Citizen trust in Centralized and decentralized police systems: A tale of tw w rlds GRICHAWAT LOWATCHARIN • JUDITH I STALLMANN Truman School of Public Affairs, University of Missouri RPLC Webinar• March 30th, 2016 Decentralization Decentralization: FOCUS the transfer of power/ OF THIS STUDY authority from a higher level of Vertical Decentralization of government to a lower level of General-Purpose Police government (vertical decentralization) General-purpose police = police officers “with full powers of Since the 1980s, international access, arrest, and investigation organizations have promoted for any criminal offense and assisted in decentralization throughout the territory of the authorizing government unit” reforms—particularly, in (Bayley, 1992, p. 517) developing countries March 29, 2016 CENTRALIZED AND DECENTRALIZED POLICE SYSTEMS 2 Context of Policing in Thailand Least honest public institution (2000) Highest level of corruption (2013) Source: http://122.155.0.199/jabchai/images_joke/3711/3711-1.jpg March 29, 2016 CENTRALIZED AND DECENTRALIZED POLICE SYSTEMS 3 History of Thai Police Reforms Two major reforms in modern history Thailand started 1933 1998-2004 decentralizing powers to local governments Integrated RTP various police transferred in the 1990s agencies into the Office of 238 public Ministry of the the Prime Interior Minister goods/services decentralized; no Ministry of Office of the interior prime minister police services Structure of Royal Thai Police Department Royal Thai Police Police (RTP) remains accountability, Source: http://www.facebook.com effectiveness, Efficiency, responsiveness, public highly centralized participation March 29, 2016 CENTRALIZED AND DECENTRALIZED POLICE SYSTEMS 4 Recent Proposals for Reforms 2006 2011 Self-governing Police Reform Chiang Mai Committee Movement 2014 2014 Decentralization Student and People’s from the People Network Democratic of police services for Thailand’s Reform national government Reform Committee to the local governments March 29, 2016 CENTRALIZED AND DECENTRALIZED POLICE SYSTEMS 5 A Call for Research Centralization/ decentralization of 1980s-1990s 2010s police services is a Study of the police More studies of the common policy issue systems was relatively police systems; mostly for countries around new descriptive the world Some descriptive case Brazil Mexico Philippines Lack of standardized studies; very few comparative studies typology of police South Korea Thailand Venezuela systems More comparative, generalizable Difficult to conduct empirical studies empirical There is a gap in needed (Bayley, 1992) comparative studies empirical research March 29, 2016 CENTRALIZED AND DECENTRALIZED POLICE SYSTEMS 6 Decentralization in more/less developed countries Decentralization has Research finds differences between VS stronger historical roots in the more developed and less developed countries than developed countries in: in developing countries Technological accumulation and (Mills et al., 1990; B. C. production capacity Smith, 1985) (Bell & Pavitt, 1997) Human capital Decentralization in most (Noorbakhsh & Paloni, 2001) developing countries Governance capacity began in the 1970s or later (Strauss, 2001) (Cheema & Rondinelli, Administration of police services 2007) (Das, 2006; Kurian, 2006; Sullivan, 2005) March 29, 2016 CENTRALIZED AND DECENTRALIZED POLICE SYSTEMS 7 Objectives 1 To develop a typology of police systems based on the theories/concepts of new institutionalism, decentralization, and fiscal federalism 2 To examine the effect police systems on citizen trust in the police via empirical analyses of 72 countries 3 To examine the effect police systems on citizen trust in the police in the more and less developed countries March 29, 2016 CENTRALIZED AND DECENTRALIZED POLICE SYSTEMS 8 Framing a New Typology Administrative Decentralization: transfer of managerial/supervisory responsibility (e.g., planning, management, resource allocation) Political Decentralization: transfer of decision-making authority to lower level DECENTRALIZATION of government OF PUBLIC GOODS AND SERVICES Fiscal Decentralization: transfer of $ $$ authority for revenue generation, allocation, and expenditure for the provision of public services March 29, 2016 CENTRALIZED AND DECENTRALIZED POLICE SYSTEMS 9 New Typology of Police Systems POLICE DECENTRALIZATION INDEX (PDI) measures the varying degrees of PDI = B / A police decentralization Based on the following components: United States Thailand A B C Federal Government National States Government $$$ Counties PAOs Municipalities Municipalities TIERS OF TIERS OF TIERS OF GOVERNMENT GOVERNMENT WITH GOVERNMENT WITH PDI = 1.00 PDI = 0.33 POLITICAL/ADMIN. FISCAL CONTROL CONTROL OVER POLICE OVER POLICE March 29, 2016 CENTRALIZED AND DECENTRALIZED POLICE SYSTEMS 10 Canada Canada Tiers of Police Operational Jurisdiction Government National Regional Local Contract Out Federal Royal Canadian Government Mounted Police Own Provincial Contract Out TIERS OF TIERS OF Police Forces*** Provinces and or GOVERNMENT GOVERNMENT Territories Contracted-Out WITH POLICE Police Forces Supra-regional Councils* 5 4 Regional Regional Police Contract Out Councils** Forces Own Municipal Police Forces**** Municipalities or Contracted-Out PDI = 0.80 Municipal Police * Two in Quebec. ** British Columbia, Ontario, and Quebec; names vary, i.e. regional, supra-local, and metropolitan authorities.*** Ontario and Quebec. **** Larger municipalities. March 29, 2016 CENTRALIZED AND DECENTRALIZED POLICE SYSTEMS 11 March 29, 2016 CENTRALIZED AND DECENTRALIZED POLICE SYSTEMS 12 Theoretical Framework A move from a centralized police system to a decentralized one denotes an institutional change that is hypothesized to lead to changes in behavior and performance of the police Decentralization is Decentralized Institutions provide more responsive to provision of public information and citizens’ goods/services affect individual’s preferences, and reveals citizen behavior and enhances preference/demand performance accountability and and enhances responsiveness efficiency NEW DECENTRALIZATION FISCAL FEDERALSIM INSTITUTIONALISM March 29, 2016 CENTRALIZED AND DECENTRALIZED POLICE SYSTEMS 13 Hypotheses H1 72 COUNTRIES Higher level of citizen trust in the police (+ relationship) H2 COUNTRIES COMPARISON More developed countries DECENTRALIZED will have higher level of POLICE SYSTEM citizen trust in the police VS than less developed countries March 29, 2016 CENTRALIZED AND DECENTRALIZED POLICE SYSTEMS 14 Empirical Analysis DATA Unbalanced panel data VARIABLES ENTITY TIME Dependent Variable 72 12 Y Citizen trust in police (%) countries years Independent Variable TOTAL OBSERVATION X Police decentralization index 321 country-years Control Variables C Governance measures Select Sources of Data Environmental measures Socio-economic measures Demographic measures Geographic measures March 29, 2016 CENTRALIZED AND DECENTRALIZED POLICE SYSTEMS 15 Empirical Analysis (cont.) One-way (year) More Developed Less Developed MODELS random effects 1 Australia 1 Albania 25 Jordan 2 Austria 2 Argentina 26 Kazakhstan 3 Belgium 3 Azerbaijan 27 Kenya 72 countries 4 Canada 4 Bangladesh 28 Latvia 1 5 Czech Republic 5 Belarus 29 Lithuania 6 Denmark 6 Bolivia 30 Mauritius 7 Finland 7 Brazil 31 Mexico More developed countries (24) 8 France 8 Bulgaria 32 Moldova 9 Germany 9 Chile 33 Morocco 2 Human Development Index ≥ 0.8 10 Ireland 10 Colombia 34 Nicaragua 11 Israel 11 Costa Rica 35 Panama Less developed countries (48) 12 Italy 12 Croatia 36 Paraguay 13 Japan 13 Dominican Republic 37 Peru 3 Human Development Index < 0.8 14 Korea, Rep. 14 Ecuador 38 Philippines 15 Luxembourg 15 El Salvador 39 Poland 16 Netherlands 16 Estonia 40 Portugal Less More Developed Developed 17 New Zealand 17 Georgia 41 Russian Federation 18 Norway 18 Greece 42 Thailand 19 Slovenia 19 Guatemala 43 Trinidad and Tobago 20 Spain 20 Honduras 44 Turkey 21 Sweden 21 Hungary 45 Uganda 22 Switzerland 22 India 46 Ukraine 23 United Kingdom 23 Indonesia 47 Uruguay 24 United States 24 Jamaica 48 Venezuela March 29, 2016 CENTRALIZED AND DECENTRALIZED POLICE SYSTEMS 16 Descriptive Statistics DEPENDENT CONTROL OBS. MEAN SD MIN. MAX. OBS. MEAN SD MIN. MAX. Y VARIABLE C VARIABLE Citizen trust in the Governance 321 58.17 19.51 12.20 91.90 police (%) Democracy index 321 8.89 2.30 -6.00 10.00 Corruption perception index 321 5.79 2.29 1.70 9.70 INDEPENDENT Civil conflict index 321 0.28 1.08 0.00 7.00 OBS. MEAN SD MIN. MAX. X VARIABLE Environmental Police decentralization Police rate 321 297.83 114.86 82.07 692.54 321 0.55 0.24 0.25 1.00 Armed police 321 0.91 0.28 0 1 index Formal contact rate 321 1762.94 1512.44 25.05 7094.88 Homicide rate 321 7.59 13.32 0.40 91.40 POLICE DECENTRALIZATION INDEX FREQUENCY PERCENT Firearm ownership rate 321 17.66 17.92 0.50 88.80 Socio-economic 0.25 6 8.33 GDP per capita 321 22981 19733 485 112477 0.33 22 30.56 GDP per capita (log) 321 9.51 1.21 6.18 11.63 0.40 1 1.39 Income inequality index 321 36.36 9.88 22.70 58.00 0.50 11 15.28 Unemployment rate 321 7.16 3.23 0.70 25.20 Years of schooling 321 9.76 2.39 3.50 13.10 0.60 2 2.78 Demographic 0.67 13 18.06 Median age 321 34.84 7.22 15.43 45.52 0.75 4 5.56 Ethnic heterogeneity 321 0.30 0.22 0.00 0.93 0.80 1 1.39 Geographic 1.00 12 16.67 Population density 321 131.30 137.12 2.91 1099.60 Total 72 100 Neighbors' homicide spillover 321 8.67 11.79 0.00 63.21 March 29, 2016 CENTRALIZED AND DECENTRALIZED POLICE SYSTEMS 17 Key Findings: Police Decentralization Index and Citizen Trust MODELS COEF.