France: Is prison a business like any other?

Isabelle Leroux. The siting of a correctional facility such as a remand prison or a penitentiary centre is often a source of conflict with future local residents, known as NIMBY or Not In My Backyard. It’s a rejection based not only on how people imagine prisons to be, but also on fears which they see as real threats.

Studies have shown that residents often have an exaggerated perception of the risks involved in living near a prison, such as an escape that goes wrong, which in reality is very rare. Added to this sense of insecurity is the fear of losing certain amenities, such as having a future prison ruin the scenery, limit access to walking trails and devalue a potential tourist zone. There are recurring conflicts over the loss of land and real estate value, possible loss of a farming zone or the devaluing of a nearby building.

The failure to notify and enter into dialogue with residents living near the future prison can lead to feelings of injustice, which can cause greater protest movements (petitions, lobbying of public officials, anti-prison organizations, etc.).

However, the NIMBY issue is only one aspect of conflicts that can arise when planning to locate a prison facility.

Sometimes there are bigger conflicts that impact a whole community, or even several communities, especially when local politics are involved. Conflicts often arise when politicians present prisons as money-making enterprises which will lead to increased economic activity. This goes back to wanting the establishment of a prison for the wrong reasons – that is, leading the population to believe that this facility will lead to economic gains, jobs, new families, new services, local buying, tax revenues…Unfortunately, this is not always the case.

The lack of information and of knowledge about the operation and economic model of a prison facility, along with the lack of notice, are the main sources of conflict. Residents see it as a fait accompli, and mayors must deal with the issue of acceptance after the fact. In other cases, conflicts erupt after the State has imposed a prison despite objections by elected leaders and populations. This happens, for example, when there is an extreme dearth of suitable locations. The consequences can be disastrous in the medium and long term, especially when discussions break down between the different parties.

IL. Prisons are not in themselves economic drivers and cannot be compared with a business to be set up in a given community. In fact, it is large national contractors ─chosen after submitting their bid to calls for tender─ that construct prisons instead of local business ventures. The purchasing of food products, small supplies and equipment parts is done mainly through national central supplies centres and not through local business infrastructure.

The sole exception is the purchase of cigarettes, which has to be done through the nearest tobacco outlet as the crow flies. Sometimes, the nearest tobacco outlet is located in a neighbouring community, which can cause conflicts. As for prison guards, they usually avoid residing in the prison’s host community. This allows them to separate themselves from a very difficult work environment. On the other hand, the local population increases due to the number of prisoners, which certainly contributes to an increase in the overall operational funds allocated. However, this increase is minimal in proportion to the budget of a municipality: on average in the order of 90 to 100 € per prisoner per year, far from the windfall announced by certain local politicians. Lastly, a prison is not taxed like a business. In the case of prisons run as public-private-partnerships, only the private operators have to pay taxes for land rental: the company’s property tax. This tax is minimal compared with the budget of municipalities involved – on average from 7,500 to 8,000 euros per year for a facility with 400 prisoners.

As for unemployment, it is not reduced by the development of prison guard jobs. In fact, to become a guard, a person has to go through a national competition.

Making people from the host municipality believe that they will benefit economically from the establishment of a prison is a source of disappointment and conflicts later on.

On the other hand, if it is announced in advance and included in a social, cultural and economic regional project, the siting of a prison can be a win-win proposition for both the region and prisoners. We must not forget that reintegration involves access to jobs for prisoners who are on day parole.

This involves real local development work based on partnerships on a much larger scale than just the host municipality, such as on the scale of urban agglomeration, for instance. Transportation networks must be developed so that the prison is accessible to prisoners on day parole, and to families, employees and lawyers. In conjunction with that, it is necessary to create awareness among the local populations in order to gain their acceptance for the project in all its aspects, including social and cultural.

IL. A win-win strategy for the region, prison and society as a whole takes time and coordination at different levels (local, departmental, regional, State). Elected representatives, organisations, and the State rarely engage in discussions regarding the establishment details and the interaction between the prison and the region when planning its construction.

Sometimes, municipalities face uncertainty about starting the construction of a prison for as long as ten years. As such, planning to locate a prison in a region requires a great deal of advance work on an extended “relevant” region, mainly at the inter-municipal and urban agglomeration scale, as well as on different considerations:

• economic development, businesses, access to services
• facilities, amenities
• mobility and easy access to the prison for all visitors
• housing
• social development, relationship with organisations, civil society
• regional identity and quality of life
• communication about the project

The ideal is to be able to develop a zone of economic activity around the prison to encourage new businesses, access to services and commercial activities, and to provide employment opportunities not only for local inhabitants but also for prisoners on parole. The area of activity could also be juxtaposed with housing zones with facilities and amenities in keeping with everyone’s needs, such as sustainable transportation.

Different configurations are possible depending on the size of the facility, the geography of the area and the urban and peri-urban character of the prison facility. On the other hand, building a prison in a rural region away from all sources of manpower and in the absence of transit could lead to failure and an experience not to be repeated.

The challenge is to engage local inhabitants and organisations without politicising the process: explaining that the region’s project is a win-win situation, reassuring the local residents, explaining how they will also benefit from the project based on actual facts, and reflecting collectively on the question of regional identity and quality of life.

Naturally, this all depends on proper governance, with, for example, a regional development committee co-led by elected representatives from the different regions concerned (host municipality, inter-municipality, agglomeration, etc.), organisations and managers, and in conjunction with State services. The more skills can be shared, the greater chance there is of creating institutional and social innovations. When they are well run, prisons can be sources of regional innovation and socio-economic experimentation. There are some promising experiments currently underway in Northern Europe and in France. Their aim is to build smaller innovative facilities, or more open ones that help reduce recidivism and thereby the cost to society.

France¶

Emmaüs Farms¶

• Web site of the Baudonne Farm (40) An organic farm which admits female prisoners who have been granted sentence adjustments; it offers them work, lodging and socio-professional support.

• Web site of the Moyembrie Farm (02) The Moyembrie farm admits male prisoners who are allowed to serve their sentence in an “exterior placement”, usually for nine months.

Structures d’accompagnement vers la sortie (SAS) (Structures Supporting Release)¶

• This is the new type of prison facility to be built by 2022 in Orléans, which is meant to better prepare prisoners to complete their sentences and return to civilian life. — France Bleu article 15 June 2019.

• À la SAS des Baumettes, les détenus préparent leur sortie un pied dedans, un pas dehors.* — Marsactu article 3 March 2020.

Finland¶

• Des prisons “ouvertes” pour réinsérer les détenus * — Euronews article 19 July 2019.

• Dans les prisons ouvertes, surveiller (un peu) et réinsérer (beaucoup) — [France 24 video] (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n_H9pYLMoHQ) 18 May 2018.