New open access book: “Asylum Determination in Europe – Ethnographic Perspectives”, edited by Nick Gill and Anthony Good

Carceral geographers and other scholars of migration and asylum may be interested to hear about a new open access book entitled ‘Asylum Determination in Europe – Ethnographic Perspectives’ and edited by Nick Gill and Anthony Good, just published in the Palgrave Macmillan socio-legal studies book series.

Drawing on research material from ten European countries, Asylum Determination in Europe: Ethnographic Perspectives brings together a range of detailed accounts of the legal and bureaucratic processes by which asylum claims are decided. The book includes a legal overview of European asylum determination procedures, followed by sections on the diverse actors involved, the means by which they communicate, and the ways in which they make life and death decisions on a daily basis. It offers a contextually rich account that moves beyond doctrinal law to uncover the gaps and variances between formal policy and legislation, and law as actually practiced.

The contributors employ a variety of disciplinary perspectives – sociological, anthropological, geographical and linguistic – but are united in their use of an ethnographic methodological approach. Through this lens, the book captures the confusion, improvisation, inconsistency, complexity and emotional turmoil inherent to the process of claiming asylum in Europe.

Introduction (html) (pdf) Nick Gill and Anthony Good

Legal Overview (html) (pdf) Sarah Craig and Karin Zwaan

Part I: Actors

The “Inner Belief ” of French Asylum Judges (html) (pdf) Carolina Kobelinsky

“It’s All About Naming Things Right”: The Paradox of Web Truths in the Belgian Asylum-Seeking Procedure (html) (pdf) Massimiliano Spotti

The World of Home Office Presenting Officers (html) (pdf) John R. Campbell

Asylum Procedures in Greece: The Case of Unaccompanied Asylum Seeking Minors (html) (pdf) Chrisa Giannopoulou and Nick Gill

Part II Communication

Why Handling Power Responsibly Matters: The Active Interpreter Through the Sociological Lens (html) (pdf) Julia Dahlvik

Communicative Practices and Contexts of Interaction in the Refugee Status Determination Process in France (html) (pdf) Robert Gibb

Narrating Asylum in Camp and at Court (html) (pdf) Matilde Skov Danstrøm and Zachary Whyte

Interactions and Identities in UK Asylum Appeals: Lawyers and Law in a Quasi-Legal Setting (html) (pdf) Jessica Hambly

Part III Decision-Making

What Do We Talk About When We Talk About Credibility? Refugee Appeals in Italy (html) (pdf) Barbara Sorgoni

Making the Right Decision: Justice in the Asylum Bureaucracy in Norway (html) (pdf) Tone Maia Liodden

Taking the ‘Just’ Decision: Caseworkers and Their Communities of Interpretation in the Swiss Asylum Office (html) (pdf) Laura Affolter, Jonathan Miaz and Ephraim Poertner

Becoming a Decision-Maker, or: “Don’t Turn Your Heart into a Den of Thieves and Murderers” (html) (pdf) Stephanie Schneider

Conclusion (html) (pdf) Nick Gill

The whole book is available as a .pdf here:


Calls for Papers for Carceral Geography sessions at RGS-IBG 2019

There are three live calls for papers for prospective sessions sponsored by the Carceral Geography Working Group of the RGS-IBG:

  • The carceral offshore: unpacking geographies of detriment, intent and spatiality at sea 
  • Carceral Archipelagos of trouble and hope
  • The politics of hope within systems of border control: Troubled subjects, materials and temporalities

Details for each are below – submit your papers now!


The carceral offshore: unpacking geographies of detriment, intent and spatiality at sea

In examining geographies of trouble/geographies of hope at this year’s conference, it would be difficult for the seas and oceans not to come to mind. With recent, and also more longstanding, attention being drawn to both environmental and socio-cultural and political crisis (and so-called ‘crisis’) offshore (from threats to more-than-human ocean biodiversity and the perils of plastics, to the devastating human dimensions of oceanic migration and offshore detention) this session seeks to pay attention to the ways in which ‘carceral conditions’ (Moran, Turner and Schliehe, 2017) can be further unpacked at sea; and how in turn the sea becomes a space for further conceptualising the carceral.

This session invites papers to explore a myriad of issues that connect up carcerality (broadly encapsulated by conditions of detriment, intent and spatiality, see Moran, Turner and Schliehe, 2017) and the seas (also broadly understood as relational, three-dimensional, multi-state and more-than-wet, see Peters and Steinberg 2019). Papers may be historical or contemporary in focus, empirically driven or conceptually led.

Themes could include but are not limited to:

  • ships (in their many and various types, from cruise liners to cargo ships to sailing vessels and prison hulks) as a carceral spaces/spaces of incarceration;
  • the specific spaces within ships (from everyday spaces such cabins to engine rooms to safe rooms or panic rooms and on board holding cells) and their carceral conditions;
  • the materiality of seas and oceans themselves as geophysical spaces of carcerality for those who live or work there or are forced to traverse these ‘water’ worlds;
  • the politics of demarcating, bordering and ordering the seas and oceans in ways that create carceral conditions for those using the seas;
  • other ‘maritime’ spaces of incarceration – ports that connect land and sea; islands (from artificial to quarantine); exploratory platforms and rigs; fantasy spaces such as seasteads;
  • specific maritime technologies that may have incarcerating effects such as submarines; dive wear and apparatus; maritime simulation machines in vessel handling training; nets and meshes etc.
  • the way more-than-human life/biodiversity at sea (from sea-going mammals, to fish, to micro organisms) become subject to carceral conditions through their relation to human use, exploitation and governance;
  • how forms of offshoring might be examined as ‘carceral’ (for example the offshoring of activities and people which/who are constructed as ‘other’);
  • how forms of ocean mapping and planning might have incarcerating impacts for people, ecosystems, more-than-human life and relations between these.

If you would be interested in participating, please get in touch and send abstracts of no more 200 words to Kimberley Peters ( and Jennifer Turner ( by 8th February 2019.

Carceral Archipelagos of trouble and hope

Ever since the establishment of carceral institutions, their legitimate existence has been questioned. In recent years, the carceral archipelago that was first described by Foucault (1975/1991: 297) as a series of institutions that operate with a punitive model and are built on surveillance and discipline, has increasingly included spaces beyond the prison. In this session, we want to explore this archipelago further by asking how far we can venture from the enclosed institutions and still identify the carceral (Moran et al 2017). Playing with this year’s theme we want to particularly focus on trouble and the many troubles that exist in the carceral sphere, as well as hope. Hope might be more elusive than trouble; however, the two are not binaries but rather co-exist and intertwine in carceral spaces. In fact, trouble can produce hope and hope can be troubling to some. We invite submissions that explore the reach of the carceral, e.g. with regards to electronic monitoring and digital developments; but also pay particular attention the spatial in carceral geography and how people not just do time, but also ‘do space’ (Philo 2018). We would like to explore the carceral archipelago and how this fits in with what has been described as societies of control (Deleuze 1992). We invite papers from all disciplinary backgrounds that seek to engage with, but are not limited to, the following topics and areas:

• The various roles of trouble in carceral environments
• The role of punishment in defining the carceral
• More dispersed forms of carceral interventions like electronic monitoring, community sentences and other interventions
• The role of the digital in carceral archipelagos
• Experiences of hope in carceral space
• Issues of legitimacy and questions of abolition
• Normalisation the strive towards reducing boundaries
• Carceral landscapes and the design of hope and/or trouble
• Carceral practices beyond the prison
• Disruptive practices, resistance and questions of citizenship

Please send abstracts of max 200 words, giving names, institutional affiliation and contact details for authors/presenters, to Anna Schliehe ( by no later than Friday the 8th of February 2019.

The politics of hope within systems of border control: Troubled subjects, materials and temporalities

The contemporary landscape of border control is not widely considered to be hopeful. Profit margins and a political rhetoric of ‘secure borders’ are valued more than life lived in fullness. The UK’s hostile environment policies, the measures put in place by ‘Fortress Europe’, ‘Brexit’ and anxieties of settled status, escalating family detention and Trump’s border wall are but a few examples of increasing hostility to migrants. Simply put, things are getting worse.

And yet hope remains. The politics of migration control can also be characterised as a struggle for/over hope. We encounter hopeful actions in those moving to find family, escape war, find work and in aims for a better life. We find them in the activists and charities working to kindle hope within these systems. Yet we also see hope in the policy strategies to deter ‘hopeful’ migrants, to reduce incentives and to ‘increase border security’. What then, does it mean to talk of ‘hope’ in the context of such increasingly pervasive, hostile and deadly systems of border control? What forms of politics does a focus upon hope open up, and what does it risk precluding? And what might it mean to “hope with teeth” (Mieville 2018)?

The aim for border scholars and activists, however, cannot be to simply engender a sense of hopefulness in the face of such strategies. In this session we therefore seek to further unpack the politics of hope in the context of borders and immigration control by recognising that hope is not necessarily positive, nor is it inherently progressive. We trouble the potentially dangerous simplicity of the ‘hopeful migrant subject’, focusing instead on the multiple forms of hopeful, incoherent subjectivities that are emerging within systems of border control. We also seek to investigate the power of objects and things in shaping the forms and intensities of hope or despair. Furthermore, what temporalities of hope emerge in the context of border control?

We welcome papers and submissions in non-traditional formats (for example video or visual submissions) that explore themes including but not limited to:

  • The relation between hope and resistance
  • The performativity of hope and the variations that occur between subjects and temporalities
  • The temporalities that a focus on hope may open up
  • Hopeful subjectivities: beyond the ‘hopeful migrant’
  • Possible/realised consequences of hoping or engendering hope
  • Hope and the more than human
  • The affectual politics of hope
  • Researcher encounters with hope ‘in the field’
  • The communication of hope and sort of publics that hope may gather
  • Forms of hope engendered through organised action
  • The role of academics in providing a productive form of despair

Please send abstracts of 200 words to Sarah Hughes ( and Daniel Fisher ( by midnight on the 1st February 2019.

CFP Carceral Geography/Geographien des Einschlusses, at the Deutscher Kongress für Geographie 2019 in Kiel, Germany, September 25-30

Logo CAU2019 brings our first ever call for carceral geography papers for a dedicated session at the German Geography conference/Deutscher Kongress für Geographie 2019, to be held at Christian-Albrechts-Universität in Kiel, Germany, 25-30 September 2019.


L7-FS-166 Geographien des Einschlusses: Gefängnisse, einschliessende Institutionen und andere Formen der Sicherung und Sanktionierung

Organisers: Dr. Marina Richter, Dr. Anna Schliehe

English speakers are welcome. Any questions can be directed to Anna Schliehe –


Bisher hat sich die deutschsprachige Geographie kaum für Fragen der Inhaftierung und Bestrafung interessiert. Die Fachsitzung diskutiert aktuelle der Geographien des Einschlusses.

[English translation: German-speaking research in geography has very rarely engaged with questions around incarceration and punishment. This session aims to discuss carceral geography and geographies of closed space.]


Zum weitherum konstatierten ‚punitive turn’ (Garland 2001) in der derzeitigen Praxis geschlossener Institutionen wie Gefängnissen, gesellt sich vermehrt auch ein Bestreben nach maximaler Sicherheit. Im Deutschen und Schweizer Jutizvollzug zeigt sich das exemplarisch an der Bedeutung der Verwahrung. Carceralgeographies, also die Geographie von Gefängnissen und anderen geschlossenen Räumen, wie Lagern oder Auffangstationen, befasst sich derzeit intensiv mit diesen Fragen. Dabei werden, wie bspw. auch in den security geographies und border studies Fragender Überwachung, Ein- und Ausgrenzung und Internierung kritisch diskutiert.

Für diese Fachsitzung sind wir interessiert an Beiträgen, die sich nuanciert mit der Beschaffenheit von geschlossenen Räumen und mit den Akteur*innen in ihnen beschäftigen und die darüber hinaus auch Fragen der Lokalisierung und Verteilung solcher Räume, der Beziehung zwischen einzelnen Institutionen und einem vermehrt „strafenden“ Staat analysieren. Beiträge können sowohl empirisch wie auch theoretisch ausgelegt sein. Als theoretische Leitlinien können, müssen aber nicht, die Arbeiten von Erving Goffman (1961), Michel Foucault (1975) oder auch Giorgio Agamben (1998) dienen. Als heuristische Instrumente können Kategorien wie Zeit, Mobilität oder Taktiken und Strategien des Lebens in geschlossenen Räumen dienen. Dabei müssen geschlossene Räume immer auch in Relation zur Gesellschaft und ihren Veränderungen gesehen werden. Denn die Gesellschaft bestimmt die Funktion solcher Räume: System der Korrektur und Wiedereingliederung oder Sammelraum für dysfunktionale Elemente der Gesellschaft (Durkheim).

Von Ebenen des Persönlichen zum Globalen wollen wir in dieser Fachsitzung die diversen Forschungsrichtungen der Geographien des Einschliessens erkunden. Neben konventionellen, vom Staat sanktionierten Gefängnisräumen, sollen daher auch weitere Räume im Fokus stehen wie Räume der Internierung von Flüchtlingen und Nicht-Bürger*innen, Geheimgefängnisse, Lager oder auch Formen von Internierung die sich nicht auf physische Immobilität beschränken. Themen können beinhalten:

– Theoretische Konzeptionen von ‚Carcerality‘ und Einschluss

– Elektronische Überwachung, Kameraüberwachung und Sekuritisierung

– Mobilität und Internierung

– Körper und ihre Materialität in geschlossenen Räumen

Papers should be submitted via this portal: by the deadline of 25 January 2019

Postdoc opportunity with Sophie Fuggle – “Postcards from the bagne: Tourism in the shadow of France’s overseas penal colonies”

Apply now to hit the 11 Nov deadline for applications for to work with Sophie Fuggle on the AHRC-funded project ‘Postcards from the bagne: Tourism in the shadow of France’s overseas penal colonies’.

Specific duties will involve, for example, carrying out archival and fieldwork at relevant sites in France and internationally, organising dissemination events including an international conference, preparing journal articles and other outputs, organising pathways to impact activities.

For more information and to apply please visit:

The position is 1.0FTE for 8 months starting in January 2019 (or as soon as possible thereafter) but there is the possibility to discuss carrying out the role on a part-time basis over a longer period.

For an informal discussion, please contact

Application deadline: 11 November 2018
Interview date: 4 December 2018

Asylum Archive book launch – Dublin, 12 Oct 6-8pm

clockAsylum Archive: an Archive of Asylum and Direct Provision in Ireland will be launched in Temple Bar Gallery and Studios on 12th October 6-8 pm. Download the invitation here.


The Asylum Archive website is an art, activist and academic online platform that examines the notion of Direct Provision Centres; the localities and sites where asylum seekers are being held while in the process of seeking a refugee status.

The new Asylum Archive book, a hardback including photographs, essays and a map of all present and past Direct Provision Centres in Ireland, is the continuation of Vukašin Nedeljkovic’s ongoing work highlighting the injustices, confinement and incarceration of asylum seekers in Ireland. It is a significant work, since there is very  little visual information about previous Irish Carceral sites including Magdalene Laundries, Industrial Schools, Mother and Baby Homes and Lunatic Asylums.

The book launch will comprise a short panel discussion with academics Anne Mulhall (UCD), Ronit Lentin (Trinity College) and Karen Till (Maynooth University) who wrote essays included in the book. The panel will be chaired by Lucky Khambule, a former asylum seeker and member of MASI – Movement of Asylum Seekers in Ireland.

All are welcome!



CFP – ‘Criminological Encounters’ – a new online journal – for papers bringing together geography and criminology

crim encountersCarceral geographers and others concerned with the spatiality of carceral formations may be interested to contribute to a second issue of Criminological Encounters, a new international, interdisciplinary, double blind peer-reviewed, digital, and open-access journal in the field of criminology, edited out of the Vrije Universiteit Brussels, Belgium, which aims to facilitate critical dialogues between criminology, and other disciplines.

The fundamental idea behind this journal is that of “encountering”. An “encounter” evokes the idea of solidary gatherings, moments to get together and build common projects as well as moments of confrontation. Such encounters include:

  • Dialogues between criminology and other disciplines;
  • Dialogues between criminology scholars and practitioners;

Encounters between research methods, theories or between different schools of thought: e.g. qualitative/quantitative approaches; critical/positivistic criminology; American/European criminology; criminology from the “Global South” and from the “Global North”.

The journal can be accessed here.

The inaugural issue of the journal is online, with papers on “Hobocops”: Undercover Policing’s Deceptive Encounters by J. Monaghan and K. Walby; Whose Knowledges? Moving Beyond Damage-Centred Research in Studies of Women in Street-Based Sex Work by C. Shdaimah and C.S. Leon; Understanding Fear and Unease in Open Domains: Toward a Typology for Deviant Behaviour in Public Space by S.F. Meyer; Access Denied: Studying Up in the Criminological Encounter by J.C. Oleson; Stabbing to Get to Prison: Biography as an Encounter with the Criminal Mind by F. van Gemert; a Book Review: Kerman, P. (2010). Orange is the New Black: My Year in a Women’s Prison. New York: Spiegel & Grau by A. Nuytiens and A. Vanhouche; and an Interview: The Encounters of… Sonja Snacken. Back and Forth: From Activism to (Social) Science, From Law to Criminology interviewed by S. De Ridder

Authors are invited to submit articles, and submissions received before December 15th 2018 will be considered for the second issue of the journal.

Should prisons have trees?

Fig. 2Prisons are typically highly-controlled spaces, in which landscape elements (buildings, fences etc.) are carefully planned to maintain a secure perimeter and clear sightlines, and to minimise opportunities for prisoners to scale vertical structures, or conceal contraband. They are also environments whose cost, both capital-build and facilities-management, is under constant scrutiny. Further, they are environments about which very strong opinions are held about what is ‘appropriate’ – public opinion, as reported in a vigilant media, complains that prisons resemble ‘holiday camps’ and are ‘too soft’, instead demanding ‘no-frills’ accommodation. However, contemporary prison reform discourse emphasises normalisation, and suggests that therapeutic environments can support enhanced rehabilitation and possibly desistance from reoffending.

In a new open-access paper just published in Social Science & Medicine, entitled Turning over a new leaf: The health-enabling capacities of nature contact in prison Dominique Moran and Jennifer Turner report on findings from a project undertaken with Yvonne Jewkes. They explore the potential applicability of evidence of health-enabling effects of elements of the built environment – particularly access to nature – deriving from research in healthcare facilities – to evidence-based design in the custodial context. Drawing on comparative qualitative research conducted in the UK and the Nordic region, they argue that although available data lack direct comparability, there is evidence that access to nature generates the same health-enabling effects in custody as are recognised in healthcare facilities. Reflecting on the differing political contexts of imprisonment in the two study areas, they conclude by advocating further research both to better understand health-enabling elements of the custodial built environment, and to better enable robust findings from healthcare facilities to be applied in custodial contexts.

This paper is the latest in a growing list of studies which consider the beneficial effects of access to nature in prisons. It traces its origins back to Ernest O Moore’s much-cited 1981 study, A prison environment’s effect on health care service demands (Journal of Environmental Systems, 11, 17-34) which was the first empirical study of the effect of nature views on prisoner wellbeing. Moore found that prisoners in a US jail who looked at something green from their cells made fewer sickness calls than those who did not. He noted that these prisoners may not be less ‘sick’, but rather in less desperate need of human contact that they would make a sickness call in order to get it. Two further unpublished PhD theses (by Marcia West, Landscape Views and Stress Response in the Prison Environment, in 1986, at the University of Washington, Seattle; and Anne Spafford, The Prison Landscape and the Captive Audience: Is Nature Necessity or Amenity? in 1991, at the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign) replicated and extended Moore’s work, showing that inmates and staff felt calmer when prisons offered more visually complex views, and that inmates with a higher percentage of naturalistic elements visible from their cells made fewer sick-calls than inmates with views dominated by the built environment.

However, since the early 1990s, and in line with a dearth of research into prison environments in general, very few researchers have probed the effects of nature contact, especially views of nature, for persons in custody. Although there are numerous studies of the positive effects of prison gardens and horticulture programmes, (such as Lindemuth, A. 2007. Designing therapeutic environments for inmates and prison staff in the United States: Precedents and contemporary applications. Journal of Mediterranean Ecology, 8, 87-97) very few consider the effect of the views of green spaces independent of the effects of getting outside and doing physical work, so it’s hard to know which element is having the positive effect, and in what proportion. In terms of drawing out recommendations, it is difficult to know what this means for prisons that cannot offer large scale horticulture programmes.

The revival of rehabilitative ideals for custodial environments has seen a recent increase in interest in the potential of nature contact to assist in rehabilitation; (e.g. Jana Söderlund and Peter Newman’s 2017 piece Improving Mental Health in Prisons Through Biophilic Design (The Prison Journal, 97(6), 750-772) and Nalini M Nadkarni and colleagues’ 2017 paper, Impacts of nature imagery on people in severely nature‐deprived environments (Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 15(7), 395-403) which reflect on the potential impact of nature contact in custodial environments.

In Moran and Turner’s new paper, they find that the calming, de-stressing effects of nature contact, which are widely found in healthcare facilities, were also observable in two study prisons; “across the two study sites, one much ‘greener’ than the other, respondents denied nature contact wanted to have it and could articulate the benefits it would bring, and those provided with green spaces valued them highly and described the health-enabling effects they derived”. They argue first that more serious consideration should be given to the application of evidence-based design, derived from healthcare facilities (such as support for greater access to and views of green spaces for prisoners), to the custodial sector. So yes, prisons should have trees. But second, and reflecting on insights into the management of green spaces in prison, they argue that “almost any aspect of prison life which is valued by prisoners, and to which access is not protected in law, can be transformed into a privilege to be earned or punitively removed, and this management tendency would need to be carefully considered in future knowledge transfer”.

Call for papers: ‘Food in Prison. International and Multidisciplinary Perspectives’ Brussels 21-22 Sept 2018

VUBCarceral geographers and others working on the embodiment of confinement may wish to contribute to an upcoming seminar:

The Research Groups ‘Crime & Society’ (CRiS) and ‘Social and Cultural Food Studies’ (FOST) of the Vrije Universiteit Brussel, extend an invitation to the international seminar ‘Food in Prison. International and Multidisciplinary Perspectives’, which will take place in Brussels (Belgium) on the 21-22 September.

The goal of this seminar is not only to offer an overview of studies on prison food, but to stimulate scientific discussion over the different disciplines on specific prison food related topics, such as self-catering systems, hunger strikes, gender issues, etc.

Read the full call for papers here.

Central themes of discussion include: 

  • prison food practices in different jurisdictions
  • the meanings of food for prisoners
  • food as part of the (disciplinary) regime
  • hunger strikes in prison
  • food as means for protest/ resistance
  • prison food and identity construction
  • prison food practices and gender
  • prison diets

Abstracts on prison food are invited – send by mail to: Deadline: June, 15th. Total word count: 400- 500 words. Notification of acceptance: June, 30th).

The finalized and peer reviewed articles will be published in a special issue of an international peer reviewed journal.

The following key note speakers will be present: Linda Kjaer Minke (Associate Professor, University of Southern Denmark), (to be confirmed:) Amy Smoyer (Assistant Professor, Southern Connecticut State University, U.S.), An-Sofie Vanhouche (PhD, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Belgium) and Helen Sandwell (nutritionist, Food Matters Inside & Out, U.K.).

For any inquiries regarding the program, please contact:

CFP: contributions to an edited collection on media, incarceration, prisons

Marcus Harmes at the University of South Queensland is issuing a call for papers for a proposed edited collection on media, incarceration, prisons

Image result for paddington 2 prisonPrisons, prisoners, and crime are attracting unprecedented levels of interest from both predictable sources (tabloid media) to more unexpected (such as the prison setting of Paddington 2).

Globally, but especially in the United Kingdom, the United States and Australia, the real life prison population is rising dramatically. The fictional presentations of prison, which may be prurient and sexploitative, high minded or fantastical, is matched by the barely factual and highly sensationalized prison of reality television. Orange is the New Black is only the latest example of the compulsion media of all types have to look inside the prison.

This proposed book focuses on the (real or imagined) spaces of the prison and prisoners and the stories told about prisons and justice in media both fictional and non-fictional media, and perhaps more importantly, in the uncertain space between both. Reality television, tabloid media, crime and horror films, soap opera and pornography and gaming are all possible areas of focus.

Possible themes, areas and productions include (but are not limited to)

  • Fantasy and comedy incarceration (eg The Prisoner and The Avengers, Porridge, Get Smart, The Simpsons and Hogan’s Heroes)
  • Wrongful imprisonment and escape from prison
  • The women in prison genre (eg Yield to the Night, Turn the Key Softly)
  • Sexploitation and naziploitation
  • Reality television of the ‘world’s toughest jails’
  • Celebrity prisoners (eg Chopper Read, Conrad Black)
  • The prison soap (eg Bad Girls, Cell Block H)
  • Running prisons (eg The Governor, Within these Walls)
  • The prison of the future in science fiction or of the past in historical drama
  • Dark tourism
  • Selling private prisons: prison promotional texts and media
  • The prison camp (eg Tenko, Colditz)
  • Scientific experimentation in prisons (eg A Clockwork Orange, Tales from the Hood, The Vanishing Man)


Please send chapter abstracts of 300 words by June 15th 2018. The abstract should indicate the focus of the contribution, the approach/method the author/s is taking to the research question and tentatively the conclusions the chapter will be making.

Abstracts which would provide the basis of chapters of 3000-6000 words, needed by the end of 2018.

At present no contract is signed but there is positive interest from a major international publisher for a full proposal.

Questions can be directed to

Guest passes for the RGS-IBG conference 2018

RGS.M blackThe Carceral Geography Working Group of the RGS-IBG has a small number of complimentary guest registration passes (for up to the entire duration of the RGS-IBG conference) to offer to potential conference delegates who would not normally attend the conference without complimentary registration. These complimentary registrations are provided by the RGS-IBG to encourage participation in the Annual International Conference from non-geographers based in the UK, and from either geographers or non-geographers overseas who may have difficulties in paying their registration fee. Usual registration costs start at £100 (details here). The conference will pay for registration fees only. Guests are responsible for paying for travel, accommodation and all other costs of attending the conference. There are further details about the guest scheme here.

The RGS-IBG conference takes place in Cardiff, UK on 28-31 August 2018. The CGWG will be well represented, with three sponsored sessions (Geographies of Institutionalised Childhood, Camps, Control and Crime: Critical geographies of security and refugee encampment; and Care as Incarceration: The Changing Landscapes of Institutional Treatment of Disabled People) as well as the AGM of the Working Group itself. (The conference programme is to be announced imminently here: RGS-IBG conference)

If you would like to express interest in receiving one of these complimentary passes, then please carefully review the Research Group Guest criteria to check your eligibility. (The three key criteria are that nominated guests: (1) must be making a substantive contribution to the conference programme, e.g. presenting a conference paper, acting as session panellist or discussant, or convening a conference session; (2) are expected to also be active participants in the conference, attending sessions beyond the one in which they are directly involved, and that (3) if a nominated guest is from the UK, they must not be a geographer or a member of a university geography department).

If you fit these, and the other, criteria, please send a statement of motivation (max 100 words), to by 16 May 2018.