Kruttschnitt, Candace and Anja Dirkzwager. "Are there still Contrasts in Tolerance? Imprisonment in the Netherlands and England 20 years later". Punishment and Society, Vol.13, No.3 (2011): 283-306.

Kruttschnitt, Candace and Anja Dirkzwager. "Are there still Contrasts in Tolerance? Imprisonment in the Netherlands and England 20 years later". Punishment and Society, Vol.13, No.3 (2011): 283-306.

• This article is largely written as a follow-up to the famous 1988 comparative study of the English and Netherlandish prison systems by David Downes. At the time, the author concluded that the Netherlandish system was more tolerant and more humane than the English system (283-284).
• This study has been followed up by a number of others -- source mine on this on page 284 -- but these have mainly focused on convergence of prison policies in Western countries, they have not looked at actual experiences of incarciration. This is an important distinction because many policies are only partially implemented in prison (284).
• From the turn of the 21st Century onward, the Netherlands experienced a radical change in penal policy, moving towards the increased rates of incarceration and punitive penalties observed in other jurisdictions. Although associated with a cultural shift towards individualism, the Netherlands has maintained indicators like generous welfare policies and low wealth disparity, which would normally clash with its high rates of imprisonment, esp. those non-citizens (285).
• The reform of the Netherlandish penal system was partially influenced by contemporary changes in England, but it also resulted from the same political pressures: demands for increasingly punitive punishments, especially for repeat offenders; decreased belief in the power of rehabilitation. Prison sentences have increased, as has the population, which is now the third highest in Europe (286-287).
• Penal policy in the Netherlands has been particularly influenced by increased focus on personal responsibility. This idea has been seen as matching general market forces and also allowed for concentration of resources in a time of major cutbacks after 2004 (287).
• Beginning in the late 1970s, particularly under the government of Margaret Thatcher, the British government began systematically demolishing many institutions of the welfare state and introducing much more punitive criminal justice measures, resulting in large increases in the prison population (285-286).
• When the Labour party returned to power in 1997, they continued many of the same 'tough on crime' policies as the previous administration. They presided over extension of prison sentences for dangerous repeat offenders, in particular the Crime Sentences Act of 1997. This act introduced mandatory minimum sentences for repeat offenses of certain crimes, further contributing to the growth of the prison population (286).
• These policies saw the increase of the English and Welsh prison population from 80 per 100,000 people in 1980 to 142 per 100,000 people in 2005, giving England the highest incarceration rate in Western Europe (286).
• This study is modeled after that conducted by Dr. Downes in 1988, with information about prison experiences coming from Netherlandish nations imprisoned in England and Englishmen imprisoned in the Netherlands. The study interviewed people from a variety of institutions, including different classes of offenders, women, and juveniles (288).
• The Netherlandish prisoners interviewed were mostly convicted on drug-related offenses, often associated with trafficking. English prisoners tended to be involved in a wider range of more serious crimes. The English prisoners were also almost 90% White, whereas the Netherlandish prisoners came from a number of racial backgrounds (290).
• The authors' findings on the rights and privileges of prisoners agree with those of Dr. Downes, that both country's were largely similar with the exceptions that those imprisoned in England generally received more visitors and got to wear their own close (291-292).
• Experience of prison differed significantly depending on the degree of incarceration and whether the sentence had been received yet. Both groups reported that being locked in their cell for large period of time was a major negative experience and made higher security facilities worst (292).
• Prisoners reported that the material standards of the cell provided the main difference between prison experiences in the two countries. Common practice in the Netherlands is to give inmates their own cell after the first few months, whereas in England single cell are reserved for inmates with special jobs (292).
• Food was a major point of difference between the two countries. Although the quality of prison food differed between facilities, it was markedly worst in England. Prisoners reported that food in English prisons was disgusting, whereas food in Netherlandish prisons was adequate. Netherlandish prisoners also could gain the right to cook their own food, a privilege which was much appreciated (292-293).
• Whereas in the 1988 study, Netherlandish prisoners were paid more for in-prison work and could choose from a wider range of jobs, the 2011 study shows that pay has equalized and the range of jobs is now actually more diverse in English prisons. Jobs that provide freedom of movement or that pay well are the most sought after, with future employment opportunities not factoring in to a great degree (293).
• Dr. Downes noted that the quality of imprisonment was largely judged in terms of the ability to contact the outside world, something that was far deficient in England in the 1980s. Since that time, that disparity was vanished; prisoners in both systems are allowed to send and receive any number of letters after censorship. Phones are available in both countries, although spots are contested and calls can be expensive (293).
• England has a much more strict regime regarding visitation than the Netherlands, although this was limited effects on foreign nationals held there. English prisoners are allowed visitors twice a month, whereas Netherlandish prisoners are allowed prisoners weekly and one conjugal visit per month (293).
• Access to reintegration services is also an issue for foreign prisoners. Most faced deportation after imprisonment and are confused about how to integrate back in their home country; many want to be transferred to a prison in their home country (293-294).
• Consistent with Dr. Downes 1988 study, disciplinary measure in English prisons are more severe than those in Netherlandish prisons. The severity of punishment was not too different, with both involving confinement in the cell, but the English system including removal of all privileges rather than just TV access. English prisons were much more willing to actually invoke disciplinary measures compared to Netherlandish prisons (294).
• General impressions of prisoners who had served time in both countries reflected similar impressions in the 1988 study, that the Netherlandish system was more humane and personal. Netherlandish prison staff were described as generally polite, reasonable, and willing to engage personally, whereas English staff were described as confrontational, aggressive, and favoring impersonal proceduralism (294-295).
• Although broad agreement existed about the nature of the relationships between prisoners and staff in both prisoners, there were some dissent opinions on its benefit. Some were unnerved by the friendliness of Netherlandish prison guards, and another appreciated the consistency of English unfriendliness (295).
• Prisoners largely put these difference down the cultures within those prisons, especially the prevalence of high-level drugs in English prisons. They noted that this meant that risk of predation, especially for valuables were high and both guards and prisoners were distrustful as recognition of this fact (295).
• There are major differences in how people experience imprisonment depending if they are being imprisoned for the first time or not. As the majority of Netherlandish convicts in English prisons were first-time offenders, this may have colored the experiences represented in this study (296).
• First-time offenders in both groups reported surprise and anxiety about the monotony of prison life, but there were still significant differences in the reported experiences of the groups. Both repeat offenders and first-time offenders reported that English prisons were unfriendly and unsafe, whereas no similar complaints were made by either groups about imprisonment in the Netherlands (297).
• Experiences of prison also differed between convicts with long sentences and those with short sentences under a year. Generally, those with shorter sentences minded prison less and expressed less concern about the number of hours a day they were kept in their cells (297).
• Although convicts with longer sentences generally expressed less concern about their imprisonment, they still reflected significant differences between England and the Netherlands and raised the same concerns, including about a lack of privacy, as other demographics of inmates (298).
• Following from the research methods pursued by Dr. Downes, the experiences of prison are characterized by the 'depth' of prison, meaning that degree to which it represented an isolation from the outside world, and the degree to which prisons were perceived as damaging and repressive by inmates (298).
• Trends in contrasts in the depth of prison between England and the Netherlands have continued, although they have been diminished by improvements in the English system. Although the Netherlands is still superior to allowing inmates to see visitors, reforms to the English system allowing greater access to letters and phones have mitigated most of the differences observed in 1988 (299).
• Just like Dr. Downes observed in 1988, there is also a general consensus that the Netherlandish prison system is less damaging that the English system in all aspects. More privacy, more hygienic conditions, more time outside of cells, less violence, and friendlier staff all combined to make Netherlandish prisons more livable than their English equivalents (299).
• The Netherlandish system continues to be ranked as superior to the English system, and likely more other Western correctional facilities, despite the fact that, "Prison conditions have deteriorated over time due to budget cuts, a decreased focus on rehabilitation, the introduction of sober regimes with increasing hours spent inside the prison cell, and increased staff workload" (299).
• Although both England and the Netherlands have incorporated managerial techniques and market dynamics into their prison systems, the effects continue to be different. The author explain this in reference to Dr. Tim Hallett's work on the translation of these goals into practice by incentivizing officials to implement them (300).
• The difference between England and the Netherlands in prison practice and the experiences of prisoners likely comes from the lack of effective implementation among prison staff in the Netherlands. In England, these reforms have become reality because a central service has begun holding prisons accountable to key performance standards based on these principles, whereas no analogous process has occurred in the Netherlands (300).