Addressing recidivism and prison overcrowding in the UK justice system

On 30th October, the chancellor pledged £2.3bn investment in prison expansion for 23/24 and 24/25, to address prison overcrowding and improve the UK justice system. This will be a significant boost to the prison service, which has reached its maximum capacity several times over the past three years and is set to do so again in July 2025.

The probation service is also struggling, operating at a current capacity of 120%¹. The Lord Chancellor recently announced numerous short-term and very necessary initiatives underway to alleviate the pressure on the service. But do we need to explore different options and approaches that can make a lasting difference to the service and offenders, ensuring that this additional £2.3bn investment addresses some of the long-term challenges of our judicial system?

Current situation in the UK justice system

The current prison population is 87,000. The Ministry of Justice predicts that by 2027 the prison population will grow to between 95,000 and 114,000², highlighting the urgent need to address prison overcrowding.
The highest incarceration rate of any, developed European country³.
Adults released from custodial sentences of less than 12 months had a proven reoffending rate of 56.6%⁴.
The total estimated economic and social cost of reoffending has been calculated as totalling £18.1 billion⁵.

Short-term solutions

The SDS40 Early Release Scheme (Standard Determinate Sentences 40%) is a stopgap measure, introduced by the Government to ease the pressure on the prison system. The policy itself will allow certain cohorts to be released from custody after serving 40% of their sentence in prison as opposed to 50%. This has provided some breathing space until July 2025; however, it has inadvertently increased the recall rate exacerbating the problem it was aiming to solve by contributing to a revolving door of people passing through the prison system.
The Gauke Sentencing Review - Gauke acknowledges that we currently sentence more people to prison than ever before and we also do it for longer. The review will look at alternatives to this. Namely, exploring the concept of house arrest along with expanded and enhanced use of Electronic Monitoring (EM) to support non-custodial sentences. The review will also consider scrapping six-month sentences although initial plans were for 12 months. While these ideas are positive, there are fundamental weaknesses based on the current staffing levels in prisons and probation, and the complexity of the community support system (both government and VSCE services) and its ability to support offenders throughout their journey.
More Electric Monitoring (EM) - The use of EM devices for lower-risk groups and Home Detention Curfews supporting early release and movement from prison to community should be expanded. This can be done through Standard determinate sentences utilising more stringent/restrictive tagging conditions. This would see the establishment of “virtual prisons”. However, to make this work, there needs to be an escalating range of non-custodial options to penalise non-compliance rather than custody being the default response to any breach. Both EM and alcohol and drug treatments (see below) were mentioned as ‘punishments outside of prison’ in the Lord Chancellor’s speech on the 12th of February.
Alcohol and drug tags - These types of tags measure the level of alcohol or a specific type of drug in the wearer’s sweat. If a person drinks/ingests that type of drug, it will be recorded by the tag. There is also a key role here for the extension of alcohol, and potentially drug tags, to help remove the trigger to criminality. The use of alcohol tags has been seen to make a significant difference to individuals reconnecting with their families and reducing criminality whilst on the tag.
Foreign National Offenders (FNOs) - There are currently 10,000 FNOs in British prisons. There may be an opportunity for those people to serve the sentence in their home country, thereby reducing costs and freeing up places.
Incentives for good behavior in custody (particularly for longer sentences of 4+ years) - Following the Texas model, a ‘points-based’ system could be implemented where people in prison earn points for attending courses that aim to tackle the underlying causes of offending e.g. drugs, lack of education/training, poor family relationships. If a prisoner gains a high number of points, their case would be brought in front of the Parole Board sooner. The Parole Board then still has the power to decide whether this ‘good conduct time’ is an accurate reflection of an individual’s rehabilitation and, therefore, whether they should be released or not.

What can we learn from countries with low recidivism levels?

Not all countries struggle with the UK’s recidivism levels. Some countries have taken a far more innovative approach to driving lower incarceration rates and recidivism rates.

The Netherlands

The Dutch have seen their prison population decrease by more than 40% over the past 20 years, offering valuable lessons for reducing recidivism and prison overcrowding. The Dutch believe that a stay in prison does more harm than good. They feel that society may be rid of a criminal for a while, but in many cases, criminals simply resume their activities when they leave prison. Their system puts far more emphasis on issuing community or suspended sentences which are much cheaper and reduce the likelihood of reoffending⁶.

Norway

In Norway, less than 20% of prisoners have reoffended after two years of leaving prison.

Data from the Ministry of Justice puts the UK reoffending rate at 58% for those serving sentences of six months or less⁷. There is a concept of normalization (not feeling like incarceration) in their prisons that has a positive effect on their lives after release. Educational and vocational programs offered in prisons have also been effective in improving the skill sets and mindsets of prisoners for use after their release.

It is acknowledged that when inmates spend long periods of time in jail, their ability to function in an open society becomes compromised. The chances for employment are also diminished after a long prison sentence. Norway’s model is underpinned by a number of key strategic goals; an assessment of the convicted person’s needs, resources and risk, the development of an individual plan for executing the sentence, mutually binding agreements between the prisoner and the state, and the creation of a normalized environment where individuals can develop their own competencies and qualifications.

Germany

The German Prison Act states the purpose of prison is rehabilitation, not punishment. As such, prisons in Germany are generally kept to a high standard, with nearly every person in prison having their own room that they are allowed to decorate with photos and posters. Prison is seen as a chance to consider what makes an individual offend, and therefore what rehabilitative support they need to not do so again. As a result they have maintained low recidivism rates half the size of the UK, with a prison population rate of 69 per 100,000 population, compared to England and Wales’ of 139⁸.

New Zealand

In New Zealand, a prison has been designed using the “responsible prisoner” or “progression-regression” model. Offenders start their prison journey in basic accommodation and progress to better housing if they exhibit good behavior and complete activities (e.g. education and abstinence programmes) that help address their criminogenic needs.

How do we test some of these initiatives?

Adopting some of the innovative practices from other countries around the world will be challenging for the UK. Successive governments have found support amongst the electorate on being "tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime".

Adopting new, innovative and in some cases, contentious, measures will take strong political and operational leadership and cross-departmental support from the DWP, Home Office, Councils and third-sector providers within the Probation Service.

Could we ringfence some of this additional investment to explore a range of pathfinder models that adapt current prison operations to mirror some of the innovative models built in other countries? With a small-scale, agile approach we can test the ROI in terms of recidivism and the associated costs of reoffending. It's been acknowledged by successive governments that we cannot build our way out of the current prison crisis, but maybe that isn’t true, particularly if we start building differently and testing the success as we go.

Conclusion

In 2025 we find ourselves at a crossroads for Justice, we know what we have been doing for the last 50 years doesn’t work, but we are still incarcerating more and more people and for longer periods. We do this whilst watching the recidivism rates constantly rise.

It's clear this will take more than the life of one parliament to transform the UK justice system and it will take significant funds to fix all that is broken. But the challenge for this government is to set the direction for justice for the next 30 years and start taking the bold steps required to deliver for both the public and offenders.

At Clarasys, we understand the complexities and challenges faced by the justice system. Our expertise in digital transformation, service design, cross-departmental collaboration, and operational efficiency can help drive meaningful change. By adopting innovative practices and data-driven approaches, we aim to support the government in creating a more effective and rehabilitative justice system.

References

Addressing recidivism and prison overcrowding in the UK justice system

Katy Mallinson

Meet the author

Katy Mallinson

Current situation in the UK justice system

Short-term solutions