Evaluation of the Use of Dispersal Powers in the East End of Glasgow: Full Report Mcmillan, Lesley; Robertson, Annette
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Evaluation of the Use of Dispersal Powers in the East End of Glasgow: Full Report McMillan, Lesley; Robertson, Annette Publication date: 2012 Document Version Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record Link to publication in ResearchOnline Citation for published version (Harvard): McMillan, L & Robertson, A 2012, Evaluation of the Use of Dispersal Powers in the East End of Glasgow: Full Report. Glasgow Caledonian University. General rights Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. Take down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please view our takedown policy at https://edshare.gcu.ac.uk/id/eprint/5179 for details of how to contact us. Download date: 05. Oct. 2021 Glasgow 2012 Published by: Glasgow School for Business and Society Glasgow Caledonian University Cowcaddens Road Glasgow G4 OBA Telephone: 0141 331 8284/3181 ISBN: 9781905866588 The views expressed in this report are those of the research team and do not necessarily reflect the views of the funders. You are welcome to quote from the report but please acknowledge the source as: McMillan, L. and Robertson, A. (2012) An Evaluation of the Use of Dispersal Powers in the Parkhead Area of Glasgow, Glasgow: Glasgow Caledonian University. Contents List of figures and tables 4 Acknowledgements 6 Executive Summary 7 Chapter 1 – Introduction 10 1.1 Background 10 1.2 Aims and Objectives 11 1.3 Structure of the Report 11 Chapter 2 - Previous Research on Antisocial Behaviour and Dispersal Zones 12 2.1 Defining Anti-Social Behaviour 12 2.2 Measuring Antisocial Behaviour 13 2.3 Young People and Antisocial Behaviour 14 2.4 Young People and the Police 15 2.5 Young People and Gangs 16 2.6 Young People as Victims 17 2.7 Policy Documents 18 2.8 Diversion 19 2.9 Evaluating Strengths and Weaknesses of Using Dispersal Zones 19 Chapter 3 - Research Methodology 21 3.1 Analysis of Police Recorded Data and Official Statistics 21 3.2 In-depth Interviews 21 3.3 Survey of Local Community 22 3.4 Focus Groups with Young People 23 1 3.5 Analysis 23 3.6 Anonymity and Identification of Individuals 24 3.7 Ethical Considerations 24 Chapter 4 - The Parkhead Dispersal Zone 26 4.1 The Parkhead Area 26 4.2 The Dispersal Zone Location 29 4.3 Justifying the Use of Dispersal Powers in Parkhead 30 4.4 The Consultation Process 34 4.5 Partnership Approach 37 4.6 The Authorisation Process 40 4.7 Implementing the Dispersal Powers 43 4.8 Resourcing the Dispersal Zone 46 4.9 Using the Dispersal Powers 48 4.10 Extending the Use of the Dispersal Powers 53 4.11 Exit Strategy 54 Chapter 5 – The Results of the Use of the Dispersal Powers 56 5.1 Measuring Success 56 5.2 Impact on Crime and ASB 56 5.3 Crime Displacement 68 Chapter 6 - Perceptions of Antisocial Behaviour and the Use of Dispersal Powers in 74 Parkhead 6.1 Police Perceptions 74 6.2 Partner Perceptions 75 2 6.3 Local Community Views – Community Survey 78 6.4 Young People’s Views – Focus Group Findings 90 Chapter 7 – General Discussion & Conclusions 99 7.1 Consultation and Communication 99 7.2 Dispersal 100 7.3 Diversion 101 7.4 Displacement 101 7.5 Demonising Young People 102 7.6 The Usual Suspects 103 7.7 Sustainability of Results 103 7.8 Measuring Results 104 References 105 Appendices Appendix 1: There’s more to do than you think: Parkhead activity booklet 108 Parkhead Appendix 2: Dispersal Notice Leaflet 110 3 List of Tables and Figures Tables Table 1 Interviews with Partner Organisations 22 Table 2 Life Expectancy in Parkhead Compared to the Scottish Average by Gender 26 Table 3 Socioeconomic Indicators in the Parkhead Area Compared to Scottish Average 28 Table 4 Total Number of Exclusions, Dispersals and Arrests for Breach over the Lifetime 57 of the Parkhead Dispersal Order Table 5 Total number of individuals whose details were recorded by the police 58 Table 6 Breakdown of details recorded by gender 59 Table 7 Breakdown of individual data by age 59 Table 8 Total number of events for which data were provided by the police 60 Table 9 Number and percentage of dispersals and exclusions by reason recorded 60 Table 10 Number and percentage of arrests by reason recorded 61 Table 11 Stop and Search Data by Reason during the Lifetime of the Dispersal 63 Table 12 Groups 1-7 Crimes for the Dispersal Zone and Bordering Beats Over 3 Years 66 Table 13 Incidents (Complaints and Disturbances) for the Dispersal Zone and Bordering 67 Beats Over 3 Years Table 14 Stop and Search for the Dispersal Zone and Bordering Beats Over 3 Years 67 Table 15 Youth Incidents (STORM) for the Dispersal Zone and Bordering Beats Over 68 3 Years Table 16 Survey Respondents by Age Group 78 Table 17 Reasons for the Dispersal Order 82 Table 18 Understanding of the Dispersal Order Powers and Geographical Boundaries 83 Table 19 Do you think the dispersal order successfully reduced antisocial behaviour, 86 crime and the numbers of young people hanging around in public places? Table 20 Changes in Antisocial Behaviour, Crime and the Numbers of Young People 88 Hanging Around in Public Places since the End of the Dispersal List of Figures Figure 1 Life Expectancy in Parkhead Compared to the Scottish Average by Gender 27 Figure 2 Dispersal Zone Map 29 Figure 3 Parkhead Dispersal Zone Map 41 Figure 4 Exclusions, Dispersals and Arrests for Breach by Week 57 Figure 5 Complaints and Disturbances by Week 62 Figure 6 Stop and Search Data by Reason during the Lifetime of the Dispersal 64 Figure 7 Attitudes about the Extent of Antisocial Behaviour 79 Figure 8 Attitudes about the Extent of Crime 80 Figure 9 Feelings of Safety at Night-time by Age Group 81 Figure 10 Changes in Perceptions of Safety in the Local Area as a Result of the Dispersal 85 Figure 11 Dispersal Orders Unfairly Target Young People for being out in Groups by 87 Age Group 5 Acknowledgments The authors would like to thank the interviewees who shared their views and insights on the use of dispersal powers with us – both candidly and critically. Special thanks to the residents and young people of the East End for their unequivocal voicing of opinions and viewpoints. Research assistance was provided in various ways and at different stages by Rosie Elliott, William Graham, Marlene McMillan, Gordon Pearson, and Michelle Robertson. The research would not have been possible without the financial support of the Violence Reduction Unit, Strathclyde Police and The Scottish Institute for Policing Research (SIPR) Small Grants’ Scheme. The opinions expressed here, however, are those of the authors alone and any queries should be addressed to them. Dr Lesley McMillan ([email protected]) Dr Annette Robertson ([email protected]) 6 Executive Summary The aim of this research was to evaluate the use of dispersal powers in the Parkhead area of Glasgow. The dispersal order was in place from September 2009 to January 2010 and early indicators suggested a significant impact on antisocial behaviour in the area. The research sought to investigate the overall impact on the community by reviewing the available statistical evidence on crime and antisocial behaviour before, during and after the dispersal order was in place and also providing a qualitative overview, which involved talking to the police, statutory and non-statutory agencies involved to various degrees in the development and implementation of the dispersal order, and also the wider community, including young people. The general findings of the research are summarised under four main headings: overall conclusions, dispersal, diversion and displacement. Overall Conclusions In terms of meeting its main aim (‘To improve behaviour within the area and to offer respite to those within it who have suffered from antisocial behaviour over a substantial period of time’), there is evidence that the use of dispersal powers was successful – i.e. statistical data suggest there was a reduction in some forms of antisocial behaviour during the dispersal period and the community survey indicated it was felt to be a worthwhile initiative. There was some evidence of a public reassurance effect, which often results from such policing initiatives. As an example of a multi-agency partnership approach, the implementation of the dispersal zone appears to have been reasonably successful in pulling the resources of various agencies together. The police respondents spoke very positively about the initiative, the partner agencies equally so, but with some key reservations, whilst young people were most critical of the use of these powers. Although there appeared to be extensive consultation on the use of dispersal powers, it was suggested by some of those involved that this was perhaps not as inclusive or wide as it could have been. A large part of the community felt they were not sufficiently informed about the purpose and use of dispersal powers. A key feature of the diversion aspect of the initiative was sustainability, but this does not appear to have been successful to the extent that it could have been. In spite of claims that young people were not the intended target of the dispersal, many young people felt stigmatised and demonised by the initiative. A tendency was noted of a reliance on anecdotal and other non-empirical data, resulting in a certain level of mythologizing about the success of the initiative.