Integration of Police in the United States: Changes and Development after 9/11

Abstract

This paper is an explorative study of changes in police organizational structure and operations, and the mindset and culture of individual officers in the U.S. after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. The purpose is to understand the extent and nature of police integration, which represents a philosophical and operational departure from the traditional, localized policing feature in the U.S. A small, non-random survey of police officers from departments of various sizes and documentary research of open source materials and government publications are used to gauge this development. Findings suggest that significant changes have taken place in anti-terror training, communications, and in some instances, regionalized operations and partnerships. Most officers surveyed suggest also that their mindset or culture has changed, regardless of the size of the departments they work in. There is no evidence, however, that the traditional, localized police structure is being replaced by a more integrated system for the purpose of fighting terrorism. The police may instead have reinforced the bureaucratic professional crime-fighting model. The implications of these findings and related institutional concepts are discussed.

Threatened Globally, Acting Locally: Modeling Law Enforcement Homeland Security Practices

“…Agency size and jurisdiction size have also been linked to preparedness activities (Davis et al, 2004;Gerber et al, 2005;Jiao & Rhea, 2007;Pelfrey, 2007). Larger agencies (or agencies with more populous jurisdictions) tend to take more measures than smaller (or less populous) jurisdictions.…”

“…Jiao and Rhea (2007), in their study of six agencies, highlighted the value of contingency theory and the need for police organizations to "adjust to [their] dynamic environment" (p. 402). Although the authors found that significant changes had occurred in law enforcement agencies since September 11, 2001 (e.g., changes in structure, cooperation with other agencies), they assumed environmental dynamism and did not use any external contingency factors such as risk or crime to predict organizational and operational changes.…”

“…The theory's logic is evident in a number of "thought" or prescriptive pieces arguing for the need for change in law enforcement organizations in order to address homeland security matters. Jiao and Rhea (2007), for example, argued that reorganization in a police department is undertaken, "to address potential terrorist attacks more effectively" (p. 389). Similarly, Henry (2002) stated that, "to be effective, agencies must work together cooperatively and their personnel must be properly equipped and properly trained to quickly assess and react to crisis situations in a strategic and flexible way" (p. 322).…”

“…These publications describe, among other things, "the types of resources that police may want to consider when developing their own terrorism prevention and response plan" (Chapman et al, 2002, p. 1). This prescriptive focus is visible in academic publications as well (e.g., Henry, 2002;Jiao & Rhea, 2007). To the extent that these resources are consulted, the ideas contained therein might be adopted in whole or in part by a reader's organization.…”

“…Davis et al (2006) reported that more than half of law enforcement agencies surveyed updated mutual aid agreements for the purposes of terrorism, emergency response, or both. Despite both proposed and actual changes in emergency preparation, relatively few empirical studies have examined how American law enforcement agencies have addressed the homeland security function (see, e.g., Davis et al, 2004;Davis et al, 2006;Gerber, Cohen, Cannon, Patterson, & Stewart, 2005;Jiao & Rhea, 2007;Ortiz et al, 2007;Pelfrey, 2007).…”