The first presentation of the seminar was given by Marc Alain. Mr. Alain is the manager of the Centre d’intégration et de diffusion de la recherche en activité policière’, at the École national de police du Québec (National Police School of Quebec). He began by referring to Peel’s nine principles, highlighting the disjuncture between Peel’s vision and the contemporary policing. In particular, he was concerned with the entrenchment of politics in policing. Police have traditionally answered to three distinct categories of citizens, each with their own demands, namely: citizens, pressure groups, and elite groups. As these demands vary and change along with the political climate, there was no way to appease everyone. The bourgeoisie in particular didn’t support the Peel principles, as they feared that they would lose their power. In the 1950s and 1960s, police training only served to further distance the police from the public. In the 1980s, the implementation of the “911” approach came to dominate emergency response. Most recently, the Sureté du Québec moved away from Peel’s principles and from crime prevention. While Peel’s first mandate was prevention, contemporary policing overwhelmingly fails to address this issue. What needs to be done is to ensure that Peel’s first mandate is observed in a manner appropriate for today’s world, by changing the policing structure along the lines of what has been done in Laval (Québec), for example. There is also a need for more co-operation between the police, the population and other groups in order to address neighbourhood-specific problems.

The second presentation for Community Policing and Contemporary Challenges in Preventive Policing was given by Brian Ford, former police chief of the Ottawa-Carleton Police Service. He reported that at his service, he was fortunate enough to have the support of the Board when he sought community involvement, changing his forces’ focus from emergency response, to community involvement. He asserted that crime was a community problem, and that nothing can be changed without the involvement of the community working to identify the problems as well as the solutions. Reaching out to the community requires a proper amalgamation of representatives forming community partnerships. A good example of community partnership cited by Mr. Ford was the roundtable on violence against women where many services are represented, including women’s advocacy groups and women’s shelters. The roundtable is ongoing in Ottawa and helps reduce crime against women. The roundtable found that police need to be educated about domestic abuse, especially since mandatory arrest and sentencing is not working. In this case, reliance on the justice system is not the solution, and police must move towards gaining a deeper understanding of the community.

According to Mr. Ford, a great emphasis should be placed on diversion, especially for youth, the criminal justice system should be used only as a last resort. It is for this reason that the police service of Ottawa-Carleton has partnered up with other organisations to work together in developing programs for youth, offering diverse services. Today, in the Ottawa-Carleton region of Canada, 60% of youth are diverted when they come into contact with the police. The new challenge is to find ways in which the philosophy of community policing can become entrenched.

Evaluation of Crime Prevention Strategies

The first presentation of the session was given by ICPC’s Daniel Sansfaçon. He began by reviewing the Sherman Report on what works, what doesn’t and what’s promising in crime prevention evaluation. He emphasised that one cannot conduct controlled experiments in society since it is inherently dynamic in nature, and the factors are too numerous and complex to be integrated. For example, how do we evaluate the important variables of determination and will? Do we understand these factors enough to be able to evaluate them? These problems are compounded by the fact that our preconceptions slow us down. The necessity for conducting evaluations is recognised on paper, but this doesn’t translate to it getting done. Even when evaluations do get done, the results often fail to be translated into practice. In addition, more often than not, the partners involved are conspicuously absent from the evaluation process, so are those who can use the information gathered to take action. A good evaluation must involve the right people, and put findings into practice. All implications of the evaluation’s findings must be taken into account, and not just those with insights for crime prevention. While successful programs cannot be reproduced with exactitude, they can be implemented similarly elsewhere and it is for this reason that alternative forms of evaluation are important strategic mechanisms.

Lucie Léonard and Antoine Bourdages are both senior research analysts at Canada’s National Crime Prevention Centre. They continued the discussion adding insight from their own experiences at the federal level. Lucie began the discussion by pointing out that there are two simple elements to effective crime prevention guidelines : they must be evidence-based and they must provide long-term benefits, including reducing the social cost of crime and the costs to the criminal justice system. Well-planned strategies prevent crime, promote safety and contribute to sustainable urban development.

The 2002 UN Guidelines are a good international starting point and have been signed by 36 countries, including Canada. The guidelines emphasise social development, and might expand to include international phenomena such as human trafficking. Effective cross-national approaches to crime prevention tend to incorporate notions of sustainable government, of which community safety and local partnerships are key components. They need to be locally developed, implemented and owned, but supported by national and regional infrastructures.

Antoine Bourdages continued the presentation, outlining Canada’s work in the field of evaluation. In Canada, the National Crime Prevention Centre (NCPC) manages the implementation of the National Crime Prevention Strategy. The strategy emphasises the importance of social development as a central element to crime prevention and community safety. It develops city­wide, community-based programs through partnerships, neighbourhood and community involvement. It targets vulnerable groups, focusing on factors such as poor parenting, substance abuse, low literacy skills, and poverty. Crime prevention through social development recognises the complex social, economic, and cultural processes contributing to crime. It is distinct from, but complimentary to traditional crime prevention, which focuses on opportunity reduction and ‘target hardening’. Short-term objectives being sought by NCPC include: improved evaluation, improved integration, better partnerships, and the sharing of experience. Medium-term objectives include: better integration of crime prevention activities at all levels of government, better knowledge of best practices, improved integration of enhanced knowledge into the development of appropriate tools, resources and models, more capacity to address crime problems, and broader participation. The National Crime Prevention Centre is meeting both the short and medium term objectives, and the case for funding is strong. The long-term challenges remain, however. The research base is vast, making it hard to transfer knowledge to practice. In addition, funding is not always available for the introduction of new strategies.

Links: