Extended use of electronic tagging in Sweden
The offenders' and the victims' view. English summary of Brå report 2007:1
The purpose of this report on receivers of stolen goods is to launch a supplementary strategy to combat theft crime. By focusing additional efforts on the receivers and the criminal markets for stolen goods, theft crime can be fought from one more perspective.
Related content

About the publication
- Author
- Other information
- © Brottsförebyggande rådet 2007
- urn:nbn:se:bra-267
- Report 2007:3
About the study
With the purpose of finding credible alternatives to shorter prison sentences, intensive supervision with electronic monitoring (EM) was introduced in Sweden in 1994. The pilot scheme was made permanent in 1999, and meant that prison sentences of up to three months could be replaced by wearing an electronic ankle bracelet at home. One of the motivations behind EM was to create alternatives to prison that could satisfy criminal justice requirements, without consuming the resources or producing the negative effects on individuals associated with imprisonment. A pilot scheme for long-term offenders was launched in 2001, where offenders serving a sentence of two years or more could complete a maximum of four months at the end of their prison sentence on EM Release (intensive supervision with electronic monitoring) as a lead up to their final release. The purpose of the pilot was to ease the transition from prison back into the community, to provide opportunities for rehabilitation and to prevent further offences subsequent to release.
The Swedish Government has assigned Brå the task of evaluating both EM and EM Release, and the results have been positive in several respects (Brå, 1999, 2003, 2004 and 2005). The evaluations show that only a few clients placed on EM or EM Release were recalled because of breaches of programme conditions. Both clients and family members are predominantly positive, and neither EM nor EM Release has been shown to increase the proportion of re-offenders. EM Release has also had positive effects on re-offending levels amongst older offenders. The follow-up period for the re-offending study was short, however, and a longer-term study is required. The results of a follow-up study six months after release also indicated improvements in the subjects’ home and employment situations.