When talking about crime and alternatives to incarceration, we often end up talking about particular instances of crime and what to do with that particular person. This framing causes us to miss systemic effects and solutions. Instead of talking about what we do with this
Concern would be on things like time horizons: many of the prevention and early intervention stuff is cost-effective, but the costs are now and the benefits are later. That doesn't work as well for elected officials thinking about the next election, or public pressure on crime today.
Big fan of this in general, and would point to orgs like WSIPP that pioneered some of this pragmatic reframing almost two decades ago. See., e.g., https://www.wsipp.wa.gov/ReportFile/952/Wsipp_Evidence-Based-Public-Policy-Options-to-Reduce-Future-Prison-Construction-Criminal-Justice-Costs-and-Crime-Rates_Full-Report.pdf
Concern would be on things like time horizons: many of the prevention and early intervention stuff is cost-effective, but the costs are now and the benefits are later. That doesn't work as well for elected officials thinking about the next election, or public pressure on crime today.