Advertisement

Building a Bedrock of Trust Between Citizens, Law Enforcement and Other Stakeholders: A Scalable Architecture for Community Policing

  • Laurence MarzellEmail author
  • Ben Brewster
Chapter
Part of the Security Informatics and Law Enforcement book series (SILE)

Abstract

In today’s complex and interconnected world, the diverse communities that exist within it are complex ecosystems; no longer defined by geography alone. Instead, a multitude of factors, interests and connections, both virtual and physical, bind us together. These connections define the actions of collaborative multi-agency community policing (CP) approaches. In this chapter, a community policing architecture framework (CPAF) is defined. The CPAF framework provides a common and shared understanding of the governance, policy and flow of information, across and between the multiple stakeholder organisations involved. It includes not only citizens and law enforcement but all stakeholder actors. This creates a mechanism to better understand and share information at a community level, providing an essential building block to create and sustain trust and, ultimately, the means by which shared CP outcomes can be achieved.

Keywords

Community policing Trust Stakeholder engagement Community policing architecture framework Country comparison Operating models Community policing journey 

References

  1. Akhgar, B., Bayerl, P. S., Markarian, G., & Karlovic, R. (2017). Concluding remarks. In Community policing—A European perspective (pp. 269–271). Berlin: Springer.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-53396-4.Google Scholar
  2. Bayerl, P. S., van der Giessen, M., & Jacobs, G. (2015). Report on existing approaches and best/effective practices to community policing. Unity Project. Retrieved from https://www.unity-project.eu/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/D3.1-Report-on-Existing-Approaches-and-Best-Practices-to-CP.pdf
  3. Brewster, B., Gibson, H., & Gunning, M. (2018). Policing the community together: The impact of technology on citizen engagement. In G. Levantakis, M. Haberfeld, & P. Papanikolaou (Eds.), Societal implications of community-oriented policing technology. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  4. Community Oriented Policing Services. (2014). Community policing defined. Washington, DC: Department of Justice.Google Scholar
  5. Disraeli, B. (1880). Endymion. London: Longman.Google Scholar
  6. ISO/IEC/IEEE42010:2011. (2011). Systems and software engineering—Architecture description. ISO Architecture.Google Scholar
  7. Maguire, E. R., Kuhns, J. B., Cox, S. M., & Cox, S. M. (1997). Patterns of community policing in nonurban America. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 34(3), 368–394.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0022427897034003004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Marzell, L., Pettengell, T., Lewis, C., & Rai, I. (2017a). First report on provision of usable community stakeholder outputs and meaningful scope for the CPAF, TOM and CONOPS. Unity Project. Retrieved from https://www.unity-project.eu/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/D4.5-1st-report-on-provision-of-usable-community-stakeholder-outputs-and-meaningful-scope-for-CPAF-TOM-CONOPs.pdf
  9. Marzell, L., Pettengell, T., & Rai, I. (2017b). Third report on gap, capability and role mapping and assessment for combined effect CP initiatives between extant CP methods and CP target operating model. Unity Project. https://www.unity-project.eu/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/D4.7-Extant-CP-vs-TOM-3rd-Report.pdf
  10. Peak, K. J., & Glensor, R. W. (1996). Community policing and problem solving: Strategies and practices (p. 436). Upper Saddle River: Pearson Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  11. Reisig, M. D., & Parks, R. B. (2004). Can community policing help the truly disadvantaged? Crime and Delinquency, 50(2), 139–167.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0011128703253157 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Renard, T., André, S., Devroe, E., Duquet, N., Lemeunier, F., Ponsaers, P., & Seron, V. (2016, October). Counterterrorism in Belgium: Key challenges and policy options. Egmont Paper, 89. Retrieved from http://www.egmontinstitute.be/content/uploads/2016/10/Egmont-Paper-89_OFFICIAL-FINAL.pdf?type=pdf
  13. Rukus, J., Warner, M. E., & Zhang, X. (2018). Community policing: Least effective where need is greatest. Crime and Delinquency, 64(14), 1858–1881.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0011128716686339 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. van der Giessen, M., Jacobs, G., Brein, E., & Bayerl, P. S. (2016). 1st stakeholder analysis—Comparative view on stakeholder needs and perspectives. Unity Project. Retrieved from https://www.unity-project.eu/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/D3.3-Comparative-View-on-Stakeholder-Needs-and-Perspectives.pdf
  15. Vickers, L., Aston, E., Bayerl, P. S., Marzell, L., McCrone, N., Ayora, C., et al. (2018). Overall project report. Unity project. Retrieved from https://www.unity-project.eu/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/D1.3-Unity-Project-Report.pdf
  16. Weine, S. (2017). How local law enforcement uses community policing to combat terrorism. Retrieved September 20, 2018, from https://www.lawfareblog.com/how-local-law-enforcement-uses-community-policing-combat-terrorism

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Serco EuropeHampshireUK
  2. 2.CENTRICSheffield Hallam UniversitySheffieldUK

Personalised recommendations