Thinking about penal equivalents

Abstract

Authors have pointed to multiple dimensions of crime and punishment, and in particular, the need to understand both the roles of instrumental and expressive elements. The latter dimension - the expressive or symbolic purpose of punishment - has been viewed as a specific reason for the relatively low success rate of decreasing the use of imprisonment, particularly with respect to public acceptability. I argue that in addition, there has not been adequate attention paid to the roles of factors such as the nature of the offence and the age of the offender. The purpose of this article is to offer a lens through which to think about penal equivalents, and the nuances of various connections among multiple dimensions of punishment. What is lacking from criminal justice literature and legislation is a broader framework for understanding the relationship among purposes of sentencing, sanctions, offences and offenders - how a specific sanction is seen as accomplishing specific purposes only with respect to certain offences and offenders. The present analysis draws on a random sample of residents in Ontario, Canada about their views of the acceptability of fines and community service orders as penal substitutes for custodial sentences across different offence and offender scenarios.