Despite harsher sentences and increased resources for the criminal justice system, research shows nothing to indicate that this leads to reduced criminality. "We wanted to problematise the notion that punishment is the best option," says Tova Bennet, researcher in Criminal Law at Lund University.
Over the past 15 years, tougher sentencing has been a popular tool in Swedish law and order politics. This trend is not limited to the current government; it has been ongoing for a longer period. But have these tougher sentences had the desired effect? It is doubtful, according to Tova Bennet and Sverker Jönsson.
"It might seem cheap and simple to just raise sentences. But, on closer inspection, it is both complicated and expensive. It is a way of reformulating society's more complex problems into a superficially simple problem of criminal law," says Sverker Jönsson.
Tough measures - but too late
In short, the trade-off between sentences and other measures is about where the state is able and willing to put its resources. The Swedish Prison and Probation Service has been warning of lack of capacity for some time - in February 2024, state broadcaster SVT reported that there is a shortfall of around 3,000 places in Swedish prisons. When the Budget Bill was presented in September this year, the Government proposed that the Swedish Prison and Probation Service should receive additional funding more than SEK 1 billion next year.
"A large proportion of our shared resources are put in when it's already too late," says Tova Bennet.
It might seem like the trend for tougher sentencing is a new one, but it is in fact a tendency that has been present in Sweden for at least 15 years. This development fits with a broader political trend in which the general focus is shifting from society to the individual.
"There's a link here to how you define societal problems. If criminality is defined as a social problem with social solutions, then you put resources into psychiatry for children and young people, for example, and into the area of social justice. But if you regard it as an individual problem, you put the resources into the criminal law system. The focus then ends up on the individual's responsibility and the consequences of their actions," says Tova Bennet.
Tougher punishments can reinforce young people's criminality
So, does punishment not have a deterrent effect? The research provides no support for that notion. It is of course difficult to say which initiatives are the most effective, since it is not possible to conduct controlled studies in which some criminals receive custodial sentences and others are dealt with using other measures. What can be done, however, is to attempt to evaluate various sanctions and social interventions. It is also possible to research what it is that makes people stop committing crimes or what sticks out about those who never start," argues Tova Bennet.
"Despite this trend towards tougher punishments having been ongoing in criminal justice policy for 15 years, no one has demonstrated that these measures have had any positive effects. When it comes to the introduction of tougher punishments for young people, for example, the research shows that it risks reinforcing their criminal identity and leads to more criminality," says Tova Bennet.
Finding yourself in an environment with other criminals is something that can reinforce a criminal identity.
International studies, particularly from the USA, which has long had a very repressive criminal justice system, shows that stricter legislation has not resulted in less criminality in the long term. It has, on the other hand, resulted in overfull prisons.
"In the USA, we can see the pendulum starting to swing back the other way. Many people are questioning this development in different ways, noting that tougher sentences do not seem to have the desired effects. Focus then settles on other measures in the state's toolbox, criminal justice is much more than just sentencing policy," says Tova Bennet.
The question of punishment
Both researchers return to the question of why we want punishment, and what we as a society hope to achieve with it? Is it about deterrence or exacting revenge? And why prison - is the important thing to rehabilitate or is it about protecting society from criminals?
"Punishment doesn't look beyond or ahead, only backwards, and remains a big question mark hanging over both victim and perpetrator. What we do know is that the rate of reoffending is around 40 per cent after a prison sentence, and more than 50 per cent if a child is given a custodial sentence. Some people argue that it doesn't matter - the individual concerned has been deprived of their liberty and that is reason enough for tough punishments," says Sverker Jönsson.
Tova Bennet and Sverker Jönsson understand the anger and indignation about criminality and note that everyone probably agrees that all criminal activity is undesirable.
"But that tougher punishments are the solution is far from obvious. From a scientific perspective, we need to take a step backwards and think about why criminality exists. Only when we have an answer to that question can we move on to discussing solutions. In the end, it comes down to how we look at people and society," says Sverker Jönsson.
