Author:
Boels Dominique,Verhage Antoinette
Abstract
Purpose
– The purpose of this paper is to report on the systematic review on the topic of plural policing. The authors aim to discuss the general characteristics of empirical research into plural policing and describe the way in which police literature deals with the questions related to plural policing.
Design/methodology/approach
– A systematic review, including qualitative research, focused on empirical research results.
Findings
– First of all, plural policing has been subject of study in a diversity of contexts, using multiple methods and treating very diverse research questions. Although the dangers of blurring boundaries between policing actors is a focal issue in contemplative papers, empirical research on plural policing does not focus on this issue but mentions it in the margins of the research results.
Research limitations/implications
– Limitations are that the authors had to set a timeframe for the systematic review and that not all research was accessible. Furthermore, the authors had to limit the studies that could be included in this systematic review.
Social implications
– One of the main research questions relates to the dangers of blurring boundaries between multiple policing actors. This has important implications for citizens in their relations and contacts with police actors (in terms of transparency, equality of rights and so on).
Originality/value
– The paper gives a first insight into a domain that is written on extensively, but less empirically studied and sheds light on the studies that have taken the topic of plural policing as the focal point.
Subject
Law,Public Administration,Pathology and Forensic Medicine
Reference61 articles.
1. Baker, B.
(2009), “A policing partnership for post-war Africa? Lessons from Liberia and Southern Sudan”,
Policing and Society
, Vol. 19 No. 4, pp. 372-389. doi: 10.1080/10439460902871330.
2. Bayley, D.H.
and
Shearing, C.D.
(1996), “The future of policing”,
Law and Society Review
, Vol. 30 No. 3, pp. 585-606.
3. Booth, A.
(2001), “Cochrane or cock-eyed? How should we conduct systematic reviews of qualitative research?”, paper presented at the Qualitative Evidence-based Practice Conference, Taking a Critical Stance, Coventry University Coventry, 14-16 May.
4. Brunet, J.R.
(2008), “Blurring the line between public and private sectors: the case of police officers’ off-duty employment”,
Public Personnel Management
, Vol. 37 No. 2, pp. 161-174.
5. Button, M.
and
John, T.
(2002), “‘Plural policing’ in action: a review of the policing of environmental protests in England and Wales”,
Policing and Society
, Vol. 12 No. 2, pp. 111-121, available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10439460290002659
Cited by
24 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献