Social Control Meets New Public Management: Examining the Diffusion of State Prison Privatization, 1979‐2010

Abstract

While the merits and perils of privatization have remained a contentious and often polarizing debate, privatization of public services remains commonplace throughout the world. For instance, over the last several decades, U.S. governments at all levels have routinely pursued contracting arrangements for corrections management, known popularly as prison privatization. In this article, state prison privatization (SPP) is examined in three ways. First, we use an externally focused policy diffusion framework to help explain the adoption of SPP‐enabling legislation across U.S. states. Second, we explore the extent to which the American Legislative Exchange Council has influenced the adoption of prison privatization legislation. Third, we explore the role of state wealth inequality in determining a state's propensity to adopt prison privatization policies. Examining state‐level data from 1979 to 2010, this article finds empirical support for each of these key theoretical assertions. Furthermore, we find evidence that the external diffusion effect may vary depending on the political orientation of the state. Related Articles Butz, Adam M., Michael P. Fix, and Joshua L. Mitchell. 2005. “Policy Learning and the Diffusion of Stand‐Your‐Ground Laws.” Politics & Policy 43 (3): 347‐377. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12116 Gerlach, John David, Laron K. Williams, and Colleen E. Forcina. 2013. “The Science‐Natural Resource Policy Relationship: How Aspects of Diffusion Theory Explain Data Selection for Making Biodiversity Management Decisions.” Politics & Policy 41 (3): 326‐354. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12017 Morris, John C. 2007. “Government and Market Pathologies of Privatization: The Case of Prison Privatization.” Politics & Policy 35 (2): 318‐341. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1747-1346.2007.00062.x Related Media American Civil Liberties Union of Ohio. 2015. “Prisons for Profit: 18 Months in the Life of the Nation's First Prison Sold for Profit.” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQcZzS7eqfY Now on PBS. 2008. “Prisons for Profit.” https://www.pbs.org/now/shows/419/video.html Sullivan, Eileen. 2016. “PBS News Hour: Obama Administration Set to End Use of Private Prisons.” https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/obama-administration-end-use-private-prisons

Toward a political sociology of privatized punishment: Contestation, state structures, and stratification

“…This research has identified various state‐level features associated with private prison adoption, including a conservative political ideology (Burkhardt, 2017b; Jing, 2010; Nicholson‐Crotty, 2004), budget constraints (Morris, 2007; Nicholson‐Crotty, 2004; Price, 2002), crowded prisons (Jing, 2010; cf. ; Nicholson‐Crotty, 2004), and corporate influence (Mitchell & Butz, 2019). Researchers have also found evidence of diffusion through geographic (Mitchell & Butz, 2019) or ideological proximity (Nicholson‐Crotty, 2004) to prior adopters.…”

“…; Nicholson‐Crotty, 2004), and corporate influence (Mitchell & Butz, 2019). Researchers have also found evidence of diffusion through geographic (Mitchell & Butz, 2019) or ideological proximity (Nicholson‐Crotty, 2004) to prior adopters.…”

The color of corrections: Racial politics and prison privatization

“…Privatization theorists also recognise that privatization may be driven in part by political considerations. In particular, privatization is thought to be driven by conservative ideological values and penchant for market-based administrative solutions (Mitchell & Butz, 2019). For this reason, in addition to measures of state fiscal conditions we also include two indicators of the state political environment.…”

“…Scholars have sought to understand why some states have aggressively pursued privatization while others have been more reluctant to do so (Gunderson, 2020;Jing, 2005Jing, , 2010Kim & Price, 2014;Mitchell & Butz, 2019;Nicholson-Crotty, 2004;Price & Riccucci, 2005). These studies have advanced our understanding of prison privatization adoption, especially the role of budgetary constraints, prison capacity-overcrowding (Kim & Price, 2014;Price & Riccucci, 2005) and right-wing legislative advocacy (Mitchell & Butz, 2019).…”

“…Scholars have sought to understand why some states have aggressively pursued privatization while others have been more reluctant to do so (Gunderson, 2020;Jing, 2005Jing, , 2010Kim & Price, 2014;Mitchell & Butz, 2019;Nicholson-Crotty, 2004;Price & Riccucci, 2005). These studies have advanced our understanding of prison privatization adoption, especially the role of budgetary constraints, prison capacity-overcrowding (Kim & Price, 2014;Price & Riccucci, 2005) and right-wing legislative advocacy (Mitchell & Butz, 2019). However, despite the well-known, longtime association between race and criminal justice in America (Alexander, 2010;Blackmon, 2009;Peffley & Hurwitz, 2010;Wacquant, 2009) as well as arguments that trends in administrative privatization are an outgrowth of this history (Hallett, 2006), the role of racial politics has been largely ignored in comparative studies of state prison privatization.…”