Relational dynamics and prison climate in Serbia: Insights from an under-studied European context

Background Relational and moral dimensions of prison life are widely recognised as important components of prisoners’ well-being and institutional functioning. However, fewer studies have examined the relative contribution of staff–prisoner and peer relationships to overall prison climate, particularly whether these associations ‘travel’ beyond Western contexts to understudied prison systems such as Serbia. This study investigates how these relational dynamics relate to prisoners’ overall evaluations of prison climate within the five largest prisons in Serbia, while accounting for individual and institutional factors. Methods A cross-sectional survey included 577 prisoners (86% males, average age 39.9 years) using the Measuring the Quality of Prison Life (MQPL) survey. Most participants (75%) were held under a closed regime and had been incarcerated for more than 1 year (73%). While over half (52%) had non-violent offences, 39 percent had received at least one disciplinary measure. Hierarchical regression analyses were used to examine the predictive value of two MQPL dimensions (staff–prisoner and prisoner–prisoner relationships) on prisoners’ overall evaluation of the prison climate, controlling for individual-level characteristics, institutional conditions and prison-fixed effects. Results Hierarchical regression showed that adding relational dimensions increased the explained variance in prison climate from 23 to 51 percent. Staff–prisoner relationships were the strongest predictor (β = .56), while peer interactions (β = .09), regime type, and lockdown had smaller effects. Climate was rated moderately positive. Functional day-to-day staff interactions coexisted with low institutional trust and signs of social withdrawal among peers. Conclusions The findings suggest that prison climate theory is portable beyond Western contexts. Relational dimensions, particularly staff–prisoner relationships, retain strong associations with climate evaluations in Serbia even after accounting for structural and institutional factors. However, regime conditions and routine restrictions remain relevant boundary conditions. The Serbian case further indicates that institutional order may coexist with low trust, distinguishing functional authority from trust-based legitimacy.