Is there something wrong with the prisons in Norway?

Norway’s prison policy is widely regarded as an example of high standards of treatment and respect for human rights and is often considered part of a phenomenon some scholars call Scandinavian exceptionalism.

However, no matter how organised and shiny Norwegian prisons are, they are still prisons: institutions serving the purpose of social control, restraining the freedom of people who do not conform to the law to protect the wider society.

We conducted an in-depth study of Norwegian imprisonment policy, in which we analysed the way the prison policy is implemented at Bergen Prison through a case study. 

We spoke with people who fulfilled different roles among prison staff, to get a better understanding of the prison, how it works, their routines, social relationships in the workplace, thoughts about the prison, and daily challenges.

What's different about Norwegian prisons?

Inside Bergen Prison, we saw pristine conditions. Individual rooms for each inmate, a well-equipped grocery store, educational programmes, and professionals well-prepared to deal with issues ranging from drug abuse to sexual offences and anger management. Efforts to connect with the inmates are considered measures towards building a more humane prison system, measures at which Bergen Prison excels.

All officers undergo a three-year programme at the University College of Norwegian Correctional Service (KRUS), where they learn to restrain and subdue a temporarily violent person, but also dynamic security, the art of socially connecting with the inmates to build a community based on respect. 

This builds on the principle that inmates are less likely to hurt or attack someone who treats them well and whom they respect.

In our study, we found that inmates are given broad support, in compliance with the guidelines established by the Norwegian Correctional Service.

Demystifying the exceptionality

However, a closer examination reveals contradictions, leaving the Norwegian prison system looking less polished, and demystifying the exceptionality that surrounds it when viewed from outside Scandinavia. Not only are there cracks in the system, but they are widening, as prisons’ budgets are squeezed by annual 'efficiency cuts', and parliamentary decisions limit spending discretion.

In addition to the economic stressors eroding conditions for the current imprisonment policy, there are contradictions inherent in the policy. While the Norwegian Correctional Service’s institutional strategy defines resocialisation as the goal, a significant share of those incarcerated come back after release – around 20 per cent, according to national statistics. 

And while Norway does not impose life sentences, some are convicted to indefinite imprisonment, where sentences are extended every five years, and release may be unlikely.

There is plenty of support for inmates to learn a trade, finish their education, or get a college degree. But while such programmes, aimed at resocialisation, are well suited to some inmates, such as the young and economically active, they may be less beneficial for the elderly or mentally ill. 

Resocialisation requires people to think about the future they want for themselves, which is hard for people who cannot see a way forward or feel that they have little time left.

Limitations of incarceration

In practice, the resocialisation policy is difficult to distinguish from compliance. The inmates who can be 'saved' are given a social and economic purpose; the rest are removed from society on a semi-permanent basis to prevent future crimes. Such measures, disposing of people in a humane way, are arguably necessary, but still tragic, as they represent the society giving up on some of its own.

Despite excellent material conditions compared to prisons in most other countries, Norwegian prisons are still products of public policies attempting to solve social problems through incarceration. They remain a sword of Damocles, hanging by a single horse’s hair over the head of each person in Norway, potentially snapping from a single lack of judgment or bad decision made in the course of everyday life.

This doesn’t mean that the current imprisonment policy shouldn’t be protected. Despite challenges, it continues to reflect the progress made through political struggles in the 70s, that made Norwegian state-of-the-art prisons acknowledged throughout the world as a model to emulate. This will soon be lost if nothing is done to prevent the erosion of the system by politicians failing to pass budgets that can sustain the prison system in its current form.

References:

• Crewe, B., Ievins, A., Larmour, S., Laursen, J., Mjaland, K., & Schliehe, A. (2022). Nordic penal exceptionalism: A comparative, empirical analysis. BRITISH JOURNAL OF CRIMINOLOGY, XX, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjc/azac013
• Pratt, J. (2007). Scandinavian Exceptionalism in an Era of Penal Excess: Part I: The Nature and Roots of Scandinavian Exceptionalism. British Journal of Criminology, 48(2), 119–137. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjc/azm072
• United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime. (2015). Handbook on Dynamic Security and Prison Intelligence. United Nations.

Further reading:

The Covid-19 pandemic has unveiled the pervasive dangers of autocratic responses to crises

Does social media content creation impact the professional identity of preventive health professionals?