[Recommended]Securing communities: summaries of key literature on community policing Sarah Jenkins

Securing communities: summaries of key literature on community policing Sarah Jenkins October 2013 Securing communities: summaries of key literature on community policing Sarah Jenkins October…

Securing communities: summaries of key literature on community policing Sarah Jenkins
October 2013
Securing communities: summaries of key literature on community policing
Sarah Jenkins
October 2013
Shaping policy for development odi.org
About This document contains extended summaries of key background texts and readings from both academic and policy literatures which elucidate and debate the definitions, objectives, models and influencing factors of community policing in different contexts. There is an extensive literature on community policing and it was not possible to cover it all in these summaries. What is included here are key contributions to the literature that have been helpful in understanding the different manifestations of community policing around the world. The material is organised alphabetically.
Resources Alemika, E.E.O., and Chukwuma, I.C., 2004, The Poor and Informal Policing in Nigeria, The Centre for Law Enforcement Education (CLEEN), Lagos, Nigeria
Baker, B. 2002, ‘Living with non-state policing in South Africa: the issues and dilemmas’, Journal of Modern African Studies, Vol. 40, No. 1, pp. 29-53
Baker, B., 2008, ‘Community policing in Freetown, Sierra Leone: Foreign import or local solution?’, Journal of Intervention and Statebuilding, Vol. 2, No. 1, pp. 23-42
Brogden, M., 2005, ‘“Horses for Courses” and “Thin Blue Lines”: Community policing in transitional society’, Police Quarterly, Vol. 8, No. 1, pp. 64-98
Brogden, M., and Nijhar, P., 2005, Community Policing: National and international models and approaches, Willan Publishing, Cullompton
Cain, M., 2000, ‘Orientalism, Occidentalism and the Sociology of Crime’, British Journal of Criminology, Vol. 40, No. 2, pp. 239-260
Casey, J., 2010, ‘Implementing community policing in different countries and cultures’, Pakistan Journal of Criminology, Vol. 2, No. 4, pp. 55-70
Clegg, I., Hunt, R., and Whetton, J., 2000, Policy Guidance on Support to Developing Countries, Centre for Development Studies, University of Wales, Swansea
Davis, R. C., Henderson, N. J., and Merrick, C., 2003, ‘Community Policing: Variations on the Western model in the developing world’, Police Practice and Research, Vol. 4, No. 3, pp. 28-300
Dinnen, S., and Mcleod, A., 2009, ‘Policing Melanesia – international expectations and local realities’, Policing and Society, Vol. 19, No. 4, pp. 333-353
Ferreira, B. R., 1996, ‘The Use and Effectiveness of Community Policing in a Democracy’, in M. Pagon (ed), Policing in Central Europe: Comparing Firsthand knowledge with experience from the West, College of Peace and Security Studies, Ljubljana, Slovenia
Fruhling, H., 2007, ‘The impact of international models of policing in Latin America: the case of community policing’, Police Practice and Research, Vol. 8, No. 2, pp. 123-144
Grabosky, P., 2009, ‘Community Policing, East and West, North and South’, in P. Grabosky (ed), Community Policing and Peacekeeping, CRC Press, Bosta Ranton, FL, pp. 1-11
Groenwald, H., and Peake, G., 2004, ‘Police Reform through Community-Based Policing: Philosophy and Guidelines for Implementation’, Saferworld and International Police Academy, New York
Heald, S., 2009, ‘Reforming Community, Reclaiming the State: The Development of Sungusungu in Northern Tanzania’, in D. Wisler and I.D. Onwudiwe (eds), Community Policing: International patterns and comparative perspectives, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, pp. 57-79
Hills, A. 2007, ‘Police commissioners, presidents and the governance of security’, Journal of Modern African Studies, Vol. 45, No. 3, pp. 403-423
Hills, A., 2012, ‘Lost in Translation: Why Nigeria’s police don’t implement democratic reforms’, International Affairs, Vol. 88, No. 4, pp. 739-75z
Independent Commission for Policing for Northern Ireland, 1999, ‘A New Beginning: Policing in Northern Ireland’, Report of the Independent Commission on Policing for Northern Ireland, HMSO, UK
King Wa, L., 2009, ‘The Effect of Community Policing on Chinese Organised Crime: The Hong Kong case’, in P. Grabosky (ed), Community Policing and Peacekeeping, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, pp. 187-200
Kyed, H.M., 2009, ‘Community policing in post-war Mozambique’, Policing and Society, Vol. 19, No. 4, pp. 354-371
Marks, M., Shearing, C., and Wood, J., 2009, ‘A Thin or Thick Blue Line? Exploring alternative models for community policing and the police role in South Africa’, in P. Grabosky (ed), Community Policing and Peacekeeping, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, pp. 153-168
Mathias, G., Kendrick, D., Peake, G., and Groenwald, H., 2006, Philosophy and Principles of Community-based Policing, UNDP South Eastern and Eastern Europe Clearinghouse for the Control of Small Arms and Light Weapons (SEESAC), 3rd edition, Belgrade
Minaar, A., 2009, ‘Community policing in a high crime transitional state: the case of South Africa since democratisation in 1994’, in D. Wisler and I.D. Onwudiwe (eds), Community Policing: International patterns and comparative perspectives, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, pp. 19-56
Mouhanna, C., 2009, ‘The French Centralized Model of Policing: Control of the citizens’, in D. Wisler and I.D. Onwudiwe (eds), Community Policing: International patterns and comparative perspectives, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, pp. 103-123
OECD, 2005, Issues Brief: Introduction to security system reform, Development Assistance Committee (DAC) Mainstreaming Conflict Prevention
O’Neill, W.G., 2005, Police reform in post-conflict societies: What we know and what we still need to know, The Security Development Nexus Program, International Peace Academy, New York
Onwudiwe, I.D., 2009, ‘Community Policing: The case of informal policing in Nigeria’, in D. Wisler and I.D. Onwudiwe (eds), Community Policing: International patterns and comparative perspectives, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, pp. 81-101
Ruteere, M. and Pommerolle M. E., 2003, ‘Democratizing security or decentralizing repression? The ambiguities of community policing in Kenya’, African Affairs, Vol. 102, No. 409, pp. 587-604
Saferworld, 2008, ‘Implementing community-based policing in Kenya’, Saferworld, February 2008
Scher, Daniel, 2010, ‘Restoring police service with a community vision: Tanzania 2006- 2009, Innovations for Successful Societies, Princeton University, Princeton
Shearing, C., 1997, ‘Toward Democratic Policing: Rethinking strategies of transformation’, in Policing in Emerging Democracies: Workshop Papers and Highlights, US Department of Justice, Washington DC, pp. 29-38
Wisler, D. and Onwudiwe, I., 2008, ‘Community Policing in Comparison’, Police Quarterly, Vol. 11, No. 4, pp. 427-446
Wisler D., and Onwudiwe, I.D., 2009, ‘Rethinking Police and Society: Community policing in comparison’, in D. Wisler and I.D. Onwudiwe (eds), Community Policing: International Patterns and Comparative Perspectives, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, pp. 1-17
Wojkowska, E. 2006, Doing Justice: How informal justice systems can contribute, UNDP, Oslo Governance Centre, Oslo
Zwane, P., 1994, ‘The Need for Community Policing’, African Defence Review, Vol. 18 55
Alemika, E.E.O., and Chukwuma, I.C., 2004, The Poor and Informal Policing in Nigeria, The Centre for Law Enforcement Education (CLEEN), Lagos, Nigeria
Brief Summary: There are numerous different non-state groups and informal policing structures that provide security at the local level. While they raise some concerns, particularly in their employment of mob justice and in their sheer multiplicity, they also present opportunities for programmatic intervention in communities.
Extended Summary: Apart from the state police, a number of different types of informal policing structures are established in communities in order to deal with crime. These community-initiated policing mechanisms tend to arise out of a perceived failure of the state to provide security and protection, often in the context of rising crime rates. Many of these groups are rooted in their communities, they enjoy significant levels of legitimacy and they often work in close collaboration with the formal police. In the literature, the term ‘vigilante’ is often used to describe these groups, however this masks their diversity. This paper identifies four different types of ‘vigilante’ or informal policing structures: religious, ethnic, state-sponsored and community/neighbourhood watch.
It should be noted that the term ‘informal policing’ is problematic. While these groups are often ‘informal’ in relation to the contemporary state, they are central aspects of lived experience for many communities. Indeed, they are often rooted in culture and are part of traditional criminal justice structures.
The Nigeria Police Force does not oppose the formation and activities of community-initiated crime watch groups as long as they:
• Register with the police. • Ensure that members are screened by the police. • Guarantee that members do not bear arms. • Ensure that suspects are not detained by the group, but rather are handed over
to the police.
While informal policing structures present opportunities for effective programmatic intervention, they are also subject to a number of concerns:
• Multiplicity of security providers and lack of coordination. • Non-representative of the community – sections of the community – such as
women, age groups, occupational groups, or ethnic groups – are often excluded.
• Use of arms and mob-justice – the presence of groups that are armed and that exist outside the control of the state raises concerns for human rights, accountability and the legitimacy of the state.
The following recommendations are made for engaging with informal policing structures:
• Establish Community Safety and Security Forums to build trust and improve relationships between the people and the police.
• Regulate IPS activities by identifying groups that do not use weapons or mob justice and coordinate them through meetings with police authorities. Such meetings could serve as a structure for information exchange, peer review, the standardization of procedures, the screening of members, registration, and improvement of relationships with the state police.
• Establish structures of accountability for IPS groups. • Introduce reward mechanisms – such as the provision of raincoats, torches,
and other non-lethal equipment – to encourage groups to play by the rules. • Encourage NGOs to invite IPS members into their human rights education
and training programmes.
Full text available at: http://www.gsdrc.org/docs/open/SSAJ126.pdf
Baker, B. 2002, ‘Living with non-state policing in South Africa: the issues and dilemmas’, Journal of Modern African Studies, Vol. 40, No. 1, pp. 29-53
Brief Summary: Policing activities – that is the maintenance of order and stability, the prevention and response to criminal activity, and the use of coercion in these roles – are typically understood to be the sole responsibility of the state. However, in many places around the world, in reality, policing is carried out by a wide range of groups independent of the state police; that is to say, policing is not simply ‘what The Police do’ (p. 30). Nevertheless, the prevalence of non-state policing in democratic societies has engendered significant debate over the appropriate stance to adopt in response. Is it a valuable resource, supplementing the over-stretched police force, or does it threaten the hegemony of state power? This paper explores these questions in relation to South Africa, examining the different forms of policing that operate on the ground, reflecting upon the state’s response to these activities, and highlighting some of the problems and challenges presented by the ubiquity of non-state policing.
Extended Summary: Non-state policing activities in South Africa are wide-ranging and include a number of disparate groups and practices, from private security companies, to neighbourhood watch groups, to vigilante gangs. However, they are bound together by certain commonalities and origins, most notably that they by-pass the South African Police Service (SAPS), are continuations of a culture of self-reliance, and emerge from a dissatisfaction with state policing services. In the last twenty years, in the context of rising crime and insecurity in South Africa, there has been an increasing overlap and interpenetration of public and private, of state and non-state forms of policing.
Following Johnston’s (1991)1 categorisation, there are three different types of non-state policing:
1. Autonomous citizen responses – often called vigilantes, these are groups that act independently of the state police and often do not cooperate with it. They are prepared to break the law to investigate and respond to crime and insecurity and are willing to employ violent methods of control. Such groups are prominent in the townships of South Africa. While they tend to be small, reactive, and loosely organised, some are larger and more formal.
Mapago a matamaga is one of the largest vigilante groups in the country. They work with communities to investigate and arrest alleged criminals, and are renowned for exacting brutal assaults upon them before handing them over to the police.
State Response: While these groups have been denounced by authorities at the national and local level, this does not account for the attitudes of people on the ground. There is significant support for alternative or traditional forms of punishment which are justified on the grounds of their effectiveness and in the support given to traditional leaders.
1 Johnston, L., 1991, The Rebirth of Private Policing, Routledge, London
2. Responsible citizen responses – these are activities which are carried out with the approval or cooperation of the police. These ‘responsible’ groups do not necessarily abstain from violence and some have been reported to engage in assaults and attacks. Examples of such groups include:
• Car guards in Grahamstown who offer personal surveillance of parked cars in the city centre in return for a voluntary contribution. This initiative was established by a local man who approached the SAPS and the municipality with the project, asserting that it would protect tourism, provide employment and reduce car theft.
• Traditional courts and justice systems where tribal police and courts police customary law within the framework of the Constitution and the law.
• In a small wealthy, suburban area of Grahamstown, residents have employed their own ‘bobbies on the beat’ and four police reservists are paid to patrol the roads during the day.
State response: Local police see these groups as a valuable means of supplementing their limited resources. However, local politicians are more uneasy; whilst the DP takes a pragmatic approach, the ANC preferred that these groups fall under Municipality control to ensure adequate training and full accountability.
3. Private security industry – which is supervised and overseen by a government agency. The industry employs approximately 167,000 active security officers who operate as guards or armed response units for wealthy, predominantly white, suburbs in South Africa. The private security industry has also recently expanded and is utilised by large businesses. The industry has been subject to a number of accusations, such as allegations of illegal activity and the misuse of weapons.
State Response: the SAPS welcome partnerships with security firms and tend to cooperate with them. While local and national politicians are suspicious of key figures in the industry, they adopt a pragmatic approach, accepting that non-state policing is prevalent and ‘here to stay’ (p. 43).
The three different types of non-state policing are all evident in the city of Grahamstown, which remains spatially divided by race. Private security firms patrolled business premises in the city centre and guarded private school premises; informal groups and vigilantes operate largely in the black townships, acting as investigators tribunals and judges; and the car guards and bobbies on the beat are evidence of ‘responsible’ citizen policing in the town. Thus, there are clear spatial patterns to non-state policing: while the townships resort to vigilantes, the wealthy elements of society employ private security firms.
Few challenge the legitimacy of non-state policing in South Africa, given its ubiquity in the country and the state police are not adequately resourced or accountable to assume sole responsibility for policing in the country. However, there are a number of dangers inherent in the prevalence of non-state policing in South Africa:
• Exclusion and social isolation can be an unintended side-effect of non-state responses to insecurity. ‘No-go’ areas and physical barriers serve to insulate communities, fragmenting the urban arena and presenting a significant obstacle to the consolidation of a common identity.
• Support of non-state policing undermines the legitimacy of the SAPS. • Non-state-policing exacerbates inequalities as access is dependent upon
location and wealth, and consequently, race. • Some forms of non-state policing identify certain elements of society as
‘undesirables’ who need to be ‘cleansed’ from the area, and thus they nurture attitudes of discrimination.
• Some forms of non-state policing provoke the use of violence.
Since the state is unable to act as the sole guarantor of security in the country due to inadequate resources, other avenues of ensuring an accountable, consistent and humane form of policing must be sought.
Baker, B., 2008, ‘Community policing in Freetown, Sierra Leone: Foreign import or local solution?’, Journal of Intervention and Statebuilding, Vol. 2, No. 1, pp. 23-42
Brief Summary: Community policing, and particularly community forum initiatives have been widely recommended for developing countries. These projects – which emphasise police-neighbourhood partnerships in addressing local concerns – are seen by many as a key to reducing both crime and, ultimately, poverty. Yet, despite the attention and positive rhetoric, we have limited knowledge of community policing in practice and little empirical evidence supporting its validity. This paper seeks to address this imbalance, and provides an assessment of Police Local Partnership Boards in Freetown, Sierra Leone. It argues that the criticisms of community policing have been exaggerated, and that despite flaws in implementation and design, and despite their over-ambitious objectives, there is evidence to suggest that they are valuable, relevant and sustainable.
Extended Summary: Following the war in Sierra Leone, the police were perceived as a tool of state repression, incompetent, corrupt, unaccountable, heavily politicised and engaged in human rights abuses. As a strategy for overcoming the depths of mistrust which had grown between citizens and the police, and with DFID funding, the police adopted the community policing concept. Police- community forums, known as Police Local Partnership Boards were introduced in 1999. Comprised of representatives of local groups and in partnership with the newly-established Community Relations Offices, the Partnership Boards sought to give local communities a voice in local policing and to increase security in the country.
Strengths of the Partnership Boards
The Partnership Boards were largely welcomed and valued by the state police in Freetown as well as by local communities. A number of strengths can be identified, and the Partnership Boards arguably:
• Enhanced the police image and facilitated cooperation and trusting relations between the police and local communities.
• Increased the flow of intelligence, facilitating more efficient criminal investigation.
• Augmented police manpower by providing informants, night patrols, criminal investigators, mediators in civil dispute and action teams for tackling local disputes and supplemented police resources such as providing fuel or food for night patrols.
• Raised awareness of security issues amongst local communities.
Weaknesses of the Partnership Boards
Despite these strengths, however, a number of criticisms have been directed at the program by local communities and Partnership Board executives, and several limitations and challenges remain. These include:
• Partnership Boards are undemocratic, being dominated by educated and influential elders. This can lead to particular interests being represented at the expense of those of the wider community.
• The lack of continuity brought about by the high turn over of police staff obstructs the development of relationships.
• Input of local communities in defining policing agendas is limited, and ‘the police saw no obligation to listen or to accept these suggestions’ (p. 28).
• The relationship is unequal and communities tend to put more effort and resources into developing and financing activities than the police.
Thus, there are a number of issues that need to be addressed in COP projects:
• Community input – police resistance to community-involvement in setting the agenda for security provision raises questions over the level of community input. ‘Is this lip-service to participation or is it to have substance?’ (p. 35).
• Representational community forums – forums tend to be unrepresentative of the wider community, largely dominated by educated members of society and traditional elites. True representation may be impossible, but it should be accounted for when assessing ‘local’ opinion.
• Community awareness is essential for the legitimacy of such initiatives. In Freetown, for example, there were significant limitations in terms of local knowledge of the Partnership Boards; community programmes should be actively promoted.
• The unequal investment in these projects – where community members contribute more in the relationship – should be addressed. There is a danger that the voluntarism inherent to these projects will run its course and raise the thorny issue of introducing incentives for involvement.
• There is a danger of mission creep, as the causes of crime have become part of the agenda of some Partnership Boards.
The community policing agenda in Sierra Leone has sought to transform the police in order to address poverty and prevent future conflict, and while there have been significant improvements, the transformation has not been as radical as intended. Criticisms have often been too severe and generalised, but a nuanced picture reveals a number of unresolved issues, and suggests that community policing will likely remain a police-led initiative designed to supplement resources and improve intelligence gathering techniques. There is not, as of yet, a model that fully engages the community. As a result, community-based forms of policing continue in the absence of state police.
Brogden, M., 2005, ‘“Horses for Courses” and “Thin Blue Lines”: Community policing in transitional society’, Police Quarterly, Vol. 8, No. 1, pp. 64-98
Brief Summary: The three primary components of community policing that are the most dominant in exported models – community-consultative forums, neighbourhood watch schemes, and problem-solving policing – have not been as successful as some might suggest, and in some cases have actually exacerbated social schisms. Imported Western models of COP are irrelevant in many transitional and failed societies. To be more successful, community policing must draw on local experiences and practices that are effective in managing insecurity. Western policing reforms should only be employed if they come with an attested success record, if they are sensitive to local conditions,
and if they have accounted for local knowledge. Public ownership of policing practices, not state or police control is the key to effective community policing.
Extended summary: Western approaches to transitional and failed societies are embedded within an understanding of policing as ‘the thin blue line’, as the key institutional guarantor of social order, legitimacy and, ultimately, development. In countries marked by rising crime rates, weak judicial institutions, and low economic investment, police reform – and community policing in particular – has become a dominant strategy for effecting social change and acting as a catalyst for development.
A wide range of disparate practices are incorporated within the COP rubric. However, in practice, three key activities are central to exported community policing models: neighbourhood watch schemes, community forums, and problem-solving mechanisms. The exportation of policing strategies in the contemporary era is being driven by donor interest in addition to customer demand. Several different actors are involved in this process of exportation, including:
• Individuals – rank and file police officers from the West deliver COP training in transitional societies.
• Bilateral police exchanges – police officers from the global south attend COP courses in Western societies.
• NGOs – community policing has been adopted by various NGOs as an answer to human rights problems.
• Policing for profit – private companies, agencies and individuals sell and promote community policing as they would any other product or good.
• International Organisations – such as the UN and the EU. Furthermore, the IMF and World Bank are increasingly making economic assistance conditional upon the reform of policing in a COP direction.
However, these reform packages ‘often suit sellers rather than consumers’ (p. 71) and Western COP policies have dominated reform efforts. However, this export process has been marked by a failure to account for the different social, economic and political realities in transitional and failed states.
Community policing has enjoyed an unequivocally positive rhetoric in official discourse both in the West and in many transitional societies. Indeed, it is often regarded as an ‘antidote’ to crime problems (p. 77). However, this discourse has masked the realities and confusions of community policing. There have been significant challenges to COP reforms in a number of cases. In Africa, for example:
• In Kenya, the Nairobi police unilaterally decided to introduce COP. There was limited discussion with marginalised communities and a number of groups were excluded from any form of engagement. Communities were simply expected to cooperate.
• Neighbourhood watch schemes in Zambia are subject to minimal oversight and accountability mechanisms. In many cases they have disintegrated and have been associated with mob justice.
• Community policing has met with significant organisational and individual resistance in many cases. Police reform is very difficult in the context of a grossly underpaid and undertrained police force, which suffers from a legacy of distrust amongst local communities.
• Despite the markedly diverse contexts of the urban and rural arenas, the same model of COP is often adopted in both contexts.
• A lack of community participation and consultation in many instances has led to failures of COP, such as in Uganda where little consideration was afforded to differing community needs.
• Local demands for immediate solutions to rising crime rates have led to diminished enthusiasm and the virtual abandonment of community policing practices. South Africa is a well-documented case.
Similar criticisms have been directed at community policing efforts in South Asia where adaptations in police-community relations are more genuine in some areas than in others; where there was little public interest in neighbourhood watch schemes in many areas; and where many senior police officers resisted the implementation of COP, regarding it as an encroachment upon their exclusive domain.
Organizational factors and implementation problems have undoubtedly played a role in these failures. However, the central argument in this paper is that the problem is systemic; COP is largely irrelevant to many transitional societies.
Community policing practices have largely ignored or discredited informal forms of security provision and policing which is conducted outside of the purview of the state. The dismissal of such practices has been for the good reasons of non-accountability and lack of legal status. Nevertheless, community ownership is central to success. Initiatives must be local, borrowing from the west only when they come with an attested success record, and only when they are sensitive to, and draw upon, local experience.
Brogden, M., and Nijhar, P., 2005, Community Policing: National and international models and approaches, Willan Publishing, Cullompton
Brief Summary: Community policing comes in a variety of forms and it is shaped by the histories, institutions and cultures of the immediate context. Despite their popularity, Western models of community policing are inappropriate to the context of transitional societies. There are major problems with the readiness of governments, police institutions and communities to adapt to these models, and they tend to exacerbate existing social schisms.
Extended Summary: Chapter 1: Globalising Community policing Community policing lacks a clear and coherent definition and it is manifested in a number of different ways around the world. In this book it is understood as a style and strategy of policing that reflects local community needs. Community policing has become a popular vehicle for police transformation, particularly in failed and transitional societies and it has been presented as a ‘policing elixir that will resolve a range of social ills’ (p. 3). However, scholars have identified a number of problems that occur when western models of policing are superimposed on different social, economic and political contexts.
Chapters 2& 3: The Anglo-American Model While a universally applicable definition of community policing is impossible, the key characteristics include community partnerships, problem-solving, and a commitment to policing a limited geographical area. Nevertheless, community policing as a concept remains vaguely articulated, often referred to as a philosophy or a body or ideas, rather than a specific plan of action. Advocates of community policing in the West often hark back to a ‘golden age’ of Peelian policing, characterised by close police-public relations and the understanding of policing as a practice carried out by ‘citizens-in-uniform’ (p. 25). However, the realities of contemporary society – modern, diverse, and socially unequal – raise significant questions regarding the applicability of Peelian principles today. Indeed, the role of the police officer as a ‘uniformed social worker’ advocated by the community policing paradigm may obscure the fact that the police role was and always will be, law enforcement based on legal powers (p. 44).
There are a number of criticisms that have been directed at community policing:
• It incorporates diverse and unrelated procedures and practices. This is reflected in Goldstein’s conceptualisation that community policing is, ‘any activity whereby the police develop closer working relations with the community and respond to citizens’ needs.’
• The ‘community’ as a singular, coherent unit is an illusion. Very few places possess unitary cultural traits, and contemporary society is characterised by plurality.
• Community participation often only mobilises small segments of the local population and therefore does not necessarily reflect broader values and concerns.
• Community participation might be limited to an intelligence-gathering techni

The post Securing communities: summaries of key literature on community policing Sarah Jenkins appeared first on ExpertCustomWritings.
Assignment status: Solved by our experts

>>>Click here to get this paper written at the best price. 100% Custom, 0% plagiarism.<<<

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *