Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-r6qrq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-27T15:20:51.015Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Introduction

Understanding Police Innovation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 August 2019

David Weisburd
Affiliation:
George Mason University, Virginia
Anthony A. Braga
Affiliation:
Northeastern University, Boston
Get access

Summary

Over the last decades of the twentieth century, American policing went 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 during this period, was even used 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.

Type
Chapter
Information
Police Innovation
Contrasting Perspectives
, pp. 1 - 24
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2019

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., & Behn, R. D. (eds.) (1997). Innovation in American Government: Challenges, Opportunities, and Dilemmas. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.Google Scholar
Bayley, D. H. (1988). Community policing: A report from the devil’s advocate. In Greene, J. R., & Mastrofski, S. D. (eds.), Community Policing: Rhetoric or Reality? (pp. 225238). New York: Praeger.Google Scholar
Bayley, D. (1994). Police for the Future. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bell, J. G., Robins, P. K., Spiegelman, R. G., & Weiner, S. (eds.) (1980). A Guaranteed Annual Income: Evidence from a Social Experiment. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Bratton, W. J. (1998a). Crime is down in New York City: Blame the police. In Bratton, W. J., & 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.Google Scholar
Bureau of Justice Statistics. (2003). Local Police Departments 2000. Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics, US Department of Justice.Google Scholar
Chaiken, J. (1978). What is known about deterrent effects of police activities. In Cromer, J. (ed.), Preventing Crime (pp. 109136). 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 Shelley, T., & Grant, A. C. (eds.), Problem-Oriented Policing: Crime-Specific Problems, Critical Issues, and Making POP Work. Washington, DC: Police Executive Research Forum.Google Scholar
Cordner, G. (1988). A problem-oriented approach to community-oriented policing. In Greene, J., & Mastrofski, S. (eds.), Community Policing: Rhetoric or Reality? New York: Praeger.Google Scholar
Cullen, F., & Gendreau, P. (2000). Assessing correctional rehabilitation: Policy, practice, and rospects. 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., & Smith, P. (2000). What Works: Evidence-Based Policy and Practice in Public Services. London: Policy Press.Google 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 its problems: The means over ends syndrome strikes back and the return of the problem-solver. Unpublished manuscript. Cincinnati, OH: University of Cincinnati.Google Scholar
Evans, W. N., & Owens, E. G. (2007). COPS and crime. Journal of Public Economics, 91, 181201.Google Scholar
Goldstein, H. (1979). Improving policing: A problem oriented approach. Crime and Delinquency, 24, 236258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldstein, H. (1987). Toward community-oriented policing: potential, basic requirements, and threshold questions. Crime and Delinquency, 25, 236258.Google Scholar
Gottfredson, M., & Hirschi, T. (1990). A General Theory of Crime. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Greene, J., & Mastrofski, S. (eds.) (1988). Community Policing: Rhetoric or Reality? New York: Praeger.Google Scholar
Greenwood, P. W., Chaiken, J., Petersilia, M., & Prusoff, L. (1975). Criminal Investigation Process, III: Observations and Analysis. Santa Monica, CA: Rand Corporation.Google Scholar
Greenwood, P. W., Petersilia, J., & 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.Google Scholar
Kelling, G. L., & 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., & Moore, M. H. (1988). From political to reform to community: The evolving strategy of police. In Greene, J. R., & Mastrofski, S. D. (eds.), Community Policing: Rhetoric or Reality? New York: Praeger.Google Scholar
Kelling, G. L., Pate, A., Dieckman, D., & Brown, C. E. (1974). The Kansas City Preventive Patrol Experiment: Technical Report. Washington, DC: Police Foundation.Google Scholar
Kelling, G. L., Pate, A., Ferrera, A., Utne, M., & Brown, C. E. (1981). Newark Foot Patrol Experiment. Washington, DC: The Police Foundation.Google Scholar
Kennedy, D., Piehl, A., & Braga, A. (1996). Youth violence in Boston: Gun markets, serious offenders, and a use-reduction strategy. Law and Contemporary Problems, 59, 147196.Google Scholar
Kerner Commission. (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, 461468.Google Scholar
Klockars, C. B. (1988). The rhetoric of community policing. In Greene, J. R., & Mastrofski, S. D. (eds.), Community Policing: Rhetoric or Reality (pp. 239258). New York: Praeger.Google 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., & Cahn, M. F. (1985). Synthesizing and Extending the Results of Police Patrols. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
Lee, Y., Eck, J. E., & Corsaro, N. (2016). Conclusions from the history of research into the effects of police force size on crime – 1968 through 2013: A Historical Systematic Review. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 12, 431451.Google Scholar
Levine, J. P. (1975). Ineffectiveness of adding police to prevent crime. Public Policy, 23, 523545.Google Scholar
Lum, C., & Koper, C. S. (2017). Evidence-Based Policing: Translating Research into Practice. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Lum, C., Koper, C. S., Willis, J., Happeny, S., Vovak, H., & Nichols, J. (2016). The Rapid Diffusion of License Plate Readers in US Law Enforcement Agencies. Fairfax, VA: Center for Evidence-Based Crime Policy, George Mason University.Google Scholar
Machin, S., & Olivier, M. (2011). Crime and police resources: The street crime initiative. Journal of the European Economic Association, 9, 678701.Google Scholar
MacKenzie, D. (2000). Evidence-based corrections: Identifying what works. Crime and Delinquency, 46, 457471.Google Scholar
Mann, K. (1992). Punitive civil sanctions: The middleground between criminal and civil law. Yale Law Journal, 101, 17951873.Google Scholar
Mazerolle, L. G., & Ransley, J. (2006). Third-Party Policing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google 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, 115138.Google Scholar
Murphy, P. V. (1974). Foreword. In Kelling, G. L., Pate, T., Dieckman, D., & Brown, C. E., The Kansas City Preventive Patrol Experiment: Technical Report. Washington, DC: Police Foundation.Google Scholar
Neyroud, P., & Weisburd, D. (2014). Transforming the police through science: The challenge of ownership. Policing,8(4), 287293.Google Scholar
Nutley, S., & Davies, H. T. O. (1999). The fall and rise of evidence in criminal justice. Public Money and Management, 19, 4754.Google Scholar
Ostrom, E., Whitaker, G., & Parks, R. (1978). Policing: Is there a system? In May, J., & Wildavsky, A. (eds.), The Policy Cycle. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
Parsons, W. (2002). From muddling through to muddling up: Evidence based policy making and the modernisation of British Government. Public Policy and administration, 17, 4360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pierce, G., Spaar, S., & Briggs, L. R. (1986). The Character of Police Work: Strategic and Tactical Implications. Boston: 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.Google Scholar
President’s Task Force on 21st Century Policing. (2015). Final Report of the President’s Task Force on 21st Century Policing. Washington, DC: Office of Community Oriented Policing Services.Google Scholar
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., & Roth, J. A. (eds.) (1993). Understanding and Preventing Violence: Panel on the Understanding and Control of Violent Behavior. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.Google Scholar
Rogers, E. M. (1995). Diffusion of Innovations (4th ed.). New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Schnelle, J. F., Kirchner, R. E. Jr., Casey, J. D., Uselton, P. H. Jr., & 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, 3340.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sherman, L. W. (1987). Repeat calls to the police in Minneapolis. Washington, DC: CrimeControl Institute.Google Scholar
Sherman, L. W. (1998). Evidence-Based Policing. Ideas in American Policing Series. Washington, DC: The Police Foundation.Google Scholar
Sherman, L. W., & Weisburd, D. (1995). General deterrent effects of police patrol in crime “hot-spots”: A randomized controlled trial. Justice Quarterly, 12, 626648.Google Scholar
Sherman, L. W., Gartin, P. R., & Buerger, M. E. (1989). Hot spots of predatory crime: Routine activities and the criminology of place. Criminology, 27, 2756.Google Scholar
Sherman, L. W., Farrington, D., Welsh, B., & MacKenzie, D. (eds.) (2002). Evidence Based Crime Prevention. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Skogan, W. G. (2004). Impediments to community policing. In Fridell, L., & Wycoff, M. A. (eds.), Community Policing: The Past, Present and Future. Washington, DC: Police Executive Research Forum.Google Scholar
Skogan, W. G., & Antunes, G. E. (1979). Information, apprehension, and deterrence: Exploring the limits of police productivity. Journal of Criminal Justice, 7, 217241.Google Scholar
Skogan, W., & Frydl, K. 2004. Fairness and Effectiveness in Policing: The Evidence. Washington, DC: National Research Council.Google Scholar
Skolnick, J. H., & Bayley, D. H. (1986). The New Blue Line: Police Innovation in Six American Cities. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
Spelman, W., & Brown, D. K. (1984). Calling the Police: Citizen Reporting of Serious Crime. Washington: US Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
Struyk, R. J., & Bendick, M. Jr. (eds.) (1981). Housing Vouchers for the Poor: Lessons from a National Experiment. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute Press.Google Scholar
Telep, C. W., & Winegar, S. (2015). Police executive receptivity to research: A survey of chiefs and sheriffs in Oregon. Policing: A Journal of Policy and Practice, 10, 241249.Google Scholar
Telep, C. W., Garner, J. H., & Visher, C. A. (2015). The production of criminological experiments revisited: The nature and extent of federal support for experimental designs, 2001–2013. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 11, 541563.Google Scholar
Trojanowicz, R. (1982). An Evaluation of the Neighborhood Foot Patrol Program in Flint, Michigan. East Lansing: National Neighborhood Foot Patrol Center, Michigan State University.Google Scholar
Trojanowicz, R. (1989). Preventing Civil Disturbances: A Community Policing Approach. East Lansing: Michigan State University, National Center for Community Policing.Google Scholar
Tyler, T. R., Goff, P. A., & MacCoun, R. J. (2015). The impact of psychological science on policing in the United States: Procedural justice, legitimacy, and effective law enforcement. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 16, 75109.Google Scholar
Victora, C. G., Habicht, J. P., & Bryce, J. (2004). Evidence-based public health: moving beyond randomized trials. American Journal of Public Health, 94, 400405.Google Scholar
Weisburd, D., & 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, 4265.Google Scholar
Weisburd, D., & Neyroud, P. (2011). Police Science: Towards a New Paradigm. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.Google Scholar
Weisburd, D., & Majmundar, M. (eds.). (2018). Proactive Policing: Effects on Crime and Communities. Committee on Proactive Policing: Effects on Crime, Communities, and Civil Liberties. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
Weisburd, D., Maher, L., & Sherman, L. W. (1992). Contrasting crime general and crime specific theory: The case of hot-spots of crime. Advances in Criminological Theory, 4, 4570.Google Scholar
Weisburd, D., Mastrofski, S. D., McNally, A. M., Greenspan, R., & Willis, J. J. (2003). Reforming to preserve: Compstat and strategic problem solving in American policing. Criminology and Public Policy, 2, 421456.Google Scholar
Weisburd, D., & 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., & Mastrofski, S. D. (eds.), Community Policing: Rhetoric or Reality? New York: Praeger.Google Scholar
Weiss, A. (1997). The communication of innovation in American policing. Policing, 20, 292310.Google Scholar
Wilson, J. Q. (1968). Varieties of Police Behavior: The Management of Law and Order in Eight Communities. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Wilson, J. Q., & Kelling, G. L. (1982). Broken windows: The police and neighborhood safety. The Atlantic Monthly, March, 2938.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.

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.

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.

Available formats
×