2011
DOI: 10.1111/j.1745-9133.2011.00729.x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A private‐sector, incentives‐based model for justice reinvestment

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
83
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
4
4
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 50 publications
(84 citation statements)
references
References 7 publications
1
83
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Clear, 2011), this study may provide some optimism. The impetus for change was entirely driven by economics.…”
Section: Part IV -Decarceration 'Alberta Style': Mechanismsmentioning
confidence: 82%
“…Clear, 2011), this study may provide some optimism. The impetus for change was entirely driven by economics.…”
Section: Part IV -Decarceration 'Alberta Style': Mechanismsmentioning
confidence: 82%
“…A change is needed, and there are strong indications that it is occurring. Federal interest in smart on crime approaches (Department of Justice 2013b), excitement about promising state and local initiatives (Hawken and Kleiman 2009;Listwan et al 2008; National Institute of Corrections 2010), and enthusiasm for approaches related to procedural justice (Tyler 2010) and the justice reinvestment model (Clear 2011) all signal a shift in the way federal criminal justice work is done. Indeed, the move to operationalize evidence-based practices throughout the federal probation and pretrial services system is a landmark and will likely redefine community corrections for decades to come.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…(Allen & Stern, 2007a, p. 6) Crime and justice scholars are now trying to make sense of: the rapid rise in popularity of justice reinvestment (Maruna, 2011); the tendency of justice reinvestment initiatives to redirect funds to community-based corrections rather than to communities (Clear, 2011); the applicability of justice reinvestment in countries other than the United States (Allen, 2011;Allen, Jallab, & Snaith, 2007;Fox & Albertson, 2010;Fox, Albertson, & Warburton, 2011;Schwartz, 2010); the relationship of justice reinvestment to community justice (Clear, 2007); the relationship of justice reinvestment to restorative justice (Allen & Stern, 2007a); and the ability of justice reinvestment to deliver on its promise to reduce prison populations and save money for state governments (Fabelo, 2010;Fox et al, 2011). Last year, Criminology & Public Policy published a Special Issue on Mass Incarceration that includes a research article on justice reinvestment by Todd Clear (2011) and six related policy essays (Allen, 2011;Austin, 2011;Burch, 2011;Kleiman, 2011;Maruna, 2011;Tonry, 2011).…”
Section: Barlowmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…The earliest justice reinvestment initiatives took place with direction from the Council of State Governments Justice Center. An early project in Connecticut is reported to have saved that state $30 million dollars, which, of course, caught the attention of other states struggling with the high costs of imprisonment (Clear, 2011).…”
Section: Justice Reinvestmentmentioning
confidence: 99%