Search

Third party policing represents a major shift in crime control. It is a trend in policing that mirrors wider societal transformations in regulatory practices concomitant with the emergence of the “risk society.” In third party policing, responsibility for crime control no longer rests with state agencies, but is shared with a wide range of regulatory nodes (both formal and informal) including regulatory agencies, local councils, businesses and individuals. Police partner with property owners, local residents, business owners, parents, health and fire regulators and local councils to control and prevent crime. Third party policing is thus defined in our book as police efforts to persuade or coerce organizations or non-offending persons, such as public housing agencies, property owners, parents, health and building inspectors, and business owners to take some responsibility for preventing crime or reducing crime problems (Buerger and Mazerolle, 1998: 301). In third party policing, the police create or enhance crime control guardians in locations or situations where crime control guardianship was previously absent or non-effective. Our book had four main goals: first, to define and describe third party policing. What does third party policing look like in practice? How is third party policing implemented at the coalface of policing? What are the key dimensions of third party policing? What types of legal levers are used in third party policing and why? [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the previous chapter we described how in the neo-liberal, governed-at-a-distance, risk-managing state, police form communities of interest with other actors for crime control and crime prevention purposes. We defined third party policing as police efforts to persuade or coerce other non-offending parties such as health and building inspectors, housing agencies, property and business owners, parents and schools to take responsibility for preventing or reducing crime problems. We showed how third party policing is part of a transformation of governance generally, a shift from welfarism to neo-liberalism, directed at making individuals and groups within society more responsible for their own governance. In the transformed world of crime control, risk assessment and management has become the new primary goal of governance networks. These new networks require police to form partnerships with potential guardians to prevent or respond to criminal activity. As governments accept that crime is a problem to be curtailed and contained, rather than corrected, the police role moves increasingly from front-line patroller to facilitator, or information hub and risk assessor (Ericson and Haggerty, 1997) within the third party policing network. In the following chapters we go on to describe these partnerships in detail, to evaluate how they work, and to examine their impact on both levels of criminal activity and police. But to examine only the role of police in third party policing is to examine only one side of the third party policing equation – the other parties to the partnerships and networks and their goals and motivations should also be considered. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]