Conceptualizing and measuring “punitiveness” in contemporary advanced democracies

Elizabeth Gordon Pfeffer

Regulation & Governance, 2024, vol. 18, issue 2, 573-589

Abstract: This article addresses a key political question regarding the relationship between states and their citizens: how harsh are judicial systems in their punishment of those who deviate from the law? Punitiveness is a fraught concept in the existing literature and robust measurement methods maximizing conceptual complexity are lacking. Here I develop a functional approach to punitiveness through a revised conceptualization and operationalization of this key variable while cautioning against the solitary use of incarceration rates to measure state intention. Punitiveness is conceptually disaggregated into three main components: (1) a commitment to punishment over rehabilitation, (2) the degree of harshness of response to crime (i.e., a longer sentence in prison), and (3) the lack of a logical progression of punishment based on the severity of crime committed or intent of the offender. These axes are further disaggregated into measurable indicators to build a novel index of punitiveness (P‐Index) from the legal codes of 26 countries. Ultimately, this rules‐as‐data measure offers researchers purchase on the puzzling variation in punitiveness across contexts, which persists regardless of current and historical crime levels, offering particular utility for supply‐side political‐economic explanations.

Date: 2024
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12533

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:wly:reggov:v:18:y:2024:i:2:p:573-589

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Regulation & Governance from John Wiley & Sons
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Wiley Content Delivery ().