Effects of a prison facility on the regional economy

Smykla, John Ortiz; Ferguson, Carl E.; Cheng, David C.; Trent, Carolyn; French, Barbara A.; Waters, Annette

doi:10.1016/0047-2352(84)90111-9

Cited by 11 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Economics have received the lion's share of the (empirical) attention in prison impact studies. Indicators ranging from changes in property values to tax revenues to growth of new business to employment rates have been used to assess economic impact (see, for example, Abrams & Lyons, 1987;Carlson, 1991;Grieco, 1978;Smykla et al, 1984). Economic variables have usually been operationalized through existing community statistics or sometimes through anecdotal evidence.…”

Section: Survey Instrumentmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Data on economic impact are quite consistent across the different studies. Smykla et al (1984) compared counties with and without prisons and found that those with prisons exhibited increased levels of "economic and social prosperity" (i.e., higher property values, increased retail sales, new businesses, and higher quality of social services). They also cite three other studies that report no adverse impacts on local economies.…”

Section: Specific Findingsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Community Perceptions About Prison Construction: Why Not in My Backyard?

Martín

2000

The Prison Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The image portrayed in literature is that communities express strong resistance to and negative attitudes about the introduction of a prison. Such claims, however, have not been supported with systematically collected data. A survey was administered to 3,795 residents of a county in which the construction of a new prison had just begun. Residents from throughout the county were asked to indicate their expectations about the impact of the prison on their community. Contrary to the literature, it was found that the majority of the 1,659 respondents were, at worst, neutral in their overall perceptions about the prison's likely impact. This article describes the results of this survey and examines them within the context of the literature on locally unwanted land use (LULU) and the not in my backyard (NIMBY) syndrome.

show abstract

Section: Survey Instrumentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Specific Findingsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Community Perceptions About Prison Construction: Why Not in My Backyard?

Martín

2000

The Prison Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The current study departs from previous work (Abrams and Lyons 1987;Smykla et al 1984;Stanley 1978) by focusing on correctional facilities in urban neighborhoods. While the prior research helps inform this study, there are several drawbacks to concentrating solely on rural places.…”

Section: Stigmatization and Urban Locationmentioning

confidence: 86%

“…The second drawback of prior studies is the level of geographic aggregation. The prison studies have used counties (Smykla et al 1984) and cities (Hawes 1985) as the units of analysis, but neighborhood effects of prisons have not been fully assessed. The impact of correctional facilities, if any, is expected to occur at a localized level.…”

Section: Theory and Empirical Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…While prior research has consistently suggested that residents expect lower property values in places with correctional facilities, the research on whether the perceptions represent reality is inconsistent. Several studies (Abrams and Lyons 1987; Hawes 1985; Stanley 1978) found that there were no negative effects of prisons to housing prices in the surrounding community, and one study suggested communities with prisons had higher property values (Smykla et al 1984). These studies, however, are rather dated and have a number of methodological drawbacks that minimize the generalizability and reliability of their findings (see McShane, Williams, and Wagoner 1992 for full critique).…”

Section: Theory and Empirical Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Correctional Facility Establishments and Neighborhood Housing Characteristics

McGeever

2018

Sociological Perspectives

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the 1990s, the United States experienced unprecedented correctional population growth and accommodated the increase by building new facilities. Worries about the negative effect of such facilities on property values were a primary concern and complicated the siting of facilities. The aim of this study was to examine whether establishing correctional group quarters in urban neighborhoods changed housing characteristics. Propensity score matching was used to estimate the effect of establishing a correctional group quarter between 1990-2000 on 2000 median property values, median rent, home ownership rates, and vacancy rates for 12,790 neighborhoods in 124 large U.S. cities. Housing outcomes in neighborhoods with correctional facility sitings did not differ from what would be expected if such establishments were not created. This finding held regardless of the correctional facility type. The concern of declining property values as a result of the introduction of correctional group quarters populations in neighborhoods is generally unwarranted.

show abstract

The ‘big house’ in a small town: The economic and social impacts of a correctional facility on its host community

Thies¹

2001

The Justice Professional

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Effects of a prison facility on the regional economy

Cited by 11 publications

References 1 publication

Community Perceptions About Prison Construction: Why Not in My Backyard?

Community Perceptions About Prison Construction: Why Not in My Backyard?

Correctional Facility Establishments and Neighborhood Housing Characteristics

The ‘big house’ in a small town: The economic and social impacts of a correctional facility on its host community

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About