This article illustrates, through a combination of administrative and legal perspectives, how ambitions to centralise prioritisation decisions within a police organisation can be limited by the legal rules relating to crime investigations and public order policing. As a case study, we use the centralisation of the Swedish Police, a reform intending to reduce the previously far-reaching operational independence of regional police authorities in favour of a centralised and uniform single authority. Through this case study, we analyse the interaction between the legal and institutional frameworks of policing and prosecution, including positive obligations enshrined in the European Convention on Human Rights. We conclude that legal responsibilities affecting the Swedish Police may significantly limit the possibility for managers and officers to de-prioritise many cases and public order concerns, which, in turn, may limit the ability to divert resources to other-centrally prioritised-tasks. Failure to account for such limits may cause reform ambitions to collide with legal responsibilities in day-to-day operative policing. The results indicate that research into organisational reform and police prioritisation may benefit from a more systemic analysis of the legal and institutional factors limiting institutional discretion.
The literature on policing asserts that there has been a remarkable emphasis on innovation in police work over the last decades. During the same time, police organizations in several countries have been centralized to promote increased unity and response to political steering and method development. In Sweden, the police reform was motivated by a perceived correlation between uniformity in working methods and organizational effectiveness. From a legal perspective, innovation in police methods involves inherent questions of rule of law – ensuring legality, compatibility with human rights, and predictability for citizens. This also carries implications for democratic legitimacy, since the police have far-reaching power to interfere with citizens’ spheres of interest. This article discusses issues of innovation within the Swedish police from a rule of law and democracy perspective. Innovation in police work is discussed on a system level through a study of the legal framework and institutional conditions introduced with the creation of the new police organization. Results are presented from an interview study with police managers on different levels within the new organization. The results suggest that innovation in police work develops largely organically at different levels and units within the police organization and then spread as “best practices” which the new Police Authority is seen as organizationally able to pick up and disseminate. Secondly, police openness to new evidence-based methods from outside the organization is increasing. Thirdly, there is a tension between the increased ability to create uniformity in methods and the need to adjust these methods to local conditions. Lastly, some uncertainties regarding legal accountability seem to exist as new methods are developed and implemented.
This paper presents a summary of the session "Implementation and management of life cycle approaches in business-challenges, opportunities, business learnings and best practice". In the session, the audience got the opportunity to listen to examples from industry and ways to include life cycle approaches in their business decision making processes. The audience also attended presentations where learnings from the environmental footprint process were discussed. The conclusions from the presentations and the final panel discussion can be summarized in some key messages. To succeed we need to go together and that is why harmonization of e.g. methods and regulations are important. As a basis when developing the way forward it was concluded that the life cycle approach is an important tool. L. Landström
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.