Is being soft on punishment the solution of gentle justice to reducing crime?
Gao, Chao (2022)
2022
Master's Programme in Global Society
Yhteiskuntatieteiden tiedekunta - Faculty of Social Sciences
This publication is copyrighted. You may download, display and print it for Your own personal use. Commercial use is prohibited.
Hyväksymispäivämäärä
2022-06-13
Julkaisun pysyvä osoite on
https://urn.fi/URN:NBN:fi:tuni-202205164979
https://urn.fi/URN:NBN:fi:tuni-202205164979
Tiivistelmä
Finland has succeeded in reducing a significant prison population, lowering its recidivism rate, and bringing its imprisonment rate in line with the rest of Nordic countries since the 1960s. Finland's “soft” penal system and its open prisons have attracted a lot of attention from around the world in recent years, much of it positive, thanks to the liberal penal system and substantial rehabilitation programs. Finland also faces some criticism for its adoption of humane criminal policy and "gentle justice" for prisoners. Although Finland's political and public policy settings have recognized evidence-based crime prevention and control as a priority, little is known regarding the impact of Finland's “gentle justice” in the global context.
Should we punish all offenders harsh and lock them up? Most rational theories on criminal deterrence implicate severe punishment has a little effect of reducing recidivism rate and criminal behaviour. Many reputational economists and scholars, Ehrlich (1973), Sieberg (2005), Western (2013), have argued that alternatives to punishments such as rehabilitation programs and other enhancing legal human capital investments in prison, including educational, work-related training, and post-releases programs, may substantially support and foster reintegration into the society by improving prisoner’s accessibility to future labour market, while encouraging them to invest in legal human capital during incarceration. Because human capital is subject depreciation. Individuals may enhance their legal human through investments.
Thus, the master thesis is a study of the three-period model of optimal participation in legitimate and illegitimate market activities, which is inspired by Ehrlich (1973) model that harsh punishment does not rehabilitate. In every period, the individual can choose the optimal allocation of time between conducting either legitimate or illegitimate income-generating activities. While the rehabilitation effect on punishment may affect individual’s choices and preferences in crime after each period. Therefore, the realization of human capital depletion and other social stigmas may have implications for both available choices and future decisions to the individual. The three-period model has emphasized the key importance of rehabilitation effects of punishment during incarceration. It has also highlighted the positive changes in the legal human capital while being incarcerated may also influence the post-prison behaviour of prisoners, which also provides new insights and suggestion, such as enhancing legal human capital during incarceration and emphasizing the rehabilitation effect of punishment, which are distinctively different from many extant models that are heavily associated with more punitive, harsher punishment models.
Should we punish all offenders harsh and lock them up? Most rational theories on criminal deterrence implicate severe punishment has a little effect of reducing recidivism rate and criminal behaviour. Many reputational economists and scholars, Ehrlich (1973), Sieberg (2005), Western (2013), have argued that alternatives to punishments such as rehabilitation programs and other enhancing legal human capital investments in prison, including educational, work-related training, and post-releases programs, may substantially support and foster reintegration into the society by improving prisoner’s accessibility to future labour market, while encouraging them to invest in legal human capital during incarceration. Because human capital is subject depreciation. Individuals may enhance their legal human through investments.
Thus, the master thesis is a study of the three-period model of optimal participation in legitimate and illegitimate market activities, which is inspired by Ehrlich (1973) model that harsh punishment does not rehabilitate. In every period, the individual can choose the optimal allocation of time between conducting either legitimate or illegitimate income-generating activities. While the rehabilitation effect on punishment may affect individual’s choices and preferences in crime after each period. Therefore, the realization of human capital depletion and other social stigmas may have implications for both available choices and future decisions to the individual. The three-period model has emphasized the key importance of rehabilitation effects of punishment during incarceration. It has also highlighted the positive changes in the legal human capital while being incarcerated may also influence the post-prison behaviour of prisoners, which also provides new insights and suggestion, such as enhancing legal human capital during incarceration and emphasizing the rehabilitation effect of punishment, which are distinctively different from many extant models that are heavily associated with more punitive, harsher punishment models.