Chris Fox

Payment by results and social impact bonds in the criminal justice sector: new challenges for the concept of evidence-based policy?

Payment by results allows the government to pay a provider of services on the basis of the outcomes their service achieves rather than the inputs or outputs the provider delivers. Social impact bonds (SIBs) are a form of payment by results which allow the financing of social outcomes via private investment. It is suggested that payment by results and SIBs will drive greater efficiency, innovation and impact in tackling social problems through focusing reward on outcomes and providing minimal prescription as to how these outcomes should be achieved. It is suggested that this may be achieved while also reducing risk for government. Here we set out the challenges likely to arise in developing payment by results models and SIBs in the criminal justice system of England and Wales. These include the uncertainty arising from defining outcomes, estimating the potential impact of interventions, measuring and attributing change, valuing benefits, demonstrating a fiscal return and getting interventions to scale. We conclude that, to a government trying to deliver ‘more for less’, payment by results may offer an attractive solution in some parts of the public sector. However, the case for this approach in the criminal justice sector, where the evidence base is contested and potential savings difficult to quantify and realize, is not yet proven.

Social innovation, an answer to contemporary societal challenges? Locating the concept in theory and practice

Social innovation discourses see in social challenges opportunities to make societies more sustainable and cohesive through inclusive practices, coproduction and pro-active grassroots initiatives. In this paper we are concerned first that the concept has been stretched in so many directions that it is at breaking point. We illustrate this by documenting the varied uses of social innovation in different academic and policy discourses. Second, we assume that, if social innovation is to be a useful concept for policy-makers, then it must tell us something about what adjustments are needed to develop an effective political economy that is social innovation ready. Finally, we argue that what is needed is more theoretical and empirical work to help social innovation to develop into an effective policy tool.

Is payment by results the most efficient way to address the challenges faced by the criminal justice sector

In recent years the UK government has emphasized evidence-based policy, as a part of which the Payment by Results (PbR) approach has increasingly been promoted. Payment by Results allows the government to pay a provider of services on the basis of specified outcomes achieved rather than the inputs or outputs delivered. Linked to PbR is the innovative source of funding social interventions know as Social Impact Bonds (SIBs). We discuss the potential benefits of PbR and survey its use across the UK public sector. Then, concentrating in particular on the Criminal Justice System (CJS) we outline three methodological challenges to the implementation of PbR: gaming, measuring outcomes and identifying fiscal benefits. We then identify a number of challenges to the implementation of PbR. We conclude that PbR has a place in commissioning services, but that its role in the CJS is likely to be limited and unlikely to succeed as a socially efficient means of attracting new sources of funding. We finish by considering two alternatives to PbR: justice reinvestment and personalization.

Justice Reinvestment: Can it Deliver More for Less?

Recent years have seen high levels of public spending on criminal justice but to relatively little effect. Prison numbers have risen sharply and public confidence in the criminal justice system remains relatively low. Although crime has fallen there is limited evidence to suggest that this is because of increased criminal justice activity. Justice reinvestment (JR) is a concept that has been widely touted as an approach that might help UK authorities deliver more for less at a time when public sector spending is being cut. It has been used widely in the USA with seemingly promising results. Although elements of JR have been tried in the UK, a full-scale implementation has yet to be attempted. Such an attempt will have to give careful consideration to a variety of practical implementation challenges and methodological issues which range from the potential unification and devolution of criminal justice budgets, to the transferability of a predominantly USA-originating evidence base to the UK. This article identifies a number of such issues and attempts to set out an agenda for academic discourse on JR.

Partnerships: where next?

Partnership working is critical to delivery across the public sector but can often feel frustrating and ineffectual for those involved. This article focuses on four areas crucial for effective partnership working: ensuring that there is a clear justification for the partnership; involving service users and communities in ways that are empowering and sustainable; developing good governance arrangements; and developing effective performance management arrangements. Throughout the article, the contrasting experiences of crime and disorder reduction partnerships (CDRPs) and youth offending teams (YOTs) are used to illustrate key points.

Could Personalisation Reduce Re-offending? Reflections on Potential Lessons from British Social Care Reform for the British Criminal Justice System

Rising prison numbers and high rates of re-offending illustrate the need for criminal justice reform. In the social care sector, the ‘personalisation revolution’ has resulted in the near eradication of long-term, institutional care for the majority of people with disabilities and many frail older people, increasing satisfaction. This paper examines what this has entailed and considers the case for introducing personalisation in the criminal justice system. It concludes that criminal justice reformers can learn from the social care experience and suggests how personalisation might fit within the current criminal justice reform agenda. However, introducing personalisation will pose significant challenges, perhaps the biggest being the need to change criminal justice culture.

Crime and Economics : An Introduction

The economics of crime is an area of growing activity and concern, increasingly influential both to the study of crime and criminal justice and to the formulation of crime reduction and criminal justice policy. As well as providing an overview of the relationship between economics and crime, this book poses key questions such as: What is the impact of the labour market and poverty on crime? Can society decrease criminal activity from a basis of economic disincentives? What forms of crime reduction and methods of reducing re-offending are most cost beneficial? Can illicit organised crime and illicit drug markets be understood better through the application of economic analysis? For those interested in economic methods, but without previous economic training, this book also provides an accessible overview of key areas such as cost-benefit analysis, econometrics and the debate around how to estimate the costs of crime.

Do You Get What You Pay for? Assessing the Use of Prison from an Economic Perspective

This article assesses the relative economic costs and benefits of alternative sentences. A conceptual economic model is developed in which the benefits are the rehabilitation, incapacitation, deterrence and retribution effects of prison. A review of the literature was undertaken to identify economic studies that measure these effects. The evidence available tends to focus on costs and the rehabilitation and incapacitation effects. The evidence on the deterrence effect takes two forms – theoretical models and empirical analysis. Little economic evidence on the retribution effect of prison was identified. In conclusion, whatever the other reasons put forward for or against the use of prison, it is reasonable to conclude that using it for anyone but those convicted of serious offences is a waste of public resources.

Justice reinvestment : can the criminal justice system deliver more for less?

1. Introduction, 2. Rising prison numbers: the key challenge for criminal justice policy, 3. Justice Reinvestment overview, 4. A new approach to criminal justice policy, 5. Justice mapping, 6. Justice Reinvestment and evidence-based policy, 7. The economics of criminal justice policy, 8. New ways of financing criminal justice interventions: Payment by results and Social Impact Bonds, 9. Conclusion.

Could economics solve the prison crisis

This article considers important developments over the last decade which have laid the foundations for a new approach to criminal justice policy; an approach in which economic analysis is central. These developments include aspects of the policy debate on sentencing; the government’s commitment to evidence-based policy; investment in the economics profession across government; and the rise of the Justice Reinvestment movement. While many of the opportunities presented for economic analysis of sentencing policy have not yet been exploited, there is reason to believe that they will be over the next few years. Various reasons are discussed including the current economic situation, which makes increasingly untenable the continuing commitment of government to increasing prison capacity without consideration of more efficient alternatives. The article concludes by suggesting some steps that the new government might take to ensure that the benefits of an economically efficient approach to criminal justice policy are realized.