Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-2xdlg Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-03T07:50:46.321Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

1 - Introduction: understanding police innovation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 September 2009

David Weisburd
Affiliation:
Walter E. Meyer Professor of Law and Criminal Justice Hebrew University Law School in Jerusalem; Professor of Criminology and Criminal Justice University of Maryland, College Park
Anthony A. Braga
Affiliation:
Senior Research Associate in the Program in Criminal Justice Policy and Management of the Malcolm Wiener Center for Social Policy Harvard University's John F. Kennedy School of Government
David Weisburd
Affiliation:
Hebrew University of Jerusalem
Anthony A. Braga
Affiliation:
Harvard University, Massachusetts
Get access

Summary

Introduction

Over the last three decades American policing has gone through a period of significant change and innovation. In what is a relatively short historical time frame the police began to reconsider their fundamental mission, the nature of the core strategies of policing, and the character of their relationships with the communities that they serve. Innovations in policing in this period were not insular and restricted to police professionals and scholars, but were often seen on the front pages of America's newspapers and magazines, and spoken about in the electronic media. Some approaches, like broken windows policing – termed by some as zero tolerance policing – became the subject of heated political debate. Community policing, one of the most important police programs that emerged in this period, was even to give its name to a large federal agency – The Office of Community Oriented Policing Services – created by the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994.

Some have described this period of change as the most dramatic in the history of policing (e.g., see Bayley 1994). This claim does not perhaps do justice to the radical reforms that led to the creation of modern police forces in the nineteenth century, or even the wide-scale innovations in tactics or approaches to policing that emerged after the Second World War. However, observers of the police today are inevitably struck by the pace and variety of innovation in the last few decades.

Type
Chapter
Information
Police Innovation
Contrasting Perspectives
, pp. 1 - 24
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2006

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Altschuler, A. A. and Behn, R. D. (eds.) (1997). Innovation in American government: Challenges, opportunities, and dilemmas. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution.Google Scholar
Bayley, D. H. (1988). Community policing: A report from the devil's advocate. In Greene, J. R. and Mastrofski, S. D. (eds.), Community policing: Rhetoric or reality? (pp. 225–238). New York: Praeger.Google Scholar
Bayley, D. H. (1994). Police for the future. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bell, J. G., Robins, P. K., Spiegelman, R. G., and Weiner, S. (eds.) (1980). A guaranteed annual income: Evidence from a social experiment. New York: Academic Press.
Bratton, W. J. (1998a). Crime is down in New York City: Blame the police. In Bratton, W. J. and Dennis, N. (eds.), Zero tolerance: Policing a free society. London: Institute of Economic Affairs Health and Welfare Unit.Google Scholar
Bratton, W. J. with Knobler, P. (1998b). Turnaround: How America's top cop reversed the crime epidemic. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
Bundy, McGeorge. (1970, July). Press Conference. Presented in New York City, NY.
Bureau of Justice Statistics. (2003). Local police departments 2000. Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics, US Department of Justice.
Chaiken, J. (1978). What is known about deterrent effects of police activities. In Cromer, J. (ed.), Preventing crime (pp. 109–136). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Clarke, R. (1998). Defining police strategies: Problem solving, problem-oriented policing and community-oriented policing. In O'Connor, T.Shelley, and Grant, A. C. (eds.), Problem-oriented policing: Crime-specific problems, critical issues, and making POP work. Washington, DC: Police Executive Research Forum.Google Scholar
Committee to Review Research on Police Policy and Practices. (2004). Fairness and effectiveness in policing: The evidence. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
Cordner, G. (1988). A problem-oriented approach to community-oriented policing. In Greene, J. and Mastrofski, S. (eds.), Community policing: Rhetoric or reality?New York: Praeger.Google Scholar
Cullen, F. and Gendreau, P. (2000). Assessing correctional rehabilitation: Policy, practice, and prospects. In Horney, J. (ed.), Policies, processes, and decisions of the criminal justice system: Criminal justice 3. Washington, DC: US Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice.Google Scholar
Davies, H. T. O., Nutley, S., and Smith, P. (2000). What works: Evidence-based policy and practice in public services. London: Policy Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eck, J. E. (1983). Solving crime: A study of the investigation of burglary and robbery. Washington, DC: Police Executive Research Forum.Google Scholar
Eck, J. E. (2000). Problem-oriented policing and it's problems: The means over ends syndrome strikes back and the return of the problem-solver. Unpublished manuscript. Cincinnati, OH: University of Cincinnati.
Goldstein, H. (1979). Improving policing: A problem oriented approach. Crime and Delinquency, 24, 236–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldstein, H. (1987). Toward community-oriented policing: Potential, basic requirements, and threshold questions. Crime and Delinquency, 25, 236–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gottfredson, M. and Hirschi, T. (1990). A general theory of crime. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Greene, J. and Mastrofski, S. (eds.) (1988). Community policing: Rhetoric or reality?New York: Praeger.Google Scholar
Greenwood, P. W., Chaiken, J., Petersilia, M., and Prusoff, L. (1975). Criminal investigation process, III: Observations and analysis. Santa Monica, CA: Rand Corporation.Google Scholar
Greenwood, P. W., Petersilia, J., and Chaiken, J. (1977). The criminal investigation process. Lexington, MA: D. C. Heath.Google Scholar
Kansas City Police Department. (1977). Response time analysis. Kansas City, MO: Kansas City Police Department.
Kelling, G. L. and Coles, C. M. (1996). Fixing broken windows: Restoring order and reducing crime in our communities. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
Kelling, G. L. and Moore, M. H. (1988). From political to reform to community: The evolving strategy of police. In Greene, J. R. and Mastrofski, S. D. (eds.), Community policing: Rhetoric or reality?New York: Praeger Publishers.Google Scholar
Kelling, G. L., Pate, A., Dieckman, D., and Brown, C. E. (1974). The Kansas City preventative patrol experiment: Technical report. Washington, DC: Police Foundation.Google Scholar
Kelling, G. L., Pate, A., Ferrera, A., Utne, M., and Brown, C. E. (1981). Newark foot patrol experiment. Washington, DC: The Police Foundation.
Kennedy, D., Piehl, A., and Braga, A. (1996). Youth violence in Boston: Gun markets, serious offenders, and a use-reduction strategy. Law and Contemporary Problems, 59, 147–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Commission, Kerner. (1968). National advisory commission on civil disorder. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
Klinger, D. A. (2003). Spreading diffusion in criminology. Criminology and Public Policy, 2(3), 461–468.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
LaFree, G. (1998). Losing legitimacy: Street crime and the decline of social institutions in America. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Larson, R. C. and Cahn, M. F. (1985). Synthesizing and extending the results of police patrols. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
Levine, J. P. (1975). Ineffectiveness of adding police to prevent crime. Public Policy, 23, 523–545.Google Scholar
MacKenzie, D. (2000). Evidence-based corrections: Identifying what works. Crime and Delinquency, 46, 457–471.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mann, K. (1992). Punitive civil sanctions: The middleground between criminal and civil law. Yale Law Journal, 101(8), 1795–1873.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mazerolle, L. G. and Ransley, J. (2006). Third-party policing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Millenson, M. L. (1997). Demanding medical excellence: Doctors and accountability in the information age. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Minneapolis Medical Research Foundation, Inc. (1976). Critiques and commentaries on evaluation research activities – Russell Sage reports. Evaluation, 3(1–2), 115–138.
Murphy, P. V. (1974). Foreword. In Kelling, G. L., Pate, T., Dieckman, D., and Brown, C. E., The Kansas City preventative patrol experiment: Technical report. Washington, DC: Police Foundation.Google Scholar
Nutley, S. and Davies, H. T. O. (1999). The fall and rise of evidence in criminal justice. Public Money and Management, 19, 47–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ostrom, E., Whitaker, G., and Parks, R. (1978). Policing: Is there a system? In May, J. and Wildavsky, A. (eds.), The policy cycle. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
Pierce, G., Spaar, S., and Briggs, L. R. (1986). The character of police work: Strategic and tactical implications. Boston, MA: Center for Applied Social Research, Northeastern University.Google Scholar
President's Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice. (1967). The crime commission report: The challenge of crime in a free society. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office.
Press, S. J. (1971). Some effects of an increase in police manpower in the 20th precinct of New York City. New York: New York City Rand Institute.Google Scholar
Reiss, A. J. Jr. and Roth, J. A. (eds.) (1993). Understanding and preventing violence: Panel on the understanding and control of violent behavior. Washington DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
Rogers, E. M. (1995). Diffusion of innovations (4th ed.). New York: Free Press.Google ScholarPubMed
Schnelle, J. F., Kirchner, R. E. Jr., Casey, J. D., Uselton, P. H. Jr., and McNees, M. P. (1977). Patrol evaluation research: A multiple-baseline analysis of saturation police patrolling during day and night hours. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 10, 33–40.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sherman, L. W. (1998). Evidence-based policing. Ideas in American policing series. Washington, DC: The Police Foundation.Google Scholar
Sherman, L. W. and Weisburd, D. (1995). General deterrent effects of police patrol in crime “hot-spots”: A randomized controlled trial. Justice Quarterly, 12, 626–648.Google Scholar
Sherman, L. W., Gartin, P. R., and Buerger, M. E. (1989). Hot spots of predatory crime: Routine activities and the criminology of place. Criminology, 27, 27–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sherman, L. W., Farrington, D., Welsh, B., and MacKenzie, D. (eds.) (2002). Evidence based crime prevention. New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Skogan, W. G. (in Press). Impediments to community policing. In Fridell, L. and Wycoff, M. A. (eds.), The future of community policing. Washington, DC: Police Executive Research Forum.
Skogan, W. G. and Antunes, G. E. (1979). Information, apprehension, and deterrence: Exploring the limits of police productivity. Journal of Criminal Justice, 7, 217–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spelman, W. and Brown, D. K. (1984). Calling the police: Citizen reporting of serious crime. Washington: US Government Printing Office.
Struyk, R. J. and Bendick, M. Jr. (eds.) (1981). Housing vouchers for the poor: Lessons from a national experiment. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute Press.Google Scholar
Trojanowicz, R. (1982). An evaluation of the neighborhood foot patrol program in Flint, Michigan. East Lansing, MI: National Neighborhood Foot Patrol Center, Michigan State University.Google Scholar
Trojanowicz, R. (1989). Preventing civil disturbances: A community policing approach. East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University, National Center for Community Policing.Google Scholar
Visher, C. and Weisburd, D. (1998). Identifying what works: Recent trends in crime prevention strategies. Crime, Law and Social Change, 28, 223–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weisburd, D. and Eck, J. E. (2004). What can police do to reduce crime, disorder, and fear?Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 593, 42–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weisburd, D. and Lum, C. (2005). The diffusion of computerized crime mapping policing: Linking research and practice. Police Practice and Research, 6(5), 433–448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weisburd, D. and McElroy, J. E. (1988). Enacting the CPO (Community Patrol Officer) role: Findings from the New York City pilot program in community policing. In Greene, J. R. and Mastrofski, S. D. (eds.), Community policing: Rhetoric or reality?New York: Praeger Publishers.Google Scholar
Weisburd, D., Maher, L., and Sherman, L. W. (1992). Contrasting crime general and crime specific theory: The case of hot-spots of crime. Advances in Criminological Theory, 4, 45–70.Google Scholar
Weisburd, D., Mastrofski, S. D., McNally, A. M., Greenspan, R., and Willis, J. J. (2003). Reforming to preserve: Compstat and strategic problem solving in American policing. Criminology and Public Policy, 2(3), 421–456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weiss, A. (1997). The communication of innovation in American policing. Policing, 20, 292–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, J. Q. and Kelling, G. L. (1982). Broken windows: The police and neighborhood safety. The Atlantic Monthly, March, 29–38.Google Scholar
Zuger, A. (1997). New way of doctoring: By the book. The New York Times. December 16.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

  • Introduction: understanding police innovation
    • By David Weisburd, Walter E. Meyer Professor of Law and Criminal Justice Hebrew University Law School in Jerusalem; Professor of Criminology and Criminal Justice University of Maryland, College Park, Anthony A. Braga, Senior Research Associate in the Program in Criminal Justice Policy and Management of the Malcolm Wiener Center for Social Policy Harvard University's John F. Kennedy School of Government
  • Edited by David Weisburd, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Anthony A. Braga, Harvard University, Massachusetts
  • Book: Police Innovation
  • Online publication: 22 September 2009
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511489334.001
Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

  • Introduction: understanding police innovation
    • By David Weisburd, Walter E. Meyer Professor of Law and Criminal Justice Hebrew University Law School in Jerusalem; Professor of Criminology and Criminal Justice University of Maryland, College Park, Anthony A. Braga, Senior Research Associate in the Program in Criminal Justice Policy and Management of the Malcolm Wiener Center for Social Policy Harvard University's John F. Kennedy School of Government
  • Edited by David Weisburd, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Anthony A. Braga, Harvard University, Massachusetts
  • Book: Police Innovation
  • Online publication: 22 September 2009
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511489334.001
Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

  • Introduction: understanding police innovation
    • By David Weisburd, Walter E. Meyer Professor of Law and Criminal Justice Hebrew University Law School in Jerusalem; Professor of Criminology and Criminal Justice University of Maryland, College Park, Anthony A. Braga, Senior Research Associate in the Program in Criminal Justice Policy and Management of the Malcolm Wiener Center for Social Policy Harvard University's John F. Kennedy School of Government
  • Edited by David Weisburd, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Anthony A. Braga, Harvard University, Massachusetts
  • Book: Police Innovation
  • Online publication: 22 September 2009
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511489334.001
Available formats
×