« Previous | Contents | Next »
Listen
CHAPTER 2 THE RESEARCH
2.1 Section 24 of the Antisocial Behaviour etc (Scotland) Act 2004 required Scottish Ministers to arrange a study into the operations of the dispersal powers and to lay this report before the Scottish Parliament within 3 years of the introduction of the powers.
2.2 This work has been undertaken by Justice Analytical Services within the Scottish Government. The project was designed to consider questions of how dispersal powers have been administered and how far they represent an effective means of providing relief to communities affected by the presence and behaviour of groups of individuals in public spaces.
2.3 The following subject areas were looked at:
- the scale and nature of antisocial behaviour that had been commonly reported in the dispersal locations
- previous methods used to tackle antisocial behaviour
- evidence used by police to make a case for the use of dispersal powers
- the nature of consultation that took place before dispersal powers were authorised
- policing requirements during the 3 month operations
- the cost of dispersal powers
- displacement of groups to other locations
- the effects of dispersal powers on the behaviour of perceived perpetrators
- the number and type of complaints to police through the dispersal process
- perceptions of disorder once the dispersal period came to an end
- comparison with other measures designed to address the underlying causes of group related antisocial behaviour
Methods
2.4 Information regarding the operational effectiveness of the powers, as well as information about breaches, arrests and court disposals was taken from police command and control databases and the Scottish Government's court proceedings database. Statistics on police complaint calls were also analysed to consider the severity of the behaviour in the period leading up to the authorisation of the powers and allowed for comparisons with complaints data from previous years.
2.5 As well as the statistics, the research questions required the consideration of a variety of perspectives including those of police, residents, businesses, local authorities and voluntary organisations. In assessing the effectiveness of the powers it was necessary to interview the key individuals responsible for managing the problems in these areas: the police and local authorities. The views of the members of the public affected by antisocial behaviour were also sought through semi-structured interviews and focus groups. This included residents and businesses in each location.
2.6 Police in all areas were visited and interviewed. These officers had been through the process of deciding to use dispersal powers, consulting with the local authority and general public and establishing strategies for implementing the powers. On most occasions interviews took place with more than one officer in each location; senior officers spoke about alternative police approaches and how the powers fit into the overall police strategy and other officers spoke about the implementation of the powers in the designated areas.
2.7 This report also contains the results of research with young people in some of the areas where young people were perceived as the perpetrators of antisocial behaviour. These young people were asked about their experiences of antisocial behaviour, the previous and alternative methods used to tackle disorder, the effectiveness of dispersal powers and other mechanisms that have been used or considered as a means of reducing disorder. This also adds to the picture of antisocial behaviour in each location by bringing to light the experiences of young people who were sometimes themselves the victims of the antisocial behaviour of groups.
2.8 Other key individuals such as local authority solicitors, youth service managers and representatives of voluntary organisations were interviewed to comment on the input they gave to this process including legal advice and strategic help to enable effective coherence with other neighbourhood strategies designed to tackle antisocial behaviour.
2.9 The views of residents and businesses were sought through interviews with prominent local individuals, community councillors, residents' and tenants' association representatives and service managers. Focus groups were arranged in each location to obtain the views of members of the public. Other data were also considered including the results of locally organised surveys and police evaluation documents.
2.10 In summary, the following research methods were used:
- Semi-structured interviews with 54 key professionals including the police, local authorities, solicitors, owners/proprietors and representatives of stakeholder organisations
- Focus groups with residents in areas where 7 of the dispersal designations had been authorised (involving 31 individuals)
- Focus groups and interviews with young people in 3 areas where they were perceived as perpetrators of antisocial behaviour (involving 48 young people)
- Analysis of police command and control data on dispersals, breaches and public complaints
- Cost analysis
2.11 Parts of the research were carried out by external research contractors. Research with young people was undertaken by Dr Hannah Smithson and Leanne Monchuk of the Applied Criminology Centre, University of Huddersfield. The focus groups with residents of powers were undertaken by Louise Brown, an independent consultant. All other fieldwork was carried out by Ben Cavanagh, a Social Researcher in the Scottish Government, Justice Analytical Services.
Timing
2.12 Dispersal powers can be authorised at any time and location on the authority of a senior police officer; it was not known at the beginning or at any time throughout the duration of the research how many times dispersal powers would be authorised before the submission date. The same methodology was followed, as far as possible, in each location once the research team was made aware of the dispersal authorisation.
Notes on Methodology
2.13 The research in dispersal areas was commissioned an average of 6-12 months after the dispersal powers had ceased in each of the areas. Research participants' accounts of their experiences may have become less accurate over time.
2.14 Whilst the research methods used to gain the views of members of the public in Chapter 7 and young people in Chapter 8 are considered to be robust, the responses of the 31 residents and business owners who were interviewed and the 48 young people who participated in interviews and focus groups are not necessarily representative of the general population of these three areas.
2.15 Although the research with young people engaged people of a variety of ages and both sexes, further work on engaging with "disaffected" and "hard to reach" young people may have presented a range of different experiences with regard to the dispersal authorisation. "Disaffected" young people are likely to be those that would not attend a youth centre or may have been excluded from school. The use of these venues for the research might have meant that views of other people were missed.
Note on Terminology
2.16 Dispersal powers are commonly referred to by officials and members of the public as "dispersal orders." This term was used by participants in the course of this research to refer both to the use of dispersal powers generally but also to a direction to disperse, given to an individual by a police officer. For the sake of clarity, the phrases "dispersal powers" and "directions to disperse" have been used in the main text.
The Format of the Report
2.17 The report continues in Chapter 3 with a summary of locations where dispersal powers have been used including descriptions of the antisocial behaviour that has been experienced in those areas. Chapter 4 looks at the previous attempts of police, local authorities and local people to try to address the problems.
2.18 The implementation of the powers is discussed in Chapter 5 including what procedures were followed by the police during the authorisation stage, how they made local people aware of the restrictions, what legal advice was sought by the police and how police went about consultation with other partners. Chapter 6 looks at the numbers of times people were dispersed in each of the areas, how many times directions to disperse were breached and information about court disposals. The chapter also includes police views on their experience of using the powers.
2.19 Chapter 7 contains analysis of the views of members of the public and other organisations on the effectiveness of the powers. Chapter 8 includes the views of young people in three of the locations where the powers were used. Chapter 9 looks at the typical costs involved with the authorisation of dispersal powers and Chapter 10 offers conclusions about what the powers have achieved in the places where they have been used so far.
« Previous | Contents | Next »