{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.018964259664478483, 'fraction_numerical': 0.007293946024799417, 'mean_word_length': 5.351851851851852, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Beyond the austerity-driven hypothesis: Political economic theses on penality and the recent prison population decline

In what might be called the ‘austerity-driven hypothesis’, a consistent strand of literature has sought to explain the prison downsizing witnessed in many jurisdictions of the global north over the past decade by referring to the financial crisis of the late 2000s to early 2010s and its effects in terms of public spending cuts. Since this economic phase is essentially over, whereas the (moderate) decarceration turn is still ongoing, there are good reasons to challenge this hypothesis. This article delves into the non-economic forces that are fostering a prison population decline that, 10 years on, is becoming the new ‘penal normal’. The article thereby aims to spark a dialogue not only with the scholarship exploring the prison downsizing but also with certain theoretical frameworks that have played a key role in examining the punitive turn era. Additionally, the article contributes to the conversation on the need to reframe materialist readings on penality in a ‘non-reductionist’ fashion. By revisiting heterodox theses and scrutinizing the impact of recent penal changes on traditional materialist accounts, the article joins the collective endeavour seeking to update political economic perspectives on punishment and the penal field.