PRIVATIZATIONAL PRISONS
Article Critique
Liberty University
CJUS 500: Criminal Justice Integration
Dr. Jade Pumphrey
November 8, 2024
1
PRIVATIZATIONAL PRISONS
Abstract
The question of US prison privatization has been controversial in recent years, and the sides have
all made their cases.0In this essay, we compare two peer-reviewed papers: one that is in favor of
privatizing prisons, and one that is against it.0The paper reviews the research approach, evidence,
strengths and weaknesses of both articles.0The first article says privatization of prisons brings
cost savings and improved efficiency with competition, whereas the second addresses issues of
ethics, like the exploitation of prisoners and lack of accountability in private prisons.0The critique
considers the evidence, theory and morality of both views.0Fourth, a Christian perspective is
added to propose reforms on biblical ground, such as justice, mercy and the worth of each
person. It is the state governments, and particularly those of the United States of America, where
privatization has been most enthusiastically welcomed. At the same time, there is fierce
opposition to the idea of allowing companies to make a profit from the incarceration of a human
being. Even during those times when the nation's economies were booming and there was a
strong economy, it would have been difficult to find people who would have advocated for the
Department of Defense to be handed over for the profit of a private company, and so the concern
and opposition to such an approach with respect to prisons is understandable.
2
PRIVATIZATIONAL PRISONS
Article Critique
This paper takes a comparative approach to central arguments for and against private prisons in
America. The main purpose of this paper is to provide a comprehensive review and synthesis of
the differing perspectives on the issue, take the next step in filling gaps in the literature, stimulate
the debate, and potentially provide some direction for future research and policy. A thoughtful
discussion on this topic is crucial. Private prison privatization in the US is now a controversial
subject – whether it is efficient, expensive, ethical or humane.0Prison privatization became an
option during the 1980s to fill public facilities and reduce costs.0The argument by proponents is
that privatization creates economic efficiency and innovation, while the argument by dissenters
creates human rights abuses and un-representation.0In this essay, we review two articles (one
arguing for prison privatization, the other against) for methodology and evidence quality.0The
review will examine the strengths and limitations of each article and offer a biblical-based way
forward for prison reform.
Article 1-Background
The first article reviewed in this essay favors privatization of prisons on the grounds that,
thanks to the competitive markets of privatization, costs are minimized and efficiency
improved.0This is a case study from the article that indicates private prisons are more equipped to
be innovative in prison administration and savings than public prisons.0He refers to specific case
studies and statistics from different states to support his point that privatization will save you lots
of money on operations. Huemer & Wang believes that to most critics of prison privatization fail
to realize that private production can overcome these market-crippling hurdles only by having a
sizable activity.
3
PRIVATIZATIONAL PRISONS
Article 1 - Critique of Strengths and Weaknesses of the Article
Strengths
Powerful empirical evidence is one of the strengths of the article that it is based on
data.0He uses case examples and statistics from a variety of states to show that privatized prisons
tend to be less expensive and more efficient.0For example, the article provides examples from
Arizona and Florida where private prisons have claimed to have cut costs per-inmate via better
resource and operation management (Huemer & Wang, 2021).0With his real-life examples, the
author supports the privatization case with empirical proof for cost reductions. Now why is this
an asset? The empirical evidence lends support to the case for privatization, which is why it’s
more convincing.0It shows that privatization in some cases can have a financial efficiency
benefit. Looking at the second strength, recognition of obstacles and approaches, the article does
not deny the harms that privatization can cause, but instead offers ways around it.0For instance,
the writer recognizes that opponents of privatization complain that prisoners are extorted and
treated badly.0But according to the author, those risks can be reduced with regulation and
supervision so that private businesses are responsible for providing humane conditions (Huemer
& Wang, 2021). By dealing with the privatization problem and providing solutions, the author
gives subtle treatment to the problem.0This lends the article credence by saying that privatization
alone is not enough, and more protection is needed.
Weaknesses
While the article does a very thorough job of showing cost savings, it covers almost
exclusively in terms of cash flow.0This is the author’s idea of cost-cutting as the real value of
4
PRIVATIZATIONAL PRISONS
privatization without sufficiently weighing in on wider social and moral issues.0It is mentioned
only briefly that private companies are encouraged to provide a secure environment but does not
mention privatization risks (exploitation of prisoners, for example, or the ethical issues
surrounding profit-driven incarceration). The article’s single point of cost efficiency is very
constrained.0The money’s fine, but prison privatization comes with serious ethical questions,
such as whether prisoners will be well-treated, whether they’ll be overcrowded, or whether
monopolistic detention has moral bearings.0An appropriate compromise would be to have these
in addition to cost.
(2). Long-term impacts must be considered as weakness of the piece is that it is only
about short-term money-savings without any deep consideration of long-term implications.0In the
article, no one addresses the impact that privatization will have on recidivism rates, rehabilitation
of prisoners, or over time, fairness in the criminal justice system.0In the absence of these long-
term impacts, the privatization case is not complete. 0The sole attention to cost savings over the
short term ignores the impact on the criminal justice system that is long-term, which is the most
important factor to fully understand privatization.0No one talks, for instance, about whether
private prisons decrease recidivism or ensure successful release.
Article 2-Background
In the second, they oppose prison privatization as it is profit oriented instead of humane,
and inhumane to prisoners.0In it, the author attacks the obscurity and corruption in private
prisons, where the drive to save money tends to lead to overcrowding, bad healthcare and poor
rehabilitative services.0He even writes about the morality of privatizing prisons into companies
5
PRIVATIZATIONAL PRISONS
that make money, using qualitative data and case studies from states where privatization has
brought bad consequences.
Article 2 - Critique of Strengths and Weaknesses of the Article
Strengths
Consider Ethical Impact and Human Rights: one of the best parts of the article is the way
that it raises the ethical questions about privatization.0He says that it is profit motives that
dehumanize prisoners by reducing care, and that the companies reduce essential services for
rehabilitative programs.0With qualitative case studies and the testimony of prisoners and
correctional officers, the article makes the subject human, and thus the moral arguments more
convincing (Mahan, 1996). 0The article goes a bit further from the money part of the equation to
talk about human dignity and justice in prisons.0It asks readers to consider not the economic cost
of privatization, but its human cost.
This paper describes a deeper discussion on social impact. The social effects of privatization in
general, such as the possibility of incarceration and systemic inequality.0Private prisons are
encouraged to have low occupancy, the writer writes, and these policies could have the
unintended consequence of targeting disenfranchised groups.0The article is about how
privatization might increase racial and socioeconomic inequality in the criminal justice system.
The piece is not content to stick to the cost-benefit model but instead, tries to look at what
privatization could do for social justice.0It places the matter within the wider scheme of social
values, and therefore renders the criticism more attractive for those concerned with justice and
equality.
Weaknesses
6
PRIVATIZATIONAL PRISONS
The article’s weak point is that the evidence cited in it is qualitative (people’s own testimonies
and anecdotal case studies, for example).0They do help to tell us about the negative effects of
privatization but are less empirically rigorous than the quantitative studies that could provide a
more balanced view of the problem.0In the article lacks statistical evidence for the claim so the
data doesn’t appear strong. Qualitative data sets inhibit generalization.0Ethical data will be able
to support the article’s claims and show us what the wider effects of privatization really look
like.
While the article is an interesting and well-reasoned anti-privatization argument, it
doesn’t really suggest any realistic policy fixes or alternatives.0It’s the critique of privatization
with no viable solution to transform the prison system – and the reader gets frustrated not
informed. The criticism would be more useful if it had recommendations for how the public
prison could be improved or some other ways to do something about the problem without going
privatized.
Summary of Articles
Both articles specifically detail the author’s perspective on the why there are either for or
against the prison privatization. Both these articles and authors deviate from the status quo by
giving voice to the voiceless on the issue of prison privatization. I want to reference Thomas and
Logan (2023) as they acknowledge that privatized prisons need to be held accountable, but they
also argue that with proper regulation and oversight, private firms can still offer competitive
advantages over public prisons. However, the implementation of effective oversight is a
challenge, and without it, the risk of abuse remains high. In contrast, the writing suggests that
7
PRIVATIZATIONAL PRISONS
increased oversight and better contractual agreements can mitigate these risks, though they
acknowledge that problems still exist. They argue that with proper monitoring, private prisons
could offer competitive advantages over public ones, including better management practices and
greater flexibility in addressing overcrowding and resource constraints.
Conclusion: Personal Reflection, Position, and Christian Worldview
Christian prison reform must put justice, mercy and dignity first.0It is taught in the Bible
that everyone is made in God’s image (Genesis 1:27) and deserves to be treated with dignity and
love, no matter what actions he or she has taken in the past.0For prison reform, that means
working to promote rehabilitation rather than punishment and an end to the abuse of inmates for
profit. Rights: Penitentiary reform must provide for the design of justice-based systems wherein
offenders are released fairly and justly, given the chance to confess, re-enter society, and re-
instructed.0If it’s just, as in Proverbs 21:15, "the righteous will rejoice, but the wicked will fear".
2.0Mercy: We Christians are to show mercy, because God shows mercy to us (Matthew 5:7).0An
unpunished prison would be rehabilitative and provide interventions to get prisoners back into
the community as contributing members. 3.0Dignity: Every person, even a prisoner, has a right to
dignity.0The prison system that cares about profit more than people degrades this.0Matthew 25:36
invites Christians to care for prisoners in their prisons because we are all valuable individually.
Correctional reform should strive to achieve a system that promotes rehabilitation and
human dignity, all without sacrificing the moral treatment of prisoners to the financial realities of
public systems. Prison privatizations is a hot button issue in the United States, and for good
8
PRIVATIZATIONAL PRISONS
reason.0Advocates highlight cost savings and efficiency benefits, and opponents point to moral
issues and prisoner profit-seeking.0Neither of these accounts are altogether wrong, and neither
gives us the full picture.0In the Christian view, prison reform should be based on justice, mercy
and human dignity.0All reform should end up being about rehabilitating offenders, solving
structural inequities and making the prison system work for the benefit of society.
9
PRIVATIZATIONAL PRISONS
References
Huemer, L., & Wang, X. (2021). Resource bundles and value creation: An analytical
framework. Journal of Business Research. Cardiff.ac.uk.
Mahan, S., & Tae-ese, C. M. (1996). Crack cocaine, crime, and women: Legal, social,
and treatment issues (Vols. 1-4). SAGE Publications, Inc.
https://doi.org/10.4135/9781483327754
Thomas, C. W., & Logan, C. H. (2023). The development, present status, and future
potential of correctional privatization in America. Privatizing correctional institutions.
[HTML].
10
