In this blog written for Penal Reform International, Stephen Pitts and Leo Tigges provide insights from research conducted on probation in Europe. Their timely contribution aligns with global efforts to reduce imprisonment through effective alternatives, a key focus of the World Congress on Probation and Parole held in the Netherlands in April 2024.
In this blog, the key findings of the comprehensive research “Building Probation Capacity, What Works: Learning from the European Experience of Probation Service Development in the 21st Century” are shared as a useful resource for justice stakeholders.
A project on probation capacity building
A need for more and better non-custodial options is rarely contested at a global level. International bodies including the Council of Europe and United Nations argue strongly for, and support, efforts to deliver alternatives more widely and convincingly. Donors, service-providers, and beneficiary countries commit considerable financial resources and deploy skilled staff and expertise, beneficiaries often stretching their limited development capacity.
Furthermore, the benefits of community-based provisions, including increased opportunity to deliver proportionality in sentencing, for improved impact on reoffending, lower cost, and reduction of some of the “side effects of mass incarceration” [1] such as stigmatization, disconnection, impact on families and children, and destabilised communities are argued with increasing power and frequency – see for example “Probation, Why and How” [2].
However, despite these positive signs, “alternatives” remain under-developed and underused in many parts of the world and, where they exist, vary greatly in maturity and emphasis. Prison populations continue to expand overall and in many world regions, disproportionately in the case of women and girls, and include 1 in 3 on pre-trial detention – see for example Global Prison Trends, PRI, 2023 [3]. As PRI also reports, adequate resources do not match the benefits of non-custodial measures like probation to roll-out, expand, and ensure successful implementation. Moreover, if available, alternatives do not always lead to decreased national prison populations.
Aims and Methodology
The project was stimulated by determination to strengthen probation “alternatives” or community corrections to achieve more fully their potential contribution to fair, effective, proportional justice including less use of prison, enhanced human rights, improved rehabilitation and reintegration, and safer communities.
The project took place against the background of remarkable European expansion of probation provision in the past 20-25 years (“probation” provision is used in its wider sense including work pre-trial, following court disposal, and during and after a custodial sentence). Can European developments be described as a success story? Undoubtably yes – but with significant caveats, not least regarding net-widening and the broader questions raised concerning “purposefull” or appropriate probation.
Additionally, little literature or evaluation exists specific to probation development (in contrast to, for example, prisons, health, or security). Some initiatives however appear more successful than others (although purpose and “success” are themselves widely defined). A limited “language” of probation development hampers international discourse and learning.
Research therefore aimed to –
- test and refine a model or “language” to support probation capacity building
- identify potential development “success factors” and risks, and
- consider the potential relevance of European lessons (successes and challenges) at a global level.
Methodology included study of probation development in five European countries: motivations and purposes (human rights and reducing the number of prisoners often foremost), steps, results, success factors, and sometimes hindrances along the way. This was supplemented with knowledge of development in other European jurisdictions and world regions, an extensive literature review, consideration of the role and impact of European Institutions (Council of Europe and European Commission) and the CEP (Confederation of European Probation), and attention to sources of the United Nations.
The Essential Takeaways
The final report was published in November 2023. What are the essential takeaways from this extensive study?
- The researchers developed a model or “language” of capacity building to support discussion and capacity building practice.The model provides a tool to explore the present probation situation and potential in a jurisdiction, to plan development, and over time gain insight into change. The model helps to explain probation roles or activities (the four “domains” of probation) and what needs to be in place to enable delivery – the organisational conditions (or “enablers”). In short – “a strong probation role and a strong probation organisation.” The model, illustrated in infographic 1, has international applicability. Most current activity was found in Domain 2 (post court sentence). Strengthened guidance and activity in domains 1 and 3/4 has potential to influence features such as pre-trial detention and sentence proportionality, parole decision making, transition, and reintegration.
Infographic 1 (see in full size: Probation Model Infographic FV 14-9-23)
2. Research identified 10 probation capacity building “success factors”.
- A collaborative, partnership approach – based on knowledge exchange and equality, empowering the beneficiary country to build capacity by addressing identified needs, to create a tailored approach.
- Creating and communicating a shared vision or aspiration regarding probation’s potential contribution.
- Recognising and working with (national, system, international) context and complexity: identify factors critical to development, such as penal culture and social/economic environment, and plan accordingly; be aware of the complex, unpredictable nature of change and consequently its potential duration.
- Identifying and addressing potential resistances (political, system, organisational, public…) and risks, including net-widening, over-reliance on training at the expense of wider organisation and system needs.
- Building networks and alliances – engaging and involving critical stakeholders and partners in developing probation’s vision and contribution.
- Achieving the vision – by devising an accepted integral strategy and implementation plan that balances work in domains and enablers.
- Project Management – allowing for preparation time, development of mutual understanding, a step-by-step approach, piloting, review, iterative and flexible development, continuous and coordinated across time and donors.
- Professional technical and “soft” skills – involving experienced, knowledgeable, long-term, committed, inspiring, skilled and relational experts/consultants, balancing international and national context – sensitive and adaptable to culture, diversity, and language.
- Drawing on and collaborating with supra-national organisations and professional bodies in probation development.
- Building in evaluation, research and reporting.
|
3. Research also revealed risk factors in capacity building: among them net-widening and mass supervision, resistances, high caseloads, and the potential dominance of electronic monitoring or other primarily control mechanisms at the cost of rehabilitation. Risks can be mitigated by pre-awareness, communication, and measures to prevent or overcome them.
4. Researchers considered the relevance of European experience in other world regions, especially at a time of growing global interest in the potential of community-based approaches.
5 recommendations to support probation development globally
- Build a world-wide probation network, platform, or organisation:
• linked to regional networks and able to support their development, and to regional and global bodies
• encouraging intensive exchange and cooperation on probation policy, research, and practice, enriching probation’s global diverse knowledge-base
• supporting communication of the societal and economic advantages of probation and how to introduce and strengthen probation systems
• assisting capacity development initiatives, globally and regionally informed.
- Revisit and update existing recommendations and guidance on probation / community-based work, ensuring attention to all domains and measures (for instance pre-trial work, reintegration, electronic monitoring), taking account of regional differences.
- Ensure that budgets at the disposal of the UN and potential donor organisations have a direct focus on the development of probation agencies and their work. Improve donor coordination, ensure projects are complementary, avoid duplication, and provide continuity in beneficiary support.
- Strengthen the availability of data, comparable to the SPACE data of the Council of Europe.
- Promote research, evaluation, and step-up communication about the contribution of community-based work to fair and effective justice and safer societies
|
Moving Forward
What then for the future of probation? The recent 6th World Congress on Probation and Parole asked this very question; the success of the Congress itself, which included the widest yet representation from across the world including the global south, encourages optimism, including through helping to build a global community, platform, or network committed to enhancing probation’s contribution.
An article by the researchers published in 2021 [4] had this to say –
“In envisioning 2030, we aspire to a situation in which community-based provision has a substantially higher profile than is often now the case… (with) a significantly greater proportion of cases relative to prison than at present… where the overall prison and probation net has not widened… Services have sufficient and well-trained staff versed in evidence-informed relational skills … to support desistance and reintegration, and who manage risk and compliance in ways that are procedurally just… embrace technology positively and engage fully with communities, including volunteers, who share and mutually reinforce the achievement of safer, inclusive, and sustainable societies… Furthermore, global learning is supported by improved sharing and policy exchange, informed by research, practice and stakeholders including service user co-production … guided by international standards that reflect human rights and are sensitive to global diversity.”
“Good” probation should not be for “probation’s sake”, but guided by parsimony, proportionality, and productiveness [5].
The researcher’s 2021 article concluded with a “call for action” – “Enabling probation around the world in 2030 to deliver fully on its potential contribution to a well-balanced penal system …. will depend especially on whether leaders go the extra mile to join forces, increase information sharing and joint learning, and influence intergovernmental organisations and nations about the benefits of probation.”
The research findings provide detailed and concrete recommendations to help shape the future of probation.
End notes:
[1] Porporino, F. (2015). Implementing Community Alterntatives to Imprisonment: Answering the Why, What and How? Keynote address to the Seminar on Promoting Community Based Treatment in the ASEAN Region. Available at www.academia.edu
[2] Bosker, J., Tigges, L.C.M., Henskens, R., (2021) Probation: Why and How, University of Applied Science, Utrecht (https://www.internationalhu.com/research/projects/ probation-why-and-how)
[3] Penal Reform International (2023), Global Prison Trends 2023, https://www.penalreform.org/global-prison-trends-2023/
[4] Pitts, S., Tigges, L., (2021), ‘Probation 2030 – Pitfalls and Possibilities’, Advancing Corrections, Edition 11:95-112
[5] McNeill, F. (2018), Pervasive Punishment: Making Sense of Mass Supervision, Emerald
Publishing: Bingley, West Yorkshire
A project on probation capacity building
A need for more and better non-custodial options is rarely contested at a global level. International bodies including the Council of Europe and United Nations argue strongly for, and support, efforts to deliver alternatives more widely and convincingly. Donors, service-providers, and beneficiary countries commit considerable financial resources and deploy skilled staff and expertise, beneficiaries often stretching their limited development capacity.
Furthermore, the benefits of community-based provisions, including increased opportunity to deliver proportionality in sentencing, for improved impact on reoffending, lower cost, and reduction of some of the “side effects of mass incarceration” [1] such as stigmatization, disconnection, impact on families and children, and destabilised communities are argued with increasing power and frequency – see for example “Probation, Why and How” [2].
However, despite these positive signs, “alternatives” remain under-developed and underused in many parts of the world and, where they exist, vary greatly in maturity and emphasis. Prison populations continue to expand overall and in many world regions, disproportionately in the case of women and girls, and include 1 in 3 on pre-trial detention – see for example Global Prison Trends, PRI, 2023 [3]. As PRI also reports, the benefits of non-custodial measures like probation are not matched by adequate resources to roll-out, expand, and ensure successful implementation. Moreover, if available, alternatives do not always lead to decreased national prison populations.
Aims and Methodology
The project was stimulated by determination to strengthen probation “alternatives” or community corrections to achieve more fully their potential contribution to fair, effective, proportional justice including less use of prison, enhanced human rights, improved rehabilitation and reintegration, and safer communities.
The project took place against the background of remarkable European expansion of probation provision in the past 20-25 years (“probation” provision is used in its wider sense including work pre-trial, following court disposal, and during and after a custodial sentence). Can European developments be described as a success story? Undoubtably yes – but with significant caveats, not least regarding net-widening and the broader questions raised concerning “purposefull” or appropriate probation.
Additionally, little literature or evaluation exists specific to probation development (in contrast to, for example, prisons, health, or security). Some initiatives however appear more successful than others (although purpose and “success” are themselves widely defined). A limited “language” of probation development hampers international discourse and learning.
Research therefore aimed to –
- test and refine a model or “language” to support probation capacity building
- identify potential development “success factors” and risks, and
- consider the potential relevance of European lessons (successes and challenges) at a global level.
Methodology included study of probation development in five European countries: motivations and purposes (human rights and reducing the number of prisoners often foremost), steps, results, success factors, and sometimes hindrances along the way. This was supplemented with knowledge of development in other European jurisdictions and world regions, an extensive literature review, consideration of the role and impact of European Institutions (Council of Europe and European Commission) and the CEP (Confederation of European Probation), and attention to sources of the United Nations.
- The Essential Takeaways
The final report was published in November 2023. What are the essential take aways from this extensive study?
- The researchers developed a model or “language” of capacity building to support discussion and capacity building practice. The model provides a tool to explore the present probation situation and potential in a jurisdiction, to plan development, and over time gain insight into change. The model helps to explain probation roles or activities (the four “domains” of probation) and what needs to be in place to enable delivery – the organisational conditions (or “enablers”). In short – “a strong probation role and a strong probation organisation.” The model, illustrated in infographic 1, has international applicability.
Most current activity was found in Domain 2 (post court sentence). Strengthened guidance and activity in domains 1 and 3/4 has potential to influence features such as pre-trial detention and sentence proportionality, parole decision making, transition, and reintegration.
A project on probation capacity building
A need for more and better non-custodial options is rarely contested at a global level. International bodies including the Council of Europe and United Nations argue strongly for, and support, efforts to deliver alternatives more widely and convincingly. Donors, service-providers, and beneficiary countries commit considerable financial resources and deploy skilled staff and expertise, beneficiaries often stretching their limited development capacity.
Furthermore, the benefits of community-based provisions, including increased opportunity to deliver proportionality in sentencing, for improved impact on reoffending, lower cost, and reduction of some of the “side effects of mass incarceration” [1] such as stigmatization, disconnection, impact on families and children, and destabilised communities are argued with increasing power and frequency – see for example “Probation, Why and How” [2].
However, despite these positive signs, “alternatives” remain under-developed and underused in many parts of the world and, where they exist, vary greatly in maturity and emphasis. Prison populations continue to expand overall and in many world regions, disproportionately in the case of women and girls, and include 1 in 3 on pre-trial detention – see for example Global Prison Trends, PRI, 2023 [3]. As PRI also reports, the benefits of non-custodial measures like probation are not matched by adequate resources to roll-out, expand, and ensure successful implementation. Moreover, if available, alternatives do not always lead to decreased national prison populations.
Aims and Methodology
The project was stimulated by determination to strengthen probation “alternatives” or community corrections to achieve more fully their potential contribution to fair, effective, proportional justice including less use of prison, enhanced human rights, improved rehabilitation and reintegration, and safer communities.
The project took place against the background of remarkable European expansion of probation provision in the past 20-25 years (“probation” provision is used in its wider sense including work pre-trial, following court disposal, and during and after a custodial sentence). Can European developments be described as a success story? Undoubtably yes – but with significant caveats, not least regarding net-widening and the broader questions raised concerning “purposefull” or appropriate probation.
Additionally, little literature or evaluation exists specific to probation development (in contrast to, for example, prisons, health, or security). Some initiatives however appear more successful than others (although purpose and “success” are themselves widely defined). A limited “language” of probation development hampers international discourse and learning.
Research therefore aimed to –
- test and refine a model or “language” to support probation capacity building
- identify potential development “success factors” and risks, and
- consider the potential relevance of European lessons (successes and challenges) at a global level.
Methodology included study of probation development in five European countries: motivations and purposes (human rights and reducing the number of prisoners often foremost), steps, results, success factors, and sometimes hindrances along the way. This was supplemented with knowledge of development in other European jurisdictions and world regions, an extensive literature review, consideration of the role and impact of European Institutions (Council of Europe and European Commission) and the CEP (Confederation of European Probation), and attention to sources of the United Nations.
- The Essential Takeaways
The final report was published in November 2023. What are the essential take aways from this extensive study?
- The researchers developed a model or “language” of capacity building to support discussion and capacity building practice. The model provides a tool to explore the present probation situation and potential in a jurisdiction, to plan development, and over time gain insight into change. The model helps to explain probation roles or activities (the four “domains” of probation) and what needs to be in place to enable delivery – the organisational conditions (or “enablers”). In short – “a strong probation role and a strong probation organisation.” The model, illustrated in infographic 1, has international applicability.
Most current activity was found in Domain 2 (post court sentence). Strengthened guidance and activity in domains 1 and 3/4 has potential to influence features such as pre-trial detention and sentence proportionality, parole decision making, transition, and reintegration.
A project on probation capacity building
A need for more and better non-custodial options is rarely contested at a global level. International bodies including the Council of Europe and United Nations argue strongly for, and support, efforts to deliver alternatives more widely and convincingly. Donors, service-providers, and beneficiary countries commit considerable financial resources and deploy skilled staff and expertise, beneficiaries often stretching their limited development capacity.
Furthermore, the benefits of community-based provisions, including increased opportunity to deliver proportionality in sentencing, for improved impact on reoffending, lower cost, and reduction of some of the “side effects of mass incarceration” [1] such as stigmatization, disconnection, impact on families and children, and destabilised communities are argued with increasing power and frequency – see for example “Probation, Why and How” [2].
However, despite these positive signs, “alternatives” remain under-developed and underused in many parts of the world and, where they exist, vary greatly in maturity and emphasis. Prison populations continue to expand overall and in many world regions, disproportionately in the case of women and girls, and include 1 in 3 on pre-trial detention – see for example Global Prison Trends, PRI, 2023 [3]. As PRI also reports, the benefits of non-custodial measures like probation are not matched by adequate resources to roll-out, expand, and ensure successful implementation. Moreover, if available, alternatives do not always lead to decreased national prison populations.
Aims and Methodology
The project was stimulated by determination to strengthen probation “alternatives” or community corrections to achieve more fully their potential contribution to fair, effective, proportional justice including less use of prison, enhanced human rights, improved rehabilitation and reintegration, and safer communities.
The project took place against the background of remarkable European expansion of probation provision in the past 20-25 years (“probation” provision is used in its wider sense including work pre-trial, following court disposal, and during and after a custodial sentence). Can European developments be described as a success story? Undoubtably yes – but with significant caveats, not least regarding net-widening and the broader questions raised concerning “purposefull” or appropriate probation.
Additionally, little literature or evaluation exists specific to probation development (in contrast to, for example, prisons, health, or security). Some initiatives however appear more successful than others (although purpose and “success” are themselves widely defined). A limited “language” of probation development hampers international discourse and learning.
Research therefore aimed to –
- test and refine a model or “language” to support probation capacity building
- identify potential development “success factors” and risks, and
- consider the potential relevance of European lessons (successes and challenges) at a global level.
Methodology included study of probation development in five European countries: motivations and purposes (human rights and reducing the number of prisoners often foremost), steps, results, success factors, and sometimes hindrances along the way. This was supplemented with knowledge of development in other European jurisdictions and world regions, an extensive literature review, consideration of the role and impact of European Institutions (Council of Europe and European Commission) and the CEP (Confederation of European Probation), and attention to sources of the United Nations.
- The Essential Takeaways
The final report was published in November 2023. What are the essential take aways from this extensive study?
- The researchers developed a model or “language” of capacity building to support discussion and capacity building practice. The model provides a tool to explore the present probation situation and potential in a jurisdiction, to plan development, and over time gain insight into change. The model helps to explain probation roles or activities (the four “domains” of probation) and what needs to be in place to enable delivery – the organisational conditions (or “enablers”). In short – “a strong probation role and a strong probation organisation.” The model, illustrated in infographic 1, has international applicability.
Most current activity was found in Domain 2 (post court sentence). Strengthened guidance and activity in domains 1 and 3/4 has potential to influence features such as pre-trial detention and sentence proportionality, parole decision making, transition, and reintegration.
A project on probation capacity building
A need for more and better non-custodial options is rarely contested at a global level. International bodies including the Council of Europe and United Nations argue strongly for, and support, efforts to deliver alternatives more widely and convincingly. Donors, service-providers, and beneficiary countries commit considerable financial resources and deploy skilled staff and expertise, beneficiaries often stretching their limited development capacity.
Furthermore, the benefits of community-based provisions, including increased opportunity to deliver proportionality in sentencing, for improved impact on reoffending, lower cost, and reduction of some of the “side effects of mass incarceration” [1] such as stigmatization, disconnection, impact on families and children, and destabilised communities are argued with increasing power and frequency – see for example “Probation, Why and How” [2].
However, despite these positive signs, “alternatives” remain under-developed and underused in many parts of the world and, where they exist, vary greatly in maturity and emphasis. Prison populations continue to expand overall and in many world regions, disproportionately in the case of women and girls, and include 1 in 3 on pre-trial detention – see for example Global Prison Trends, PRI, 2023 [3]. As PRI also reports, the benefits of non-custodial measures like probation are not matched by adequate resources to roll-out, expand, and ensure successful implementation. Moreover, if available, alternatives do not always lead to decreased national prison populations.
Aims and Methodology
The project was stimulated by determination to strengthen probation “alternatives” or community corrections to achieve more fully their potential contribution to fair, effective, proportional justice including less use of prison, enhanced human rights, improved rehabilitation and reintegration, and safer communities.
The project took place against the background of remarkable European expansion of probation provision in the past 20-25 years (“probation” provision is used in its wider sense including work pre-trial, following court disposal, and during and after a custodial sentence). Can European developments be described as a success story? Undoubtably yes – but with significant caveats, not least regarding net-widening and the broader questions raised concerning “purposefull” or appropriate probation.
Additionally, little literature or evaluation exists specific to probation development (in contrast to, for example, prisons, health, or security). Some initiatives however appear more successful than others (although purpose and “success” are themselves widely defined). A limited “language” of probation development hampers international discourse and learning.
Research therefore aimed to –
- test and refine a model or “language” to support probation capacity building
- identify potential development “success factors” and risks, and
- consider the potential relevance of European lessons (successes and challenges) at a global level.
Methodology included study of probation development in five European countries: motivations and purposes (human rights and reducing the number of prisoners often foremost), steps, results, success factors, and sometimes hindrances along the way. This was supplemented with knowledge of development in other European jurisdictions and world regions, an extensive literature review, consideration of the role and impact of European Institutions (Council of Europe and European Commission) and the CEP (Confederation of European Probation), and attention to sources of the United Nations.
- The Essential Takeaways
The final report was published in November 2023. What are the essential take aways from this extensive study?
- The researchers developed a model or “language” of capacity building to support discussion and capacity building practice. The model provides a tool to explore the present probation situation and potential in a jurisdiction, to plan development, and over time gain insight into change. The model helps to explain probation roles or activities (the four “domains” of probation) and what needs to be in place to enable delivery – the organisational conditions (or “enablers”). In short – “a strong probation role and a strong probation organisation.” The model, illustrated in infographic 1, has international applicability.
Most current activity was found in Domain 2 (post court sentence). Strengthened guidance and activity in domains 1 and 3/4 has potential to influence features such as pre-trial detention and sentence proportionality, parole decision making, transition, and reintegration.
A project on probation capacity building
A need for more and better non-custodial options is rarely contested at a global level. International bodies including the Council of Europe and United Nations argue strongly for, and support, efforts to deliver alternatives more widely and convincingly. Donors, service-providers, and beneficiary countries commit considerable financial resources and deploy skilled staff and expertise, beneficiaries often stretching their limited development capacity.
Furthermore, the benefits of community-based provisions, including increased opportunity to deliver proportionality in sentencing, for improved impact on reoffending, lower cost, and reduction of some of the “side effects of mass incarceration” [1] such as stigmatization, disconnection, impact on families and children, and destabilised communities are argued with increasing power and frequency – see for example “Probation, Why and How” [2].
However, despite these positive signs, “alternatives” remain under-developed and underused in many parts of the world and, where they exist, vary greatly in maturity and emphasis. Prison populations continue to expand overall and in many world regions, disproportionately in the case of women and girls, and include 1 in 3 on pre-trial detention – see for example Global Prison Trends, PRI, 2023 [3]. As PRI also reports, the benefits of non-custodial measures like probation are not matched by adequate resources to roll-out, expand, and ensure successful implementation. Moreover, if available, alternatives do not always lead to decreased national prison populations.
Aims and Methodology
The project was stimulated by determination to strengthen probation “alternatives” or community corrections to achieve more fully their potential contribution to fair, effective, proportional justice including less use of prison, enhanced human rights, improved rehabilitation and reintegration, and safer communities.
The project took place against the background of remarkable European expansion of probation provision in the past 20-25 years (“probation” provision is used in its wider sense including work pre-trial, following court disposal, and during and after a custodial sentence). Can European developments be described as a success story? Undoubtably yes – but with significant caveats, not least regarding net-widening and the broader questions raised concerning “purposefull” or appropriate probation.
Additionally, little literature or evaluation exists specific to probation development (in contrast to, for example, prisons, health, or security). Some initiatives however appear more successful than others (although purpose and “success” are themselves widely defined). A limited “language” of probation development hampers international discourse and learning.
Research therefore aimed to –
- test and refine a model or “language” to support probation capacity building
- identify potential development “success factors” and risks, and
- consider the potential relevance of European lessons (successes and challenges) at a global level.
Methodology included study of probation development in five European countries: motivations and purposes (human rights and reducing the number of prisoners often foremost), steps, results, success factors, and sometimes hindrances along the way. This was supplemented with knowledge of development in other European jurisdictions and world regions, an extensive literature review, consideration of the role and impact of European Institutions (Council of Europe and European Commission) and the CEP (Confederation of European Probation), and attention to sources of the United Nations.
- The Essential Takeaways
The final report was published in November 2023. What are the essential take aways from this extensive study?
- The researchers developed a model or “language” of capacity building to support discussion and capacity building practice. The model provides a tool to explore the present probation situation and potential in a jurisdiction, to plan development, and over time gain insight into change. The model helps to explain probation roles or activities (the four “domains” of probation) and what needs to be in place to enable delivery – the organisational conditions (or “enablers”). In short – “a strong probation role and a strong probation organisation.” The model, illustrated in infographic 1, has international applicability.
Most current activity was found in Domain 2 (post court sentence). Strengthened guidance and activity in domains 1 and 3/4 has potential to influence features such as pre-trial detention and sentence proportionality, parole decision making, transition, and reintegration.
A project on probation capacity building
A need for more and better non-custodial options is rarely contested at a global level. International bodies including the Council of Europe and United Nations argue strongly for, and support, efforts to deliver alternatives more widely and convincingly. Donors, service-providers, and beneficiary countries commit considerable financial resources and deploy skilled staff and expertise, beneficiaries often stretching their limited development capacity.
Furthermore, the benefits of community-based provisions, including increased opportunity to deliver proportionality in sentencing, for improved impact on reoffending, lower cost, and reduction of some of the “side effects of mass incarceration” [1] such as stigmatization, disconnection, impact on families and children, and destabilised communities are argued with increasing power and frequency – see for example “Probation, Why and How” [2].
However, despite these positive signs, “alternatives” remain under-developed and underused in many parts of the world and, where they exist, vary greatly in maturity and emphasis. Prison populations continue to expand overall and in many world regions, disproportionately in the case of women and girls, and include 1 in 3 on pre-trial detention – see for example Global Prison Trends, PRI, 2023 [3]. As PRI also reports, the benefits of non-custodial measures like probation are not matched by adequate resources to roll-out, expand, and ensure successful implementation. Moreover, if available, alternatives do not always lead to decreased national prison populations.
Aims and Methodology
The project was stimulated by determination to strengthen probation “alternatives” or community corrections to achieve more fully their potential contribution to fair, effective, proportional justice including less use of prison, enhanced human rights, improved rehabilitation and reintegration, and safer communities.
The project took place against the background of remarkable European expansion of probation provision in the past 20-25 years (“probation” provision is used in its wider sense including work pre-trial, following court disposal, and during and after a custodial sentence). Can European developments be described as a success story? Undoubtably yes – but with significant caveats, not least regarding net-widening and the broader questions raised concerning “purposefull” or appropriate probation.
Additionally, little literature or evaluation exists specific to probation development (in contrast to, for example, prisons, health, or security). Some initiatives however appear more successful than others (although purpose and “success” are themselves widely defined). A limited “language” of probation development hampers international discourse and learning.
Research therefore aimed to –
- test and refine a model or “language” to support probation capacity building
- identify potential development “success factors” and risks, and
- consider the potential relevance of European lessons (successes and challenges) at a global level.
Methodology included study of probation development in five European countries: motivations and purposes (human rights and reducing the number of prisoners often foremost), steps, results, success factors, and sometimes hindrances along the way. This was supplemented with knowledge of development in other European jurisdictions and world regions, an extensive literature review, consideration of the role and impact of European Institutions (Council of Europe and European Commission) and the CEP (Confederation of European Probation), and attention to sources of the United Nations.
- The Essential Takeaways
The final report was published in November 2023. What are the essential take aways from this extensive study?
- The researchers developed a model or “language” of capacity building to support discussion and capacity building practice. The model provides a tool to explore the present probation situation and potential in a jurisdiction, to plan development, and over time gain insight into change. The model helps to explain probation roles or activities (the four “domains” of probation) and what needs to be in place to enable delivery – the organisational conditions (or “enablers”). In short – “a strong probation role and a strong probation organisation.” The model, illustrated in infographic 1, has international applicability.
Most current activity was found in Domain 2 (post court sentence). Strengthened guidance and activity in domains 1 and 3/4 has potential to influence features such as pre-trial detention and sentence proportionality, parole decision making, transition, and reintegration.
A project on probation capacity building
A need for more and better non-custodial options is rarely contested at a global level. International bodies including the Council of Europe and United Nations argue strongly for, and support, efforts to deliver alternatives more widely and convincingly. Donors, service-providers, and beneficiary countries commit considerable financial resources and deploy skilled staff and expertise, beneficiaries often stretching their limited development capacity.
Furthermore, the benefits of community-based provisions, including increased opportunity to deliver proportionality in sentencing, for improved impact on reoffending, lower cost, and reduction of some of the “side effects of mass incarceration” [1] such as stigmatization, disconnection, impact on families and children, and destabilised communities are argued with increasing power and frequency – see for example “Probation, Why and How” [2].
However, despite these positive signs, “alternatives” remain under-developed and underused in many parts of the world and, where they exist, vary greatly in maturity and emphasis. Prison populations continue to expand overall and in many world regions, disproportionately in the case of women and girls, and include 1 in 3 on pre-trial detention – see for example Global Prison Trends, PRI, 2023 [3]. As PRI also reports, the benefits of non-custodial measures like probation are not matched by adequate resources to roll-out, expand, and ensure successful implementation. Moreover, if available, alternatives do not always lead to decreased national prison populations.
Aims and Methodology
The project was stimulated by determination to strengthen probation “alternatives” or community corrections to achieve more fully their potential contribution to fair, effective, proportional justice including less use of prison, enhanced human rights, improved rehabilitation and reintegration, and safer communities.
The project took place against the background of remarkable European expansion of probation provision in the past 20-25 years (“probation” provision is used in its wider sense including work pre-trial, following court disposal, and during and after a custodial sentence). Can European developments be described as a success story? Undoubtably yes – but with significant caveats, not least regarding net-widening and the broader questions raised concerning “purposefull” or appropriate probation.
Additionally, little literature or evaluation exists specific to probation development (in contrast to, for example, prisons, health, or security). Some initiatives however appear more successful than others (although purpose and “success” are themselves widely defined). A limited “language” of probation development hampers international discourse and learning.
Research therefore aimed to –
- test and refine a model or “language” to support probation capacity building
- identify potential development “success factors” and risks, and
- consider the potential relevance of European lessons (successes and challenges) at a global level.
Methodology included study of probation development in five European countries: motivations and purposes (human rights and reducing the number of prisoners often foremost), steps, results, success factors, and sometimes hindrances along the way. This was supplemented with knowledge of development in other European jurisdictions and world regions, an extensive literature review, consideration of the role and impact of European Institutions (Council of Europe and European Commission) and the CEP (Confederation of European Probation), and attention to sources of the United Nations.
- The Essential Takeaways
The final report was published in November 2023. What are the essential take aways from this extensive study?
- The researchers developed a model or “language” of capacity building to support discussion and capacity building practice. The model provides a tool to explore the present probation situation and potential in a jurisdiction, to plan development, and over time gain insight into change. The model helps to explain probation roles or activities (the four “domains” of probation) and what needs to be in place to enable delivery – the organisational conditions (or “enablers”). In short – “a strong probation role and a strong probation organisation.” The model, illustrated in infographic 1, has international applicability.
Most current activity was found in Domain 2 (post court sentence). Strengthened guidance and activity in domains 1 and 3/4 has potential to influence features such as pre-trial detention and sentence proportionality, parole decision making, transition, and reintegration.