Introduction

The Political Economy of Punishment (PEofP) is a traditional theoretical framework present in criminological debates. Since Rusche and Kirchheimer (henceforth R&K, 2003 [1939]), then Melossi and Pavarini (1977) and Hall et al (1978), and several other scholars more recently (De Giorgi, 2002; Sutton, 2004; Lacey, 2008; Cheolitis and Xenakis, 2010; Martins, 2016; Melossi et al, 2018; Dal Santo, 2021, forthcoming c; Cheliotis, 2022), the PEofP brings a materialist approach to the analysis of trends and patterns of punishment. As De Giorgi (2018: 1) puts, the PEofP ‘hypothesizes the existence of a structural relationship between transformations of the economy and changes in the penal field’.

After experiencing a ‘culturalist turn’ in the 1990s, the sociology of punishment saw a ‘renaissance of the political economy of punishment’ in the early 2000s (Sozzo, 2018). This theoretical framework has undergone some changes, among which we could highlight: (1) the overcoming of unemployment rates as the only indicator of the lowest labour class standards of life (Sutton, 2004); (2) the consideration of symbolic dimensions of punishment, as well as the influence of cultural, political and institutional elements on its trends (De Giorgi, 2002, 2013, 2018); and (3) the growth of a comparative approach between different countries (Sutton, 2004; Cavadino and Dignan, 2006, 2011; Lacey, 2008). Nonetheless, the PEofP still faces some problems.

Despite expanding its comparative approach, the PEofP remains oriented by, and limited to, the experiences of core countries. When peripheral countries are considered, it seems that some of the main premises of the PEofP may not be empirically observed. For instance, Latin American countries have experienced increasing incarceration rates even during times of social inclusion (Fonseca, 2015; Azevedo and Cifali, 2016; Hernandez and Grajales, 2016; Paladines, 2016; Sozzo, 2017; Iturralde, 2019; Dal Santo, 2020, forthcoming a). In addition, Brazilian prisons have been marked by low numbers of prisoners involved in working/teaching activities (Dal Santo, 2019, forthcoming b). This chapter is then aimed at answering whether the PEofP is a theoretical framework from and for core countries only, or if this may also be helpful to make sense of punishment in peripheral regions.