Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: November 22, 2024 Fri
Time: 12:06 pm
Time: 12:06 pm
Results for citizen participation
3 results foundAuthor: Guclu, Timur Title: Use of Volunteers in Policing Summary: Although the use of volunteers in policing is considered to be a relatively new program, the origin of uncompensated work in law enforcement can be traced back to the early Anglo-Saxon times in England (Greenberg, 2005). However, according to Ren, Zhao, Lovrich, and Gaffney (2006), despite the popularity of volunteers over the past two decades, there is still limited research on the use of volunteers in policing. Friedman (1998) suggested that through direct involvement in crime prevention, ordinary citizens have contributed considerably to the decline in crime rates that were witnessed during the middle to late 1990s. Citizen participation in volunteer activities can enhance police functions that include: (a) the ability to help clear crimes, (b) prevent crimes from occurring, (c) maintain public order in difficult situations, and (d) provide services to potential and current crime victims. In addition, given that agency resources are often limited, citizens voluntary participation can serve, to some extent, as an effective means of compensating for the lack of financial and workforce resources (Zhao, Gibson, Lovrich, & Gaffney, 2002). Similar to commercial private security, acceptance of volunteer policing has been transformed in less than a generation. Nevertheless, Bayley and Shearing (1996) identified trends that pose significant problems, particularly in regard to community mobilization and volunteerism. They found that there exists a great amount of selectivity concerning individual and community participation in government programs in general and criminal justice programs in particular. Details: Huntsville, TX: Sam Houston State University, Bill Blackwood Law Enforcement Management Institute of Texas, 2010. 8p. Source: Internet Resource: Telemasp Bulletin 17(1): Accessed March 16, 2015 at: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/411574/a_final_report_12_03_2015.pdf Year: 2010 Country: United States URL: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/411574/a_final_report_12_03_2015.pdf Shelf Number: 134922 Keywords: Citizen ParticipationPolicing Volunteers (U.S.) |
Author: Ross, Stuart Title: Evaluating neighbourhood justice: Measuring and attributing outcomes for a community justice program Summary: One of the most important recent developments in criminal justice has been that of 'neighbourhood' or 'community' justice. Community justice recognises the important role that local communities play in responding to crime and provides a way to engage the community in identifying crime problems and solutions (Karp & Clear 2000). Dealing with crime under a community justice model involves extending the role of the justice system to help build community resilience in relation to the problems that make crime possible or more likely. The first court established on a 'community justice' model was the Midtown Community Court, located in the Times Square district, New York, in 1993. Since then, the idea of community justice has gained wide acceptance and support. The Center for Court Innovation (New York) reports that more than 30 community court programs have been established in various jurisdictions in the United States. The first UK community court was established in Liverpool in 2005, followed by a further 12 courts around the United Kingdom in 2008. There are now community or neighbourhood courts in South Africa, Canada, Scotland, Singapore and Australia, with more scheduled to follow. As with any new justice program, the establishment of new community courts involves the investment of substantial amounts of public funds. It is therefore critical that governments understand whether these programs provide benefits commensurate with the funds invested in them. However, the evaluation of community and neighbourhood courts, and the calculation of cost-benefit measures pose a number of significant challenges. These include the complexity of the program model and in particular, its reliance on engagement with community service providers, the relatively small scale of many programs and the difficulty in attributing outcomes to a single cause. This Trends & Issues paper examines data from the first comprehensive Australian community justice initiative- the Neighbourhood Justice Centre (NJC) in the City of Yarra, Melbourne - and suggests a number of strategies to improve understanding of how programs like this contribute to improved justice and community outcomes. Details: Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology, 2015. 8p. Source: Internet Resource: Trends & issues in crime and criminal justice, No. 499: Accessed November 24, 2015 at: http://www.aic.gov.au/media_library/publications/tandi_pdf/tandi499.pdf Year: 2015 Country: Australia URL: http://www.aic.gov.au/media_library/publications/tandi_pdf/tandi499.pdf Shelf Number: 137324 Keywords: Citizen ParticipationCommunity Justice CentersNeighborhood Justice Centers |
Author: Morgan, Anthony Title: Estimating the costs associated with community justice Summary: In recent years, governments at all levels have been faced with increasingly tight budgets and limited resources, placing greater pressure on service providers - including those involved in crime prevention and criminal justice - to demonstrate value for money. This has resulted in a growing interest in economic analysis as a tool to assess the cost-efficiency and cost-effectiveness of programs and help inform decision-making. This is reflected in the evaluation guides that have been produced by treasury departments to encourage the robust economic analysis of government funded programs (eg Department of Treasury and Finance 2013). Established in 2007 to address high rates of crime and disadvantage, the Neighbourhood Justice Centre (NJC) provides a range of local justice and social services to the City of Yarra community in Victoria. A major challenge for the NJC is dealing with questions regarding value for money and responding to the criticism that they are an expensive alternative to traditional responses to crime and offending. The development and implementation of new and innovative programs often involves a significant financial investment by government and, in the case of the NJC, the concentration of these resources in one location. Recent examples, such as the abolition of several specialist court models in Queensland, have shown that, even where there is evidence of positive outcomes, an inability to demonstrate cost-efficiency and effectiveness in financial terms can weaken the argument in favour of ongoing funding and support - even where this is not the principal reason for the decision. The purpose of this paper is to address one dimension of the value for money debate and compare the operating costs of NJC court and client services with similar mainstream programs operating within the Magistrates' Court of Victoria. Following a brief overview of the NJC and evidence from previous economic studies of community justice models, the methodology used to estimate the costs associated with NJC court and client services is described, along with the results of a cost comparison of the NJC and the Magistrates' Court of Victoria. Directions for further economic analysis for the NJC and other similar programs are proposed. Details: Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology, 2015. 12p. Source: Internet Resource: Trends & issues in crime and criminal justice, No. 507: Accessed November 24, 2015 at: http://www.aic.gov.au/media_library/publications/tandi_pdf/tandi507.pdf Year: 2015 Country: Australia URL: http://www.aic.gov.au/media_library/publications/tandi_pdf/tandi507.pdf Shelf Number: 137325 Keywords: Citizen ParticipationCommunity Justice Centers Costs of Criminal JusticeNeighborhood Justice Centers |