Multiagency programs with police as a partner for reducing radicalisation to violence

Abstract

Background: Multiagency responses to reduce radicalisation often involve collaborations between police, government, nongovernment, business and/or community organisations. The complexities of radicalisation suggest it is impossible for any single agency to address the problem alone. Police-involved multiagency partnerships may disrupt pathways from radicalisation to violence by addressing multiple risk factors in a coordinated manner. Objectives:1. Synthesise evidence on the effectiveness of police-involved multiagency interventions on radicalisation or multiagency collaboration 2. Qualitatively synthesise information about how the intervention works (mechanisms), intervention context (moderators), implementation factors and economic considerations. Search Methods: Terrorism-related terms were used to search the Global Policing Database, terrorism/counterterrorism websites and repositories, and relevant journals for published and unpublished evaluations conducted 2002-2018. The search was conducted November 2019. Expert consultation, reference harvesting and forward citation searching was conducted November 2020. Selection Criteria: Eligible studies needed to report an intervention where police partnered with at least one other agency and explicitly aimed to address terrorism, violent extremism or radicalisation. Objective 1 eligible outcomes included violent extremism, radicalisation and/or terrorism, and multiagency collaboration. Only impact evaluations using experimental or robust quasi-experimental designs were eligible. Objective 2 placed no limits on outcomes. Studies needed to report an empirical assessment of an eligible intervention and provide data on mechanisms, moderators, implementation or economic considerations. Data Collection and Analysis: The search identified 7384 records. Systematic screening identified 181 studies, of which five were eligible for Objective 1 and 26 for Objective 2.Effectiveness studies could not be meta-analysed, so were summarised and effect size

PROTOCOL: Case management interventions seeking to counter radicalisation to violence: A systematic review of tools and approaches

“…Given the broad spectrum of case management tools and approaches that are likely being used to counter radicalisation to violence and the large amount of potential outcome variables relating to each of the research questions we will run meta‐analyses for all factors and outcome combinations for which at least two inputs from independent samples can be identified. In general, we follow protocols of Campbell systematic reviews on related topics as guides (e.g., Mazerolle et al, 2021; Wolfowicz et al, 2021).…”

“…Only quantitative studies using experimental (e.g., randomised controlled trials) or ‘stronger’ quasi‐experimental research designs (as listed in guidance such as the UK government's Magenta Book (HM Treasury, 2020) will be eligible for inclusion in the analysis of question 1. Following previous Campbell systematic reviews relating to counter‐radicalisation (e.g., Mazerolle et al, 2021) and the Magenta Book , eligible quasi‐experimental designs include: Cross‐over designs; Regression discontinuity designs; Designs using multivariate controls (e.g., multiple regression); Matched control group designs; Unmatched control group designs where the control group has face validity; Unmatched control group designs allowing for difference‐in‐difference analysis; and Time‐series designs.…”

Criminal justice interventions for preventing radicalisation, violent extremism and terrorism: An evidence and gap map

“…Several systematic reviews have synthesised the effectiveness literature. However, these reviews have either had a broad scope including criminal justice agencies amongst other agencies or a more targeted scope focusing on just a particular branch of the criminal justice system (see e.g., Mazerolle et al, 2021 for multi-agency responses to radicalisation with police as a partner). Other reviews have focused on a particular type of program.…”

PROTOCOL: Criminal justice interventions for preventing terrorism and radicalisation: An evidence and gap map

“…In line with previous reviews (Mazerolle et al, 2020;Mazerolle et al, 2021) which recognise the significant shift in counterterrorism policies post 9/11 (Gaibulloev & Sandler, 2019), only studies that are published from or report on impact evaluations conducted between January 2002 and December 2021 will be included in the EGM. We will not include qualitative research as we are exclusively interested in mapping high quality impact evaluations.…”

“…Following September 11, police became more actively involved in countering terrorism ‐ disrupting terrorist activity through intelligence gathering, covert investigations, information sharing and enforcement activities (Ortiz et al, 2007). As frontline practitioners, police are also instrumental in identifying, reducing, and preventing both radicalisation and violent extremism (Mazerolle et al, 2021). Police approaches for preventing radicalisation and violent extremism involve a range of different interventions and strategies.…”