Institutional incentives and community policing

Abstract

Most American police departments claim to practice community-oriented policing (COP). The stated goals are to build partnerships between the police and the community, maintain order and quality of life, and solve problems that contribute to crime and fear of crime. However, researchers have noted how most departments attempting to implement COP have fallen short in successfully adopting the recommended reforms. This paper argues that the institutional setting in which American public policing operates leads to this result. By contrast, the institutional features of private security make its operation more conducive to achieving the goals of COP. These institutional differences include whether economic calculation is possible, the domain that is policed, and which rules are enforced.

From defunding to refunding police: institutions and the persistence of policing budgets

“…Like defunding the police, neighborhood policing has proven challenging to implement. Communities seeking to scale down policing have had a hard time acquiring meaningful control over police, including their budget decisions (Boettke et al, 2016 ; Fegley 2021 ). In addition, there are downsides to neighborhood policing; for one thing, homeowners have disproportionate political power in local elections and an incentive to block “investment in serious foot patrols or ‘community’ policing in poor areas,” thus exacerbating racist policing outcomes (Lacey and Soskice 2015 : 457).…”