Geen categorie Archives

4 September 202518 September 2025

Lived experience: the power and pitfalls

Lived experience and experience experts are increasingly recognised as valuable contributors in social domains, healthcare, and justice reform. From mental health and substance use care to reintegration programmes for formerly incarcerated individuals the involvement of people with firsthand knowledge has the potential to transform policies and practices. However, drawing on lived experience must be approached with care to ensure ethical engagement, prevent exploitation, and safeguard the well-being of those who choose to share their personal stories.

My own journey: from lived experience to becoming an experience expert

As a person with lived experience, I have personally navigated the complexities of this landscape. Over the years, I was frequently invited to contribute to articles, projects, and media programmes as someone with firsthand knowledge of the justice system. Sometimes, these opportunities were beneficial, providing networking possibilities, financial support, or a sense of purpose during difficult times. However, I also encountered empty promises,offers that suggested my participation would lead to job opportunities or professional development, only for these assurances to disappear once my contribution had been secured.

There were moments when I worked extensively on projects, dedicating countless unpaid hours, only to discover that other professionals involved had received significant financial compensation. In some cases, I was assured anonymity, only to be made identifiable in publications. Such experiences underscored the importance of informed consent, fair compensation, and the need for structured pathways for people with lived experience to transition into professional roles.

I was fortunate to break free from the limitations of being seen solely as a “lived experience” contributor. Through education, skill-building, and collaboration with professionals, I evolved into a professional, a professional with lived experience, an experience expert. I founded Stichting Sileo to help others make the same transition, to ensure that people with lived experience have the opportunity to develop into professionals if they choose to, but also recognising that not everyone may wish or be able to take this path. Lived experience is a valuable perspective in itself.

The value of lived experience and experience experts

The shift from a “repair” model to a “recovery” model in social and healthcare sectors has emphasised the importance of lived experience in ensuring a deeper understanding of systemic barriers and personal resilience. Organisations such as RESCALED and Sileo advocate for embedding the voices of those affected by the justice system into reform efforts. When applied ethically, lived experience enhances policy design, strengthens reintegration programmes, and offers unique insights into the lived realities of people navigating complex social systems. The role of experience experts, in the criminal justice sector, is increasingly formalised, with structured training programmes ensuring that their insights contribute effectively and ethically to policy and practice.

The risks and exploitation of lived experience

Despite the growing appreciation for lived experience, risks remain. Too often, people with lived experience are invited to share their stories in ways that can be exploitative. NGOs, journalists, and documentary makers may approach people during vulnerable moments, requesting personal narratives without ensuring informed consent or considering the long-term effects. Many people do not immediately grasp the consequences of being publicly identified as a former incarcerated individual or someone with a troubled past, labels that can follow them indefinitely and hinder their reintegration.

Sometimes, people with lived experience are offered opportunities under false pretences leading to the belief that participating in a project, interview, or initiative will come with paid work or career opportunities, only to find out that their contributions are undervalued or unpaid. Meanwhile, professionals involved in the same projects often earn substantial fees. This creates an imbalance in which the very people whose experiences are being leveraged receive little to no compensation or professional advancement. After release, their stories and experiences are often the only resources they possess, leaving them vulnerable to further exploitation.

Another challenge is the tendency of some people to reduce themselves to their lived experience. When lived experience becomes an identity rather than a perspective, it can trap people in a cycle of self-definition that limits their growth. Instead of seeing themselves as professionals with a broad range of skills and contributions, they may be pigeonholed as “ex-detainees”. This narrow framing not only affects personal development but also reinforces societal stigmas that hinder long-term reintegration and empowerment.

Furthermore, there is a crucial distinction between those with lived experience and experience experts. While people with lived experience have valuable perspectives, expertise goes beyond personal history—therefore experience experts are people who have developed critical insights and professional expertise alongside their lived experience. Experience experts are not merely about sharing a personal story, but about using personal experience and developed professional skills as a foundation for systemic change.

The path forward: ethical and sustainable inclusion of lived experience

To realise the ethical and sustainable inclusion of lived experience, as well as experience experts, it’s important to consider the differences as an organisation/NGO, also taking in account the individual aspects such as motivation, expectations and abilities of the lived experience. For the experience experts it’s important to have an approach by the equity method that acknowledges the circumstances from which they came, while also upholding the same standards as other professionals.

To truly harness the power of lived experience while avoiding and managing its pitfalls and risks, several key measures must be taken:

Fair compensation: People with lived experience should be paid equitably for their contributions, just like any other expert or professional.
Informed consent: People should fully understand the long-term implications of sharing their stories, including potential social and professional repercussions.
Development pathways: Structured programmes should be in place to help people transition from lived experience to experience expertise, ensuring that experience is combined with professional knowledge and expertise, ultimately resulting in a sustainable career.
Protection against exploitation: NGOs, media, and institutions must be held accountable for ethical engagement with people with lived experience, ensuring that they are not used merely as a “token voice.”
Collaboration with professionals: Experience experts should work alongside professionals as equals, combining insights from lived experience with evidence-based practices to drive systemic change.

By prioritising ethical engagement and structured pathways, we can ensure that people with lived experience and experience experts are empowered, not exploited. The voices of lived experience must be amplified in ways that lead to long-term impact, professional growth, and societal transformation. We invite all relevant parties within the criminal justice system to join us, so together we can continue building a future where lived experience is not a label, but a stepping stone towards expertise, leadership, and meaningful contribution.

Stichting Sileo contributed to RESCALED’s position paper Lived Experience at the Core – Embedding Voices, Knowledge, and Expertise in the RESCALED Movement.

The paper stresses the meaningful inclusion of people with lived experience, uniting diverse perspectives within one framework and centring the individual. It calls for lived experience to be embedded as a foundation for systemic change, a vision Sileo fully supports.

10 July 202510 July 2025

From isolation to integration: a new vision for youth justice in Austria

Youth detention is a crucial issue throughout Europe, as stakeholders pursue more humane, effective, and community-focused ways to support young people facing deprivation of liberty.

In Austria, research initiated by Salzburg Children’s and Youth Advocacy sparked a collaboration with the NGO Richtungswechsel. A joint visit to the small-scale facility of Seehaus in Germany, together with Salzburg’s prison director, Colonel Knebel, further fuelled interest in practical alternatives for Austria’s youth detention system.

In May 2025, the first Youth Custody Conference took place in Salzburg. Richtungswechsel and Salzburg Children’s and Youth Advocacy initiated a meaningful dialogue about what a child-centred, rights-based, and progressive model of youth detention could look like in Austria.

Over 120 experts from 16 countries gathered to share insights and examine the feasibility of small-scale custodial alternatives. The conference showcased inspiring international practices and explored how such approaches might be adapted to Austria’s legal, political, and social contexts.

Institutional perspectives: Austria and beyond

The conference opened with insights from Katharina Dürr of the General Directorate for the Austrian Prison System. Dürr outlined the current state of Austria’s youth detention framework, emphasising challenges such as overcrowding, limited family proximity, and restricted access to support services within existing institutions. Her presentation highlighted the urgent need for reform to support young people in detention better and facilitate their (re)integration.

Next, Karel Dvořák, the Czech Republic’s Deputy Minister of Justice, described ongoing efforts in Czechia to move away from large-scale incarceration towards smaller, target group–oriented facilities more closely embedded in local communities. He showcased promising examples, such as an open prison for men and a probation house supporting reintegration, which already reflect key approaches to incarceration like dynamic security and trust-based relationships.

He emphasised the Czech Republic’s collaboration with the RESCALED network, notably through RUBIKON, the Czech member of RESCALED, and underlined the government’s intention to develop a context-specific detention house facility. Dvořák concluded with a clear commitment to realising the EU Council’s call for small-scale detention, stating:

“We have a common task to fulfil the conclusion of small-scale detention adopted by the EU Council last year.”

His contribution reflected both a grounded awareness of current systemic challenges and a forward-looking dedication to transforming imprisonment into a more humane, reintegrative, and community-connected system.

Setting a new vision

Colonel Dipl. – Päd. Dietmar Knebel from the Austrian Ministry of Justice officially launched the conference, emphasising political will and the need for a justice system that prioritises young people’s development and societal safety.

“What these young individuals truly need is structure within an environment that fits their specific needs surrounded by peers, personal mentors, and small, intensively supported groups.“

Building on this foundation, Noa Shoshan, Knowledge Manager at RESCALED Europe, presented the movement’s core principles and vision: a paradigm shift from large prison institutions toward small-scale detention houses embedded in and supported by local communities.

She described these houses as accommodating a maximum of 30 residents, working closely with local services, schools, neighbours, and civil society organisations. She emphasised the need for a collective effort. RESCALED’s work goes beyond policy; it seeks to shift societal narratives around incarceration through knowledge sharing, raising awareness, and the cross-national exchange of best practices.

Importantly, Shoshan stressed that there is no one-size-fits-all model:

“There is not one perfect detention house model – in practice, it materialises in various ways because it depends on a national context, it depends on the legal frameworks, it depends on the community where it is located, and it depends on the local services.”

Therefore, implementation must be tailored to context and involve early community engagement to address scepticism and promote shared responsibility.

Overall, detention houses offer a more sustainable and effective approach to incarceration. However, they must be part of a broader ecosystem prioritising integration, differentiation, and community-based care.

Political momentum is increasing: all 27 EU Ministers of Justice recently issued a joint statement endorsing small-scale detention, and the UN Human Rights Council emphasised these models in a resolution on social (re)integration.

Model from practice: Estonia and Germany

Stanislav Solodov from Estonia’s Ministry of Justice outlined two initiatives to support young people’s reintegration. These efforts reflect Estonia’s broader strategy of combining state-led policy with NGO-driven practices to promote long-term change.

The monitoring programme connects young people aged 14 to 20 with trained mentors six months before their release. Building trust is a key aspect of supporting personal growth, helping to shift values and attitudes, and ultimately enabling sustainable behaviour change. The second initiative is the halfway house, operated in partnership with the Village of Hope. Up to 20 young people live in a structured, family-like environment in these small-scale residential settings.

Solodov emphasised that a minimum of nine months of long-term support is critical for success. Shorter interventions show little effect.

From Germany, Ulrich Weinhold and Irmela Abrell shared insights into the Seehaus e.V. facilities, where adolescents in conflict with the law live in supervised homes together with mentor families. Daily life in Seehaus follows a clear and structured routine, including school attendance, vocational training, shared meals, household responsibilities, sports, and group discussions. This everyday structure is designed to promote responsibility, rhythm, and a sense of community.

Instead of control and punishment, daily life is built on trust, accountability, and positive relationships.

“We don’t focus on what went wrong – we focus on what can go right from here.”

A cornerstone of Seehaus is its commitment to restorative justice. Crime is seen as harm done to human relationships, and change is facilitated through dialogue, accountability, and active involvement of survivors, peers, and the community. Through this approach, Seehaus promotes communal living as a route to reintegration, focused on personal development and constructively resolving conflicts.

Austria’s opportunity to lead change

Throughout the Youth Justice Conference, participants expressed a common belief: youth detention should not merely aim to reduce harm but must actively support young people in growing, restoring relationships, and envisioning a future beyond deprivation of liberty. While some voiced concerns that Austria risks falling behind, others emphasised that the necessary momentum is already present. What is needed now is bold leadership and practical steps forward.

Austria now stands at a pivotal crossroads. Experts, practitioners, and policymakers alike signalled a strong desire for transformation; one that embraces small-scale, human-centred approaches rooted in dignity, participation, and community.

The conference clarified that the necessary foundations are already in place: international inspiration, local expertise, and a wealth of practical models. Yet, the political will and societal vision remain to bring them to life. The examples of RESCALED, Estonia, and Seehaus, along with the voices of the Austrian professionals, highlight what is possible: an approach to detention that restores dignity, supports growth, and aligns justice with social integration.

By initiating a pilot project grounded in these values, Austria has the chance to reform its system and contribute meaningfully to a growing European movement. A system that reimagines detention as a space for support, accountability, hope, and that gives young people a chance.

30 May 20255 June 2025

General Assembly 2025: welcoming new members and strengthening the RESCALED movement

On the 23rd of May 2025, RESCALED held its annual General Assembly in Salzburg, Austria. This year’s event marked a meaningful gathering to reflect, (re)connect, and look ahead.

In addition to reflecting on the key highlights and achievements of the past year, including our growing impact and the expanding reach of the RESCALED movement across Europe. We took time to (re)connect, with new members bringing fresh perspectives, and long-standing members sharing valuable insights and impact. But most importantly, we looked ahead together, reaffirming our shared vision for the future and the path we are taking as a movement.

This year, we were proud to welcome three new members who each enrich our network with their own unique strengths and commitments:

Diagrama Foundation (United Kingdom)

Diagrama Foundation supports vulnerable children and young people in custodial and care settings. Their approach is based on trauma-informed care, restorative justice principles, and child development theory. Operating small-scale, therapeutic residential settings, that move away from punitive, institutional approaches and instead prioritise relational security, personal growth, and reintegration into the community. Diagrama has charity status in England and Wales and is part of Fundación Diagrama, one of Spain’s largest NGOs.

Jalta – Cultural and Social Centre (Slovakia)

Based in Slovakia, Jalta works at the intersection of community engagement, policy advocacy, and creative methodologies. Through projects like #stopdiscrimination they address systemic issues affecting vulnerable groups and promote inclusive reform through public advocacy, workshops, and educational campaigns, while projects like inVulnerables/DAR and Theatregeneration offer creative and educational methodologies that support the reintegration of justice-involved youth and vulnerable individuals through European collaborations.

Dr. Olta Qejvani (Albania)

Dr. Olta Qejvani is a lecturer in European Law and has over a decade of experience across academia, civil society, and public administration. She has represented Albania at the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities at the Council of Europe in Strasbourg, where her project ‘Different local communities, same youth perspective’ was recognized as one of the best initiatives for youth participation at the local level.

Board elections

We also proudly re-elected Gonçalo Noronha Andrade and Birte Metz to the RESCALED Board. Their ongoing leadership will continue to strengthen and guide our movement.

We look ahead with energy and purpose, moving forward as a European movement with members across 20 countries, committed to driving justice reform.

15 May 20255 June 2025

Women in detention: Challenges and new approaches

Around the world, women make up a small but growing group within the prison population. According to the World Prison Brief¹ over 733,000 women and girls are incarcerated globally, accounting for about 6.8% of the total prison population worldwide. In Europe, the proportion is even lower, around 5% of people in prison are women².

While this percentage may seem small, it masks a deeply concerning trend: the dramatic and disproportionate growth in women’s³ imprisonment. Since 2000, the global women prison population has surged by 57%, compared to a 22% increase for men over the same period⁴. This rapid rise is particularly severe in certain regions and countries. Both Asia and Oceania have seen their women prison populations more than double since 2000, with countries like Cambodia, Indonesia, and Brazil experiencing explosive growth. The highest numbers of incarcerated women are found in the USA (174,607), China (145,000), and Brazil (50,441)⁵^–⁶^–⁷.

While Europe has seen a slight overall decline in women’s imprisonment, patterns vary significantly by country ⁸. Excluding Russia, the women prison population in the rest of Europe actually grew by about 25% from 2000 to 2024⁹. Women make up approximately 5-6% of the European prison population, with notable variations, from as high as 9.5% in Malta and 8.5% in Czechia to as low as 3.2% in France and 3.7% in Bulgaria¹⁰. Some countries like Poland see their women prisoner population more than double since 2000¹¹.

Understanding women’s pathways to incarceration

Incarcerated women often follow different pathways into crime than men, reflecting different life experiences and vulnerabilities¹². Their paths are frequently characterized by economic hardship, poverty, low levels of education, lack of employment opportunities, and homelessness.

While men dominate statistics for violent crime, women are more often imprisoned for non-violent offenses, particularly property and drug-related crimes¹³. For example, in England and Wales, shoplifting accounts for 40% of women’s prison sentences under six months, while almost two-thirds (64%) of prison sentences given to women were for less than six months¹⁴.

A system not designed for women

Prison systems worldwide share a fundamental problem: they were originally designed by men and for men¹⁵. As women constitute a minority of the prison population, their specific needs are often overlooked within this man-centric framework. The ‘one-size-fits-all’ approach fundamentally fails to provide a safe, humane, or rehabilitative environment for many incarcerated women.

Key challenges include:

Histories of trauma and mental health:

Women behind bars are more likely than men to have suffered abuse and trauma prior to incarceration. Over 90% have experienced some form of childhood trauma, including physical or sexual abuse, neglect, bullying, or witnessing extreme violence¹⁶, often continuing into adulthood with intimate partner violence.

This continuous exposure to trauma contributes to high rates of mental health issues¹⁷, with studies showing 57% of women under probation supervision in Ireland experiencing mental health problems (compared to 40% of men)¹⁸.

Reproductive and healthcare needs:

Women have specific reproductive and sexual healthcare needs that prisons commonly fail to address¹⁹. Many incarcerated women are of child-bearing age and approximately 5-10% of women are pregnant when admitted to prison²⁰, requiring prenatal care, proper nutrition, and childbirth arrangements. Even basic reproductive health can be neglected in prisons, with inadequate access to gynecological services, mammograms, pap smears, and even menstrual hygiene products.

Safety and dignity

Women in prison are particularly vulnerable to sexual harassment, abuse, and violence, perpetrated by both staff and fellow incarcerated individuals²¹. Lack of privacy, supervision by male staff in sensitive situations, and invasive or humiliating search procedures can violate dignity and exacerbate feelings of vulnerability and fear. Although International standards recommend searches be conducted by women staff, yet this is not always implemented²².

Family responsibilities and caregiving

Most incarcerated women are mothers, and many were the primary caregivers for their children prior to arrest²³. In Italy, at the end of 2021 nearly 64% of women in detention were mothers²⁴, and in the UK, an estimated 17,500 children were separated from their mothers by imprisonment in 2020. This separation doubles the risk of poor mental health in children and increases their risk of poverty and housing insecurity²⁵. Traditional prisons, with distant locations and limited visitation, make maintaining family bonds extremely difficult.

International standards and reform movements

The international community has formally recognized the inadequacy of treating incarcerated women identically to men and the need for gender-specific approaches. International standards have been developed to address these issues, like the United Nations Bangkok Rules (2010). These rules set standards for non-discrimination and gender-responsive approaches, covering admission procedures, healthcare, humane treatment, and family contact²⁶ and they emphasize the need for alternatives to imprisonment for women²⁷.

The Council of Europe has also addressed women’s incarceration through the European Prison Rules (revised in 2006, updated in 2020)²⁸, which emphasize that imprisonment should be a last resort, especially for mothers of young children. These standards call for prison conditions that respect human rights, tailored healthcare, protection from abuse, and support for family contact.

Despite these detailed international and European standards, a significant implementation gap persists.

RESCALED Movement

For women experiencing incarceration large-scale prisons often fail to meet their (most basic) needs. But what if women were incarcerated in a more humane, community-integrated setting?

Detention houses provide exactly that through three key principles:

Small-scale: Detention houses typically accommodate only about 8 to 30 residents, creating more personal, human-centered environments. Finland’s Vanaja Prison exemplifies this approach by housing up to 57 women in small-scale house units of five people each, plus a special family house for parents with children. This village-like arrangement creates a more intimate environment where staff can develop meaningful relationships with each resident and tailor support to individual needs, particularly helpful for women who have experienced trauma.

Differentiation: This principle means placing individuals in the context best suited to their specific circumstances. In these kinds of contexts, staff are trained in gender-responsive practices and the programming is tailored specifically for women’s needs, covering topics like healthy relationships, parenting skills, and women’s health.

The prison for women in Řepy (Czech Republic) demonstrates differentiation through its specialized selection process and treatment approach. With a capacity of 56 women, Řepy divides residents into smaller groups based on security level.

Community-Integration: Detention houses are embedded in the community rather than isolated, allowing residents to remain literally and figuratively closer to normal life. Scotland’s Community Custody Units illustrate this well, designed with family-friendly visit areas including community rooms and gardens that create child-friendly environments. This integration reduces stigma, improves access to community services like healthcare and education, and makes regular family visits more feasible.

The economic argument for community-based solutions is compelling. Research shows that the cost per woman at Women’s Centres ranges from £1,223 to £4,125 depending on their level of need, while a place in prison costs £52,121 per year. Despite this clear cost advantage, investment in Women’s Centres tends to be short-term, inconsistent, and inadequate, limiting their potential impact²⁹.

By shifting from large prisons to detention houses, RESCALED envisions a justice system that is not only more humane, but also more effective for society.

Women benefit from environments that respect their dignity, address their trauma, and keep them connected to their families. Communities benefit as well: because small-scale, community-integrated detention houses are more transparent and oriented toward reintegration, they can reduce recidivism and aid public safety in the long run.

For women in detention, who have too often been unseen and underserved, detention houses offer a chance to be treated as people, not statistics, as mothers, workers, and community members who, with the right support, can successfully turn their lives around.

Read the full report on Women Download

About the WOMEN Project: To address the challenges outlined in this blog post, RESCALED is proud to be leading the “Workspace for Mapping, Engaging, and Networking with, for, and by Incarcerated Women” (WOMEN) project. Click here to learn more.

Institute for Crime & Justice Policy Research. (2025, February). Female prison population growing faster than male, worldwide. World Prison Brief. ↩︎
Irish Penal Reform Trust. (2024, June) . Council of Europe: ‘SPACE I’ Annual penal statistics: Prison Populations 2023. ↩︎
Throughout this text, we use the term “women” instead of “female” to center the social and gendered dimensions of incarceration. Where sources use the term “female” (e.g., in data sets or reports), this reflects their original language. Our choice aligns with person-centered, gender-responsive language. ↩︎
Institute for Crime & Justice Policy Research. (2025, February). Female prison population growing faster than male, worldwide. World Prison Brief. ↩︎
United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime. (2021, June). Data Matters No. 1: Nearly twelve million people imprisoned globally, nearly one-third unsentenced with prisons overcrowded in half of all countries. ↩︎
Institute for Crime & Justice Policy Research. (2025, February). Female prison population growing faster than male, worldwide. World Prison Brief. ↩︎
Webster, R. (2025, February). Global female incarceration on the rise. Russell Webster. ↩︎
Institute for Crime & Justice Policy Research. (2025, February). Female prison population growing faster than male, worldwide. World Prison Brief. ↩︎
Fair, H., & Walmsley, R. (2022, October). World Female Imprisonment List (5ª edition). Institute for Crime & Justice Policy Research. ↩︎
Eurostat. (2025, April). Prison statistics. Statistics Explained. ↩︎
Fair, H., & Walmsley, R. (2022, October). World Female Imprisonment List (5ª edition). Institute for Crime & Justice Policy Research. ↩︎
Council on Criminal Justice. (2024, August). Women’s justice: A preliminary assessment of women in the criminal justice system. ↩︎
Institute for Crime & Justice Policy Research. (2025, February). Female prison population growing faster than male, worldwide. World Prison Brief. ↩︎
Prison Reform Trust. (2025, April). Resetting the approach to women’s imprisonment. ↩︎
Penal Reform International. (n.d.). UN Bangkok Rules. ↩︎
Council on Criminal Justice. (2024, August). Women’s justice: A preliminary assessment of women in the criminal justice system. ↩︎
Penal Reform International, & Association for the Prevention of Torture. (2015). Women in detention: A guide to gender-sensitive monitoring (2nd ed.). ↩︎
Probation Service. (2021, June). Towards a ‘best practice’ approach to working with women who offend. ↩︎
United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime. (2014). Handbook on women and imprisonment (2nd ed.). United Nations. ↩︎
Wikipedia contributors. (n.d.). Reproductive health care for incarcerated women in the United States. Wikipedia. ↩︎
Abasguliyeva, K., Misenheimer, A., Ram, S., Tromboo, H., & Tsoi, K. W. (2024, September 11). Prison in Pink: The Struggles of Female Incarceration. OxJournal. ↩︎
Penal Reform International. (2013). UN Bangkok Rules on women offenders and prisoners: Short guide. ↩︎
Council on Criminal Justice. (2024, August). Women’s justice: A preliminary assessment of women in the criminal justice system. ↩︎
Associazione Antigone. (2023). Dalla parte di Antigone: Cartella stampa. ↩︎
Prison Reform Trust. (2025, April). Resetting the approach to women’s imprisonment. ↩︎
Penal Reform International. (n.d.). UN Bangkok Rules. ↩︎
United Nations Special Representative of the Secretary-General on Violence Against Children. (2020, December 10). Leading human rights experts call for overdue implementation of the UN Bangkok Rules a decade after they were adopted. ↩︎
Quaker Council for European Affairs. (2007). Women in prison: A review of the conditions in member states of the Council of Europe. ↩︎
Women’s Budget Group. (2020, October). The case for sustainable funding for women’s centres. ↩︎

1 April 202517 April 2025

Normalisation as a Mirror: What Prisons Reveal About Society

Welcome to Let’s Talk RESCALED, the podcast where we dive deep into the heart of justice reform. Hosted by Noa Shoshan and brought to you by RESCALED, a European Movement dedicated to reshaping our approach to incarceration.

In our third episode, host Noa Shoshan engages in an insightful conversation with Helene de Vos, Executive Director of RESCALED and former prison researcher at the Leuven Institute of Criminology.

During this episode, we explore the principle of normalization in prison systems, comparing Norwegian and Belgian approaches to detention. Our guest shares valuable insights from her doctoral research on the normalization principle, detailing how smaller-scale facilities like Norway’s Leira prison create environments and initiatives that better prepare individuals for life after release.

Discover how normalized detention settings impact both incarcerated individuals and staff, and learn about the challenges and opportunities in implementing these approaches across different cultural contexts. This conversation highlights how prison conditions reflect broader societal values and why system change requires looking both inside detention facilities and at the society that shapes them.

“When you bring in living conditions from outside, like customers coming to the garden center, you’re not artificially normalizing these interactions, they are normal. These are real, normal situations which are really important in life after release.” – Helene de Vos

20 March 20255 June 2025

RESIZE – Reshaping Correctional Competencies through RESCALED Innovation

For current and future workforce adaptation based on profiles of competencies, recognition of prior learning, micro-credentialing and certification, following correctional systemic changes in Europe.

The “RESIZE” project—Reshaping Correctional Competencies through RESCALED Innovation—is an innovative European partnership designed to address the evolving needs of the staff within the correctional ecosystem. Running from 2025 to 2029 and led by CPIP Romania, RESIZE builds upon the LiberateSkill Pact for Skills. The project will focus on upskilling correctional professionals to navigate and adapt to ongoing systemic changes across Europe. This will be achieved through micro-credentialing, certification, and the recognition of prior learning, ensuring a more dynamic approach to staff development.

The project focuses on small-scale, community-integrated detention houses that align with the RESCALED concept striving to enhance correctional standards and practices. As one of only eight Blueprint Alliances selected by the EU, RESIZE emphasizes a more humane and effective approach to detention, promoting integrated detention houses that prioritize both reintegration and community integration.

With the active collaboration of 24 partner organizations, RESIZE is set to drive transformative change in the future of detention across Europe.

Objectives

The RESIZE project is designed to address the evolving needs of correctional professionals in response to the transition towards small-scale detention houses and a broader shift towards a focus on reintegration and reform. This shift directly impacts the reskilling and upskilling of correctional staff in several key areas:

Focus on rehabilitation techniques: As the correctional system places greater emphasis on reintegration and social integration, there is an increasing demand for staff skilled in counseling, social work, and reintegration techniques. This requires the reskilling of current employees and the upskilling of new hires to effectively engage with incarcerated people in programs that support their successful reintegration into society.

Community-integration: Small-scale detention houses emphasize community integration and support systems as part of the reintegration process. Correctional staff working in these settings require training in community engagement, outreach, and collaboration with external stakeholders such as social services, educational institutions, and local community organizations. Reskilling programs can provide staff with the necessary competencies to foster positive relationships with community partners and facilitate successful offender reintegration.

Interdisciplinary collaboration: The shift towards rehabilitation-oriented correctional practices underscores the importance of interdisciplinary collaboration within the workforce. Correctional staff need to work closely with professionals from diverse fields, including mental health specialists, substance abuse counselors, educators, and social workers, to address the complex needs of incarcerated people. Reskilling initiatives can promote cross-disciplinary training and teamwork, enabling staff to effectively collaborate with colleagues from different backgrounds and expertise areas.

Adoption of innovative practices: As detention houses embrace innovative approaches to incarceration, such as restorative justice, trauma-informed care, and cognitive-behavioral therapy, correctional staff must be equipped with the knowledge and skills to implement these practices effectively. Reskilling programs can introduce staff to evidence-based interventions and provide training in their implementation, ensuring that they are equipped to support the rehabilitation and well-being of incarcerated people.

Work packages

To achieve these objectives, RESIZE is organized into five structured work packages (WPs):

Workpackage 1: Management and coordination of the project, ensuring effective dissemination, quality assurance, and evaluation of project outputs.
Workpackage 2: Conducting a comprehensive needs assessment to identify the skills gaps and training requirements within the correctional workforce.
Workpackage 3: Development of a European Qualification Map and Correctional Core Competencies Curricula, providing a standardized framework for training programs.
Workpackage 4: Delivery of Core Curricula and training programs, emphasizing a lifelong learning continuum and specialized tracks within Centers of Vocational Excellence (CoVEs).
Workpackage 5: Designing a Long-Term Action Plan for sustainable workforce development, visibility, and dissemination. This includes the establishment of Regional Pacts for Skills, a European Correctional Competencies Observatory, a Micro-credentialing Catalogue, and policy proposals for implementing Recognition, Validation, and Accreditation (RVA).

RESIZE represents a significant step forward in reshaping correctional training, ensuring that correctional professionals across Europe are equipped to work within a modern, rehabilitation-focused detention system.

Results

The project aims to implement regional Pacts for Skills and develop high-quality curricula to enhance the competencies of both current and future staff within the ecosystem of correctional facilities. This will ensure that staff are equipped with the necessary skills to effectively engage in changing correctional practices, support community-based detention models and address the complex needs of incarcerated people.

Consortium of Partners

Romania: Centrul Pentru Promovarea Invatarii Permanente (CPIP) (Project leader), Penitenciarul Timisoara, Penitenciarul Gherla, Greece: The Greek federation of Correctional Officers (OSYE), Athens Lifelong Learning Institute, Odyssea AMKE, Panepistimio Aigaiou (University of the Aegean) Slovenia: CIK TREBNJE SI Spain: Universidad de Valladolid, Qualificalia Analytics, S.L. Denmark: BrainLog, Danish Prison Union Albania: Luarasi University, Shërbimi i Kontrollit të Brendshëm në Sistemin e Burgjeve Austria: Richtungswechsel Croatia: Ustanova za Obrazovanje Odraslih Dante Italy: Centro Internazionale per la Promozione dell’Educazione e lo Sviluppo (CEIPES), Centro Studi – Opera Don Calabria, Germany: Interchange Non-Profit (GUG) North Macedonia: Stabilitas Skopje Portugal: Aproximar – Cooperativa de Solidariedade Social Bosnia and Herzegovina: Univerzitet u Istocnom Sarajevu, Switzerland: United Nations Institute for Training and Research (UNITAR) Belgium: RESCALED

Funded by the European Union. Views and opinions expressed are however those of the author(s) only and do not necessarily reflect those of the European Union or the European Education and Culture Executive Agency (EACEA). Neither the European Union nor EACEA can be held responsible for them.

8 March 20255 June 2025

WOMEN: The Workspace for Mapping, Engaging, and Networking with, for, and by Incarcerated Women

The Workspace for Mapping, Engaging, and Networking with, for, and by Incarcerated Women (WOMEN) project addresses the unique challenges faced by incarcerated women in Europe. Despite making up only 6.1% of the prison population¹, women in detention often experience greater vulnerability due to past trauma, caregiving responsibilities, and limited access to rehabilitation programs.

Recognizing this issue, the Committee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality presented a Motion for a European Parliament Resolution in 2008, emphasizing that women’s incarceration reflects their broader societal position. The resolution argued that prisons are “essentially designed, built and run by men for men”, failing to accommodate the specific needs of incarcerated women.

To bridge this gap, the WOMEN project promotes a paradigm shift from large-scale prisons to detention houses, which are small-scale, differentiated and community-integrated facilities that better support women’s lives during and after detention. The initiative aims to develop expertise in working with incarcerated women and facilitate knowledge-sharing across Europe.

To achieve this, the project will adopt a Human-Centered Design approach and incorporate multiple perspectives for an in-depth understanding of incarcerated women’s diversity and their needs. Through (online) workshops and visits to best practices, WOMEN aims to enable discussions and exchanges between professionals, academics, policymakers, and individuals with lived experience. This know-how will contribute to and be disseminated by various RESCALED Knowledge Workspaces.

The WOMEN project, funded by Erasmus+, is a transnational collaboration involving three core teams from different countries. These include RESCALED, a European movement based in Belgium focused on the implementation of detention houses, Rubikon Center, a Czech NGO that helps individuals move beyond their criminal past, and Silta, a Finnish non-profit organization dedicated to increasing societal equality, participation, and welfare. With the support of Erasmus+, these organizations aim to improve conditions for incarcerated women and enhance their opportunities for maintaining integration with society.

World Female Imprisonment List 6th ed. ↩︎

20 February 202517 April 2025

Amsterdam Southeast – Evolving towards a Restorative District

Welcome to Let’s Talk RESCALED, the podcast where we dive deep into the heart of justice reform. Hosted by Noa Shoshan and brought to you by RESCALED, a European Movement dedicated to reshaping our approach to incarceration.

In our second episode, host Noa Shoshan engages in an inspiring conversation with two changemakers from the Netherlands: Gert Jan Slump, criminologist and co-founder of Restorative Justice Netherlands, and Tanja Jadnanansing, Chair of the Executive Board for Amsterdam Zuidoost/ Amsterdam South East.

During this second episode we discover how Amsterdam South East is embracing restorative justice principles and community-centered approaches to create positive change. Our guests share personal insights about their collaboration and vision for justice reform, including their view on detention houses as alternative to large scale prisons.

💡 Discover how concepts like “Love and Law” are reshaping community responses to justice, and learn about practical examples of restorative practices in action. This conversation highlights how local communities can lead the way in developing more humane and effective approaches to conflict, justice and incarceration.

“We want this togetherness. We want people to live together, but we know that when people come together, there will be challenging events. So we are not closing our eyes to that.” – Tanja Jadnanansing

Thank you for tuning in at Let’s Talk RESCALED!

This episode is part of the INSPIRE project, funded by Erasmus+. Through the INSPIRE project, Restorative Justice Nederland aims to refine the concept of a restorative city by identifying key principles, such as dialogue, community involvement, democracy and horizontal relationships, and urban design. In addition, the role of small-scale detention within a restorative city is explored.

21 January 202517 April 2025

Introducing RESCALED: A Movement for Justice Reform

RESCALED team leading the European movement for justice reform through small-scale, community-based detention houses

In this first episode, you’ll learn more about the RESCALED movement—its mission, values, and vision for a justice system that fosters dignity, safety, and inclusion. Learn about the core principles of detention houses: small-scale, differentiation, and community integration, and why they are essential to creating a more humane and effective approach to liberty deprivation.

Discover the origins of RESCALED, its rapid growth across 17 countries, and the systemic change we advocate. Explore how detention houses strengthen the social fabric, address systemic inequities, and foster reintegration into society.

This episode sets the foundation for a series of thought-provoking discussions with policymakers, practitioners, and advocates who are driving transformative change in justice systems across Europe and beyond. Tune in to learn how we can reshape justice together.

3 June 202216 July 2024

RESCALED from an International Human Rights Law perspective

Graduated with a Master’s degree in International Humanitarian Law and International Human Rights Law (IHRL), my first encounter with prisons’ issues were mostly through a legal prism. My first experience with the detention environment took place during an internship in a human rights organisation in Lomé (Togo). Here, I carried out monitoring activities in detention with the aim of submitting an alternative report to the United Nations human rights bodies on the issues of the carceral system in the country. Afterwards, I continued to study the provisions of the IHRL regarding detention through my academic and professional experiences.

Currently I am working as assistant coordinator of RESCALED in France. In this respect, taking my background knowledge into account, it is interesting to question in what way RESCALED is relevant from an IHRL point of view.

1. Prisons and human rights: Key principles of the IHRL

First, I will recall the main principles of the IHRL regarding detention.

Some International and Regional Human Rights norms are specifically focused on the treatment of incarcerated persons and others include references to this. Although deprivation of liberty is allowed under the IHRL, it must be carried out in a humane and dignity-respecting manner.[1] Persons deprived of their liberty continue to have their fundamental rights, without other restrictions than those inherent to detention.[2] Consequently, incarcerated persons may not be subjected to inhumane and degrading treatment. The European Court of Human Rights, like other human rights bodies, has qualified the conditions of detention as inhumane and degrading in several cases.[3] This qualification is based on the size of the individual space, access to walks and activities, privacy, access to natural light, ventilation and hygiene, amongst other things.[4] In addition, other rights that are guaranteed by international texts, such as the right to privacy and family,[5] freedom of religion,[6] the right to vote,[7] the right to health,[8] etc. also apply to incarcerated persons.

2. RESCALED in the light of the IHRL: Pillars in compliance with human rights

The majority of prison systems face problems, such as overcrowding, characteristics of facilities and difficulties in accessing care and activities, that prevent prisons from meeting these IHRL standards.

By proposing a new model for places of deprivation of liberty, RESCALED offers an alternative that can be compliant with the requirements of the IHRL: replacing the current large prison institutions by small-scale, community-integrated and differentiated detention houses.

2.1 Small-scale – Normalization

First of all, with the principle of a small-scale house instead of a large prison institution, RESCALED aims to normalize the conditions of detention, i.e. to create a place of deprivation of liberty in which the conditions of life resemble as closely as possible those of life in freedom.[9] Normalizing detention conditions is in accordance with international principles on detention. The European Prison Rules state that “life in prison shall approximate as closely as possible the positive aspects of life in the community“,[10] and the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners (hereafter referred to as the Nelson Mandela Rules) state that “the prison regime should seek to minimize any differences between prison life and life at liberty“.[11]

2.2 Community integration

Second, the detention house should be community-integrated, which creates a dynamic interaction between the detention house and the community and thus facilitates the reintegration into society. This is in line with international texts which indicate that the treatment of persons should aim primarily at the reintegration,[12] reformation and social rehabilitation of incarcerated persons.[13] In particular by “establish[ing] in them the will to lead law-abiding and self-supporting lives after their release and to fit them to do so [and] encourag[ing] their self-respect and develop their sense of responsibility”.[14]

The community integration of detention houses, that RESCALED proposes, echoes international provisions. These state that prisons should encourage incarcerated persons to establish or strengthen relationships with external persons and organisations that can assist their reintegration and that “co-operation with outside social services and as far as possible the involvement of civil society in prison life shall be encouraged”. More specifically, prison systems are encouraged to strengthen or establish links with public health services to enable continuity of care and access to the same standard of care. By giving incarcerated persons a role in the community and having them interact with the community, RESCALED adheres to these principles of international law and even seeks to go further.

2.3 Differentiation

By differentiation of detention houses RESCALED aims to place incarcerated persons in the best context according to their needs. Namely providing the right security level and offering services, activities and programs that fit the needs of the residents.

The Nelson Mandela Rules provide that incarcerated persons should be placed in groups to ensure that they are treated according to their abilities and needs with a view to their social reintegration.[15] Detention houses, given their small scale and the differentiation of the programmes they offer, therefore make it possible to meet these requirements in a comprehensive manner.

Differentiation, according to the security level and the introduction of dynamic security, also meets the requirements of the Nelson Mandela Rules, which state that detention facilities should not provide the same level of security for all incarcerated persons and should have varying degrees of security according to the needs of different groups.[16] By offering a level of security that is appropriate to the risks posed by individuals, detention houses seek to balance security, humane treatment and preparation for release and therefore propose to implement the principles set out in the above rules.

3. The IHRL to change the detention framework?

In conclusion, RESCALED, through the three pillars of a detention house, suggests a model that seems to meet the requirements of the IHRL and seems to be likely providing solutions to the violations of fundamental rights witnessed in detention today.

Furthermore, the inscription of RESCALED in these legal principles could lead to thinking of the IHRL as a means to change the framework of penitentiary systems. While international law can be seen as relatively indeterminate and allowing interpretations of norms and concepts,[17] it is still marked by balances of power in favour of the interests of some actors over others.[18] It is therefore possible to question whether IHRL has the potential to be a means of changing the framework of penitentiary systems or whether it is rather a tool to identify and respond to problems without changing this framework.

In this respect, it seems interesting to broaden the reflections on detention, on its being, functions, place in society, etc. Because of the interdisciplinary approach of RESCALED, we question those aspects and shine a new light on detention.

[1] See for example: Article 10 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).

[2] See for example: Human Rights Council, resolution 24/12, 26 September 2013. European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), Campbell and Fell v. UK, n°7819/77 and 7878/77, 1984.

[3] See for example: ECHR, J.M.B. and others v. France, n°9671/15 and others, 2020. Human Rights Committee, Brown v. Jamaica, 775/1997, § 6.13.

[4] See for example: ECHR, Muršić v. Croatia, n°7334/13, 2016. ECHR, Cucolas v. Roumania, n°17044/03, 2011.

[5] Article 8, European Convention on Human Rights. Article 17, ICCPR.

[6] Article 9, ECHR. Article 18, ICCPR.

[7] Article 3, 1st Additional Protocol to the ECHR. Article 25, ICCPR.

[8] Article 12, International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.

[9] Dan Kaminski, “Droits des détenus, normalisation et moindre éligibilité”, Criminologie, vol 43, n°1, spring-summer 2010.

[10] Rule 5, European Prison Rules.

[11] Rule 5.1, United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners

[12] Rule 4.1, United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners

[13] Article 10.3, ICCPR

[14] Rule 91, United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners

[15] Rule 93 and 94, United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners

[16] Rule 89.2, United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners

[17] Martti Koskenniemi, “From Apology to Utopia – The structure of international legal argument”, Epilogue, 2005

[18] Rémi Bachand, “Les quatres strates du droit international analysées du point de vue des subalternes”, Revue Québécoise du droit international, 2011.

Category: Geen categorie