Justice Reinvestment Overseas
This extract from the Palgrave Studies in Prisons and Penology book series discussed how as more US states have taken up justice reinvestment to deal with ballooning corrections populations and the budgetary realities that go with them, justice reinvestment has taken a range of shapes. Cumulatively, these strategies have contributed to a change in the political climate whereby lowering imprisonment rates can be seriously entertained by public officials. Moreover, according to Gary Dennis of the BJA, JRI initiatives have...
This policy brief from the Urban Institute is designed to guide local policymakers in undertaking justice reinvestment, a data-driven strategy to identify the drivers of criminal justice system costs and make more efficient use of resources while maintaining public safety.
In partnership with the U.S. Department of Justice’s Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA), the Urban Institute released a report that assesses the Justice Reinvestment Initiative (JRI) and describes the experiences and interim outcomes in participating JRI states. Seventeen states are projected to save as much as $4.6 billion through policies designed to control corrections spending and increase public safety. Eight states that had JRI policies in effect for at least one year reduced their prison populations. States have reinvested more than $165 million in public...
The Urban Institute released a report in November 2014 that summarised the findings of 17 local jurisdictions across the country that used a justice reinvestment approach to enact polices to reduce correctional populations and costs and reinvest savings into public safety strategies.
The International Centre for Prison Studies at King’s College London’s School of Law has conducted research into the experiences of Justice Reinvestment in the US and the UK. In doing so, they highlight the benefits, pitfalls, and the likely impact of Justice Reinvestment on the development of criminal justice policy.
This Urban Institute report details the activities of the 28 American states that have formally engaged with Justice Reinvestment between 2010 and 2016. It examine outcomes in a subset of those states and summarizes key policy reforms.
This 2010 paper by Melanie Schwartz in volume 14 issue 1 of the Australian Indigenous Law Review considers the merits of the justice reinvestment approach adopted in the United States and United Kingdom. It also analyses its potential for application in the Indigenous context in Australia.
