The hidden subsidies of rural prisons: Race, space and the politics of cumulative disadvantage

Walker, Hannah; Thorpe, Rebecca; Christensen, Emily K; Jp, Anderson

doi:10.1177/1462474516660694

Cited by 19 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…18 Manza and Uggen 2004. 19 Thorpe 2015Walker et al 2017. 20 Petit 2012 are in the online appendix, which reports the descriptive statistics for the CAS (tables A1-A2) and the aggregate dataset (tables A4-A5).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Civic Voluntarism of “Custodial Citizens”: Involuntary Criminal Justice Contact, Associational Life, and Political Participation

Owens¹,

Walker²

2018

Perspect. polit.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A growing body of research explores the influence of involuntary criminal justice contact on political participation, demonstrating that all types of contact weaken political participation. We posit, however, that personal connections to civil society organizations (CSOs) moderate the negative effects of involuntary criminal justice contact on political participation, particularly political activism beyond registering to vote and voting. We test this proposition with individual-level and aggregate-level data from metropolitan and municipal Chicago. Our findings confirm a paradox of participation by custodial citizens. One, we demonstrate positive, statistically significant, and substantive effects of personal connections to CSOs on nonvoting political participation by custodial citizens. Two, the negative effects of involuntary criminal justice contact on voting participation among individuals and communities may endure, despite personal connections to CSOs, even in a state where the franchise is restored immediately after incarceration. Our study suggests that an associational account of political participation deepens our understanding of the political behavior of custodial citizens and their communities in the age of mass incarceration.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Civic Voluntarism of “Custodial Citizens”: Involuntary Criminal Justice Contact, Associational Life, and Political Participation

Owens¹,

Walker²

2018

Perspect. polit.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Jail construction has also grown in rural areas while declining in urban areas (Kang‐Brown and Subramanian 2017). Some researchers have commented that carceral facilities comprise such a large part of the rural landscape that they even “foster[] cycles of base subsistence and dependence on continued incarceration rates” (Walker et al 2017:410).…”

Section: Rurality and The Carceral Landscapementioning

confidence: 99%

Legal Ruralism and California Parole Hearings: Space, Place, and the Carceral Landscape*

Young

2020

Rural Sociology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article discusses the important relationship between rurality and criminal justice processes, drawing on field observations and in‐depth interviews with parole commissioners to argue that California's physical carceral landscape profoundly shapes lifer parole hearings. First, commissioners report that prisons' location in rural areas affects the rehabilitative resources available, which are seen as an important aspect of their readiness for release. Location and perceived rurality of prisons shape commissioners' perception of the inmates at various institutions, creating implicitly different standards for inmates housed at different prisons. Second, spatiality and rurality influence parole commissioners' work lives, exacting a toll that includes onerous travel, early burnout, and challenges to assembling a diverse board. Together, these findings underscore the importance of legal ruralism to the relationship between spatial and carceral landscapes.

show abstract

“…At a more immediate level, crime policy and practice also dilute the political and economic power of individuals and communities. First, unlike conventional social policy, criminal justice policies redistribute financial resources away from poor families and areas, through apportionment schemes that allocate funds and political seats/representatives to the political districts where justice-involved individuals are held and processed, rather than those in their communities of origin, giving a "hidden subsidy" to rural areas with inflated population counts where prisons are located (Walker et al 2017;Walker and Thorpe 2018).…”

Section: Contemporary Policing Policies Tend To Disempower Race-class Subjugatedmentioning

confidence: 99%

De-Policing America’s Youth: Disrupting Criminal Justice Policy Feedbacks That Distort Power and Derail Prospects

Weaver¹,

Geller²

2019

The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Scie

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The standard account of policy feedback holds that social policy can be self-reinforcing: policies provide resources that promote economic security and well-being, and they also encourage beneficiaries to engage with government. Criminal justice policies have typically had the opposite effect: they embolden those with interests in a punitive policy agenda, while disempowering those most affected by the policies. This is of particular concern for children and adolescents in race-class subjugated communities (RCS), whose first encounters with government beyond public schooling often come through police contact and carry adverse social and political consequences at a critical developmental stage. In this article, we reimagine youth engagement with the state, arguing for substantial reductions in police surveillance of young people and for the promotion of youth attachment to civic life. We call for an investment in institutions, both state-based and community-based, that reinforce political inclusion and civic belonging.

show abstract

The hidden subsidies of rural prisons: Race, space and the politics of cumulative disadvantage

Cited by 19 publications

References 27 publications

The Civic Voluntarism of “Custodial Citizens”: Involuntary Criminal Justice Contact, Associational Life, and Political Participation

The Civic Voluntarism of “Custodial Citizens”: Involuntary Criminal Justice Contact, Associational Life, and Political Participation

Legal Ruralism and California Parole Hearings: Space, Place, and the Carceral Landscape*

De-Policing America’s Youth: Disrupting Criminal Justice Policy Feedbacks That Distort Power and Derail Prospects

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About