The Scottish Government

« Previous | Contents | Next »

Listen

CHAPTER ONE THE BACKGROUND TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF COMMUNITYWARDEN SCHEMES IN THE UNITED KINGDOM

Introduction

1.1 The purpose of this report is to outline the impact of the community wardens in Scotland, based on a 2 year evaluation undertaken by GEN Consulting on behalf of the Scottish Executive. This introductory Chapter looks at the background to the development of warden schemes within the United Kingdom.

1.2 In the late 1990's the United Kingdom Government published 2 significant reports acknowledging the potential of Neighbourhood Wardens to contribute to regeneration (Northern Ireland Housing Executive, 2003). "Bringing Britain Together: A Strategy for Neighbourhood Renewal", published by The Social Exclusion Unit in 1998, highlighted the role of Neighbourhood Wardens in relation to the regeneration process, while the Report of the Policy and Action Team ( PAT) 6, "Neighbourhood Wardens" (2000) focused on development, implementation and financing of successful schemes.

1.3 The report of PAT 6 highlighted a number of reasons why the police, local authorities and other agencies might be interested in neighbourhood wardens. These mainly related to the concentration of problems in specific areas that were exacerbated by reductions in the numbers of staff who could deal with these problems. Thus wardens were seen as being a response to:-

• Increased rates of crime and fear of crime particularly in deprived communities where the impact of crime was compounded by poverty;
• Areas of social housing that were proportionately more likely to be disadvantaged and more likely to suffer from higher rates of offending and reduced levels of informal social control; and
• The steady reductions in the numbers of neighbourhood staff over the previous 2 decades. These included care takers, community workers and park-keepers who, in the past, would have undertaken a form of informal surveillance that was thought to enhance safety and deter crime.

1.4 Acting as a valuable link between the community and other agencies, wardens were intended to be a new generation of community officials who understood the problems faced by the community, engaged with residents and acted as the "eyes and ears" of the police and local authority on the ground.

1.5 Although the majority lack law enforcement powers, neighbourhood wardens are now an integral component of "high visibility policing" strategies advocated by the Home Office. Supporters of "high visibility policing" argue that, while resource intensive, it can act as an effective deterrent to deviant behaviour and provide reassurance to those whose lives are adversely affected by crime, fear of crime and antisocial behaviour. It is also felt that the presence of Neighbourhood Wardens within the community will foster positive relations and mutual trust thereby increasing the volume of people who are prepared to report incidents to the wardens, the council or the police (Home Office, 2006).

The Theoretical Background

1.6 Doran (2003, 2) cited in Payne (2003), discusses the theoretical underpinning of the wardens initiative. Four main theories to support the introduction of wardens are put forward:-

• Dealing with minor incivilities and "broken windows": Wilson and Kelling (1982) theorised that "if the first broken window in a building is not repaired, then people who like breaking windows will assume that no one cares about the building and more widows will be broken. Soon the building will have no windows" . They were of the opinion that environmental degradation, disrespectful behaviour and low level offending, if left unchecked, would escalate into more serious crime as such neglect was illustrative of a community which no longer exercised social control. Community wardens are therefore to address low level offending and environmental problems, thereby preventing degradation of the area;
• The presence of a "capable guardian": Routine activity theory assumes that, for a crime to occur, there must be a convergence of potential offenders and suitable targets in the absence of a "capable guardian". If a component is missing, an offence is unlikely to occur. The presence of wardens, as "capable guardians", is therefore presumed to reduce opportunities to offend;
• Self discipline: The principal of social control, through high visibility, has at its root, Bentham's writings concerning the Panopticon (Bozovic and Bentham, 1995), an architectural design in which occupants could not see their observers but must assume they were being watched at all times and behave accordingly. Power is hence visible yet unverifiable. Foucault (1975) extends this discussion, asserting that surveillance, both real and imagined, has the effect of inducing self-discipline and self control. It is therefore assumed that the threat of surveillance by Neighbourhood Wardens can help deter criminal or antisocial behaviour; and
• Building capacity and social capital: Doran (2003) theorises that the creation of intermediaries, such as the community wardens (who provide a link between formal institutions, such as the police, the fire and rescue service, the local authority and informal community structures) may be a productive method of engaging with the community and enhancing social cohesion.

1.7 It is against this theoretical background, that ascribes a variety of benefits to the introduction of wardens, that they are now an integral part of the national strategy for neighbourhood renewal and provide a highly visible, semi-official presence in residential areas across England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland.

Neighbourhood Wardens in England

1.8 The country-wide Neighbourhood Wardens Programme for England and Wales was formally launched as a joint initiative by the former Department for the Environment, Transport and the Regions ( DETR) and the Home Office in 2000. Initial funding of £18.5 million was made available by central government to support 84 schemes across England and Wales until March 2003. Funding was subsequently extended until March 2004. Funding is therefore now the responsibility of the schemes themselves. In October 2001, the Department for Transport, Local Government and the Regions ( DTLR) announced additional funds to support the National Street Wardens Programme consisting of 121 new schemes. The Street Wardens are charged with improving "livability" in deprived areas. Whilst similar to community wardens, they place greater emphasis upon improving the physical environment, by dealing with such problems as litter, graffiti and dog fouling.

Neighbourhood Wardens in Northern Ireland

1.9 Following consideration of the needs of the local area and scrutiny of pathfinder Neighbourhood Warden Services in England, the first Neighbourhood Warden Scheme in Northern Ireland was established in 1998 by the Bangor District Office of the Northern Ireland Housing Executive. At this time the job specification of the wardens was that of an enhanced caretaker, with a focus on estate management support. By April 2006 the Northern Ireland Housing Executive had appointed some 50 wardens. They provide a range of on-site services to residents in disadvantaged estates. Their responsibilities include environmental and housing management, community involvement and tenancy conditions.

Community Wardens in Scotland

1.10 In March 2003 the Scottish Executive announced £30 million of funding to tackle crime and antisocial behaviour, environmental degradation and to help Build Strong, Safe, Attractive Communities ( BSSAC). Twenty million pounds of this funding was to be directed towards the establishment of community warden schemes in all 32 Scottish local authorities, from 2004 onwards. A number of Scottish local authorities, including Edinburgh and Renfrewshire, had however piloted community wardens in disadvantaged communities prior to the availability of Executive funding. Such schemes were supported through initiatives like the Better Neighbourhood Services Fund ( BNSF) established to allow councils to improve services in deprived neighbourhoods.

1.11 The Edinburgh Community Concierge Pilot Scheme was introduced in the Broomhouse area of the City in November 2001. Its principal aims were to:-

• Act as the landlord's eye and ears on the estate;
• Monitor empty houses and breaches of tenancy conditions;
• Reduce environmental nuisance;
• Provide a cleaner, safer neighbourhood;
• Promote community involvement and development; and
• Reduce minor crime.

Following an independent evaluation (which revealed increased feelings of safety in patrol areas, improved perceptions of the neighbourhood as a place to live and some progress in tackling issues related to antisocial behaviour) (cited in Payne, 2003) the City Council took the decision to establish similar schemes in other parts of the city.

1.12 Renfrewshire Council's Community Warden Scheme was launched in July 2002 as one of a number of initiatives funded by the BNSF. The Council established 4 teams of mobile wardens to work in various estates in Paisley and West Johnstone. Provision was subsequently expanded to include 2 further teams funded through the Housing Revenue Account.

1.13 The Renfrewshire wardens were intended to:-

• Act as a visible, active presence in the community;
• Improve community confidence;
• Improve communications between residents and service providers;
• Undertake a variety of environmental tasks such as coordination of graffiti removal;
• Pass on information about the state, safety or security of the neighbourhood to relevant agencies; and
• Support police investigations by acting as professional witnesses when necessary.

The Renfrewshire Wardens Scheme was hailed a success by local officials with the initial evaluation identifying reductions in the incidence of vandalism, vehicle crimes, disorder crimes, housebreaking and antisocial behaviour complaints (Shiel et al, 2005).

1.14 The examples of Edinburgh and Renfrewshire are illustrative of the 2 main broad types of scheme that the Scottish Executive has been willing to fund. These are environmental schemes (such as that initially set up in Edinburgh) that are designed primarily to improve the environment and "look" of an area, and crime prevention schemes, in line with the Renfrewshire model. In these the prime function of the wardens is to act as a deterrent to crime and antisocial behaviour and provide a reassuring presence to residents. However, as can be seen from the descriptions of both schemes, there is a degree of overlap, with the Edinburgh scheme containing an element of crime prevention and the Renfrewshire an environmental enhancement component.

1.15 Following consultation, and a review of schemes in England and Wales, the Executive elected to support schemes which conformed to what can be described as the non-enforcement model. This is the model followed by the majority of schemes across the United Kingdom, the overarching aim of which is to build community capacity and liaise with the community and other agencies. While some schemes are closely aligned with the enforcement of byelaws models (described by Doran (2003) as ones in which wardens can enforce existing local byelaws, collect evidence for antisocial behaviour orders and act a professional witnesses) there has, in the past, been little popular support to extend the enforcement powers of neighbourhood wardens (Payne, 2003). However, the situation may be changing in Scotland. For example, the wardens in Aberdeen are to have powers to serve fixed penalty notices for such things as littering and dog fouling. Similar developments are underway in Stirling.

Setting up Community warden schemes in Scotland

1.16 At the same time as funding was announced, in March 2003 the Scottish Executive published a consultation document (Scottish Executive, 2003a) which set out its proposals for establishing community wardens and other community based initiatives for tackling antisocial behaviour. Following on from this, each of the 32 local councils within Scotland was asked to submit outline proposals for a community warden scheme and associated measures for tackling antisocial behaviour. To help them do this the Executive prepared guidance (Scottish Executive, 2003b).

1.17 Amongst other things the guidance outlined a timetable. This requested that outline proposals be submitted by 31 ^st August 2003, with full proposals being required by 30 ^th November 2003 so that the schemes could become operational in April 2004. Following submission of these outlines, the Executive appraised each, using a standard pro-forma, and gave each council written feedback. This feedback was then used in the preparation of each council's final proposal. These were appraised again and councils were asked for clarification of particular aspects of their submissions. In February 2004 the then Minister for Communities formally announced the financial allocations for community wardens and related antisocial behaviour initiatives.

1.18 The initial allocations were for 2004/05 and 2005/06, with the £20 million being paid through each council's Revenue Support Grant. Table 1.1 summarises the allocations. Their sizes were based on such factors as deprivation and population levels. However, 8 authorities were given additional resources (second round funding) because of the severity of their antisocial behaviour problems ². Of the 32 awards, 24 (75%) were for £400,000 or less. The most common award was for £165,000. The smallest awards made were for £80,000 in each of the 2 years. Four councils received awards of this size: Argyll and Bute; Eileen Siar; Orkney and Shetland. Of the larger awards, Dundee City, Edinburgh City and North Lanarkshire all received funding of £650,000. Glasgow City Council received the largest award of £1 million. Many of the schemes covered a number of discrete sub-areas, that were often geographically dispersed. Despite this, with one exception, single unified management structures were in place. The exception was Dumfries and Galloway, where the 2 schemes in Stranraer (Dicks Hill and Belmont) and Dumfries (North West Dumfries) were separately managed. This reflects the geography of the area, with Stranraer and Dumfries being some 70 miles apart.

TABLE 1.1 Community Wardens Grant Awards

Project Origins

1.19 The Executive's funding for community wardens allowed all councils to set up schemes within their areas. However, in a number of councils existing warden schemes had been operational prior to the Executive providing national funding. At least 8 had their roots in either a pilot scheme or some sort of council funded estate warden scheme. These were:-

• Aberdeen City where wardens were in operation, managed by Grampian Police;
• Edinburgh where a warden scheme had operated since 2001 (Paragraph 1.11);
• North Lanarkshire where the scheme had its roots in an earlier BNSF initiative;
• Orkney which had run a 3 month pilot using Quality of Life funding;
• Renfrewshire where a BNSF Neighbourhood Warden Scheme had been in operation since 2002 (Paragraphs 1.12-1.13);
• South Lanarkshire, where 16 wardens were funded through the Executive's Quality of Life Fund;
• Stirling, where estate wardens had been established in Cultenhove and Cornton as part of the "Top of the Town" initiative; and
• West Dunbartonshire, where a warden scheme was already funded by the Council.

1.20 In the analysis of the applications for the 2004/06 funding it was apparent that the experiences of the earlier schemes had informed the development of the new ones, as with the identification of "hotspots" where wardens should be deployed and in choosing how many wardens to deploy in certain areas.

The Characteristics of the Wardens' Areas

1.21 The information given on the areas of operation in the original application forms varied greatly from bid to bid. Some applications contained detailed information on population, population age breakdowns, police statistics on crime and incidents reported to the police, housing tenure, levels of unemployment and employment by sector. Other bids were much less specific and only contained high level information on the characteristics of the local authority area as a whole.

1.22 Due to this variation and inconsistency in the information given, it is not possible to present a detailed picture of the typical types of areas to be covered by the warden schemes. It is possible to say, however, that where local authorities aimed to focus wardens on specific areas, these areas were generally characterised by levels of deprivation higher than the average for the local authority area and higher incidences of crime and antisocial behaviour. Many authorities used the Scottish Indices of Deprivation ( SIMD) as a way of measuring and ranking deprivation and used these rankings, along with other factors such as crime and antisocial behaviour, to determine where to focus efforts.

1.23 Table 1.2 looks at the justifications put forward for targeting the wardens at particular areas. It should be noted that in many cases, although information was given on some of the indicators, it was not always put in context. For example, Midlothian Council chose its areas on the basis of crime, antisocial behaviour and environmental reasons but only provided antisocial behaviour statistics for the entire authority, not the 6 areas chosen for warden patrols. Some councils, however, did indicate that the areas chosen were selected on the basis of high incidences of crime and antisocial behaviour. For example, East Dunbartonshire used a Geographical Information System to map the number of incidents and used this as justification for the choice of areas. Dundee City ranked the wards in the local authority using SIMD scoring and incidences of antisocial behaviour, vandalism, disorder and crime and used this as the basis for the choice of areas.

TABLE 1.2 Justifications for Choice of Area

Notes:

4. Perth and Kinross.

The Size of the Warden schemes

1.24 Information on the number of wardens employed was available for 31 schemes as at June/July 2006 from the 24 month templates. This showed that 504 wardens were employed throughout Scotland, excluding vacancies. A small number of schemes indicated that some of their wardens were funded from sources other than BSSAC. For example:-

• In 2006 North Ayrshire had employed an additional 8 wardens (2 seniors and 6 wardens) from Converted Better Neighbourhoods and an additional 5 through mainstream funding. When added to the original 20 funded by the Scottish Executive their total number of wardens was 33 (6 seniors and 27 wardens); and
• Renfrewshire originally employed 40 wardens through BNSF, Housing Revenue Account and BSSAC funding. They have subsequently recruited a further 10 wardens supported through BSSAC, bringing the total to 50.

1.25 The schemes can be grouped into 2 main categories:-

• Small schemes with 12 or fewer wardens. Twenty one schemes fell into this category, ranging from 3 in Orkney ³ to 12 in West Lothian and Falkirk; and
• Large schemes with 25 or more wardens. There are 11 schemes within this group ranging from 25 wardens in East Ayrshire and 50 in Renfrewshire.

Report Structure

1.26 Having outlined the background to the development of community warden schemes the remainder of this report is structured as follows:-

• Chapter Two outlines the evaluation methodology;
• Chapter Three looks at schemes' aims and objectives;
• Chapter Four looks at the characteristics of the wardens and their activities
• Chapter Five considers the wardens' roles;
• Chapter Six examines management and partnership working;
• Chapter Seven looks at community engagement in the case study areas;
• Chapter Eight examines the structures and processes put in place to allow the warden schemes to undertake self-monitoring;
• Chapters Nine, Ten and Eleven look at the impact of the wardens on reported incidents of crime and antisocial behaviour, with Chapter Nine setting out the theoretical context for this;
• Chapter Twelve draws upon community surveys to examine the impact upon perceptions in the case study areas;
• Chapters Thirteen, Fourteen and Fifteen look at perceptions of impact from the points of view of the wardens and managers, the community and the partner agencies;
• Chapter Sixteen considers the issues that emerged in the course of the evaluation;
• Chapters Seventeen and Eighteen draw conclusions, make a number of recommendations and outline the main good practices that the evaluation has uncovered; and
• A number of Appendices give details of the case study areas and survey results.

« Previous | Contents | Next »