Prisons: too full, too expensive, and ineffective

Caught in a political dilemma.
It was a striking news item in late 2024: Estonia is considering opening one of its prisons to foreign inmates. Perhaps even, Justice Minister Liisa Pakosta spoke, as a kind of “Airbnb system”. Several countries soon showed interest, such as the United Kingdom (UK) and the Netherlands, both struggling with a prison system that is stuck. Still, such a practice, on which there is no political decision yet, would not be unique. In the past, European countries have already agreed on international transfers to create cell space.
This case is just one example of a problem in various European countries: capacity problems in prisons. On the one hand, this is an all-time problem; on the other, trends are contributing to growing problems in detention facilities. The causes are diverse. In the Netherlands, for example, there is no shortage of cells, quite the contrary, but staff shortages bog the system down. Other possible causes of overcrowding include a lack of cell capacity, inadequate maintenance, or a strict(er) legal system. This article describes the current situation around capacity problems in Europe, how a hardened political climate about punitiveness can further exacerbate this situation, and what alternatives exist.
Overcrowding in European prisons
Internationally, there is no uniform measure to determine when a prison is ‘too full’. In Europe, standards from the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture, known as CPT standards, are used, in which the number of square metres of space per prisoner is a key reference point. For example, a single cell must be at least 6m2, with a minimum height of 2.5 metres. The occupancy rate shows the number of prisoners compared to the official capacity. If this figure exceeds 90, there is already serious overcrowding, as the functioning of certain wards is often already compromised.
Such figures do not necessarily have to be a major problem immediately if adjustments can be made in the prison. Yet, several countries are clearly facing major capacity problems. In 2023, the outliers in occupancy rates were Cyprus (166), Romania (120) and France (119), against a European average of 93.5. It should be noted that snapshots are always somewhat problematic and extremes push the average up. However, the problems in the aforementioned countries, among others, are clearly of a structural nature, with consistently high figures.
The Council of Europe (CoE) – that council separate from the European Union (EU) – is particularly concerned with prison conditions in Europe. They publish an annual review with statistics and the CoE is a clear advocate of improved conditions for detainees. Overcrowding is called an “acute and persistent problem” in a “significant number” of European prison systems. Moreover, prison populations in Europe have increased in recent years, although this is also partly a return to pre-COVID pandemic times, as occupancy rates were often historically low during the pandemic. One of the consequences of overcrowded prisons is that it can lead to problems in the international extradition of prisoners, due to capacity problems in the host state. In 2023, for example, Germany refused to extradite a prisoner to the UK because of the state of the UK prison system.
It is also striking how big the differences are between different European countries. While several countries are struggling with prisoner surpluses, there are also countries where empty prisons pose problems. At first glance, it may therefore seem a possible solution to transfer prisoners from full to empty prisons in another country. Yet in practice, this seems almost impossible, as well as undesirable. A range of legal and human rights-related principles are affected, such as the right to family visits, which is more difficult when the detainee is transferred abroad. The proposals have therefore attracted much criticism.
Punitive policies exacerbate the problems
It is an eternal political and philosophical dilemma: on the one hand, the importance of enforcement with deterrent sentences to create a sense of security and justice towards victims. On the other hand, the problems posed by prison sentences in terms of reintegration, cost and capacity, and questionable effectiveness or even counterproductive results. Especially in a hardening and rightward-shifting political climate, it regularly happens that the former interest prevails, while the scientific arguments clearly point in the other direction. It is a debate that quickly runs high in society, in which there seems to be little room for nuance. The majority of public opinion is often under the assumption that judges do not punish hard enough, while the trend is in fact towards harsher punishment. One aspect often left out of the picture here is the hefty cost involved in prison detention. The CoE’s (somewhat outdated) data from 2020 shows a European average of €64 per person per day. This ranges from €6.50 in Bulgaria to over €300 in Norway. In Norway, prisoners do have an (entry-level) qualification and a job at the time of their release.
More generally, there are considerable cross-country differences between legal systems and the principles that shape them. For example, the Netherlands and Germany are known as countries in which relatively few and relatively short prison sentences are imposed. If this form of punishment is used, there is also a strong emphasis on rehabilitation and preparing for a return to society. Other countries have stricter policies. France, for instance, is currently in the middle of an extensive project to expand the number of prisons, to cope with the numbers.
Naturally, there is a relationship between a strict justice system and occupancy rates: the more people are sentenced to prison, and the longer these sentences are, the more the system’s capacity comes under pressure. Moreover, there is an increasing use of pre-trial detention, i.e. prior to a conviction. This creates problems, especially when combined with staff shortages and waiting lists. In addition, short prison sentences are also a problem. The vast majority of prisoners serve short sentences for minor offences, defined as up to 12 months. Numerous studies suggest that this only increases the likelihood of recidivism, as well as taking up a huge amount of capacity and resources. There are therefore increasing calls to look at alternative forms of sentencing.
Time for more alternative penalties?
The COE has structurally advocated the use of alternative sentencing. In most countries, these methods are also available but are still underused, possibly due to public opinion, according to a 2016 white paper. The same paper detailed how, in extreme cases, overcrowded prisons can even violate Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which deals with inhuman or degrading treatment. While this is not a regular occurrence, there is concern about the overall amount of detentions.
In 2017, the European Parliament also adopted a resolution calling on member states to look at alternatives to imprisonment “whenever possible”. Besides overcrowding, the Parliament also feared the radicalising effects that prison sentences can have on detainees. Criminal law is a national competence over which European institutions do not have much influence, but the resolution sent a clear message to Member States.
The Council of the European Union – that Council in which ministers from those same Member States meet in alternating formations – adopted the Council Conclusions on Alternative Measures to Detention in 2019. This was one of the priorities of the Finnish Presidency at the time. It too concludes that detention should be looked at differently, both before and after conviction. So, it is clear that awareness is certainly there, but also that reality does not always match this yet. However, the debate has by now been gaining importance for some time and many countries have indeed reduced the rates of imprisonment. In addition, it should be stressed again how big the differences are between countries. It is certainly not the case that the problem is the same everywhere.
Alternative forms of punishment
There are several alternatives to imprisonment, often in the form of community service. For example, Reclassering Nederland advocates increasing the maximum number of hours of community service so that it can be more widely applied as an alternative to short-term detention. It also calls for more efforts towards “smart punishment”, combining punishment with some form of behavioural training or other learning trajectories. In this way, punishment thus takes on a more educational character. Of course, this option requires some (financial) resources, but ultimately yields better results.
Increasingly popular is electronic monitoring of a suspect or convict by means of an ankle monitor. Instead of completely depriving someone of their freedom, this freedom is restricted, in a manner that suits the situation. The person retains their home and work but is otherwise bound by strict location bans or a location order, which often amounts to a home sentence. The ankle monitor can be tracked every minute of the day, so the measure is certainly perceived as a punishment, while offering a cheaper and less disruptive alternative to detention. It does, of course, still have risks associated with it, such as the possibility that criminals can stay in touch with each other more easily. Several European countries already use this form of sentencing; in others, such as the Netherlands, it is only applied during conditional release.
Another interesting topic is the growing role of artificial intelligence (AI) in the criminal justice system. This topic is too big and complex to cover in detail here, but there are already studies as well as real-life applications of AI models in assessing the likelihood of recidivism based on risk profiles. For low-scoring offenders, the model recommends alternative sentences because these offenders are very unlikely to pose a risk to public safety. A study by Tulane University (United States), for example, showed that AI brought down both prison and recidivism rates. Yet there are also serious grounds for being very cautious about this type of solution, such as the inherent bias, opacity and lack of accountability of such models. Europe is generally somewhat more critical of far-reaching applications than the United States, but the role of AI in criminal justice is bound to grow in the future.
How to proceed?
Of course, the purpose of this article is not to argue for an end to all prison sentences. Criminals who pose a danger to society or their environment should be prevented from doing so. However, it is important to more clearly tell the full story around prison sentences, so that the focus is more on the main purpose, which is to prevent crime. This argument, combined with the high costs and capacity problems, makes it important to continue working on alternative forms of sentencing in Europe.
Yannick holds a master’s degree from the Centre International de Formation Européenne and is currently pursuing a master’s degree in Crisis and Security Management at Leiden University.
Image: Shutterstock