April 8, 2026
The Historical Incarceration Penalty in the United States
Ellora Derenoncourt
Asst. Professor of Economics at Princeton University and a member of the Industrial Relations Section of Princeton Economics
Ellora Derenoncourt and Hank Farber, introducer
Minutes of the 26th Meeting of the 84th Year
President George Bustin called the meeting to order. Francis Slade led the invocation. Patti Daley introduced her guest, Jeanette Rizk, executive director of Work Well Partnerships, a program for men and women returning from incarceration. Mary Breen introduced her guest, Steve Bogad, a lifelong educator. Julie Denny introduced her guest, John Clark, retired from selling commercial machinery to airlines and car manufacturers.
George Bustin announced that there will be a memorial service for Jim Hockenberry on Saturday, April 11 at the Nassau Presbyterian Church at 1 P.M. George also called for a moment of silence.
Julie Elward-Berry read the minutes of the last meeting, a presentation by Karen Elliot House about The Transformation of Saudi Arabia.
Attendance was 101.
The Historical Incarceration Penalty in the United States was the title of a talk by Ellora Derenoncourt, Assistant Professor of Economics at Princeton University and member of the Industrial Relations Section of Princeton Economics.
During the rise of incarceration in the 1970s and 1980s, social scientists became concerned with the prospects of generations of men that were returning from US prisons. Professor Derenoncourt stated that the United States has had both the largest prison population and the highest incarceration rate, except for apartheid South Africa.
Professor Derenoncourt set out to find the reasons by way of a study that was the joint work with Desmond Ang at Harvard University and two graduate students at Princeton, Kyle Hancock and Jing Wu.
Graphs and slides showed that long-run rates of incarceration rose from 50 per 100,000 (1870) to 250 per 100,000 (1940) and 500-600 per 100,000 (today).
Professor Derenoncourt used several methodologies to analyze the historical incarceration penalties.
The data linkage study involved linking census data and state prison records to track individuals over time. By identifying and connecting historical inmates with non-incarcerated individuals across various census data sets, the researchers could assess differences in socioeconomic outcomes.
Cohort analysis documented the incarceration penalty over time across different cohorts of young men. This allowed the study to observe changes in penalties from the late 19th century to the early 20th century.
Professor Derenoncourt discussed the socioeconomic penalties associated with incarceration, particularly focusing on the historical context from 1880 to 1940. The term “incarceration penalty” describes the gap in socioeconomic outcomes between formerly incarcerated individuals and those who have never been incarcerated. Her findings indicated that incarceration led to significant socioeconomic disadvantages, estimating a penalty in occupation-based income of about 5 to 15 percent with larger penalties observed in later years, reaching about 25 percent in 1940.
The research emphasized that these penalties were not fully explained by family backgrounds and socioeconomic status, as controlling for these factors still revealed substantial gaps. Derenoncourt performed trajectory analyses that demonstrated that an individual’s labor market trajectories did not significantly differ prior to incarceration, but diverged after release, highlighting the long-term negative effects of imprisonment.
Moreover, the penalties based on demographics were more severe for individuals perceived to have “more to lose,” such as white men and older individuals, and were markedly pronounced in regions with a manufacturing focus. The study also uncovered that individuals who were incarcerated were less likely to be gainfully employed, to receive higher salaries, to own homes, or to live in affluent neighborhoods. There was also a notable reduction in the likelihood of formerly incarcerated individuals to remain in their state of birth, suggesting migration in search of better opportunities became a common strategy following incarceration but failed to eliminate the stigma attached to their criminal history.
Overall, Professor Derenoncourt’s presentation underscored the significant impact and lasting socioeconomic impact of incarceration, calling attention to the need for further understanding of these dynamics across different demographics and historical contexts.
Respectfully submitted,
Albert Stark
George Bustin announced that there will be a memorial service for Jim Hockenberry on Saturday, April 11 at the Nassau Presbyterian Church at 1 P.M. George also called for a moment of silence.
Julie Elward-Berry read the minutes of the last meeting, a presentation by Karen Elliot House about The Transformation of Saudi Arabia.
Attendance was 101.
The Historical Incarceration Penalty in the United States was the title of a talk by Ellora Derenoncourt, Assistant Professor of Economics at Princeton University and member of the Industrial Relations Section of Princeton Economics.
During the rise of incarceration in the 1970s and 1980s, social scientists became concerned with the prospects of generations of men that were returning from US prisons. Professor Derenoncourt stated that the United States has had both the largest prison population and the highest incarceration rate, except for apartheid South Africa.
Professor Derenoncourt set out to find the reasons by way of a study that was the joint work with Desmond Ang at Harvard University and two graduate students at Princeton, Kyle Hancock and Jing Wu.
Graphs and slides showed that long-run rates of incarceration rose from 50 per 100,000 (1870) to 250 per 100,000 (1940) and 500-600 per 100,000 (today).
Professor Derenoncourt used several methodologies to analyze the historical incarceration penalties.
The data linkage study involved linking census data and state prison records to track individuals over time. By identifying and connecting historical inmates with non-incarcerated individuals across various census data sets, the researchers could assess differences in socioeconomic outcomes.
Cohort analysis documented the incarceration penalty over time across different cohorts of young men. This allowed the study to observe changes in penalties from the late 19th century to the early 20th century.
Professor Derenoncourt discussed the socioeconomic penalties associated with incarceration, particularly focusing on the historical context from 1880 to 1940. The term “incarceration penalty” describes the gap in socioeconomic outcomes between formerly incarcerated individuals and those who have never been incarcerated. Her findings indicated that incarceration led to significant socioeconomic disadvantages, estimating a penalty in occupation-based income of about 5 to 15 percent with larger penalties observed in later years, reaching about 25 percent in 1940.
The research emphasized that these penalties were not fully explained by family backgrounds and socioeconomic status, as controlling for these factors still revealed substantial gaps. Derenoncourt performed trajectory analyses that demonstrated that an individual’s labor market trajectories did not significantly differ prior to incarceration, but diverged after release, highlighting the long-term negative effects of imprisonment.
Moreover, the penalties based on demographics were more severe for individuals perceived to have “more to lose,” such as white men and older individuals, and were markedly pronounced in regions with a manufacturing focus. The study also uncovered that individuals who were incarcerated were less likely to be gainfully employed, to receive higher salaries, to own homes, or to live in affluent neighborhoods. There was also a notable reduction in the likelihood of formerly incarcerated individuals to remain in their state of birth, suggesting migration in search of better opportunities became a common strategy following incarceration but failed to eliminate the stigma attached to their criminal history.
Overall, Professor Derenoncourt’s presentation underscored the significant impact and lasting socioeconomic impact of incarceration, calling attention to the need for further understanding of these dynamics across different demographics and historical contexts.
Respectfully submitted,
Albert Stark