Mass Incarceration and Inequality
COMPAS (Conversations on Morality, Politics, and Society) Conference on Inequality
The Ohio State University
September 23, 2016
Sara Wakefield
Rutgers University, Newark
Brief Comments
¤ When Does Inequality Matter?
¤ How Mass Incarceration Reflects Inequality and How Mass Incarceration Creates Inequality
-
100
200
300
400
500
600 19
2519
2719
2919
3119
3319
3519
3719
3919
4119
4319
4519
4719
4919
5119
5319
5519
5719
5919
6119
6319
6519
6719
6919
7119
7319
7519
7719
7919
8119
8319
8519
8719
8919
9119
9319
9519
9719
9920
0120
0320
05
U.S. Incarceration Rate 1925-1974
-
100
200
300
400
500
600 19
2519
2719
2919
3119
3319
3519
3719
3919
4119
4319
4519
4719
4919
5119
5319
5519
5719
5919
6119
6319
6519
6719
6919
7119
7319
7519
7719
7919
8119
8319
8519
8719
8919
9119
9319
9519
9719
9920
0120
0320
05
U.S. Incarceration Rate 1925-2005
ContextCross-National Comparison
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
United StatesCuba
RwandaRussia
South AfricaIsrael
Turkey Saudi Arabia
England & WalesCanadaCroatia
ItalyFrance
NetherlandsGermanyDenmark
Incarceration Rate per 100,000 by Country, 2013
ContextMassive Racial Disparity
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%
Black Males
White Males Incarcerated by Age 30Arrest by Age 23
Risk of imprisonment by age 30-34:Men Born 1945-49 & 1970-74
Born 1945-49 Born 1970-74
All White Men 1.2 2.8All Non-College 1.8 5.1HS Dropout 4.2 14.8HS Only 0.7 4.0Some College 0.7 0.9
All Black Men 9.0 22.8All Non-College 12.1 30.9HS Dropout 14.7 62.5HS Only 10.2 20.3Some College 4.9 8.5
Mass Incarceration and Inequality
¤Mass incarceration reflects and reinforces inequality
¤The influence of mass incarceration in the direct creation of inequality is less clear for some outcomes
¤1. Labor market outcomes and earnings
¤2. Marriage and divorce
¤3. Parental incarceration
Three examples
Mass Incarceration and Inequality
¤ The lifetime risk of imprisonment is unequally distributed.
¤ The effects of imprisonment on individuals are often large.
¤But the effects on inequality are often quite small.
¤Black men are 8 times more likely to go to prison than white men.
¤And it causes a 30 percent reduction in earnings.
¤But it increases inequality between black men and white men by only 3 percent.
1. Earnings, for example
¤Black men are 8 times more likely to go to prison than white men.
¤And it causes a 20 reduction in the chance of marrying.
¤But it increases marriage inequality by only 4 percent.
2. Marriage is similar
¤ Effects on inequality are constrained by the starting distribution.
¤ Men who go to prison are at the low end of the earnings distribution and have a low probability of marriage anyway.
¤ Under those conditions, inequality can only increase a small amount—even in the presence of very large differences in rates of imprisonment and large individual-level effects
Why such small effects on inequality?
¤This is not to say that incarceration doesn’t matter for adult men.
¤Of course it does.
To be clear…
3. Parental Incarceration (here’s where it matters a lot)
¤Black children are 13 times more likely to experience the incarceration of a father.
¤And it causes: ¤ a 5% increase in behavioral problems, ¤ a 25% increase in aggression,¤ a 97% increase in homelessness (for Black
children), ¤ and a 48% increase in infant mortality
Aggression
Externalizing
Internalizing
Total
IMR
Homelessness
Percent Change Due to Incarceration
Percent Change Due to Incarceration
0 50 100
150
Low High
Aggression
Externalizing
Internalizing
Total
IMR
Homelessness
Black−White Gaps, No Incarceration
Percent Difference
0 50 100 150
Aggression
Externalizing
Internalizing
Total
IMR
Homelessness
Percent Change in Inequality
Percent Change in Inequality
0 50 100
150
1978 to 01990 to 0
The Children of the Prison Boom
¤ Mass incarceration has widened inequality in childhood wellbeing
¤ The consequences are particularly perverse as they fall on the most vulnerable of children
¤ Even if the imprisonment rate returned to 100 per 100,000 tomorrow, the ripple effects would continue for at least one more generation.
Challenges for Justice
The genius of the current caste system, and what most distinguishes it from its predecessors, is that it appears
voluntary. People choose to commit crimes, and that's why they are locked up or locked out, we are told.
(Michelle Alexander, The New Jim Crow)
The degree of civilization in a society can be judged by entering its prisons.
(Fyodor Dostoyevsky)
Thanks!
For more information, sources, or questions:
Sara Wakefield: [email protected]
For more research, resources, or 140 characters on soccer and Manchester City:
sarawakefield.net @wakefield_sara
Supplementary Slides
ContextFederal system sets the tone but doesn’t change the level
Violent
Violent
Drug
Drug
Immigration
0.00%
10.00%
20.00%
30.00%
40.00%
50.00%
60.00%
70.00%
80.00%
90.00%
100.00%
Federal (192,663 ~13%) State (1,325,305, ~87%)
Immigration
Other
Weapons
Public Order
Drug
Property
Violent
Context and SelectionPrisons and Processing as a Black Box
100 Arrests
65 Charges
30 Dismissals 23 Guilty Pleas7 Trials (3 Acquitted)
9 Probation Sentences
18 Incarceration Sentences
500 Crimes Reported
1,000 Crimes Committed?
The Funnel Model of the Criminal Justice System
ContextImprisonment Vs. Incarceration
0
200,000
400,000
600,000
800,000
1,000,000
1,200,000
1,400,000
1,600,000
1,800,000
Prison Jail
Prisons and Jails (Daily Average)
ContextJail Cycling
0
1,000,000
2,000,000
3,000,000
4,000,000
5,000,000
6,000,000
7,000,000
8,000,000
9,000,000
Prison Jail Sentenced Awaiting Trial
Prisons and Jails (Daily Average) Jails Alone (Annually)
Implications
¤ It’s time to move beyond never/ever comparisons
¤ Distinguishing parental criminality and parental punishment (handling selection)
¤ Tackling who is in prison and why and how this influences families¤ Uncomfortable but simultaneously true facts about justice,
violence, and inequity¤ Legitimacy concerns
Thanks!
For more information, sources, or questions:
Sara Wakefield: [email protected]
For more research, resources, or 140 characters on soccer and Manchester City:
sarawakefield.net @wakefield_sara
1. Risk: we show disparities in the risk of paternal imprisonment.
2. Harm: we show the effect of paternal imprisonment on mental health and behavioral problems, homelessness, and infant mortality.
3. Baseline Inequality: we show what the gap is without paternal imprisonment.
4. Increase in Inequality: we show what happens to the existing gap when accounting for varying levels of imprisonment.
4: Aggregating up
I This is how we do it for externalizing behaviors.
I Zero incarceration: BlackWhite = 9.3
7.4 = 1.26.
I Absolute di↵erence at zero incarceration is 1.9 (9.3� 7.4).
I Average (of high and low estimates) change in externalizingbehaviors associated with paternal incarceration is 1.97.
I Risks in 1990: 25.1 for black children; 3.6 for white children.
Showing the calculations
Change in inequality:
Black1990�White1990Black0�White0
.
(((9.3⇤.749)+((9.3+1.97)⇤.251)))�(((7.4⇤.964)+((7.4+1.97)⇤.036)))9.3�7.4 .
9.80�7.469.3�7.4 = 2.34
1.9 = 1.24.
So it increased inequality about 24%.