It is often noted that England and Wales have more people in jail per head of population than the rest of Europe. The implication is that judges and magistrates are keen on the rather barbaric instrument of prison when everyone else in Europe prefers a more gentle approach.

But a closer look at the figures suggests a different interpretation. The proper comparison is not between the number of prison inmates and the total population, but between the number of prisoners and the volume of crime. A country with a high level of crime would expect to have to put more people in jail. And England and Wales have one of the highest crime rates among industrialised countries.

Click here for a table showing the rate of imprisonment in the EU in 2003.

Click here for a table showing the rate of imprisonment in the EU in 2001.

Click here for a table showing the rate of imprisonment in the EU in 2000.

In the EU the average number of prisoners per 100,000 population (unweighted) in 2003 was 98, compared with 139 in England and Wales. But if we compare the number of prisoners to the number of recorded crimes, the EU average was 17.5 and the figure for England and Wales was 12.4. In fact, 8 out of 15 EU countries had rates of imprisonment for every 1,000 crimes that were higher. Scotland also has a higher rate, 13.6 per 1,000 crimes.

What would the prison population be if we imprisoned at the rate of other EU countries?

On this evidence prison in England and Wales is under-used. But does overseas experience suggest that greater use of prison would reduce crime? The best available evidence compares England and Wales with the United States.