Wiep Fokker is part of the Restorative Justice team of the Netherlands and currently works on the sustainability part of Small Scaled Detention Houses. She is doing her Bachelor’s in Communication & Life Sciences in Wageningen and she has a minor in Natural Resources Conflict and Governance.

In addition to her work for the WISH-EU project, Wiep is co-founder of the Dutch organisation Plantje Voor Morgen, which focuses on making Dutch prisons more sustainable by offering programs on gardening and increasing the amount of greenspace within detention facilities.

RESCALED challenges the concept of ‘prison’ and proposes the concept of ‘detention houses’ instead. Detention houses are small-scale, differentiated and community-integrated. Thanks to these three principles, detention houses contribute to sustainable, safe and inclusive societies.

Sustainability is referring to a future-oriented approach: socially, economically and environmentally.Sustainability is often divided into three dimensions by means of the 3 P’s: people, planet and prosperity. Within these three dimensions, a distinction can be made between micro (local, regional), meso (national) and macro (international) levels. The application of sustainability can also be described for detention houses on the basis of these nine levels in total.

Within the dimension people, a sustainable detention house contributes to the health and future prospects of people in detention. At a micro level, this concerns the impact of policy and its implementation on the mental and physical health of both people living and working in detention houses. After all, what consequences do the living environment and daytime activities have on someone’s health? Recent research has shown that brain functions change in people who are in prison and that the human brain even deteriorates[1] [VA|R2]. Implementing greenspace within the living environment can offer (part of) the solution. Practical applications of greening the living environment and methods used in daytime projects can have positive effects on the health of individuals in detention houses.

Within this dimension, at a meso-level, national regulations are central. Within which frameworks could these regulations be adapted, in order to let them be in line with the good mental and physical health of individuals in detention houses? What is the best way to organize and manage this at the international level in order to guarantee a tailor-made approach? In addition, it should be ensured that forces are joined at the national level to offer people in detention houses as many opportunities as possible to have their place in society. Which parties can contribute to this and how can we create a healthy working environment for the people working there?

Finally, the dimension of people should also be approached on a macro level. The Sustainable Development Goals, drawn up by the UN, offer good tools for making sustainable impact concrete and tangible. And how can the Declaration of Human Rights, also drawn up by the UN, play a role in ensuring a healthy living environment in detention? Long-term solutions with (social) impact on a European scale can be established at this level. More specifically, what can the European Union do alongside the European Prison Rules when it comes to legislation, regulations and policy for small scale forms of detention?

The dimension planet concerns the impact of detention houses on the ecological environment. At the local and regional level (micro level), this means that an organization must work within so-called ‘planetary boundaries’ in order to limit negative impact on biodiversity and the climate. How can detention houses and their environment contribute to ‘greener’ energy supplies, lower CO2 emissions and an increase in local biodiversity? Furthermore, consumption and production in detention houses should be reconsidered, in order to lower the ecological footprint of institutions. How about vegetarian meals or vegetable gardens that are free of pesticides, for example?

To ensure effects at a larger scale, frameworks or rules are needed at a meso level. Consider, for example, the laws and regulations that determine how government institutions must contribute to achieving national and international sustainability goals. Is attention being paid to implementing a CO2-neutral energy supply at a national level? At the moment, there are too few investments from the government in sustainable buildings and there even seems to be a mismatch between policy and practice. The Dutch Custodial Service (Dienst Justiele Inrichtingen) report from 2022 on their climate footprint shows that real estate and transport are the largest components that contribute to the fact that they do not achieve the objectives of the Climate Agreement. Which adjustments at the national level would contribute to a positive impact on the environment in the long term?

Finally, a European approach (macro level) to ecological sustainability can offer concrete tools to support countries or regions that want to make a positive impact on the (living) environment with their small scale forms of detention. After all, European ambitions to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals provide guidelines for organizations and ministries to improve their impact on the (in)direct living environment. European laws and regulations can determine the course of judicial authorities when it comes to energy supply, sustainable consumption and production, and impact on ecosystems. It is interesting to investigate how countries can cooperate in this and how the private and public sectors can support each other in this.

Lastly, within the dimension of prosperity, a sustainable detention house contributes to safeguarding its working method and ensuring impact in the long term. At the local and regional level (micro level), this means an adaptive working method that includes local collaborations and solutions. Local parties often have the best insight into problems and structural solutions that have a positive impact on the living environment around the relevant custodial institution. Maintaining contact with and staying involved with society generally has positive effects on the recovery and future prospects of people in detention. At the national level (meso level), prosperity is about how these local collaborations can be organized. Are these temporary pilots or structural projects with lasting impact? An adaptive approach is also important here.

As far as prosperity is concerned, consideration should be given to how global guidelines and rules for small scale forms of detention can generate a positive impact on people and the environment in the long term at the European level. In collaborations between governments (local, national and international) and private parties, the working method and its long-term impact on people and the environment should always be taken into account. Moreover, Europes Rules for small scale forms of detention could be drawn up that makes it possible to monitor this impact regularly and adjust it where necessary. Finally, it is important to link the plans for sustainable detention houses to economic plans of ‘macro players’ such as the UN and the World Economic Forum.