After a serious crime, the public debate often features a loud and clear demand for harsher sentences. How well does this align with what scientific research tells us about the effectiveness of punishments? Malouke Kuiper, Assistant Professor of Criminology, investigates this tension. 'After years of research, we have found no evidence that harsher punishments are effective in reducing crime, yet we still see new legislative proposals to increase maximum sentences or to ban community service sentences.'
A gap between science and legal practice
Kuiper, assistant professor of Criminology at Erasmus School of Law, examines the relationship between social science and legal practice in her research. 'Research findings from criminology, psychology and sociology are not always applied in practice.'
On the other hand, Kuiper sees that practice contains a wealth of valuable knowledge based on experience, but that this is not always taken into account in scientific research. ‘I primarily want to understand why this happens and how we can better align science and practice.'
How effective is punishment?
An important question is: how do you determine whether a punishment "works"? According to Kuiper, it is first and foremost important to be clear about what you want to measure. Is it about reducing the likelihood of repeat offences? (This is called recidivism.) Is it about deterring potential offenders? Or is it about satisfying victims by imposing severe punishments? Kuiper: 'A truly natural experiment, i.e. randomly assigning people to a prison sentence or community service, is very difficult from an ethical point of view. That is why other ways are being sought to measure the effectiveness of punishment.'
One example is the so-called “matching method”, in which groups of people are compared. 'A group of people who are receiving a prison sentence for the first time is compared with people who have a similar criminal record up to that point. The groups are matched based on background characteristics. The difference is that one group has never been in prison. These people have been convicted but were given a fine or community service instead. These two groups are then compared in terms of recidivism rates', Kuiper explains.
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.
- Assistant professor
- More information
More science stories? Have a look at our online magazine Erasmus Extra.
- Related content
