The Scottish Government

« Previous | Contents | Next »

Listen

Narrowing The Gap

CHAPTER 1 What the public want

There have been many surveys carried out into public perceptions in relation to police and policing, but these are set within their own context. To enhance understanding on the specific issues relevant to this study, Market Research UK were commissioned to undertake independent primary research to:

• identify the nature and impact of concerns that underlie public demand for greater reassurance through police visibility and accessibility;
• identify the nature and extent of gaps that may exist between perceptions, expectations and policing provision in relation to these concerns; and
• gather information to aid identification of targeted solutions to public concerns and demands.

The study, which was carried out between February and April 2002, also sought to explore views on accessibility and communication between public and police, examining links between high visibility policing and public reassurance across the range of different environments and contexts. Finally, the research sought views on how public reassurance could be enhanced.

To reiterate what has been said above, many surveys have been carried out into public perceptions in relation to police and policing, each set within its own context. Although the nature of this research and that of the recent Scottish and British Crime Surveys in particular overlap, there are a number of important differences, not least in the focus, nature and wording of the questions asked that warn against making direct comparisons. Thus these findings should be viewed not in isolation but as offering additional insight into this area.

This section summarises the main findings of the research, concentrating particularly on how crime and fear of crime inhibit daily life. The full report, with details of the methodology employed will be published as a separate research work by the Scottish Executive in the near future. HMIC considers that forces will find value in comparing the research findings with their own consultative processes.

The survey had two separate but interrelated aspects. Firstly, a qualitative dimension which elicited general opinion on relevant issues, consisting of 30 focus group discussions and 53 in depth interviews across the eight Scottish police force areas. These groups were balanced in terms of gender, location, socio-economic group and age to canvass the widest possible spectrum of opinion. The cross-section of the community involved encompassed the general public, minority groups, young people aged between 12 and 15, police officers, MSP's and members of Police Boards.

The second aspect of the research was a quantitative element which was designed to provide robust data on the views, attitudes and perceptions expressed in the qualitative phase. During this phase of the research 1170 home interviews were conducted comprising:

• 1000 random interviews with a representative sample of the population across all age ranges;
• an equal number of interviews in each force area; and
• a Booster Survey which provided
  • 100 additional interviews with school age children
  • 70 additional interviews with ethnic minority members of the population.

Significantly there was close similarity between the qualitative and quantitative sections of the research findings, a factor which enhances confidence levels in the validity of the conclusions, which are summarised below.

Qualitative Findings

Overall, within the general population, there was a varied perception of safety and fear of crime, although generally crime was thought to be on the increase and often motiveless. Greatest concerns related to violent crime and the risk of physical harm, though this was more from the point of view of the consequences of such crime than the perceived likelihood of becoming a victim. In relation to more immediate day-to-day levels of concern, young people and groups of youths repeatedly emerged as prime generators of fear and anxiety.

At one extreme, major and everyday concerns regarding crime were typically found in what would be described as socio-economic category 'C2DE' areas where this centred on the immediate locale and was based on direct or indirect practical experiences of respondents. At the opposite extreme, in areas which would be described as socio-economic category 'ABC1', fear of crime was found to be an underlying concern rather than an actual reality. Worry in these areas focused more around geographically-removed locations such as city centres and shopping areas rather than the local neighbourhood.

Reasons for Anxiety

The study is firmly based on perception - it reflects the thoughts of the public whether derived from real or imagined experience. Against that background, the core reasons for the anxieties expressed can be divided into two categories; ineffectual prevention in the longer term and ineffective intervention at source in relation to the more immediate issues. According to the survey:

Ineffectual prevention flows from:

• wider societal factors
• lack of parental discipline and schooling
• lack of respect for authority including police
• economic factors such as poverty and unemployment

Ineffective Intervention includes:

• lack of police on the beat and slow police response times - a perception that the police are not there when required
• a perception that the police and other agencies do not act when required. This is coupled with a recognition that they are sometimes unable to act.
• a perception that the Criminal Justice System is inefficient and lenient
• a perception that the system protects the rights of the criminal.

The Need for Reassurance

As regards a sense of reassurance, police and police visibility were frequently the first factors mentioned as important, with visibility being linked to greater police engagement which the public expected would impact on crime and fear of crime. Overall, it was considered that there were not enough police on the beat and the desire was expressed for a proactive rather than reactive presence.

There was a broad understanding of the role of the police with visibility linked to that role. Visibility was perceived to relate to foot patrol which respondents preferred to mobile patrol as this was seen as providing little or no opportunity for officers to interact or deter. Police visibility was seen as a means of facilitating engagement and intervention which, when combined, would be expected to enhance quality of life, reduce fear of crime, fear of intimidation and reduce the incidence of crime.

There was support for greater use of CCTV but this was tempered to some extent by the perception of a lack of impact on speedy intervention or rapport building.

With regard to perceptions on non-police uniformed patrols the qualitative survey indicated little support for the concept, even were these to consist of trained, monitored or police-related individuals (e.g. traffic wardens). It was assumed that such patrols would have no power of arrest and therefore no deterrent effect. Concern was also expressed that inappropriate individuals would be attracted to this role and overall it was considered that the money could be better spent on police patrols. In respect of special constables little or no awareness was found.

Young People

Young people, the survey found, did not have the same frame of historical reference as adults and were generally more accepting of the 'present' situation regardless of what that was.

Police officers were considered neither common nor accessible in young people's lives and although they accepted a need for police, young people did not view them positively. Indeed police were associated with negative personal experience. Greater police visibility was not important to young people and whilst the most common response to improving visibility was to have more officers on the street there was the counter concern that this may lead to more harassment for young people. Reassurance and reduction of tensions between police and young people were believed to be more dependent on positive interaction than visibility.

Young people had a limited perception of the police role, evidence of which was the 'to serve and protect' answer given by some respondents to the police role question. This comes from the film 'Robocop' and perhaps serves to illustrate how perceptions of the police may be formed.

There was, as with the general public, a lack of awareness of the Special Constabulary, with many young people finding it difficult to believe that people would carry out this role unpaid. Within the sample young people showed no interest in a police career.

Views of Minority Groups

As part of the research the views of minority groups were solicited including gay and lesbian, disabled and minority ethnic members of the general public. Minority ethnic community members surveyed included Indian, Pakistani, Chinese and Israeli. Amongst gay and lesbian people surveyed the underlying concern was fear of assault and a concern about lack of acceptance within the community. However, there were no specific concerns about the police. Amongst minority ethnic communities concern related to abuse and assault which was not always linked to being a member of a minority ethnic group. Opinion was expressed that police should have a better understanding of differing cultures and values. In respect of the minorities involved in the research there were very few differences in the views expressed from those of the general public, including the desire for greater visibility and engagement. The only exception to this related to the perceptions of crime directly attributable to the minority status of the victim. (HMIC will publish a review report on police race relations in 2003.)

Elected Representatives

In respect of the MSPs involved in the research, the need for 'Public Reassurance' was thought to have multiple causes and solutions. Solutions were thought to include police visibility, CCTV and community policing. Here again visibility was linked to greater engagement/interaction between the police and the public. As with the general public, MSPs within the survey were not in favour of non- police uniformed patrols, due to a lack of power of arrest and lack of authority.

Police Board members and Councillors displayed different views despite being from the same tier of government. Board members were generally more positive in respect of key issues, identifying the existence of a relationship with police. On the other hand Councillors who were not Board members were generally more critical and perceived a need for more community police officers and greater links between police and residents. However, both Councillors and Board members expressed concern over police responsibilities being transferred to non-police uniformed patrols. Other methods of increasing public reassurance were thought to be the introduction of CCTV, occupying and motivating young people and more efficient promotion of crime prevention.

Police Officers

Along with all the other groups mentioned, a cross-section of police officers of varying ranks were involved in the research. Their opinions do not differ greatly from those of the other groups consulted, and can be broadly summarised as follows:

• all ranks thought there was a need to increase proactive inter-agency working;
• for many officers there was an increasing frustration that police time was being taken up by non-core functions;
• the majority believed that the service lacks officers and is underfunded;
• operational officers considered that there is a need for more targeted, high-visibility policing within communities to reassure the public;
• the majority of officers defined public fear of crime as fear of violent crime with higher- ranking officers believing fear of crime to be disproportionate to actual risk of victimisation;
• for most frontline officers, visibility went beyond a physical presence to encompass more community engagement; and
• the majority of police were uncomfortable with the idea of non police uniformed patrols, although there was a generally positive opinion of special constables.

Quantitative Findings

The quantitative research results reflected the above findings of the qualitative research. Some of the key findings are as follows:

Figure 1 48% perceived that crime had increased in the last year

People perceive Crime to have increased

Figure 2 46% perceived crime to be more serious in the last year

People perceive Crime to be more serious

In addition to these general impressions about crime there were tension indicators evident when responses regarding personal safety were provided:

• 32% were very worried or worried about becoming a victim;
• 26% thought it likely that they would become a victim;
• 67% rarely or never had concerns about their own safety in daytime; but only
• 32% were never concerned about their safety after dark;
• 65% worried at least sometimes about their children being out of the home during daytime; and only;
• 10% said they never worried about their children being out after dark;
• 40% had increased worries about their own safety in the last year.

When asked about the top three issues that contribute to fear:

• 32% said housebreaking;
• 32% said gangs of youths; and
• 29% said the presence of drug users.

Fear connected with young people consistently emerged as a major contributor towards the feeling of being unsafe. A number of factors influenced this fear. Lack of parental control was mentioned by 65% as contributing most to levels of crime and disorder, 51% mentioned lack of respect for authority, and lack of police on foot patrol and in general were mentioned next by 44% and 33% respectively.

When asked about the top three police-related factors that would have the greatest impact in reducing crime and disorder:

• 38% indicated officers patrolling on foot at certain times and locations;
• 37% indicated greater use of CCTV; and
• 32% indicated having dedicated officers assigned to the community.

These findings were consistent with attitudes expressed by youth and minority ethnic contributors to the research.

With regard to non-police related issues that would have the greatest impact in making people feel 'a lot' or 'much' safer, the following prompted perceptions emerged:

• 77% said a more efficient criminal justice system;
• 69% said more activities and designated areas for young people;
• 67% said better home security;
• 67% said better lighting in public places;
• 61% said improved social issues, e.g. unemployment.
• 52% said improved building/environmental design;
• 48% said better public transport;
• 33% said uniformed non-police security personnel patrols.

Police Visibility

Policing and police visibility were consistently expressed as key factors in addressing the need for increased public reassurance. Essentially, a visible police presence was thought to allow for greater police engagement across communities with the expected outcome being a reduction in crime.

The following figure illustrates public perceptions expressed in relation to police foot patrol. When asked where and when it was most important to see more police officers on foot respondents identified a range of public areas and times of the day. To summarise, within housing estates during the evening/at night was by far the most commonly chosen option (68%), followed by outside pubs/clubs at closing time (39%) and at known local trouble spots (33%). However, there was also a marked desire to see police officers on patrol outside schools at opening and closing time (28%).

These findings were similar to those amongst minority ethnic respondents.

Public perceptions of police

Having identified a desire for increased visibility and directed foot patrols the issue of what these patrols would be able to achieve was addressed:

• 81% of people believed a visible police presence would deal with the root causes of crime and disorder;
• 83% thought it would prevent crime; and
• 89% thought that a visible police presence would make people feel safer.

Table 1

(N.B. - figures are rounded off so do not add up to 100% in each case)

Generally, CCTV, officers on foot and building personal relationships were perceived by the general public and ethnic minorities as having the greatest impact on safety. Amongst school-age children, building personal relationships was viewed as having a greater impact on safety than were patrolling officers.

This finding that over 80% of the respondents believed that an enhanced and targeted visible police presence would make them feel safer and would either reduce or prevent crime perhaps highlights the principal reason for a gap between perception and reality; that the public have an unrealistic expectation of the impact which visible policing can deliver. A visible presence on the streets is an important aspect of an integrated approach to police deployment, but the prioritisation given to the various aspects of police work must be balanced against need rather than simple demand.

Deploying resources to prioritise visible police presence might result in an enhanced level of reassurance, but with the prospect of diverting resources away from other aspects of police work that actually reduce the likelihood of the risk of crime. On the other hand reducing visibility through patrol might enable additional resources to go into more effective crime- reduction measures.

Community Consultation

When it came to being able to influence the police agenda the qualitative findings had suggested that participation in and awareness of consultation processes were limited. This was validated by the quantitative research which ascertained that:

• 79% of participants responded that they had not had the opportunity to contribute to police consultation processes in the last year; and
• 46% were interested in being given a chance to air views and concerns on these issues.

These are interesting results in view of the efforts HMIC knows that forces expend on public consultation exercises, particularly in relation to annual objective setting. There is little doubt that there are wide opportunities to express views on these matters either directly or indirectly to forces; that only 21% believed that they had had that opportunity is a significant issue for forces to address. This issue is further discussed in Chapter 3.

Linking this to satisfaction levels, just over one-third of adults were satisfied with the standard of service provided by their local police. In addition, a smaller minority indicated that they were very satisfied, producing a total of 42% who were satisfied to some extent. In contrast, more than one quarter were dissatisfied to some degree. (Again differences in the wording of the questions prevent direct comparisons being made with force surveys and the Scottish and British Crime Surveys.) There was also a widespread belief that the police were inadequately resourced. This was, however, tempered by a view that the police themselves need to manage more efficiently. To this end respondents were asked to consider various options that might help to release police officers from dealing with non-urgent matters:

• 44% of people responding indicated that they would consider it appropriate to be dealt with over the telephone or internet rather than requiring face-to-face contact with a police officer;
• 50% indicated that they would consider being dealt with by a force support officer rather than a police officer;
• 56% indicated that an appointment at a mutually convenient time with a police officer would suffice; and
• 30% would consider it suitable to be dealt with by an agency or other organisation rather than the police.

Interestingly across the survey, a consistent proportion of the sample (of the order of 40%) did not express any strong opinions on issues raised, suggesting perhaps a degree of disinterest in policing matters despite current efforts to engage with and inform the public.

Conclusion

Overall, the survey gives an important insight into the value the public places on the police as an organisation and indicates scope for change in the way that policing responds to public perceptions, expectations, and demand including:

• Clarification of statutory role and core responsibilities
• Acquisition and retention of personnel
• Community consultation
• Deployment and resource management
• Consistency of operational priorities
• Communication
• Access to services
• Status of Patrol/Community Policing and Special Constables
• Responsiveness to local problems

More specifically as a direct response to the research:

RECOMMENDATION 1
HMIC recommends that forces consider the detailed findings of the research carried out by Market Research UK and combine the outcomes with information from their own consultative processes.

RECOMMENDATION 2
HMIC recommends that forces take renewed steps to review the extent to which they are engaging with, and are accessible to, their communities, particularly in relation to quality of life issues connected to young people.

Finally, a clear finding to emerge from the research was the public's perception that the Police Service is under-resourced. This is despite comparatively high headline numbers. HMIC notes the proposed spending plans for policing in Scotland for the period 2003-2006 as setting the basis of planned police funding in sustaining these numbers.

« Previous | Contents | Next »