Matthew C. Mahutga, Manjing Gao, and Sharon S. Oselin. (Forthcoming). “Global Value Chains and the Rate of Incarceration in Rich Democracies.” Socio-Economic Review.

Abstract
To explain increases in incarceration among rich democracies, we posit the expansion of global value chains (GVCs) through trade, and its interaction with national labor market institutions. GVCs increase incarceration rates through both “supply side” and “demand side” channels. Southern manufacturing imports embody asymmetrical bargaining arrangements between leading firms and their suppliers in the global South. These imports both disproportionately impact the economic fortunes of lower-skilled segments of society that populate carceral systems, and disembed these segments from the post-war social contract. The worldwide expansion of GVCs exacerbates these effects, as the growing number of capable Southern suppliers worsens the exchange conditions governing leading and supplying firms over time. However, domestic labor market institutions ameliorate this dynamic by limiting both the supply and demand side channels through which GVCs promote incarceration. Panel regression analyses including 22 rich democracies over the 54 year period from 1963 to 2017 are largely consistent with our intervention. Southern imports increase rates of incarceration, and these effects are stronger as GVCs entrench worldwide. GVCs have weaker effects in countries with high union density and strong wage-coordination. However, counterfactual histories suggest that GVCs are more important for observed increases in incarceration on average.

Gao, Manjing, Sharon S. Oselin, Matthew C. Mahutga. (Forthcoming). “Minority Threat and Social Context: Global Value Chains and the Carceral Effect of Ethnic Polarization in Rich Democracies.” Journal of Criminal Justice.

Abstract
Integrating minority threat theory with the political economy of globalization, this study theorizes and empirically tests how macrostructural changes via global value chains (GVCs) shape the carceral consequences of rising ethnic polarization in rich democracies. GVC integration should increase economic insecurity, activate and escalate latent racial and ethnic tensions, intensify dominant groups' perceptions of minority threat, and shift state strategies toward more punitive forms of social control. Thus, ethnic polarization should more strongly increase incarceration rates in countries more deeply integrated into GVCs. Using panel data from 20 countries and fixed-effects models, we examine how GVC integration moderates the relationship between within-country changes in ethnic polarization and incarceration rates. Our findings provide strong evidence that GVC integration amplifies the positive effect of ethnic polarization on incarceration. We conclude by reflecting on the broader implications of these findings for understanding the intersection of globalization, ethnic polarization, and incarceration.

Oselin, Sharon S., Justine Ross, Qingfang Wang, and Wei Kang. 2024. “Fair Chance Act Failures? Employers’ Hiring of People with Criminal Records.” Criminology & Public Policy 23: 361–390.

Abstract
We examine the efficacy of the California Fair Chance Act (CFCA) policy—legislative stipulations regarding employers’ hiring of individuals with criminal records—on practices and outcomes in two Southern California counties during 2021. We rely on survey and experiment data with 542 hiring decision makers to investigate employer and personal compliance with the CFCA, whether applicant appeals affect employers’ willingness to hire them, and heterogeneity in treatment effects across firms and industries. Close to 80% of hiring decision makers violate the CFCA by obtaining background information before they extend an offer, appeals have a minimal impact on hiring outcomes, and firm-level characteristics continue to shape hiring practices to some extent.

Oselin, Sharon S., Matthew C. Mahutga, and Humberto Flores*. 2023. “Day Reporting Centers and Recidivism: The Role of Social Support.” Criminal Justice and Behavior 50(10): 1526–1546.

Abstract
Day reporting centers (DRCs) are increasingly popular alternative to traditional forms of supervision. Yet, studies that describe a fairly common set of programs and services among DRCs produce conflicting results regarding their efficacy, suggesting that as yet unobserved characteristics of DRCs might explain their varying efficacy. This article relies on a mixed-methods analysis of DRCs. Using quasi-experimental regression techniques and a conservative control group to estimate the average treatment effect of DRC participation, we analyze recidivism outcomes (arrests and convictions) after a 2-year follow-up period. We then draw on qualitative interview data to reveal which aspects of the DRC programs’ clients identify as most important for successful re-entry. Our analysis suggests that DRCs reduce recidivism for participants by 10.8 (convictions) to 12.8 (arrests) percentage points. Our interview data suggest that high levels of social support from justice-involved DRC staff amplify the effects of programming to help explain this outcome.

*graduate student