Harsher punishments, a safer society?

A gap between science and legal practice 

Kuiper’s research mainly focuses on the relationship between social science and legal practice. She explains: “On one hand, there is much empirical research from fields such as criminology, psychology, or sociology; on the other hand, there is legal practice, where this research does not always end up.” At the same time, Kuiper sees that practice contains valuable knowledge based on experience, but this too is not always incorporated into scientific research. “I primarily want to understand why this happens and how we can better align science and practice.” 

The effectiveness of punishment 

An important question is how we determine whether a punishment ‘works.’ According to Kuiper, clarifying what you want to measure is crucial. Is it less recidivism, deterring potential offenders, or providing justice to victims? She explains: “A true natural experiment, randomly assigning people to prison or community service, is ethically very difficult. Therefore, other methods are used to measure the effectiveness of punishments.” One example is the so-called ‘matching method,’ where groups of people are compared. “For instance, a study might compare a group of people receiving their first prison sentence with people who, up to that point, have a similar criminal record and background characteristics but received a different sanction, such as a fine or community service. These two groups are then compared regarding recidivism rates,” Kuiper says. 

Is the Netherlands ‘soft’? 

On Dutch social media, there is a sentiment that the Netherlands punishes relatively ‘softly.’ Kuiper clarifies that the Netherlands is relatively strict compared to other European countries, although this depends on how you look at it. She says: “Are we talking about the length of the sentence, the number of punishments imposed, or the regime someone ends up in? For example, if we look at our heaviest sentence, life imprisonment, it really means life imprisonment in the Netherlands. That makes the Netherlands an exception; this is not the case in other European countries.” 

However, how do other European countries compare? Which justice systems have proven effective? Kuiper says: “Scandinavian countries like Norway, Sweden, and Denmark are regarded in international literature as systems focused primarily on rehabilitation and reintegration. This focus aligns more closely with research findings on what effectively prevents recidivism.” 

The illusion of deterrence 

The idea that harsh punishments deter crime is deeply ingrained. This idea comes from the classical theory that people make rational choices about crime, weighing costs and benefits. However, research shows that people often do not think so rationally about committing crimes and the consequences of punishment. Kuiper: “The deterrence concept has not been proven effective for behavioural change. Studies show that rehabilitation is more effective in reducing crime.” Support with reintegration, finding work, or rebuilding social networks, this kind of support has a positive influence on preventing recidivism. 

According to Kuiper, one of the biggest misconceptions is that harsher punishments lead to a safer society. “Intuitively, punishment feels effective; much of our society is built around this idea. Yet research tells us that punishments are often ineffective for long-term behavioural change, which is ultimately what you want if you truly want to make society safer.” In fact, harsher punishments can have negative long-term consequences, such as making reintegration more difficult. “In the short term, harsher punishment might seem like a solution, but if the goal is to reduce crime in the long term, it is not”, Kuiper explains. 

Retribution as a motivation 

A key reason people want harsher sentences is retribution. Many victims and their families want justice for the harm done to them. “Retribution is a legitimate goal of punishment that is not about effectiveness, and as a society, we have given it a place in our criminal justice system, which I also understand. Although not every victim seeks retribution, it makes sense to me that for many victims and families, this is a very central goal in the criminal justice system. I cannot and do not want to judge that, because I do not experience the suffering they do”, Kuiper says. Still, she warns against one-sidedness: “The danger is that we get caught in a cycle of retribution, where we lose sight of our real aim, preventing crime in the long term, and focus only on past crimes. This risks overlooking crime prevention for the future.” 

Compassion in a hardening society 

Through her research, Kuiper hopes to contribute to public knowledge about the criminal justice system and the effects of punishment. She also wants to increase citizens’ understanding of the law. “We currently live in a society that seems to be hardening, and where reacting to and judging others has become easier than ever. Even in the comments under the NOS Stories video, people are still very harsh about crime and how it should be punished. I hope that I can help create a world where we can look at criminal cases differently in the long term.” Kuiper advocates for a society that remains mindful of the broader long-term impact of punishment. “I hope that if people gain more knowledge about where crime comes from and how we, as a society, can tackle it without immediately resorting to harsh punishments, we can ultimately look at each other with a little more compassion.”