GOVERNING PRISONS: A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF CORRECTIONAL MANAGEMENT

The quality of life inside America's prisons has been, and will continue to be, a major public policy issue. By some definitions, most prisons are overcrowded; by any definition, some prisons are violent institutions. In dozens of states, all or part of the prison system is under judicial orders to change and improve.

Through a comparative, exploratory study of correctional administration in Texas, Michigan, and California, the author argues that the quality of prison life can be improved by changing the way that prisons are managed. Whether prisons are safe, clean, and productive, on the one hand, or violent, harsh, and idle, on the other, depends mainly on the character of prison government. Contrary to most contemporary writings on prisons, the author contends that prisons can be improved even where budgets are tight, cells are cramped, and inmates are divided along racial and ethnic lines.

Following a critical review of the sociological literature on prisons, three models of correctional administration are compared: the Texas control model, the Michigan responsibility model, and the California consensual model. The author highlights the importance of correctional philosophy and leadership and explores the causes and consequences of administrative change. The work includes an appendix on studying prisons.