisory Panel on Deaths in Custody; and ii) service users, through my interactions with voluntary sector organisations and prisoner lived experience networks. Reconceptualising prison regulation for safer societies could benefit multiple groups. OPCAT signals the growing global significance of detention regulation. The UK is at the global forefront of detention oversight but its prison regulation is ineffective and ripe for theoretical and practical development. The multisectoral, multiscalar and multinational foci of this FLF will uniquely place it to produce internationally relevant theory and implications. Responding to the opportunity created by the expanding OPCAT, my FLF will primarily benefit England and Wales/the UK, but will foster inter and transnationally relevant and promoted excellence and collaboration. Beneficiaries include:
- academics in multiple disciplines (explained above)
- government policymakers who seek to operate prisons more safely and efficiently (e.g. the Justice Committee)
- voluntary sector prison regulators in England and Wales (e.g. Prison Reform Trust). In 2011 nearly 20,000 voluntary organisations were working with criminalised individuals in England and Wales alone (Gojkovic et al 2011). All have at least some local, regional or national regulatory interest and/or function. Findings will help advance the welfare of prisoner beneficiaries
- voluntary sector prison regulators internationally (e.g. John Howard Society of Canada, Howard League for Penal Reform New Zealand)
- multinational voluntary sector detention regulators (e.g. Dignity, Human Rights Watch)
- think tanks (e.g. New Philanthropy Capital, the Social Market Foundation). Findings will provide ideas pertinent to the socioeconomic problem of prison regulation
- (quasi-)statutory penal regulators (e.g. Independent Monitoring Boards, Ombuds institutions)
- international (quasi-)governmental actors (e.g. EU, UN Torture and Human Rights Committees, OPCAT decision makers and preventative mechanism bodies). Findings will help such groups to perform their functions more effectively
- prisoners, who suffer when conditions deteriorate (there are around 83,000 prisoners in England and Wales and over 10.74 million globally)
- prisoners' families, who have a vested interest in prisoner welfare and visits (prison crises often lead to e.g. cancelled visits and distress)
- prison staff and their families, who benefit from safer working environments
- members of the public in a growing number of societies around the world, who have an interest in reducing reoffending
- social welfare organisations with responsibilities for safeguarding and security (e.g. adult and child secure settings, broader voluntary organisations e.g. NCVO). This research has the potential to contribute to UK and international public services effectiveness through regulation

A programme of high profile multisectoral workshops with and for stakeholders (including two in Parliament at months 25 and 40) and a multimedia web portal will underpin impact. Outputs will be (re)produced in accessible formats including videos, infographics and reports coauthored and badged with partners wherever possible (e.g. the Prisons and Probation Ombudsman, the Prisoner Policy Network), and made available free of charge on the project web portal. Social media and the networks of contacts (e.g. Criminal Justice Alliance) and international partner organisations (e.g. John Howard Society of Canada, Howard League for Penal Reform New Zealand) will promote outputs and drive web traffic.
- Gojkovic D et al (2011) Offender engagement with third sector organisations: a national prison-based survey. Third Sector Research Centre Working Paper 61.