Neighborhoods and Police: the Maintenance of Civil Authority I by Georgel

ARCHIVED - Archiving Content ARCHIVÉE - Contenu archivé

Archived Content Contenu archivé

Information identified as archived is provided for L’information dont il est indiqué qu’elle est archivée reference, research or recordkeeping purposes. It est fournie à des fins de référence, de recherche is not subject to the Government of Canada Web ou de tenue de documents. Elle n’est pas Standards and has not been altered or updated assujettie aux normes Web du gouvernement du since it was archived. Please contact us to request Canada et elle n’a pas été modifiée ou mise à jour a format other than those available. depuis son archivage. Pour obtenir cette information dans un autre format, veuillez communiquer avec nous.

This document is archival in nature and is intended Le présent document a une valeur archivistique et for those who wish to consult archival documents fait partie des documents d’archives rendus made available from the collection of Public Safety disponibles par Sécurité publique Canada à ceux Canada. qui souhaitent consulter ces documents issus de sa collection. Some of these documents are available in only one official language. Translation, to be provided Certains de ces documents ne sont disponibles by Public Safety Canada, is available upon que dans une langue officielle. Sécurité publique request. Canada fournira une traduction sur demande.

U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs National*I~~tituteof Justice

May 1989 No. 10 A publication of the National Institute of Justice, U.S. Department of Justice, and the Program in Criminal Justice Policy and Management,

1, John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University

II1 Neighborhoods and Police: The Maintenance of Civil Authority I By GeorgeL. Kellingand JamesK. Stewart A cardinal tenet of community policing is that a new relationship between police and neighborhoods is required if This is one in a series of reports originally developed with the quality of residential and commercial life is to be some of the leading figures in American policing during their protected or improved in cities. This assertion raises several periodic meetings at Harvard University's John F. Kennedy School of Government. The reports are published sothat questions. What are neighborhoods? Do they exist, or are Americans interested in the improvement and the future of they largely a concoction of nostalgic policymakers, police policing can share in the information and perspectives that reformers, and revisionists who perpetuate ideals that may or were part of extensive debates at the School's Executive may not have existed in the past, but certainly are outside of Session on Policing. current urban experience? Assuming that neighborhoods The police chiefs, mayors, scholars, and others invited to the exist, what should their relationship be with police? What meetings have focused on the use and promise of such opportunities are offered both to neighborhoods and to police strategies as community-based and problem-orientedpolicing. by restructuring their relationship? How should police The testing and adoption of these strategies by some police resolve the potential conflict between the rule of law and agencies signal important changes in the way American policing now does business. What these changes mean for the neighborhood standards of conduct which they might be welfare of citizens and the fulfillment of the police mission in asked to uphold? the next decades has been at the heart of the Kennedy School meetings and this series of papers. This paper addresses these questions by focusing upon three We hope that through these publications police officialsand aspects of neighborhoods: (1) the neighborhood as polity; (2) other policymakers who affect the course of policing will the ability of a neighborhood to defend itself against crime debate and challenge their beliefs just as those of us in the and disorder without eliminatingcivility and justice from Executive Session have done. social relations there; and (3) alternate visions of the role of The Executive Session on Policing has been developed and municipal police in neighborhoods. administered by the Kennedy School's Program in Criminal Justice Policy and Management and funded by the National Institute of Justice and private sources that include the Charles Neighborhoodas polity Stewart Mott and Guggenheim Foundations. At a minimum, neighborhoods are places in which people James K. Stewart live or work near each other, recognize their recurring Director National Institute of Justice proximity, and signal this recognition to each other.' As U.S. Department of Justice Suttles2notes, residents of cities construct "cognitive maps" in which they allocate distinctive places as "theirs7'-their Mark H. Moore neighborhood. Moreover, neighbors are notjust the residents Faculty Chairman of a special geographical area but also include shopkeepers Program in Criminal Justice Policy and Management John F. Kennedy School of Government and their employees, other workers who frequent areas Harvard University bregularly (postal workers, for example), and even the h~meless.~ The intensity of neighboring relationships depends on many First, the progressive reform movement that centralized city factors, including geographical and physical characteristics government has contributed to a decline in neighborhood of the community, ethnicand kinship networks, affective influence. As Glazer notes: attachment of residents to the neighborhood, home and All during the twentieth century, indeed until the mid- business ownership, building construction features,local 1960s, proposals for city reform generally followed . . facility usage, pedestrian and automotive traffic patterns, the progressive tradition: make the mayor orthe board of amount of time neighbors spend in the area, as well as supervisors ~tronger.~ demographic patterns (e.g., the number of children, non- working adults, and aged wholive in a community). The The consequence of strengthening centralizedcity govern- content of neighboring can range from curt nods of the head ment has been the reduction of the political strength and ("good fences make good neighbors") to regularly scheduled capacity for self-help of neighborhoods. neighborhood meetings ("strength through ~nity").~ Second, congruent with the centralizationof political power Periodicity characterizes both the intensity and content of were the professionalizationand bureaucratization of neighboring. Citizens livein time, as well as area, zones. services, especially socialand police services. Problem Periodicity has two sets of implications. solving and the provision of services not only came under the political and administrative controlof executives, but also were provided by newly developing bureaucracies with (6.. . neighboringcan range from curt full-time staff recruited and promoted on the basis of nods of the head ('goodfences make good achieved qualifications, professional or otherwi~e.~Within neighborhoods, self-help in many areas, such as education, neighbors') to regular. . . meetings was eliminated or, in the case of police, denigrated and ('strengththrough unity'). 9 9 discouraged.

Third, during the 1950's and 1960's, urban renewal policies decimated many neighborhoodsin the name of eliminating First, many residents abandon their neighborhoodsduring slums, improving the urban housing stock, and integrating the day: workers may commute to their workplaces and ethnic groups into America's "melting pot." It seems ironic children may be bused to schools outside their immediate that many neighborhood self-help groups organizedin neighborhood. Other people use neighborhoods during resistance to the implementationof such policies in their particular times: merchants arrive for the opening of their immediate locales. shops and depart after closing; shoppers arrive anddepart; postal workers move through a neighborhood on a relatively predictable schedule. During particular times,the homeless can comprise the residents of a neighborhood. Traffic on 6 6 The consequenceof strengthening major thoroughfares ebbs and flows daily. Bars open and centralized citygovernment has been the close. reduction of the political strength and Second, citizen perceptions about areas change depending on capacityfor self-helpof neighborhoods.9 9 the time of the day or day of the week. During rush hour while awaiting transportation, citizens canview a neighborhood as being theirs, in a sense, and a comfortable place in which to be. The same area at another time of day or week Fourth, low-income housing developments concentrated on (midnight or Saturday) may be perceived as extraordinarily the construction of high-rise apartments ratherthan on low- alien and threatening. rise or single-dwelling residences. Jane Jacobs andOscar Newman have written persuasively about the largely Citizen participation in neighborhood activities and govern- negative consequences of such building practices on neigh- ance has long been perceived in this country as central to the borhoods and cities.' formation of an individual's character, the inculcation of traditional values, andthe maintenance of freedom. Integral Fifth, transportation policies concentratedon facilitating the parts of this participation have been self-help and self- movement of automobiles into and out of cities, at the governance. Despite this political philosophy, theaim or the expense of the public building, improvement, oreven consequence of American urban policy during the last maintenance of transportation into and within cities. Such hundred years has been to decrease the influence of neigh- policies encouraged the abandonment of cities for suburbs borhoods in American life. What factors have contributed to and left isolated those citizens who did remain in urban this decline? neighborhood^.^ Sixth, during the twentieth century, public spaces havebeen Although support of decentralization was initiated by redefined. The street traditionally was a diversified place advocates from the political left, by the late 1970's it had enjoyed and used for its own sake-a place to congregate, become as popular with the political right.I3 meet others, enjoy human-scaled architecture. But during the midcentury the tower-block-high-rise buildings surrounded Today the call for devolution of power and control over by open spaces--came to symbolize the new use of public services, indeed, the call for a self-help approach to problem space: segregated by purpose, with the street serving solving, has spread from the intellectual and political elite to primarily as a means of transportation between facilities. residents within communities and neighborhoods. No longer Thus, streets became public areas through which people pass are citizens in many communities willing to hear from to gain easy access to specific facilities: quasi-public and remote politicians what government cannot do and citizens quasi-private shopping, recreational, residential, and work should not do; citizens are demanding new kinds of ac- areas in which internal control is privatized? countability and responsibility; and neighborhoods are becoming sources of polity rather than mere locales in which Finally, for good or ill, social policies that relied on busing to people live and work. ensure equality of educational opportunity eroded the strengths of neighborhoods.

To be sure, these trends did not operate uniformly across 44NO longer are citizensin many cities. Moreover, these forces notwithstanding, destruction of communities willing to hear from remote neighborhood life and polity has not been uniform within politicians what governmentcannot do individual cities or throughout the country. In some cities such as Chicago, at least through the administration of the and citizens should not do. . . 99 late Mayor Daley, neighborhoods and wards maintain considerable power over the provision of city services and the allocation of political goods and services. Likewise, in Yet there is one important dimension in which neighbor- Boston for example, some neighborhoods have considerably hoods, even those that actually function as political units,do more power and access to goods and services than others.'' not operate as a true political system: the exercise of lawful One neighborhood, for example, not only garnered its own coercive force. Neighborhoods can serve as a polity, whose foot patrol officer who patrolled the area regularly at a time citizens lobby, unofficially govern in many dimensions, when neither foot patrol nor regular beat assignments indeed even patrol streets and parks. But the exercise of characterized police tactics, but successfully lobbied to official coercive force is reserved for city hall, for govern- restrict the types of off-duty assignments police could ment. This is not to say that neighborhoods do not use accept." These variations in neighborhoods are explained by coercion. Most often it takes the form of social persuasion, factors such as the political culture of the city, the form of threats, and informal means of approval and disapproval. city government, the demographic composition of the given Sometimes, however, illegal force is used in neighborhoods neighborhood, the extent to which neighbors feel threatened by criminal gangs, for example, who may use threats, and have been able to mobilize. vandalism, extortion, and other forms of coercion.I4Regard- less, "official" government largely maintainsa monopoly on legitimate use of force, primarily through its police 44. . .for good or ill, social policies that departments.l5 relied on busing . . . eroded the strengths of neighborhoods.99 Neighborhoods defending themselves Six factors in neighborhoods may contribute to the defense of a neighborhood against crime and disorder: Moreover, contemporary trends rejected the centralizationof governmental power. During the 1960's, dissatisfaction with 1. Individual citizensin associationwith police and centralization had its inchoate beginnings. criminal justice agencies.Individuals may act on their own to notify police of something untoward in their neighborhood At the local level, in the 1960s for the first time the or elsewhere. Moreover, citizens can become involvedin intellectual elite and the liberal national media aban- other elements of the criminal justice system in other ways, doned the argument of progressive reformers and for example as witnesses in court hearings. supported demands for decentralization of city

functions.l2 2. Individual citizens acting alone.Individuals may act on their own to protect themselves, others, and their neighborhood from crime,disorder, and fear. These actions include: examplessuggest, each elementcan detractor contributeto buying locks, weapons, alarmsystems, and other hardware; the competenceof a neighborhoodto defend itself against avoiding certain locations; restricting activities; assisting,or crime and disorder: not assisting,other persons who havedifficulty; moving out of the neighborhood; and hiring protectionfrom private A person who withdrawsbehind heavy doorsand securityfirms. substantial locks,armed with a guard dog and weapons, and who refusesto interact withneighbors, even 3. Private groups.Groups of citizensmay act on their own to the extent of observing behaviorin the street,may behalf to protect the neighborhood,its residents, and users. be detracting from the self-defenseof the community Their actions includeholding meetings; organizing neigh- rather than contributingto it. Such behavior may well borhood watchgroups; patrolling, lobbying,creating be an exampleof poor citizenship andirresponsibility telephone trees and "safehouses" for children; and monitor- rather thanprudent civilbehavior. ing courts. Further,they may purchase private securityto A neighborhoodanticrime groupthat consists exclu- protect their homes,streets, entranceways,or lobbies. sively of homeowningwhites in a racially mixed neighborhood with manyrenters may detract from community order by increasing the levelof racial an- 66 Groups of citizens may act on their tagonism betweengroups. own behalf to protect the neighborhood, A communityagency thatsponsors a food program its residents, and users.9 9 for homeless personsmay increase thelevel of citizen fear as a result of the increasing numberof homeless persons who frequentthe area.

4. Formal private organizations.Organizations suchas A large food chainthat developsa neighborhood funded communityactivist and communitydevelopment shoppingcenter that includes arecord-video store organizations implementand maintain neighborhood and a video-gameparlor may attract manyyouths to programs thatmay include recreationfor youths, victim the facility. Moreover,if the chain retains substantial assistance, gang and other forms of youth work, and commu- numbers of off-duty police officers,it may keep order nity organization. (These organizationsare different from and controlyouths in the facility. Nevertheless,al- traditional social agencies thatoperate citywide.) though the facility mightbe secure with morepolice in the neighborhood, the policemight define their re- 5. Commercial firms.Small shopkeepersand largecorpora- sponsibilityas protecting the assetsof the food chain. tions suchas hospitals, universities, shoppingmalls, and Increased numbersof youths, who now congregatein other institutions may purchase,or in some casesprovide areas adjacent to the shopping center, might engage their own, proprietary protective services. in horseplay,commit minor acts of vandalism on nearby residences,and, as a consequence,signifi- 6. Public criminal justice agencies.Police, as well as the cantly increase the levelof disorder and fear in the other elementsof the criminal justice system, mayoperate on neighborhood. their own to defend the safety of neighborhoods.

Several observationscan be made about theseelements of a community's self-defense capacity. First,in the Anglo- 6 6.. . the more police tendto solve Saxon tradition, crime control was a private,community problems, the less likely it isthat people responsibility that only recentlyhas becomeprimarily a public responsibility. Most publicorganizations of social will resort to their own devices.99 control are barely150 years old.I6Moreover, American political ideology still holds that private solutions to problems, whether the problems are relatedto health, Black and BaumgartnerI8raise the interesting point education, welfare,or crime and disorder,are preferable to that the relationshipbetween the intensityof police public solutions. Justas neighborhoodsprovide the informal presence in neighborhoods and the amountof citizen political infrastructurethat keeps urban governmentafloat," self-help in solving problems might beinverse: that neighborhood and private social controlprovide the under- is, the more police tend to solve problems,the less pinnings on which public institutionsof control build. likely it is that people will resort totheir own devices. Aconsequence of increased police presence Second,the impactof the elementsof neighborhood social control isnot necessarily cumulative.As the following and activity might be just the opposite of desired re- Both critics and supporters of the idea of neighborhood sults-the weakening, rather than the strengthening, primacy in efforts to control crime, fear, and disorder have of a neighborhood. been troubled by the limited evidence of the success of community crime control efforts and by the limited number Note that the forms that neighborhood defense take can not of citizens who participate in such efforts. Although we hope only increase or decrease the capacity of neighborhoods to that such efforts will meet with success (and believe that defend themselves, but also can influence the quality of over the long term they will) and wish that many more neighborhood life in other ways as well. Purchasing guns citizens would involve themselves in such efforts, we do not and locks does little or nothing to create or sustain commu- share the concerns mentioned above. nity relationships; they might even interfere with their development or maintenance. Similarly, calling police to deal with incidents does little to create relationships within neighborhoods. Citizen patrols, neighborhood watch, neighborhood 66.. . many neighborhoodsappear to be meetings with police to discuss problems, on the other hand, in the hands of 'caretakers' . . . Their all foster the development of neighborhood relationships and numbers may notbe large. . . but their sense of community. influence and potentialare. 9 9 There are legitimate reasons to be concerned about fairness and equity in the supply of resources for community defense. The poor are in need of as much protection as the rich-at Regarding the issue of effectiveness, we agree with Nathan times, more. Moreover, there are reasons to fear that the Glazer: actions of the well-to-do to defend themselves might increase the jeopardy of the less well-off. Thus, we are Whatever the failures of community control and com- concerned about the public quality of individual and organ- munity participation, whatever the modificationof the izational responses to crime, disorder, and fear. Guns and new procedures built on the slogan of more power to locks might protect individuals but do nothing for neighbor- the people, the thesis that had characterized the old hood security. Walling off corporations from communities progressivism, with its enthronementof the strong by architectural and security measures can secure those mayor, the single powerful board, the strong federal organizations but further erode community bonds and government, and the wisdom of the experts they

safety. l9 selected, a thesis that had been dominant for sixty years or more among liberal experts on government, never returned. Community control and participationmay not have been a great success, but it led to no desire to 66 The poor are in need of as much return to a situation that was seen as even less protection as therich--at times, more.99 desirable.2'

Given the continuing intolerably high levelsof crime, fear, and disorder, and the inability of police and other criminal Also, ensuring the rights of those who have a different sense justice agencies to manage it effectively, this is as tTue in of public morality and the rights of offenders is an important community self-defense as in other areas Glazer may have in part of the public quality of a community's self-defense mind. efforts. We will discuss these issues in some detail later. Moreover, we do not despair at the number of citizens who In sum, although we are developing some knowledge about actively participate in neighborhood governance. Elsewhere, the ecology of crime in cities and neighborhoods,2Owe know one of the authors (Kelling) has discussed this issue and practically nothing about the ecology of neighborhood or noted that many neighborhoods appear to be in the hands of city self-defense. Depending on circumstances, elements of "caretakers"-persons who meet regularly, note neighbor- control (1) complement each other and thereby improve hood conditions, schedule a few annual events, maintain overall neighborhood self-defense; (2) neutralize each other liaison with other neighborhood groups and "official and cancel out their impact; or (3) interact to make problems government," and rally neighborhood forces in the face of worse. We simply do not know how to take the different some threat.22Their numbers may not be large (often six to circumstances into account. ten persons), but their influence and potential are. Suttles describes a similar situation: Protest groups, conservation committees, landowners' groups, and realty associations spring into existence, thrive, and then decline,as the issue which brought functioningof neighborhoods.Yet little is known,beyond them into existence waxes andwanes. All this tends to narrative discussions, about the contributionof commerceto give the defendedneighborhood an ephemeraland neighborhoods, especiallycommerce's contribution to the transient appearance,as if it were a social artifact. But capacityof a neighborhood todefend itself againstcrime,

these socialforms are real enough,and they leave at fear, and disorder.29330 However,as one of the authorsof least a residueof a formulafor subsequentcohesion.23 this paper points out: Reducing crimeand its disruptiveeffect on community What is clear isthat just as neighborhoodsvary in their ties eliminatesthe largestand mostdevastating ability to obtain goodsand services,they also vary in their obstacleto developmentin many poorneighborhoods. competence to defend themselvesagainst predators.Defining And where businesses can develop,they encourage neighborhood competence, however,is difficult. Peter Hunt, furthergrowth and help createa community's cohe- a memberof the Executive Session on Community Policing siveness andid en tit^.^' and former executivedirector of the Chicago Area Project, uses such phrasesas "problem-solvingcommunity," "self- Neighborhoods and their self-help activities alsohave their regulating," "organized,"and "able to exert poweron behalf dark side. By their very nature,cities, and neighborhoods of its interests" to describeneighborhood ~ompetence.~~ within them, arepluralistic placesin which strangers Crenson2houldadd others:"rich in civility," "able to routinely meet.These characteristics, pluralism andthe respond tocrises," and "well governed."S~ttles~~ identifies interactionamong strangers, present latitudefor civil and strong communitiesas places in which "communion"of moral injustices. personal thoughts and feelings cantake placeamong others with whom onehas chosen to live orwork. Pluralism characterizes neighborhoodsin two dimensions: the relationshipof different groups(often ethnicor racial) between neighborhoods, andthe relationshipof different 6 6 Stripped of working-and middle-class groupswithin neighborhoods. Interneighborhood residents-the skillsthey possess, the pluralism needs little discussion-it is widely accepted as descriptiveof cities. Intraneighborhood pluralism,however, values they represent,and the institutions has notbeen as readily apparent. they support-such neighborhoodsand their residents experience massive The ethnic,racial, and cultural homogeneityof neighborhoods hasbeen emphasizedin popular imagesof neighbor- problems. 9 9 hoods as well as in scholarly Yet, contemporary research has demonstratedthat neighborhoods, eventhose that appear tobe homogeneous onsome basis, are characterized by considerableheterogeneity. Aparticular groupmight The issue of neighborhoodcompetence isof enormous culturally dominate an area;yet as Suttle~~~and Merry34 have significance. Currentdiscussions of extraordinarilytroubled demonstrated, neighborhoods are characterizedby extensive neighborhoodareas, such as the Robert TaylorHomes in internal diversity-individuals and groupsmove into and out Chicago,raise basic issues of the competenceof neighbor- of neighborhoods, differing groups sharespace, and bounda- hoods to defendthem~elves.~~ Stripped of working- and ries (cognitive,as well as physical) shiftover time. middle-classresidents-the skillsthey possess,the values they represent, andthe institutions theysupport-such neighborhoods andtheir residentsexperience massive problems. As Wilson notes: 66.. . neighborhoods,even those that . . . the communitiesof the underclassare plagued by appear to be homogeneouson some basis, massive joblessness, flagrant and openlawlessness, are characterizedby considerable and low-achieving schools, andtherefore tendto be avoided by outsiders.Consequently, the residentsof heterogeneity.9 9 these areas, whether women and childrenof welfare familiesor aggressivestreet criminals, haveincreas- ingly been socially isolatedfrom mainstreampatterns Intra- and interneighborhoodpluralism and the use of of behavior.28 neighborhoodsby strangers create thepossibility for conflict between groups andindividuals who maintain different It is widely believedthat a key elementof the vitality,or lifestyles,define neighborhood civilityin differentways, or competence,of neighborhoodsis commerce,especially small wish to imposetheir standards onothers-either in terms of shops that appear to havea substantialstake in the civil how theybehave or how they wishothers to behave. Most transactions betweenmembers of different groupsor quickly to police via 91 1 systems, provide information to strangers occurwith little difficulty. Goffman"demonstrates police about criminal events, andto cooperatewith prosecu- clearly that even strangers meet inpatterned uncommitted tors and courtsin the adjudication of offenders. interactions.That is, a traffic relationship is maintained, the purpose of which is toavoid untoward physicalcontact, This is a troublingand deeplymistaken metaphorfor police. achievesatisfactory spatialdistance, avoid eye contact,and First, it suggeststhat police areout there alone fightingevil manage civilly the numerous contacts that occuras strangers misdoers. This is specious.We knowthat citizens, groups, negotiate cities. and organizationsare deeply involvedin dealing with community problems. Second, theimagery of the thin blue line misrepresents the originsof crime and disorder. True, some predators do enter neighborhoods from outside, but a 66 When an offense occurs between significant portionof neighborhood problems,even serious strangers, the incident itself and the crime problems such as assault,child abuse, burglary,date- behaviors signifying offense are generally rape, and others havetheir origins within a neighborhoodas well as from without. Third, it misrepresents theobjectives minor-part of the cost of living a of the majority of police work.The imagery suggests cosmopolitan life. 9 9 isolating persons who are dangerousfrom the good people of the community.This might be true for someserious and repeat offenders. If, however,we believe that theorigins of many problems arewithin neighborhoods and involve Within or between neighborhoods, problemsdevelop when disputes, disorder,and conflicts, as well as serious crime, a individuals, groups,or residentsof a neighborhoodeither more proper representationof police is that of problem take or give ~ffense.~~,~'When an offense occurs between identifiers,dispute resolvers, and managersof relations-not strangers, the incident itself and thebehaviors signifying merely persons authorizedto arrest criminals."" offenseare generallyminor-part of the cost of living a cosmopolitanlife. Feelings maybe ruffled, demeanorturned grumpy,but all of meager consequence. 66.. . the imagery of the thin blue line When, however, the offense is major (prostitutes haranguing misrepresents the origins of crime and pedestrian and automotive traffic) orneighbors become aggrievedtoo easily (neighborhood residents resenting disorder. 9 9 minorities passing through their neighborhood), civilityis shattered andthe possibility of seriousconflict eruptingis created. In the caseof prostitutes haranguing citizens,almost The metaphor of the thin blue line is deeply mistaken notjust everyonein the neighborhood wouldagree that something because it misrepresents police business,but because it has should be done, if necessaryby police. largely determined how policehave shaped their relationship to neighborhoods and communitiesin the past. Moreover,it The case of minoritiesin neighborhoods,however, is an has often put them in conflict with neighborhoods. exampleof the potentialtyranny of neighborhoods,indeed, the potential tyrannyof democracy-the suppression of Police saw theirprimary responsibilityas crime persons whofor one reasonor another are considered control and solving crimes;citizens wanted police to objecti~nable.~~This is the dark side of intimate neighbor- improvethe quality of urban lifeand create feelings hoods: just as neighborhoodscan be places of congeniality, of personal security,as well as to control crime. sociability,and safety, they can alsobe places of smallness, meanness, and tyranny. Police wanted to be independentof political and neighborhoodcontrol-they viewed such accounta- The role of police in neighborhoods bility as tantamountto corruption; citizens wanted police to be accountableto neighborhoods-inevit- ably a formof political accountability. Police have been depicted as a community'sbastion against crime, disorder, and fear: the "thin blue line" fortifying a Police wantedto structure impersonal relationswith community against predators and wrongdoer^.^' This notion, citizens andneighborhoods; citizens wanted intimate if not promulgatedby the current generationof police relations with police. leaders, atleast has not beendenied by most police.In this view, police are acity's professionaldefense against crime Police tacticsemphasized automobile preventive and disorder;the responsibilityof citizens isto report crimes patrol and rapid response to callsfor service; citizens wanted foot patrol or other tactics that would increase capacities, in inner-city underclass areas, and in neighbor- the quantity and improve the quality of policelcitizen hoods most plagued by lawlessness, it is tempting for police interaction (as well as rapid response). to operate independently and without community consultations. The problems are so acute and the resources so meager Police saw themselves as the thin blue line between that consultations may appear inefficient and needlessly order and chaos; citizens often saw themselves as the time-consuming. This serves neither police nor residents primary source of control, backed up by police. well. Deprived of community authorization, police are vulnerable to charges of both neglect and abuse. Moreover, Police emphasized centralized efficiency; citizens the willingness of police to fill in the gap and "do it them- desired decentralized operations and localdecision- selves" deprives citizens of the very kinds of experiences making. An expression of this is participation in that American political philosophy suggests will lead them to meetings: police send community relations or crime "acquire a taste for order" and develop their capacities as prevention personnel outside the decisionmaking citizens. chain of command for the neighborhood; citizens prefer personnel empowered to make decision^.^'

Police are starting to modify their positions, however, and in 46 Police, like other agenciesof doing so have begun to change the nature of their relation- government, should notdo for citizens ship to c~mmunities.~~We believe that the following principles are now shaping the relationship between police what citizens can dofor themselves.9 9 and neighborhoods in many cities and should shape the position of police in most communities. 6. If it is believed that the function of police is to support and 1. Community self-defense against crime and disorder is increase the inherent strengths and self-governing capacities primarily a matter of private social control supported, but of neighborhoods that enable them to defend themselves never supplanted, by public police. against crime and disorder, it follows that a priority of police in bereft neighborhoods is not only to gain authorization for 2. Because neighborhoods vary in the nature of their prob- police action but also to help develop capacities for commu- lems and in their capacity for self-help (their ecology of nity self-defense. Given the desperate circumstances of some self-defense), police tactics must be tailored to specific inner-city neighborhoods, this will be an extremely difficult neighborhoods. task. It will, at times, be extraordinarily risky for citizens to attempt to defend their neighborhoods.The risk can be justified only if police commit themselves to pervasive 46 Deprived of community authorization, presence for long durations of time. Such presence must police are vulnerableto charges of both always support and encourage self-help. neglect and abuse.9 9 7. In neighborhoods that are capable of self-help and governance, police activities shouldbe designed and implemented for the purpose of strengthening neighbor- 3. Tailoring tactics to neighborhoods will require decentrali- hoods. Police, like other agencies of government, should not zation of police authority and tactical decisionmaking to do for citizens what citizens can do for themselves. There are lower levels of the organization and the empowermentof reasons to believe that when government does supplant self- sergeants and patrol officers to make decisions about the help, the capacity of citizens for self-help diminishes. types of problems with which they will deal and the tactics they will employ to deal with them. 8. Because different neighborhoods have different interests, interests that at times conflict with each other, police will 4. Precinct and beat configuration must be changed to reflect have to manage interneighborhood, as well as intraneighbor- community and neighborhood form. hood, relations. Neighborhoods require free commerce and penetration by strangers and other groups if they are to 5. In the most troubled neighborhoods, especially those now thrive. being ravaged by the problems associated with drugs, police must at least seek authority from residents to act on their 9. Police must understand that just as their task is to support behalf. In neighborhoods that are most bereft of self-help the self-help capacities of neighborhoods when those capacities are used for appropriate ends, they must thwart self-help capacities of neighborhoods when they turn petty, keeping one's property, even keeping one's life or physical mean, and tyrannical. Police are well-equipped for this. well-being. Regardless of the severity of neighborhood During the past two decades "constitutional policing," at first problems or the competence of neighborhoods in dealing resisted by many police but later embraced and incorporated with them, the police monopoly over legitimateuse of force by the great chiefs and police leaders of the era, has empow- requires that police assist neighborhoodswhen force might ered police to withstand parochial pres~ure."~This does not be required to settle neighborhood problems. mean that police will not have to be vigilant in resisting inappropriate pressures; it means that police executives have To respond appropriately police must view their role in moved to instill the values and policies that will help them neighborhoods as a means of reestablishing the neighboring maintain constitutional practice. Justice is as important as relationships and strengthening the institutions that makea security in policing. community competent and able to deal with its problems. Zachary Tumin has summarized the role of a police officer in Conclusion carrying through such a function: The role of the professional police officer as a profes- Police are now adapting to changes taking place in American sional is therefore to know the status of his local society. One of those changes is the reversal in the trend institutions; to understand how, when, and why they to centralization in government and the reemergence of work; to understand their strengths and their vulnera- neighborhoods as a source of governance. This change bilities; to know their members or users, that is, to raises a hot issue for police. Are they agents or servants of know the people whose relationships comprise the neighborhoods? institutions, and why they participate or don't.44

While we have emphasized restructuring police and increas- Police are now attempting to create a world in which they are ing their accountability to neighborhoods, we do not see more responsive to neighborhoods and communities. Their them as servants of neighborhoods. Police protect other task is not just to serve; it is also to lead by helping to foster values, as well as neighborhood values. What are those wider tolerance of strangers, minorities, and differing values? At least three. definitions of morality. How will this be accomplished? Many tactics will be used. But, at a minimum, it will require First, public police must be distributed fairly across cities on setting firm control over their own conductand embodying a the basis of neighborhood need, not neighborhood political civil approach. clout.

Second, police must be able to maintain organizational Notes integrity. Police departments must have the right to develop and maintain their own personnel, administrative, and 1. Ulf Hannerz,Exploring theCity, New York,Columbia Univer- sity Press, 1980. technological capacities without political interference. 2. Gerald D. Suttles, The Social Construction ofCommunities, Chi- Finally, they must defend minority interests and civil rights cago, University ofChicago Press, 1972: 22. against the more parochial interests of some neighborhoods. 3. In a Boston neighborhood observedby one of this paper's authors, George Kelling, residentswho organized a community anticrime effortthat included both regular meetings and citizen patrol inviteda homeless woman who lived in a comer park to a 66.. .police must view their role in special meetingon rape prevention.She not only attendedthe neighborhoodsas a means of reestablish- meeting, she recounted her own rape. Subsequentcitizen patrols always checked thepark to ensure her safety. In fact, it could be ing the neighboring relationshipsand argued that there are times in some areas of cities when the strengthening the institutions that make a homeless comprisethe residency ofthe neighborhood-downtown areas, for example, which other citizensabandon during the community competent. . . 99 eveningsfor their own residential neighborhoods.

4. See, for example, StephanieW. Greenberg,William M.Rohe, and Jay R. Williams,Informal CitizenAction andCrime Prevention Neighborhoods need police for assistance in the control of at the NeighborhoodLevel: Synthesis and Assessmentof the crime, fear, and disorder. Some neighborhoods need police Research,Research Triangle Park,North Carolina, Research Triangle Institute, March 1984; Hannerz,E.xploring the City. only rarely; in other neighborhoods pervasive police presence is required to assure the simplest of rights-shopping, 5. Nathan Glazer, The Limits of Social Policy, Cambridge, Massa- 12. Glazer, Limits of Social Policy: 12 1 chusetts, Harvard UniversityPress, 1988: 120. 13. Ibid.: 122. 6. Andrew J. Polsky, "Welfare policy: Why the past has no future," Democracy 3, 1 (Winter 1983): 21-33. 14. An interesting account of neighbors using physicalforce was recounted in the New York Times, October 8, 1988. Two citizens in 7. Jane Jacobs, The Death and Life of Great American Cities, New a Detroit neighborhood burned down a building alleged to be used York, Random House, 1961; Oscar Newman, Defensible Space: by drug dealers, admitted it, and blamed their needto do it on the Crime Prevention Through Urban Design.New York, Macmillan, failure of city and police officials to heed their requests for 1972. assistance. Tried, the two were found innocent by their peers. The jury foreman was quoted: "I imagine the verdict does set out a 8. Glenn Yago, "Sick transit,"Democracy 3, 1 (Winter 1983): message in two directions-to the Mayor and the Chief of Police 43-55. that more has to be done about crack houses." Another juror said he would have done the same thing, but then added: "No, I would have 9. Marcus Felson, "Routine activities and crime prevention in the been more violent." The Wayne County Prosecutor said after the developing metropolis," Criminology 25,4 (1987). verdict: "Vigilantism simply will notbe tolerated."

10. Research on neighborhood groups recountedin this paper was 15. Egon Bittner, The Function of Police in Modern Society, Wash- conducted during 1982and 1983 and reported in George L. Kelling, ington, D.C., U.S. Government Printing Office, 1970. "Neighborhoods and police," Occasional Paper, Program in Criminal Justice Policy and Management, John F. Kennedy School 16. See, for example, Leon Radzinowicz, A History of English of Government, Harvard University,Cambridge, Massachusetts, Criminal Law, V.2: The Enforcement of the Law, London, Stevens August 1985. & Sons. 1956.

11. This neighborhood was laced with many nightclubs and bars. 17. Matthew B. Crenson,Neighborhood Politics, Cambridge, Mas- Police were employed off-duty as security personnel. When sachusetts, Harvard University, 1982: 19. conflicts arose between establishmentowners and residents over the noise at bar-closing time,residents believed that public police, 18. Donald Black and M.P. Baumgartner,"On self help in modem employed off-duty by owners, took the side of owners against society," in Donald Black,The Manners and Customs of the Police, residents. New York. Academic Press, 1980: 193-208.

19. See, for example, James K. Stewart, "The urban strangler: How crime causes poverty in the inner city," Policy Review 37 (Summer 1986), for examples of corporations that havedone just the opposite and contributed to community life through the forms that their security efforts took.

George L. Kelling is a Research Fellow in the Program in Criminal 20. See, for example, Lawrence E.Cohen and Marcus Felson, Justice Policy and Management at the John F.Kennedy School of "Social change and crime rate trends: A routine activity approach," Government,Harvard University,and Professor of Criminal American Sociological Review 44 (1979): 588-608. Justice at Northeastern Uni~~ersity.James K. Stewart is Director of the National Institute of Justice, U.S.Department of Justice, and 2 1. Glazer, Limits of Social Policy: 123. formerly head of the Criminal Investigation Division of the Oakland,California, Police Department. 22. Kelling, "Neighborhoods and police."

Editor of this series is Susan Michaelson, Program in C1.imina1 23. Suttles, Social Constructionof Communities:36. Justice Policy and Management, John F. Kennedy School of Government,Harvard University. 24. Peter Hunt, "Community development-should it be included as part of the police mission," note draftedfor Executive Session on Points of vie^^or opinions expressed in thispublicatiorz are those of Community Policing,Program in Criminal Justice Policy and Man- the author.s and do not necessarily representthe official position or agement, John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard Univer- policies of the U.S. Department of Justice or of Harvard University. sity, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1987.

The Assistant Attorney General,Office of Justice Progrzms, coordi- nates the activities of the follou~ingprogram Offices and Bureaus: National Institute of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Bureau of Justice Assistance, Office of Juvenile Justice and DelinquencyPre- vention, and Officefor Victims of Crime. 25. Crenson, Neighborhood Politics: 18. 39. See, for example,Anthony V. Bouza, "Police unions: paper tigers or roaring lions?" in William A. Geller, ed., Police Leader- 26. Suttles, Social Constructionof Communities:265. ship in America: Crisisand Opportunity,New York, Praeger, 1985.

27. See, for example, Gerald D. Suttles,The Social Orderof the 40. For a discussion of the erosion of this belief, see George L. Slum, Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1968; William Julius Kelling, "Police and Communities: the Quiet Revolution," Wilson, The Truly Disadvantaged: theInner City,the Underclass, Perspectives onPolicing No. I, National Institute of Justice and and Public Policy,Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1987. Harvard University, Washington, D.C., February 1988.

28. W. J. Wilson, Truly Disadvantaged:58. 41. This is adapted from Kelling,"Neighborhoods and police," p. 22. 29. See, for example, Jane Jacobs,Death and Life of. . . Cities,for a discussion of the importance of local commerce in the mainte- 42. For a discussionof the reasons behind this change, see Kelling, nance of neighborhood safety. "Police and Communities: the Quiet Revolution."

30. Ulf Hannerz notes both the importance and lack of research 43. James K. Stewart, one of this paper's authors, has pointed out about the role of commerce in neighborhoods."One also finds that the period 1960-1980 is likelyto be remembered as the neighborhoods more or less wholly recruited on a work basis, such "constitutional era'-the era when chiefs of police like Patrick V. as shopping streets with shopkeepers and their employees as Murphy, ClarenceKelley, Robert Igleburger, and many others daytime neighbors. Of their kind ofneighboring there is hardly any embraced, rather than resisted, many of the major constitutional and ethnography." Exploring the City:264. legal decisions that affected police practice(Mirunda, the exclu- sionary rule, etc.). 3 1. Stewart, "Urban strangler": 6. 44. Zachary Tumin,"Managing relations with the community," 32. See, for example, Robert E. Park, Ernest W. Burgess, and Working Paper #86-05-06, Program in Criminal Justice Policy and Robert D. McKenzie, The City,4th edition, Chicago, University of Management, John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard Chicago Press, 1967. University, Cambridge, Massachusetts, November 1986, final page.

33. Suttles, Social Constructionof Communities:25.

34. Sally Engle Merry, Urban Danger:Life in a Neighborhood of Strangers, Philadelphia, TempleUniversity Press, 1981 : 93-1 24.

35. Erving Goffman, Relations in Public, New York, Basic Books, 1971.

36. This is based on Mark H. Moore's definition of civility: "Neither to give nor take offenseeasily." Personal conversation.

37. Marcus Felson suggests that the problem of dealing with strangers is becoming even more complicated in contemporary American cities, characterized as they are by large numbers of highly mobile untended youths (the sourceof the majority of the problems of crime, disorder, and fear) and untended neighborhoods The Executive Session on Policing, like other Executive (two-career marriages). N. 9 above, "Routine activities and crime Sessions at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government, prevention in the developing metropolis." is designed to encourage a new form of dialog between high-level practitioners andscholars, with a view to 38. This fear was expressed early in America's history by Alexis de redefining and proposing solutions for substantive policy Tocqueville,Democracy inAmerica, V. 1 [ 18331, New York, issues. Practitioners rather thanacademicians are given Vintage Books, 1954. majority representation in the group. The meetings of the Session are conducted as loosely structured seminars or policy debates.

Since it began in 1985, the Executive Session on Policing has met seven times. During the 3-day meetings, the3 1 members have energetically discussed the facts and values that have guided, and those that should guide, policing. The Executive Session on Policing convenes the following distinguished panel of leaders in the field of policing: Francis Roache, Commissioner Allen Andrews Robert R.Kiley, Chairman Boston PoliceDepartment Metropolitan Transportation Authority Superintendentof Police Boston, Massachusetts Peoria, Illinois New York, New York Camille CatesBarnett, Ph.D. Robert B. Kliesmet, President Michael E. Smith, Director Director of Finance and Administration International Union of PoliceAssociations Vera Instituteof Justice New York, New York Houston, Texas Am430 Washington,D.C. Cornelius Behan, Chief Darrel Stephens, ExecutiveDirector Bal'timoreCounty Police Department Richard C. Larson,Professor and Police Executive ResearchForum Baltimore County,Maryland Co-Director Washington, D.C. OperationsResearch Center Lawrence Binkley,Chief James K. Stewart, Director Long BeachPolice Department ~assachusettsInstitute of Technology Cambridge, Massachusetts National Instituteof Justice Long Beach, California U.S. Department ofJustice Lee P. Brown, Chief George Latimer, Mayor Washington,D.C. Houston Police Department St. Paul, Minnesota Houston,Texas Robert Trojanowicz,Professor and Director School of Criminal Justice Susan R. Estrich,Professor Edwin MeeseI11 Former Attorney General of the Michigan State University School of Law East Lansing, Michigan HarvardUniversity United States Washington, D.C. Camhridge,Massachusetts Kevin Tucker.Commissioner Mark H. Moore PhiladelphiaPolice Department Daryl F. Gates, Chief Philadelphia,Pennsylvania Los Angeles Police Department Daniel and Florence Guggenheim Los Angeles, California Professor of Criminal JusticePolicy and Management Benjamin Ward,Commissioner Herman Goldstein,Professor John F. Kennedy School of Government New York City Police Department School of Law Harvard University New York, New York University of Wisconsin Cambridge, Massachusetts Madison, Wisconsin Robert Wasserman, ResearchFellow Patrick Murphy,Professor of Police Science Program inCriminal JusticePolicy Francis X. Hartmann, Executive Director John Jay College of Criminal Justice and Management Program in Criminal JusticePolicy New York, New York John F. Kennedy School of Government and Management Harvard University John F. Kennedy Schoolof Government Sir KennethNewman Cambridge, Massachusetts HarvardUniversity Former Commissioner Daniel Whitehurst,President Cambridge,Massachusetts ScotlandYard & CEO Peter Hunt,former Executive Director London, England Whitehurst California Chicago AreaProject Former Mayorof Fresno Chicago,Illinois Oliver B. Revell Fresno, California ExecutiveAssistant Director George L. Kelling,Professor Federal Bureau of Investigation Hubert Williams,President School of Criminal Justice U.S. Department ofJustice Police Foundation Northeastern University Washington,D.C. Washington, D.C. Boston, Massachusetts, and Research Fellow,Program in Criminal James Q. Wilson, Collins Professor Justice Policy and Management of Management John F. Kennedy Schoolof Government Graduate Schoolof Management Harvard University University of California Cambridge, Massachusetts Los Angeles, California -- U.S. Department of Justice BULK RATE Office of Justice Programs POSTAGE & FEES PAID National Institute of Justice DOJ/NIJ Permit No. G-91 Washington,D.C. 20531

Official Business Penalty for Private Use$300

U.S. GOVERNMENT PRl NTl NG OFF1CE: 1989-241-714/80035