Sustainable Prisons or Sustaining Prisons: A Systematic Review Evaluating Green Prison Initiatives

Introduction

As global discussions on climate change and sustainability continue to influence institutional policies, carceral systems have also felt the impact of these evolving priorities. There has been a growing push for greening carceral infrastructure by reducing their carbon footprint, integrating renewable and clean energy sources, and offering green-collar trainings to incarcerated individuals in an effort to reduce recidivism. Existing literature on these initiatives remains divided between those that highlight the potential benefits of green prison initiatives and those that are critical of these initiatives. The purpose of this systematic review is to explore how green prison initiatives are reshaping the prison industrial complex and what this means for those incarcerated within it. This review aims to inform policy and practice on the potential and pitfalls of pursuing sustainability within carceral systems.

Methods

The search strategy followed PRISMA guidelines. The included studies assessed grey literature and empirical studies that focused on making prison infrastructure sustainable and providing green collar trainings to incarcerated individuals and were published in English from 1998-2025. The initial search of seven wide-reaching databases yielded 2,542 records from peer-reviewed literature. These articles were uploaded to Covidence for screening. Of these, 686 duplicate records were removed. The remaining 1,856 records were screened at the first level for titles and abstracts and 1489 records were removed. Finally, 367 records were full text reviewed at the second level and 329 records were excluded. Ultimately, 38 records were included representing studies conducted in six countries. Four authors used a data extraction form to generate summary table which recorded the aims of intervention, study sample, study design, rationale and description of the intervention and outcomes.

Results

Findings from this review indicates that green prison initiatives primarily focus on two areas: sustainable prison infrastructure and green-collar training programs for incarcerated individuals. Sustainable infrastructure efforts include the use of renewable energy, waste reduction, and eco-friendly building materials. Green-collar training programs offer skills in gardening, horticulture, and environmental conservation, often framed as tools for rehabilitation and reducing recidivism. However, these studies rarely document the long-term impact of these programs on incarcerated individuals’ post-release outcomes. Participation remains limited to a very small group of prisoners, raising concerns about equity and access. Moreover, although participation is officially voluntary, it may be shaped by prison authorities' perceptions of “deserving” inmates.

Conclusion

This review highlights the growing global interest in greening carceral systems, yet it also reveals significant gaps and contradictions in how these initiatives operate. While green infrastructure and training programs are promoted as rehabilitative and environmentally conscious, their limited reach, lack of long-term evaluation, and potential to reinforce existing hierarchies within prisons raise critical concerns. These initiatives often obscure rather than challenge the structural violence of incarceration. These initiatives mask systemic harms and reinforce the prison industrial complex, framing environmental responsibility without addressing decarceration. Future scholarship must interrogate how environmental justice can be pursued without legitimizing carceral expansion or compromising abolitionist goals.