Abstract
Prison cells and their carceral design provide a perspective on the prevailing ideological and pragmatic goals within correctional systems, especially with regard to the needs and rights of those incarcerated. Elements of the cell can therefore form a foundation for comparative analyses of correctional philosophy. This chapter explores the distinct penal ideologies of Norway and the United States, as represented by Pennsylvania, through the lens of cells in a newly constructed prison in each jurisdiction. A consideration of the constituent elements and use of prison cells highlights the official focus on utilitarian punishment goals like reintegration and “normality” through environmental-based rehabilitation in the Norwegian context, and in Pennsylvania, the primacy of efficiency and other non-utilitarian correctional goals. Ultimately, these cells reflect their respective society’s correctional priorities at the time they were built.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
We focus our discussion here on the rehabilitative aspects of utilitarianism. A smaller literature exists that discusses the prison environs as deterrent in itself (e.g. Nagin 2013). This aspect of utilitarian punishment did not arise in this examination of these two prisons and their design processes.
- 2.
Sentences are a range, with defendants spending at least the minimum—and no more than the maximum—in prison.
- 3.
A 30-year sentence is possible for war crimes. One other exception is so-called preventive detention, which is a functionally indefinite sentence used only for the most dangerous and high-risk offenders (see e.g., Norwegian Correctional Service n.d.-a).
- 4.
Consistent with legal and operational requirements, including the Americans with Disabilities Act, a small number of cells are designed for one occupant. Single-celling is also used to prevent physical assaults and other victimisation (T. Ferguson, interview, 2019).
- 5.
These rough calculations simply divide the estimated budget by the total number of general cells. This is a very rough proxy for the allocation of resources per cell, as it fails to take into account construction of additional, non-standard cells, the size and nature of the remainder of the facility, material and labourcosts, as well as myriad of other factors appropriately employed in a cost-benefit analysis.
References
Benko, J. (2015). The Radical Humaneness of Norway’s Halden Prison. New York Times. Retrieved September 11, 2019, from https://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/29/magazine/the-radical-humaneness-of-norways-halden-prison.html.
Brottveit, G. (2018). The Becoming of Punishment as an Unpredictable and Moveable Torment. In E. Fransson, F. Giofrè, & B. Johnsen (Eds.), Prison, Architecture and Humans (pp. 29–35). Oslo: Cappelen Damm Akademisk.
Crossley, N. (1993). The Politics of the Gaze: Between Foucault and Merleau-Ponty. Human Studies, 16(4), 399–419.
Dennis, M. (2018). Officials Cut Ribbon to Graterford Prison Replacement—SCI Phoenix. The Mercury. Retrieved October 2, 2019, from https://www.pottsmerc.com/news/officials-cut-ribbon-to-graterford-prison-replacement-sci-phoenix/article_7b0f4744-0360-57bf-8403-9b76aa4f9dc7.html.
DiStefano, J. (2018). Pa.’s $400 million Prison Opening Delayed. The Philadelphia Inquirer. Retrieved September 11, 2019, from https://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/inq-phillydeals/sci-phoenix-graterford-state-prison-delay-not-june-30-20180629.html.
Engbo, H. J. (2017). Normalisation in Nordic Prisons—From a Prison Governor’s Perspective. In P. Smith & T. Ugelvik (Eds.), Scandinavian Penal History, Culture and Prison Practice (pp. 327–352). London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Erik Arkitekter. (n.d.). Halden Fængsel. Retrieved September 14, 2019, from http://erik.dk/projekter/halden-faengsel/.
Esping-Andersen, G. (1990). The Three Political Economies of the Welfare State. International Journal of Sociology, 20(3), 92–123.
Fairweather, L. (2000). Psychological Effects of the Prison Environment. In L. Fairweather & S. McConville (Eds.), Prison Architecture: Policy, Design and Experience (pp. 31–48). Oxford: Architectural Press.
Foucault, M. (1977). Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. New York, NY: Vintage.
Frase, R. (2005). Punishment Purposes. Stanford Law Review, 58, 67–83.
Hancock, P., & Jewkes, Y. (2011). Architectures of Incarceration: The Spatial Pains of Imprisonment. Punishment & Society, 13(5), 611–629.
Heery International, Inc. (n.d.). SCI Phoenix New Correctional Facility. Retrieved May 22, 2020, from https://www.heery.com/projects/sci-phoenix-new-correctional-facility/.
Høidal, A. (2018). Normality behind the Walls: Examples from Halden Prison. Federal Sentencing Reporter, 31(1), 58–66.
Jewkes, Y., & Johnston, H. (2007). The Evolution of Prison Architecture. In Y. Jewkes (Ed.), Handbook on Prisons (pp. 174–196). Portland, OR: Willan Publishing.
Johnston, N. (2000). Forms of Constraint: A History of Prison Architecture. Chicago, IL: University of Illinois Press.
Johnston, N. (2004). The World’s Most Influential Prison: Success or Failure. The Prison Journal, 84(4 Suppl), 20S–40S.
K., J. (2018). Humanity Rather than Materialism: A Short Essay About the Prison Environment. In E. Fransson, F. Giofrè, & B. Johnsen (Eds.), Prison, Architecture and Humans (pp. 29–35). Oslo: Cappelen Damm Akademisk.
Kriminalomsorgen. (2019). Halden Prison: Punishment That Works - Change That Lasts!. Retrieved March 26, 2020, from https://issuu.com/omdocs/docs/magasin_halden_prison_issu.
Langelid, T., & Fridhovd, I. M. (2019). Straffegjennomføring i Noreg: eit kort historisk oversyn. In K. G. Westreim & H. M. K. Eide (Eds.), Kunnskapsbasert Straffegjennomføring i Kriminalomsorgen i Norge (pp. 29–52). Oslo: Fagbokforlaget.
Moran, D., & Jewkes, Y. (2011). Linking the Carceral and the Punitive State: A Review of Research on Prison Architecture, Design, Technology and the Lived Experience of Carceral Space. Annales de Géographie, 2, 702–703.
Moran, D., & Jewkes, Y. (2014). “Green” Prisons: Rethinking the “Sustainability” of the Carceral Estate. Geographica Helvetica, 69(5), 345–353.
Moran, D., Jewkes, Y., & Turner, J. (2016). Prison Design and Carceral Space. In Y. Jewkes, B. Crew, & J. Bennett (Eds.), Handbook on Prisons (pp. 114–130). New York, NY: Routledge.
Moran, D., & Turner, J. (2018). Turning over a New Leaf: The Health-Enabling Capacities of Nature Contact in Prison. Social Science & Medicine, 231, 62–69.
Morris, N. (1974). The Future of Imprisonment. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
Nagin, D. (2013). Deterrence in the Twenty-First Century. Crime and Justice, 42(1), 199–263.
Norwegian Correctional Service. (n.d.-a). About the Norwegian Correctional Service. Retrieved September 11, 2019, from https://www.kriminalomsorgen.no/information-in-english.265199.no.html.
Norwegian Correctional Service. (n.d.-b). Halden Prison: Punishment that Works—Change that Lasts! Retrieved September 14, 2019, from https://haldenfengsel.no/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/Magazine_Halden_Prison_prew6-Engelsk-versjon-2018-pages-3-4.pdf.
Pennsylvania Commission on Sentencing. (2018). 2017 Annual Report. Retrieved September 11, 2019, from http://pcs.la.psu.edu/publications-and-research/annual-reports/2017/view.
Pennsylvania Department of Corrections. (2019a). Mission Statement. Retrieved September 11, 2019, from https://www.cor.pa.gov/About%20Us/Pages/CONTACT%20US%20-%20About%20Us.aspx.
Pennsylvania Department of Corrections. (2019b). SCI Phoenix. Retrieved September 11, 2019, from https://www.cor.pa.gov/Facilities/StatePrisons/Pages/Phoenix.aspx.
Pratt, J., & Eriksson, A. (2011). Mr. Larsson is Walking Out Again. The Origins and Development of Scandinavian Prison Systems. Australian & New Zealand Journal of Criminology, 44(1), 7–23.
Prison Policy Initiative. (n.d.). Pennsylvania Profile. Retrieved September 11, 2019, from https://www.prisonpolicy.org/profiles/PA.html.
Rubin, A. T. (2015). A Neo-Institutional Account of Prison Diffusion. Law & Society Review, 49(2), 365–400.
Shammas, V. L. (2014). The Pains of Freedom: Assessing the Ambiguity of Scandinavian Penal Exceptionalism on Norway’s Prison Island. Punishment & Society, 16(1), 104–123.
Statsbygg. (2010). Halden Fengsel. Ferdigmelding 686/2010. Retrieved September 14, 2019, from https://www.statsbygg.no/files/publikasjoner/ferdigmeldinger/686_HaldenFengsel.pdf.
Tonry, M. (2015). Is Cross-national and Comparative Research on the Criminal Justice System Useful? European Journal of Criminology, 12(4), 505–516.
Vollan, M. (2016). «Mot normalt»? Normalitetsprinsippet i norsk straffegjennomføring. Tidsskrift for Strafferett, 16(4), 447–461.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Hyatt, J.M., Andersen, S.N., Chanenson, S.L. (2020). Prison Cells as a Grounded Embodiment of Penal Ideologies: A Norwegian-American Comparison. In: Turner, J., Knight, V. (eds) The Prison Cell. Palgrave Studies in Prisons and Penology. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-39911-5_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-39911-5_3
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-39910-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-39911-5
eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)