CFC: (In)Secure Worlds: Scales, Systems and Spaces of Carcerality

Hanneke Stuit, Jennifer Turner and Julienne Weegels have been invited by Duke University Press to submit a proposal for an edited collection on carcerality in a globalized world for their Global Insecurities book series.

If you are interested in contributing to this interdisciplinary collection, please submit an abstract of 250-300 words, a proposed chapter title and a short bio of 80 words by 30 November 2020. The envisioned chapters are approximately 6000-8000 words. Please make sure your proposed work fits the rationale of the collection.

Scales, Systems and Spaces of Carcerality

Carceral systems have expanded over the past decades as strategies accompanying the many ‘wars on’ crime, drugs, poverty, and terrorism. These systems serve to securitize, isolate, manage and police specific groups of criminalized others. In effect, the carceral has become such an inextricable aspect of current security paradigms that scientists speak of a carceral age and carceral states (Moran et al. 2018, Garland 2013, Wacquant 2000). Carceral forms, then, do not just influence those who come into daily contact with the prison.

Following Moran et al. (2018) and their conceptualization of carceral conditions, spaces that exist as performances and practices of carcerality exist in various guises and on various scales around the globe. Such spaces are both manifestations of top-down practices of securitization (such as the implementation and persistence of the immigration detention center or the control of territories through the hardening and deepening of border technologies) and emergent from or attributed to the micro-scale level of the body of the individual (such as the relationship between the home as a carceral space for domestic abuse sufferers or the disproportionate treatment of people of color on the job market).

Such manifestations are enacted through government legislation and infrastructures of sanction and control, but carcerality also ‘seeps’ into everyday spheres in different ways. Popular culture abounds with representations of the prison, for instance, and ecological concerns are making it increasingly difficult to think of an abstract “outside” to human experiences from which one can escape. Whether in material, spatial, discursive and imaginary guises, experiences and feelings of confinement are becoming increasingly commonplace, although they do so in unequally gendered and racialized ways (Alexander 2012, Browne 2015). Accordingly, then, we are living in what might be considered a ‘carceral world’, where practices, performances, spatialities, imaginaries, and experiences of carcerality are widespread and exist in a variety of scales.

This edited collection seeks to explore the complex workings of global immobilization and securitization in a number of different ways. What makes a carceral space? How might experiences and imaginations of carceral spaces be contingent upon both people and place? And, how has carcerality come to emerge as a central construction of life in our globalized world? In what ways do technologies of incarceration and securitization, legal and regulative apparatus, and economic systems impact who and what is imbricated in experiences and imaginations of carcerality? How do these practices manifest in various geographical locations and at different scales? What are the likely ongoing impacts of living in a carceral world? Ultimately, what systems of power shape notions of carcerality and what does this mean for better understanding methods of incarceration, as well as the wider politics of spaces that might be considered carceral? These are the questions central to this timely edited collection, (In)Secure Worlds: Scales, Systems and Spaces of Carcerality.

Accordingly, chapters are sought that serve to:

  • Deploy carcerality to make visible the intersections between prison conditions, colonialism and the capitalist system. Where concepts like surveillance, security and (im)mobility crucially focus on strategies and technologies of what Bigo calls professional population management (2008), the concept of carcerality helps to account for the historical and social constructions of extraction that drive connections between prisons, colonialism and the capitalist system (Fludernik 2019). In doing so carcerality explicates and makes visible the constructed nature of punishment and punitive desires in contemporary entanglements of security and capitalist labor. Under what conditions has carcerality developed and what systems continue to perpetuate its existence? How may understanding the intersections between carcerality and other world systems serve to disrupt these relationships?
  • Focus attention on the role of carcerality in spatial organization. As Moran et al. (2018) have noted, Foucault thinks the carceral as reverberating rings that disseminate discipline and self-surveillance throughout society. However, the prototypical carceral institutions he mentions, like orphanages, reformatories, disciplinary battalions, alms houses, workhouses, and factory-convents have largely waned or changed. What, then, are the carceral institutions and spaces in our current epoch and how does an analysis of those spaces help us to better understand carcerality now?
  • Open up analysis of specific conditions, experiences and imaginaries of incarceration. The word carceral, as denoting what pertains to the prison and to what is prison-like, allows for an analysis of how carceral conditions are repeated and recreated in spaces outside the prison. Although an overreliance on metaphors of carcerality risks glossing the experiences of imprisoned people, the concept also has the power to address the relays and slippages that occur in the feedback loops between on-site prison experiences and broader and more global carceral processes, like prison imaginaries in popular culture, the design of prison cells, and the globalization of prison governance regimes. Frequently, these processes rely on gendered, classed, and racialized experiences and ideas. The collection encourages contributions that allow for a better understanding of the prison itself as well as its broader influence in contemporary societies. How do particular experiences and ideas of gender, class and race shape and how are they shaped by the politics and aesthetics of incarceration?
  • Conceptualise carcerality in ways that facilitate analysis of structures of feeling associated with incarceration. The carceral’s ability to metaphorically (re)cast issues and ideas in terms of the prison highlights structures of feeling (Williams 1975) about the carceral that circulate socially (Fludernik 2005; Ahmed 2004). This begs the question why carceral metaphors pop up as frequently as they do outside the prison, what they are used for exactly and to what emotional and political effects? How is or can carcerality be embodied and performed? When is an experience carceral, and what does such a denotation help us see about the structures and experiences of present day precarity?

Contributions are not limited by discipline or geographical focus. Proposals from scholars from all career stages are encouraged. Proposals from non-Anglophone contexts are welcomed and editorial support will be given.

The following timescale for the volume is anticipated. Please note this in submitting your abstract for consideration:

– First submission of chapters to the editors required by 30thJune 2021.

– Final submission of revised chapters to the editors by 31st December 2021.

If you have any further questions, please contact the editors by email at:

Carceral Geography Working Group AGM

*With apologies for cross-posting*

Dear colleagues,

As noted on the AGM page for the RGS-IBG, the Annual General Meeting of the Carceral Geography Working Group (CGWG) of the RGS-IBG will take place online on Thursday 27th August 2020, 13:00-15:00 UK time (GMT+1). All are welcome. If you wish to send agenda items for discussion, please email our secretary Jennifer Turner ( by Thursday 20th August at noon. This meeting will be held over Zoom. Register for the Zoom session via Eventbrite.

The Carceral Geography Working Group is also looking for new committee members to fill the following positions:

  • Chair (3 year term)
  • Secretary (3 year term)
  • Postgraduate Representative (2 positions) (1 year term)

Candidates for these positions must be a Fellow or Postgraduate Fellow of the RGS-IBG.

* Chair is responsible for:

  • Chairing the AGM and working with the Research Group Secretary to produce meeting agendas, agree minutes, and communicate effectively with the RGS-IBG, CGWG committee, and membership; contributing to the Annual Report and other central RGS-IBG processes as required; a central point of contact for CGWG committee members and assisting relevant personnel with initiatives, events and activities as needed; attending Research Group Committee meetings and other associated events at the RGS-IBG offices (2-3 times per year); having (light touch) oversight of the Research Group’s activities

*Secretary is responsible for:

  • The coordination of the research group’s administration; preparation of agendas and notices; ensuring meetings are effectively organised and minuted; maintaining effective records; overseeing the membership of the group; communication and correspondence with the membership

* Postgraduate Representatives are responsible for:

  • promoting postgraduate interests and needs to the wider Research Group; occasional conference, seminar and session organisation for post-graduates (with rest of group) and maintaining connection with wider postgraduate community through the Postgraduate Forum.

Nominations for these committee roles are now open.  Nominations must be in writing to the Chair (Professor Dominique Moran – ) and Secretary (Dr Jennifer Turner – with the name of two nominators (these need not be Fellows of the RGS-IBG or existing committee members). Nominations are accepted until Thursday 20th August. If more than one person is nominated, a vote will be held during the business of the AGM. Candidates will ideally need to be based in the UK to attend meetings and make a commitment to fulfilling their elected post.

If you have any questions about what the roles involve, or anything else at all, don’t hesitate to get in contact.

All the best,

Dominique Moran (Chair, CGWG)

Jennifer Turner (Secretary, CGWG)

Anna Schliehe (Treasurer, CGWG)



CFP: To identify and expel: Historical and geographic approaches to spaces of detention. University of Cagliari, Italy 9- 10 July 2020

In the recent decades the administrative detention of “irregular” migrants has spread throughout the world as one of the main strategies adopted by nation states to assert control over migration, and to secure their territories and borders. Many scholars and observers consider the current developments as exceptional, and they believe them to represent a dramatic reaction from nation states against the challenges posed by migration fluxes. However, others have pointed out that detention has long been considered as a necessary prerogative of the state in order to identify, and eventually expel, dangerous individuals. According to this second perspective,the current situation should be seen as a development within the law, and not as sparking from a state of exception.

Regardless of our personal position, it is necessary to ask how the present state of the detention system for migrants relates to previous (and contemporary) strategies to control populations perceived as dangerous. Scholars have pointed out the similarities between detention centers and the various forms taken by the “concentration camp” in the last two centuries: the colonial camp, the internment camps during wars, the extermination camp, war refugees camp, etc… However, others have pointed to the crucial differences between the current forms of detention and the ones cited above.

Specifically, it is becoming harder to identify the “state”as a monolithic entity that operates with full agency in the current scenario. The presence of private actors, who are often almost as powerful as the state, represents an apparent discontinuity with the past. In many cases, private actors appear not only to manage detention centers, but also to lobby and operate in ways that address state policies or at least influence them in such ways that these actors cannot be seen as simple recipients of state decisions any longer. Starting from these considerations, this conference aims to spark critical and constructive reflections in order to find the best instruments to analyze the topic from historical and geographical perspectives.

In order to achieve this goal, the conference will ask the following questions: –

Is the paradigm of the concentration camp still useful to analyze present detention centers?

What is the role of private actors and how do they affect the current spaces of internment? –

What is, and has been, the role of the nation state to control, identify, and remove “dangerous” populations?

What is the role of supranational organizations such as the EU and how do they participate in the making of detention?

What is the role of international organizations, NGOs, and humanitarian associations,and how do they participate in, or oppose, detention?

How has the concept of citizenship influenced, and how does it reflect previous and current strategies of exclusion?

What kind of spaces are the camps?

How can space be used to exclude?

The call for papers is addressed to both PhDs and senior scholars. The conference will be held at the Department of Political and Social Sciences of the University of Cagliari in Cagliari (Italy) on the 9th and 10th of July 2020. Proposals of max 200 words are accepted both in English and Italian and should be sent by March 15th to Ettore Asoni, San Diego State University ( and Alessandro Pes, University of Cagliari ( Proposals will be selected by April 1st.

What ‘works’ in custodial design? Free workshop at the University of Birmingham, UK 30-31 March 2020

Custodial design (i.e. of correctional facilities, prisons, jails) has become big news. The scale and cost of incarceration has seen attention drawn to its effectiveness in delivering intended outcomes, with architecture and design recently coming under considerable media scrutiny. Whilst drawing attention to the structural violence of the carceral state, and arguing for decarceration, academic researchers are, in parallel, turning their attention to the effects of architectural and design elements on those who live, work in, or visit these facilities.

In the past, custodial design has prioritised the designing-out of risk (of escape, and of violence against the self and others). Whilst these considerations remain critical, more recently the balance has swung towards more aspirational – and controversial – ideas that facilities could instead be rehabilitative, even therapeutic environments that foster wellbeing.

We may know more than ever before about how built environments influence wellbeing in general, but the question of what custodial facilities should be like remains a challenging one. Policymakers may be open to new design ideas, but in managing tight budgets, they often require a challenging level of evidential proof of effect before changes are made.

This workshop presents research from leading international researchers addressing the question of ‘what works?’ in custodial design to deliver a rehabilitative, therapeutic environment, or other ‘positive’ outcomes. It will also help to scope out future research in this area.

All are welcome to attend – particularly prison and justice professionals, policymakers and practitioners who may be able to make use of the insights provided through the research presented, and whose input will help shape future research design.

Speakers will include:

Dominique Moran University of Birmingham, UK – Nature contact and wellbeing in prison

Kwan-Lamar Blount-Hill City University of New York, USA

Kevin Bradley University of Technology, Sydney, Australia – Characterisation of custodial design through the lens of ‘citizenship’.

Elisabeth Fransson University College of Norwegian Correctional Services – Custodial design and the construction of hope in prison facilities for children and youths in Norway

Saul Hewish RideOut, UK – The Creative Prison Revisited

Yvonne Jewkes University of Bath, UK

Rohan Lulham, University of Technology, Sydney, Australia – Impacts of physical design on how staff and detainees are perceived in youth correctional settings.

Melissa Nadel Abt Associates, Cambridge MA, USA – Challenges and Solutions for Establishing the Impact of Custodial Design on Measurable Outcomes

Roger Paez AiB Architects, Barcelona, Spain – Critical Prison Design – Between Pragmatic Engagement and the Dream of Decarceration

Ashley Rubin University of Hawaii, USA – Learning from lessons of past prison design.

Julie Stevens Iowa State University – From Grey to Green: A Case for New Standards for the Correctional Natural Landscape

Victor St. John City University of New York. USA

Christine Tartaro Stockton University, USA – Culture Change within Facilities that Incarcerate

Barb Toews University of Washington, USA – Prioritizing accountability and reparations: Restorative justice design and infrastructure

The workshop will be held at the University of Birmingham, UK on 30-31 March 2020.

Attendance is free and delegates are invited to register here. Optional day catering and a conference dinner (limited numbers) can be added to bookings. Registrations with catering/dinner must be completed by 20th March 2020; registrations without catering will be taken until 28th March 2020.

Free MOOC on Prisons in Africa from the Ecoppaf team at the Sorbonne, Paris

The research team “Ecoppaf” (Economics of punishment and prison in Africa) at the University of Paris 1 Panthéon Sorbonne will be reissuing its Massive Open Online course in Prisons in Africa in 2020, and for 2020, the MOOC is subtitled in English.

The course will not start until March, but FREE registrations to follow the MOOC are now open.

To register you must first open an account on Fun MOOC, then choose “Prisons in Africa” in the offers, and then email reminders will be sent to you to say when it will start.

This online course, open to all, offers a multidisciplinary approach to prison dynamics on the African continent. It is intended for all professionals involved in prison matters (health, reform, etc.), associations and students and anyone interested in prison matters and human rights. It also offers a platform for exchanging experiences. Do not hesitate to subscribe and distribute in your networks! MOOC transcripts are available for free here: (and in English in January).

New books in carceral geography

The recent development of carceral geography is indebted to the contributions of French-speaking scholars – even though their work is sometimes not as widely read as it deserves to be. This post seeks to bring to the attention of those able to read them, two terrific new books (in French) by Marie Morelle and Julie de Dardel:

Yaoundé carcérale. Géographie d’une ville et de sa prison by Marie Morelle Lyon ENS Editions, Collection Sociétés, Espaces, Temps 2019 228pp

Based on interviews with detainees, prison leavers, their families, as well as prison administration and NGOs, observations conducted in the prison and in the districts of Yaoundé, Marie Morelle reveals the daily life of Yaoundé central prison. This book goes beyond stereotypes about African prisons, (often reduced to overcrowded and dilapidated spaces, as signs of “states in crisis”) which are still little-known, and puts them into perspective in relation to national and international actions and discourse on prisons. More broadly, the author sheds light on the urban life of marginal populations and the regulatory practices to which they are subjected by the authorities in Cameroon. Demonstrating the existence of a continuum linking prison and working class neighbourhoods, the book shows how the government in power manages poverty as well as political opposition in the city. At the crossroads of urban, social and political approaches in geography, this book is aimed at social science students and anyone interested in prisons and human rights.

Exporter la prison américaine Le système carcéral colombien à l’ère du tournant punitif by Julie de Dardel Neuchâtel Editions Alphil Presses universitaires suisses 2016 264pp.

On May 10, 2001, they transferred me by military plane to the new Valledupar prison. We knew that it was the Yankee regime there. They took everything from me, they gave me a uniform […] and they shaved my head. The guards were very young, they treated us in a completely inhuman way. We had never known that before […]. The detainees quickly launched a protest movement on the subject of access rights. The response was brutal. Repression by fire and blood, with batons and tear gas. 

The testimony of this prisoner reflects the shift in the Colombian prison system following a reform inspired by the American maximum security prison model. Carried out within the framework of the “Plan Colombia” agreements – Washington’s vast anti-drug and anti-guerrilla program in this country – the changes in the Colombian prison system are indicative of the way in which the “punitive turn” initiated in the United States is exported internationally. This book is based on rich ethnographic material, collected during a field survey in Colombia and the United States. The study is based on observations in Colombian prisons and on in-depth interviews with prisoners, family members, guards, prison officials, human rights activists, as well as architects and contractors from the city. American prison industry. The new Colombian prisons are described there as an unprecedented space of dispossession and control, but also as a place of multifaceted resistance from the prison community.

CFP: Matter of Violence – Copenhagen 15-16 May 2020

How can we assemble accounts of the evasive forms of violence lodged in material pasts and futures in this era of fake news, omnipresent data and affective politics? Who is accountable for the violent afterlives of infrastructures? In a time when many of the established boundaries that structured common understandings of violations and responsibilities, matter and people, increasingly turn out unsettled, we urgently need to explore post-disciplinary and cross-domain methodologies to uncover the politics of violence.

KADK School of Architecture, DIGNITY and the Danish Institute for International Studies extend an invitation to an intensive two-day reflection on how to push the envelope of investigations of violence—broadly conceived. The event brings together artists, human rights activists, designers, data scientists and social scientists around shared concerns with matters of violence. They aim to collectively explore the potentialities of transdisciplinary knowledge production. How can we draw upon a plurality of epistemologies to articulate concerns with human rights, violence and power at the threshold of invisibility? Can we develop methodologies that carefully mirror and follow the patchworked and disjunctured forms of perpetration and agency in an age of ruination and the Anthropocene? 

They invite submissions of projects—embryonic or ongoing—that work with the nexus between violence and materiality. They invite both thinkers and doers, artists and scientists, who work with theoretically informed and methodologically innovative projects, to submit introductions to their work in the form of a written synopsis (+/- 300 words) and, if relevant, associated audio-visual materials. They encourage collaborative projects that entail some form of cross-fertilization between art, architecture and anthropology and work with multifaceted approaches and outputs. In the collaborative spirit of the event, they suggest that you should expect some subsequent exchange around your proposal and how it might fit in the event. They will strive to take the discussions of the seminar forward and curate a joint output.

The submission deadline is 15 January 2020

For full details go to  

Call for book chapter abstracts: What works in custodial design?

Custodial design (i.e. of correctional facilities, prisons, jails) has become big news. The scale and cost of incarceration has seen attention drawn to its effectiveness in delivering intended outcomes, with architecture and design recently coming under considerable media scrutiny. Whilst drawing attention to the structural violence of the carceral state, and arguing for decarceration, academic researchers are, in parallel, turning their attention to the effects of architectural and design elements on those who live, work in, or visit these facilities.

In the past, custodial design has prioritised the designing-out of risk (of escape, and of violence against the self and others). Whilst these considerations remain critical, more recently the balance has swung towards more aspirational – and controversial – ideas that facilities could instead be rehabilitative, even therapeutic environments that foster wellbeing.

We may know more than ever before about how built environments influence wellbeing in general, but the question of what custodial facilities should be like remains a challenging one. Policymakers may be open to new design ideas, but in managing tight budgets, they often require a challenging level of evidential proof of effect before changes are made.

This call is therefore for proposals for chapters for a collection edited by Dominique Moran, Yvonne Jewkes, Kwan-Lamar Blount-Hill and Victor St.John, asking ‘what works?’ in custodial design to deliver a rehabilitative, therapeutic environment, or other ‘positive’ outcomes?

The call is addressed to researchers in all disciplines, working in all geographical contexts, whose work addresses one or more of the following questions, whether in relation to the custodial environment as a whole, or to elements of it:

  1. How can we characterise or categorise custodial buildings/environments? How can we describe them in ways that enable us to determine the effects of their characteristics?
  2. How can we characterise the intended outcomes of custodial design? Should design prioritise, for example, ‘humanisation’, ‘normalisation’, or ‘wellbeing’, and how do we recognise and evaluate these in practice? What other ‘positive’ or desirable outcomes might custodial design encourage (for example, recovery, rehabilitation, aspiration, future orientation, aesthetic appreciation)?
  3. How – i.e. through what causal mechanisms – do we think that these characteristics of the built environment ‘work’ in the sense of being experienced by people who are incarcerated, and by the staff who work in custodial facilities, either in the ways in which the planners and designers intended, or in unanticipated ways?
  4. How can we establish whether or that these characteristics have an effect? What data and what methodologies are required to determine causality between built environments and measurable outcomes?
  5. What has been proven to ‘work’ in custodial design, in terms of characteristics of the built environment, and the ways in which it fosters wellbeing or other therapeutic outcomes?

In parallel with this edited collection, an interdisciplinary workshop will be held at the University of Birmingham, UK in 2020, to enable contributors to present and discuss their work around these questions. The workshop will also be an opportunity to explore opportunities for future interdisciplinary collaboration.

Researchers are invited to send 500-word chapter abstracts to by Monday 18th November. Pre-submission enquiries are also very welcome.

CFP AAG 2020 Food and Carceral Intersections: From geographies of confinement to enactments of abolition

Call for Papers: American Association of Geographers (AAG) Annual Meeting | April 6-10, 2020 | Denver, CO USA

Paper Session: Food and Carceral Intersections: From Geographies of Confinement to Enactments of Abolition

Organizers: Joshua Sbicca (Colorado State University) and Becca Clark-Hargreaves (Colorado State University)

Session Description: How might we better understand food systems by attending to the penal system and vice versa? Carceral spaces – such as neighborhood zones of police surveillance and plantation prisons that exploit confined labor – reflect and reproduce systems of oppression also present in the food system (Gilmore 2007). In cities, the state regularly polices poverty instead of addressing the institutional racism and capitalist urbanization that perpetuates the lack of access to goods like healthy food (Wacquant 2009; Camp 2016). Additionally, the food system relies on carceral practices to secure disciplined labor by weaponizing the possibility of deportation for racialized undocumented workers and wielding the threat of violence to keep workers in the fields (Mitchell 1996; Horton 2016). And of course, there is slow death tied to low-quality food in prisons, prison food and agriculture industries, force feeding of prisoners, and the use of food (or its denial) as punishment (Camplin 2016; Smoyer 2019).

But there are also seeds of struggle for the abolition of penal logics and institutions that maintain the violence of the ongoing practices and legacies of colonialism, white supremacy, and institutional racism vis-à-vis food (Heynen 2016; Murguía 2018; Pellow 2018). Hunger strikes and food riots have long been used as a tool to gain the sympathy of the public, shame political opponents, and gain concessions from the state and penal officials (Scanlan et al. 2008; McGregor 2011; Bargu 2014). Food is also a site for resistance in prison, whether to celebrate cultural foodways or assert a sense of self and autonomy (Ugelvik 2011; Gibson-Light 2018). Food and environmental justice activists have also sought to intervene in mass incarceration and the prison pipeline with campaigns and initiatives that support prisoners and formerly incarcerated people (Sbicca 2016; Nocella, Ducre, and Lupinacci 2016).

This session seeks to critically explore these and other intersections between food and carceral systems, politics, ideologies, spatialities, and social movements. We are especially interested in papers working through food and carceral politics through the lens of racial capitalism, racial neoliberalism, Plantationocene and plantation ecologies, abolition ecologies, masculinities and femininities, restorative justice, environmental justice, food justice, and food sovereignty.  

Some possible orienting topics include:

  • Farming, gardening, and horticulture programs in prison
  • Prison food industries
  • Social, cultural, and spatial dimensions of prison food
  • Plantation and carceral logics and the food system
  • Prison food riots and hunger strikes
  • Prison abolition and reform efforts that engage with food politics
  • Conversion of farmland into prisons and jails
  • Impacts of toxic prisons and jails on agriculture
  • Food and environmental justice activism with prisoners and formerly incarcerated people
  • Social movement alliances between food and prison abolition/reform activists  

Please send paper titles and abstracts (250 words maximum) and your personal identification number (received from the AAG after registering online at to Joshua Sbicca, Colorado State University ( Please send by October 21.


Bargu, Banu. 2014. Starve and Immolate: The Politics of Human Weapons. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.

Camp, J. T. 2016. Incarcerating the Crisis: Freedom Struggles and the Rise of the Neoliberal State. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

Camplin, E., 2016. Prison Food in America. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

Gilmore, R. W. 2007. Golden Gulag: Prisons, Surplus, Crisis, and Opposition in Globalizing California. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

Heynen, N., 2016. Urban political ecology II: The abolitionist century. Progress in Human Geography, 40(6), 839-845.

Horton, S.B., 2016. They Leave Their Kidneys in the Fields: Illness, Injury, and Illegality Among US Farmworkers. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

McGregor, J., 2011. Contestations and consequences of deportability: hunger strikes and the political agency of non-citizens. Citizenship Studies, 15(5): 597-611.

Mitchell, D., 1996. The Lie of the Land: Migrant Workers and the California Landscape. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.

Murguía, S.J., 2018. Food as a Mechanism of Control and Resistance in Jails and Prisons: Diets of Disrepute. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.

Nocella II, A.J., Ducre, K.A. and Lupinacci, J. eds., 2016. Addressing Environmental and Food Justice Toward Dismantling the School-to-Prison Pipeline: Poisoning and Imprisoning Youth. New York, NY: Springer.

Pellow, D.N., 2018. “Political Prisoners and Environmental Justice.” Capitalism, Nature, Socialism. 29(4), 1-20.

Sbicca, J., 2016. These bars can’t hold us back: Plowing incarcerated geographies with restorative food justice. Antipode, 48(5), 1359-1379.

Scanlan, S.J., Cooper Stoll, L. and Lumm, K., 2008. Starving for change: The hunger strike and nonviolent action, 1906–2004. In Research in social movements, conflicts and change (275-323). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

Smoyer, A.B., 2019. Food in correctional facilities: A scoping review. Appetite. 141(1).

Ugelvik, T., 2011. The hidden food: Mealtime resistance and identity work in a Norwegian prison. Punishment & Society, 13(1), 47-63.

Wacquant, L. 2009. Punishing the Poor: The Neoliberal Government of Social Insecurity. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

The Evolution of Prisons and Penality in the Former Soviet Union – special issue now online

Issue 19 of The Journal of Power Institutions in Post-Soviet Societies, edited by Gavin Slade, Anne Le Huérou, Elisabeth Sieca-Kozlowski and entitled “The Evolution of Prisons and Penality in the Former Soviet Union” is now online. 

This superb collection covers a staggering range of topics, from films of Soviet penal spaces, to medical professionals in modern Russian prisons, comprises resources in English and French, and includes English language reviews of topical books published in French and Russian, and interviews with key figures. The full edition is available here – links to individual papers/reviews are below.

Photo Credit: Belovodsk Colony no. 16, Kyrgyzstan (April 2015), ©Gavin Slade

Gavin Slade
Unpacking Prison Reform in the Former Soviet Union

The Visual History of Imprisonment – Article (1)
Irina Tcherneva
For an Exploration of Visual Resources of the History of Imprisonment 
Photo and Film in Penal Spaces in the USSR (1940–1970)
The Evolution of Prisons and Penality in the Former Soviet Union – Articles (2)
The Evolution of Prisons and Penality in the Former Soviet Union – Student Research Note (1)
The Evolution of Prisons and Penality in the Former Soviet Union – Conversation (1 – ru & fr)
The Evolution of Prisons and Penality in the Former Soviet Union – Bibliography
Elisabeth Sieca-Kozlowski
The Evolution of Prisons and Penality in the Former Soviet Union – A Suggested Bibliography

The Evolution of Prisons and Penality in the Former Soviet Union – Book Reviews (4)
Alan Barenberg
Luba Jurgenson et Nicolas Werth, Le Goulag : Témoignages et archives
Éditions Robert Laffont, S.A.S., Paris, 2017, 1120 pages

Gwénola Ricordeau
Judith Pallot and Elena Katz, Waiting at the Prison Gate: Women, Identity and the Russian Penal System
London: I.B. Tauris, 2017, 352 pages

Malika Talgatova
Anna Karetnikova, Marshrut. Obshchestvennyi kontrol’ za mestami lisheniya svobodi – vosem’let bez prava ostanovki
Moscow: Pravozashchitnii Tsentr, 2017, 268 pages

Gavin Slade
Mark Galeotti, The Vory: Russia’s Super-Mafia 
New Haven: Yale University Press, 2018, 344 pages

Book Reviews – General (6)
Stanislav Lvovsky
Zakhar Prilepin, Vzvod. Ofitsery i opolchentsy russkoi literatury
Moskva: AST, 2017, 736 pages

Lina Tsrimova
Rebecca Gould, Writers and Rebels: The Literature of Insurgency in the Caucasus 
Yale University Press, 2016, 352 pages

Elie Tenenbaum
Masha Cerovic, Les Enfants de Staline. La guerre des partisans soviétiques, 1941-1944 
Paris, Éditions du Seuil, 2018, 384 pages

Uri Bar-Noi
Isabella Ginor and Gideon Remez, The Soviet-Israeli War, 1967-1973: The USSR’s Military Intervention in the Egyptian-Israeli Conflict
London: Hurst & Company, 2017, 400 pages

Matthew Light
Erica Marat, The Politics of Police Reform: Society against the State in Post-Soviet Countries
Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2018, 249 pages

Karine Clément
Anna Sanina, Patriotic Education in Contemporary Russia. Sociological Studies in the Making of the Post-Soviet Citizen 
Stuttgart: Ibidem Verlag, 2017, 188 pages