THE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR PENAL LAW QUESTIONS THE EFFECTIVENESS OF DEPRIVATION OF LIBERTY AS A MEANS FOR THE ATTAINMENT OF THE PREVENTATIVE AND PROPHYLACTIC GOALS OF CRIMINAL LAW, BUT CONCLUDES THAT IMPRISONMENT MUST BE RETAINED AS A COERCIVE MEASURE OF SOCIAL CONTROL. NEW FORMS OF CRIMINALITY ARE NOT BELIEVED TO BE SIGNIFICANT ENOUGH TO MERIT NEW OR DRASTICALLY DIFFERENT EFFORTS AT CONTROL. THE INTERNATIONAL PENAL AND PENITENTIARY FOUNDATION REGARDS DEPRIVATION OF LIBERTY AS EFFECTIVE AND JUSTIFIABLE IN FURTHERING THE PUNITIVE BUT NOT THE TREATMENT PHILOSOPHIES OF CORRECTIONS. THE INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY FOR CRIMINOLOGY ALSO VIEWS IMPRISONMENT AS INADEQUATE BUT NECESSARY. BASIC REFORMS ARE SUGGESTED, INCLUDING SHORTER SENTENCES, ABOLISHING INDETERMINATE SENTENCES, AND SPECIAL SENTENCES FOR OFFENDERS WHO PRESENT PATHOLOGICAL OR PSYCHIATRIC DANGERS TO SOCIETY. THE INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY OF SOCIAL DEFENCE REPORT CALLS FOR LESS RECOURSE TO DEPRIVATION OF LIBERTY IN CRIMINAL SENTENCES, EXCEPT WHERE CONSIDERATION OF PUBLIC SAFETY DEMANDS CONFINEMENT. THERE IS GENERAL AGREEMENT AMONG THESE ORGANIZATIONS THAT NEW CRIME FORMS HAVE EVOLVED UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF FACTORS WHICH ARE LITTLE AFFECTED BY PENAL MEASURES. HERE, TOO, NEW RESEARCH ON CRIME DETERRENCE IS NEEDED.