The Effect of Imprisonment on Recidivism Rates of Felony Offenders: A Focus on Drug Offenders* (original) (raw)

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the deterrent effect of imprisonment. Using data on offenders convicted of felonies in 1993 in Jackson County (Kansas City), Missouri, we compare recidivism rates for offenders sentenced to prison with those for offenders placed on probation. W e find n o evidence that imprisonment reduces the likelihood of recidivism. Instead, we find compelling evidence that offenders who are sentenced to prison have higher rates of recidivism and recidivate more quickly than d o offenders placed on probation. We also find persuasive evidence that imprisonment has a more pronounced criminogenic effect on drug offenders than on other types of offenders. KEYWORDS Recidivism, imprisonment, drug offenders. In Malign Neglect, Michael Tonry (199581) contends that "Drugoffense sentences are the single most important cause of the trebling of the prison population in the United States since 1980." Statistics concerning state and federal prison populations support this conclusion. The percentage of state prisoners incarcerated for a drug offense nearly quadrupled from 1980 (6%) to 1996 (23%). Similarly, the percentage of federal offenders serving time for a drug offense increased from 25% in 1980 to 60% in 1996. In fact, the increase in drug offenders accounted for nearly three-quarters of the total increase in federal inmates and one-third of the total increase in state inmates during this 16-year period (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 1998). These statistics reflect a crime control policy premised on a theory of * This manuscript is based on work supported by a grant from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. Points of view are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the position of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. We are grateful for the helpful comments of the editor and the anonymous reviewers on earlier drafts of the paper. CRIMINOLOGY VOLUME 40 NUMBER 2 2002 329 330 SPOHN AND HOLLERAN deterrence that Skolnick (1997:411) characterizes as "superficially persuasive." The assumption is that sentencing drug offenders to prison for long periods of time will deter current and prospective offenders, leading eventually to a reduction in drug abuse and drug-related crime. As numerous commentators have observed, however, this assumption rests on the false premise that altering criminal penalties will alter behavior (Irwin and Austin, 1997; Paternoster, 1991, 1987; Tonry, 1995). In fact, scholarly research generally concludes that increasing the severity of penalties will have little, if any, effect on crime. This conclusion also is applicable to offenders convicted of drug offenses. As Cohen and her colleagues (19981260) recently noted, "Observers of the criminal justice system who in general agree on little else have joined in arguing that increased penalties for drug use and distribution at best have had a modest impact on the operation of illicit drug markets, on the price and availability of illicit drugs, and on consumption of illicit drugs." The purpose of this study is to evaluate the deterrent effect of incarceration, with a particular focus on drug offenders. Using data on offenders convicted of felonies in Jackson County (Kansas City), Missouri, in 1993, we compare recidivism rates for offenders sentenced to prison with those for offenders sentenced to probation. Using multiple definitions of recidivism, we examine recidivism rates for drug offenders, drug-involved offenders, and offenders convicted of nondrug offenses, controlling for the offender's background characteristics, prior criminal record, and other relevant factors. PRIOR RESEARCH EVIDENCE REGARDING THE DETERRENT EFFECT OF PUNISHMENT The crime control policies pursued in the context of the War on Drugs rest largely on the philosophy of deterrence. As developed by eighteenthcentury utilitarian philosophers such as Jeremy Bentham (1948) and Cesare Beccaria (1963 [1764]), deterrence theory suggests that crime results from a rational calculation of the costs and benefits of criminal activity: Individuals commit crimes when the benefits outweigh the costs. Because an important "cost" of crime is apprehension and punishment, deterrence theorists suggest that "persons will refrain from committing offenses if they perceive that they are certain to be punished, with a severe penalty, and soon after the crime has been committed" (Paternoster, 1991:219). Deterrence can be either specific or general. Specific deterrence occurs when those who have been punished "cease offending, commit less serious offenses, or offend at a lower rate because of the fear of some future sanction" (Paternoster and Piquero, 1995:251). General