Corrections in Asia

Although there are ample studies on corrections in the West, there is a dearth of research on corrections in Asia, especially in English language journals. From both theoretical and practical perspectives, there is a pressing need to explore corrections in Asian societies. Asia is the world’s largest and most populous continent. With China and India at the forefront, Asia has led the world in economic growth for the last three decades. This economic growth has been accompanied by rapid social changes, including those in the criminal justice system in general and corrections in particular. Asia may become the next frontier for research on the death penalty (Johnson & Zimring, 2009), crime, law and society (Leheny & Liu, 2010), and crime control (Jiang & Lambert, 2012). Research on corrections in Asia not only reveals intriguing differences between Asia and the West but also tests Western theory generalizability to Asia. In addition, research on Asian corrections can further information exchange and enhance the understanding of crime and the different methods for combating it (Cao & Cullen, 2001).

Since there is very limited research on corrections in Asia, the call-for-papers for this special issue welcomed submissions from different perspectives on any topic in the field of corrections. Subsequently, the six articles ¹ in this issue are written by scholars from different disciplines, including criminology, criminal justice, sociology, social work, and history. They span correctional across four societies: Mainland China, Hong Kong, Taiwan, and Japan.

These four societies are deeply influenced by Confucianism. Compared with the West, they all emphasize family-based or group-based collectivism, hierarchy, and harmony for groups or communities. Informal control mechanisms such as interpersonal relation and face and shame play an important role in crime prevention and corrections. On the other hand, like the West or the United States, all four of these societies have market economies. To different degrees, they have all moved toward the rule of law. These cultural and economic differences and similarities are also reflected in corrections in Asia.

Chen, Lai, and Lin’s article examines the impact of pre-prison experience and prison environment on inmates’ adjustment to prison in Taiwan. Based on a sample of 883 female offenders, adjustment was measured by institutional misconduct and prison adjustment-related symptoms of depression. The study found that pre-prison victimization, imprisonment stress, and social support were predictors of inmates’ adjustment to prison. This finding provides support for the importation model, deprivation model (Jiang & Fisher-Giorlando, 2002), and social support theory (Jiang & Winfree, 2006) developed in the United States. This study also revealed that most demographic variables are not related to female inmates’ adjustment to prison.

Another study on female inmates’ prison adjustment was conducted by Liu and Chui in Mainland China. The study examined the relationship between Chinese female inmates’ perception of social support and their prison adjustment. The study found that perceived social support from families and correctional officers has positive effects on female offenders’ prison adjustment. This finding is similar to that revealed by Chen, Lai, and Lin in Taiwan and by Jiang and Winfree (2006) in the United States. It is worth noting that more than 52% of the female inmates were married at the interview time, which is much higher than the 17% reported by Jiang and Winfree in the United States. Liu and Chui’s study also revealed that demographics are not significantly related to prison adjustment, similar to that reported by Chen, Lai, and Lin.

Noriko Yamaguchi’s is the third article studying an issue of institutional corrections. The article investigates how Japanese prisoners convicted as war criminals after WWII reflected on their past deeds through the examination of Sugamo Shimbun, the Sugamo Weekly News, written by Sugamo prisoners between 1948 and 1952. The newspaper reflected internal prison power dynamics and politics outside the prison. Based on the examination, the author suggests that the prisoners lacked a sense of guilt toward their victims of Japanese aggression. They questioned the legitimacy of the occupation authorities as well as Japanese authority. They also questioned the concept of “democracy,” which occupation authorities promoted when the Korean War started in 1950.

Community corrections were officially adopted in 2003 in Mainland China. Jiang and his associates describe the development of community corrections and five types of community corrections sanctions—public surveillance, probation, parole, temporary execution of a sentence outside a confinement facility, and the deprivation of political rights. Chinese community corrections features: (a) the “total society strategy” in which various social forces work together to reform offenders; (b) the total person approach in which an offender’s values, attitudes, and behaviors are all controlled; and (c) semiformal control in which community corrections is carried out by community-based organizations that are organized and confirmed by the government. Jiang and his associates also discuss the problems and challenges to China’s community corrections, including their lack of scientific assessment, unstable budgets, and their unequal application to migrants.

Using qualitative data from 23 ex-prisoners in Hong Kong, Adorjan and Chui examine what factors helped them desist from crime. Findings from the study suggest that aging was associated with richer life experience, higher levels of maturation, and a larger social support network, which in turn helped with desistance from crime. In addition, personal resolve, along with social support (especially family support), appeared to be other important factors in ex-convicts’ crime desistance. Having a job was also a significant predictor of an ex-prisoner’s desistance. Adorjan and Chui suggest that all these factors were related to the Chinese culture of living up to familial “face,” expectations, and obligations. This factor may explain Hong Kong’s low rates of violent crime and recidivism.

The final article by Shuping Tzeng uses the Decision Making Trial and Evaluation Laboratory developed in the United States to investigate the relationship between factors affecting parole boards’ decision-making in Taiwan. Although legal regulations state that the performance and evidence of repentance in prison should play an important role for the process of parole review, Tzeng’s study revealed different results: Crime characteristics and inmates’ recidivism risk were the major factors affecting parole boards’ decision-making in Taiwan. The discrepancy between regulations and practice were due to several reasons: (a) There was no specific and unified measure of repentance; (b) in contrast, crime characteristics and risk of recidivism were clearer and quantified; and (c) in contrast to the United States, Taiwanese parole board members were part-time, met only once a month and had large case loads. Thus, their decisions had to depend on easily found and measurable indicators such as crime characteristics and recidivism risk.