Advertisement

Policy, Design and Use of Police-Worn Bodycameras in the Netherlands

Chapter
Part of the Law, Governance and Technology Series book series (LGTS, volume 35)

Abstract

In the Netherlands, police-worn body cameras have been tested and deployed since 2009. Their introduction followed after allegedly positive results of body camera practices in the UK. Although a body camera is single-purpose in the sense of functionality (to record the moving image), its places and types of use are multiple. This paper investigates the body camera in the context of surveillance practices in Dutch nightlife districts, being a part of a larger research project investigating surveillance in urban nightscapes. This paper aims to understand which meanings and practices of use of the body camera are articulated and how the body camera alters surveillance practices in these nightlife districts. What does this new surveillance artifact do in use practice and how did it come into being in the particular way it is now? To answer these questions, I will focus on three groups of actors that are involved in the development and use of body cameras in the Netherlands, being policymakers, designers and police officers.

Keywords

Police Officer Public Space Police Work Function Creep Policy Demand 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Acknowledgments

The author would like to thank all participants for this research as well as the 3 anonymous reviewers who commented on an earlier version of this chapter. The research that lead to this chapter was funded by by the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (Mvi 313-99-140) and the VICI project “privacy for the 21st century”, ​project number 453-14-004.

References

  1. Akrich, M. (1992). “The De-scription of Technological Objects.” In W. Bijker and J. Law, (Eds). Shaping Technology/Building Society: Studies in Sociotechnical Change. London and Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 205–224.Google Scholar
  2. Brands, J., Schwanen, T, & van Aalst, I. (2013). “What Are You Looking At? Visitors’ Perspectives on CCTV in the Night-Time Economy.” European Urban and Regional Studies, 23(1), 23–39.Google Scholar
  3. Chatterton, P., and Hollands, R. (2003). Urban Nightscapes: Youth Cultures, Pleasure Spaces and Corporate Power. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  4. Clarke, A. E. and Montini, T. (1993). “The many faces of RU 486: Tales of situated knowledges and technological contestations.” Science, Technology, & Human Values, 18 (1): 42–78.Google Scholar
  5. Denzin, N. (1970). Strategies of multiple triangulation. The research act in sociology: A theoretical introduction to sociological method, 297, 313.Google Scholar
  6. Ham, T. van, Ferwerda, H., and Kuppens, J. (2010). Cameratoezicht in Beweging. Ervaringen met nieuwe vormen van cameratoezicht bij de Nederlandse politie. Arnhem: Buro Beke.Google Scholar
  7. Haggerty, K. D. and Ericson, R. V. (2000) “The Surveillant Assemblage.” The British Journal of Sociology, 51(4), 605–622.Google Scholar
  8. Hine, C. (2007). ‘Multi-sited Ethnography as a Middle Range Methodology for Contemporary STS.” Science, Technology, & Human Values, 32(6), 652–671.Google Scholar
  9. Homburg, G. H. J. & Dekkers, S. (2003). Cameratoezicht in de openbare ruimte. The Hague: College voor Bescherming Persoonsgegevens (CBP [Data Protection Authority]).Google Scholar
  10. Latour, B. 1992. Where are the missing masses? The sociology of a few mundane artifacts. In Shaping technology/building society, ed. W. E. Bijker and J. Law, 225-58. Cambridge: MIT Press ———. 1994Google Scholar
  11. Latour, B. (1996). On actor-network theory: A few clarifications. Soziale welt, 369-381.Google Scholar
  12. Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Lippert, Randy K. and Bryce Clayton Newell. (2016). Debate Introduction: The Privacy and Surveillance Implications of Police Body Cameras. Surveillance & Society 14(1): 113–116.Google Scholar
  14. Lyon D. (2001). Surveillance Society: Monitoring Everyday Life. Buckingham and Philadelphia: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Maathuis, I. J. H. (2015). Technologies of compliance? Telecare technologies and self-management of chronic patients. Doctoral Dissertation. Universiteit Twente.Google Scholar
  16. Manning, P. K. (2003). Policing Contingencies. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  17. Newell, Bryce Clayton. (Forthcoming 2016). “Collateral Visibility: Police Body Cameras, Public Disclosure, and Privacy.” Indiana Law Journal, ).  Google Scholar
  18. Oudshoorn, N. (2012). “How Places Matter: Telecare Technologies and the Changing Spatial Dimensions of Healthcare.” Social Studies of Science, 42(1), 121–142.Google Scholar
  19. Schneider, C. J. (2015). “Police Image Work in an Era of Social Media: YouTube and the 2007 Montebello Summit Protest.” In Trottier, D. and Fuchs, C. (Eds). Social Media, Politics and the State: Protests, Revolutions, Riots, Crime and Policing in an Age of Facebook, Twitter and YouTube. London: Routledge, 227–246.Google Scholar
  20. Schwanen, T., van Aalst, I., Brands, J., & Timan, T. (2012). Rhythms of the night: spatiotemporal inequalities in the nighttime economy. Environment and Planning A, 44(9), 2064-2085.Google Scholar
  21. Taylor, Emmeline. 2016. Lights, Camera, Redaction… Police Body-Worn Cameras; Autonomy, Discretion and Accountability. Surveillance & Society 14(1): 128–132.Google Scholar
  22. Timan, T. and Oudshoorn, N. E. J. (2012). “Mobile Cameras as New Technologies of Surveillance? How Citizens Experience the Use of Mobile Cameras in Public Nightscapes”. Surveillance & Society, 10(2), 167–181.Google Scholar
  23. Tyler T. R. (2004). “Enhancing Police Legitimacy”. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 593(1), 84–99.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Tilburg Institute for Law, Technology and Society (TILT)Tilburg UniversityTilburgThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations