Anti-social behaviour (ASB) policy was not pursued by the Conservative-Liberal Democrat Coalition government with the same vigour as their New Labour predecessors. Where developments did take place a clear shift in emphasis was apparent, with the needs of ASB victims elevated to the forefront of policy. This article critically appraises two major developments that showcase the Coalition government's attempts to overhaul ASB policy to 'put victims first', namely: the changes to call handling and case management processes, and the Community Trigger, which forces the authorities to review their responses to complaints of ASB in circumstances where victims feel they have been ignored. These particular policies aim to prioritise victims' needs; however, it is argued the new victim-focus: is diluted by competing Coalition ASB agendas, demonstrates little connection between rhetoric and reality, provides limited redress for all victims and fails to coalesce with established attempts to tackle perpetrators of ASB.

No abstract

Community Protection Notices (CPNs) are civil preventive orders used in England and Wales to prevent and/or require specific behaviour by an individual or organisation, where existing conduct has a ‘detrimental impact on the quality of life of those in the locality’. Breach of the notice results in a £100 fine under a Fixed Penalty Notice or a possible criminal conviction. To date, CPNs have tackled an array of perceived anti-social behaviours, ranging from rough sleeping to overgrown gardens. Using Ashworth and Zedner’s preventive justice as an analytical framework, our research qualitatively explores recipients’ experiences of this new tool for the first time. The findings highlight how the operationalisation of CPNs extends the coercive power of the state, with a range of negative consequences relating to the concepts of disproportionality, due process and accountability. We also offer three empirically-grounded recommendations for reforming CPN practices.

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to critically appraise the Public Spaces Protection Orders (PSPOs) policy that was introduced by the Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act (2014). Within a designated area assigned by the local council, PSPOs can prohibit or require specific behaviours to improve the quality of life for people inhabiting that space. Those who do not comply face a fixed penalty notice of £100 or a fine of £1,000 on summary conviction. However, the practical and theoretical impact associated with the development of these powers has yet to be fully explored. Design/methodology/approach Using Bannister and O’Sullivan’s (2013) discussion of civility and anti-social behaviour policy as a starting point, the authors show how PSPOs could create new frontiers in exclusion, intolerance and criminalisation, as PSPOs enable the prohibition of any type of behaviour perceived to negatively affect the quality of life. Findings Local councils in England and Wales now have unlimited and unregulated powers to control public spaces. The authors suggest that this has the potential to produce localised tolerance thresholds and civility agendas that currently target and further marginalise vulnerable people, and the authors highlight street sleeping homeless people as one such group. Originality/value There has been little academic debate on this topic. This paper raises a number of original, conceptual questions that provide an analytical framework for future empirical research. The authors also use original data from Freedom of Information requests to contextualise the discussions.

List of figuresList of tables Foreword by Professor Shadd Maruna Acknowledgements xm xiv IX XI Introduction 15 Developing a mixed methods research project 16 Research questions 19 Literature searching 28 Research aims 39 Research objectives 39 Clarifying your ideas and planning your project 42 Initial mixed methods project planning checklist 43 Summary 44 Learning questions 44 3 Ethics 45 Introduction 45 The importance of ethical research 46

Despite victimological interest in the impacts of different types of criminal victimisation, there is little empirical work that examines the effects of sub-criminal behaviour on victims. This article begins to redress the balance by reporting the findings from a qualitative research project in England that investigated the effects of long-term anti-social behaviour victimisation. Semi-structured interviews explored victims’ accounts of the long-term anti-social behaviour they experienced and the resultant effects it had on their lives. The research uncovered that victims experience a range of mental and physical health effects as well as behavioural changes and has provided the first in-depth insight into the impact of this type of victimisation. The findings suggest the cumulative harms associated with anti-social behaviour need to be better acknowledged, understood and addressed, with greater support made available to victims.

Community Protection Notices (CPNs) were created and introduced in England and Wales through the Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act (2014). They are used to prevent and/or require specific actions by an individual or organisation, where existing behaviour has ‘a detrimental effect on the quality of life of those in the locality’. A wide range of criminal justice actors can issue Community Protection Notices, and they require a low/no standard of evidence to do so. Breach of a Community Protection Notice results in a Fixed Penalty Notice of £100 or a possible criminal conviction. Using procedural justice theory as an analytical framework, our research is the first to investigate how Community Protection Notices are constructed, evidenced and monitored by the authorising bodies. The findings highlight divergent local practices, which sometimes lack procedural safeguards and adherence to Home Office statutory guidance. We propose 10 empirically based recommendations for policy and legislative changes to Community Protection Notice issuing practices.

This article explores procedural justice and motivational postures theories through the lens of Community Protection Notices (CPN), civil measures used to tackle anti-social behaviour in England and Wales. Through a qualitative study of CPN recipients, this article adds to our understanding of the social identity aspect of procedural justice theory by examining the impact on self-identified ‘upstanding citizens’ issued with a CPN for behaviours that they disputed on moral grounds. In order to renegotiate this anti-social label, participants explored other social categories to create distance between themselves and the authorities and challenged their role as representatives of the ‘law-abiding majority’. Ultimately, participants felt ‘compelled’ to comply with the requirements of their CPN, which in turn damaged perceptions of legitimacy.