Achieving prosperity for all within planetary boundaries requires that governments take wide-ranging transformative action, but achieving ‘triple-wins’ by joining up policies across economic, social and environmental realms can be challenging. A companion analysis undertaken under the ODI Nexus project () analysed key indicators in these realms in lower income countries and identified the Dominican Republic, Sri Lanka and Thailand as front-runners in achieving more holistic development outcomes. Looking deeper at these case studies, we sought to identify national policy interventions that struck a balance between the different realms of development and explored the policy development, legislation and implementation processes required for integrated transformational policy to succeed.
In each we found national-scale, triple-win policies led from the president’s or prime minister’s office. These policies can usually be traced to specific political moments that forced a reckoning with the failures of previous development policy, often resulting in radical change of direction in development planning. Yet, despite the existence of triple-win policies, as of 2019, there was limited evidence of triple-win outcomes being achieved. Instead, the case study countries typically performed well in one or two realms, often to the detriment of progress in the other(s).
We present potential reasons for the lacklustre impact of these policies and conclude with suggestions for future work to outline where in the policy landscape it may be possible to enact transformational nexus policies and how to support them to achieve their outcomes in the timeframes required to ensure equitable prosperity within planetary boundaries.
The current design of UK public policy and mainstream political and social discourse has consistently equated paid work with good citizenship and desirable parenting. The article presents findings from a recent qualitative study that explores how lone mothers with different moral rationalities judge themselves before and after making a transition from welfare (and being full-time carers) to paid work. The findings suggest that the design of public policy and related discourses worked well with the moral rationalities of some lone mothers who believed that paid work made them better mothers. However, it left others with moral values on direct care behind, as they suffered from physical and emotional exhaustion and feelings of guilt in paid work. The article highlights how dominant ideologies reinforce the pre-existing hierarchy of paid work and care, with the latter being viewed as deserving of less acknowledgement.
Scholars of childhood typically view children as agentic; poverty researchers, aware that poverty reduces children’s life-chances, may be tempted to consider them as victims. Adults experiencing poverty report feelings of powerlessness, and, by analogy, poverty may reduce children’s agency. However, comparatively little is known about the impact of poverty on child agency or the extent to which children use their agency to mediate the effects of poverty. Therefore, 55 low-income children from two Chinese schools were invited to participate in group discussions and qualitative interviews spread over several hours. Considering poverty to be multidimensional, children identified that their agency was restricted both by poverty and their status as children but argued that they were not without agency. This was confirmed in interviews with parents and teachers. Six strategies were identified that children use to ameliorate poverty’s effects. The strategies group into three pairs, the first strategy in each pair reflecting a child’s decision to accommodate to their circumstances with the second being an attempt to alter them. The first pair (norm adaptation and active communication) comprised coping strategies addressing the present; the second pair (self-improvement and self-sacrifice) were expressions of constructive agency; and the third pair (lowered expectations and rebellion) were partially acts of despair. Giving greater recognition to children’s attempts to improve the lives of their families and themselves may lead to more effective modes of policy intervention.
On 6 December 2022, Jakarta passed a controversial law criminalising extramarital sex within Indonesian territories. In this policy article, in response to Indonesia’s recent criminalisation of extramarital sex, the author problematises how such legislation compounds domestic sex workers’ encounters with poverty. Then, the author visits Indonesia’s minimum tolerance of prostitution, arguing how such an impractical policy hinders Jakarta from eradicating the socioeconomic root causes of prostitution. Next, the author suggests policy directions that Jakarta should take into account in order to deconstruct the problems of underprivileged, marginalised and impoverished women and girls entering the sex industry. Here the author emphasises that Indonesia can deny the recognition of prostitutes, but it has to recognise prostitutes as local citizens. Therefore, social protection schemes designated for domestic citizens should be made accessible on a gender-blind basis, regardless of beneficiaries’ socioeconomic backgrounds.
This article presents a typology to capture varying degrees of inclusive, sustainable economic transformation in low- and middle-income countries. We perform a cluster analysis of these pillars – poverty and inequality, environmental sustainability, and economic transformation – proxied by a set of quantitative indicators with data pooled between 2000 and 2018. This is supported by descriptive analysis of correlations in change over time between indicators as well as an exploration of the contextual risk and governance profiles underpinning these changes. From this analysis, we identify five clusters of countries with a range of outcomes across the three pillars. Countries consistently performing well across the three dimensions are not readily evident, though some countries are able to achieve moderate outcomes. Policy implications point to the need to get the basics right around pro-poor infrastructure development and making certain sectors greener in an effort to advance tripartite gains.
The year 2023 marks 50 years of mass incarceration in the United States. This timely volume highlights and addresses pressing social problems associated with the U.S.’s heavy reliance on mass imprisonment. In an atmosphere of charged political debate, including “tough on crime” rhetoric, the editors bring together scholars and experts in the criminal justice field to provide the most up-to-date science on mass incarceration and its ramifications on justice-impacted people and our communities.
This book offers practical solutions for advocates, policy and lawmakers, and the wider public for addressing mass incarceration and its effects to create a more just, fair and safer society.
In 48 US states, felony disenfranchisement, or the denial of voting rights to people with criminal records, creates or exacerbates multiple problems. It limits democratic participation, increases racial inequality, conflicts with public opinion, compromises reintegrative efforts and public safety, creates needless confusion about eligibility, and is far out of step with international practices. Moreover, the threat of prosecution for unlawful voting—which can result in a new felony conviction—further reduces democratic participation even among eligible voters. Over 4.6 million US adults are disenfranchised, or deprived of the right to vote based on a past felony conviction. State laws vary greatly across the country, with some states not imposing disenfranchisement on any group (Maine and Vermont), some restricting voting rights for people in prison (for example, Illinois), others restricting rights for people serving probation or parole sentences in the community (for example, Wisconsin), and some disenfranchising even after the entire sentence is served (for example, Alabama). Overall, about 48 percent of the disenfranchised had already completed their full sentences, another 28 percent are serving sentences in the community on probation (21 percent) or parole (7 percent), and the remaining 24 percent are currently incarcerated.
Beginning in the 1970s, the United States embarked on a four-decade-long policy of locking up more and more people yearly. Before starting, the nation’s incarceration rate had remained flat since 1925. Scholars discussed the “stability of punishment and the prospects for decarceration.” Suddenly, these conversations seemed quaint. Writing in 1985, Elliott Currie was shocked that the state and federal prison population had doubled to 450,000. A decade later, Todd Clear documented that this figure had almost doubled again, reaching 850,000 inmates. He called this surge “astounding,” but it proved like a number on an automobile odometer, quickly surpassed. It took until 2009 for the state and federal prison population to peak at 1.54 million. When all forms of incarceration were included (for example, jail residents), the count reached 2.29 million. The nation’s incarcerated population has since trended downward. The decline in 2010 was tiny—0.4 percent for state and federal prisoners and 1.1 percent for those incarcerated—but it was a harbinger of things to come. The era of mass incarceration, however, involved more than numbers; it involved a change in focus from the rehabilitative to the punitive ideal.
Housing instability and incarceration have complex and consequential interrelationships. People within jails and prisons are disproportionately affected by homelessness. Likewise, people experiencing housing instability have high rates of involvement with the criminal legal system (CLS). Both populations have dramatically increased in the United States since the 1970s. Reforms related to housing and the CLS are increasingly centered in public discourse and policy discussions, with the two issues increasingly overlapping. In this chapter, we argue that collaborations between researchers and practitioners are crucial for increasing housing stability and decreasing interactions with the CLS. Strategies to address structural barriers can be furthered by communicating with policy makers and leveraging existing funding opportunities and initiatives. We begin by highlighting relevant research and data and then provide key recommendations. Our understanding of the relationship between housing and CLS involvement comes from research within correctional facilities and shelters, national and large multi-site studies, and qualitative studies on stigma, discrimination, and challenges with exiting homelessness. Such studies show the overlapping prevalence of housing instability and CLS involvement and the influence of criminalization, policies, and social norms.
