Intelligence-Led Policing: Leveraging Tech for Risk Assessment & Crime Prevention - Essay Sample

Introduction

Intelligence-led policing (ILP) refers to a conceptual framework used in the control and prevention of criminal activities and violence in a particular region through practical assessment and management of risk factors (Rich, 2018). ILP leverages various technological approaches in data gathering and analysis to generate valuable crime prevention information. The information collected and analyzed through the ILP process also helps in the efficient direction of law enforcement resources to people and places experiencing various crimes (Burcher & Whelan, 2018). The success of ILP depends exclusively on sustainable collaboration between law enforcement agencies, police officers, and people who have valuable information about the state of crime in their communities. Contemporary researchers consider ILP as one of the most critical law enforcement philosophical concepts to successfully fight and prevent crime. The advantage of ILP over traditional reactive policing models lies in its capacity to prevent and control crimes before occurrence (Peterson, 2005). This research provides a comprehensive analysis of ILP by detailing its history, the current intelligence related techniques, and the emerging intelligence methods.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

History of ILP

A plethora of countries across the world, including the United States and the United Kingdom, used a responsive strategy as their primary policing approach before the invention of ILP. However, the perception of crime outgrowing police resources in developed parts of the world, such as the UK, led to the creation of a demand gap that necessitated the creation of a new policing approach that would efficiently use the available resources to control crime. The early development of occurred in the UK in the 1990s (Ratcliffe, 2017). Opponents of the responsive strategy contended that police were taking more time responding to specific crime incidents instead of addressing the challenge of repeat offenders. Many critics believed that there were fewer offenders across the UK that contributed to the vast majority of property crimes. Therefore, the ILP model required police officers to dedicate less time to the limited amount of crime-related calls to service while directing their significant focus on creating appropriate information collection units (Peterson, 2005). These information-gathering units helped in conducting a comprehensive analysis of crime issues across the country.

Burcher and Whelan (2018) averred that the driving forces of the UK's decision to adopt the ILP strategy were not only external but also internal. An example of an external factor that led to the adoption of ILP included the inability of the traditional reactive policing strategy to cope with the rapid changes in globalization. Such global transformations created and increased opportunities for planning and execution of transnational organized crime while removing all forms of physical and technological barriers across the political sphere (BJA, 2008). Also, there was an innate understanding that remarkable changes were taking place in the dynamic relationship between the public, police, and the private security industry. Public police officers were increasingly losing the battle against offenders on the streets. The ineffectiveness of these officers to control crime in the UK also culminated in the loss of public confidence (Carter & Fox, 2018). Lack of accountability and responsibility among police officers while executing their roles under the traditional reactive policing model also encouraged them to use the available resources inefficiently.

Many critics of the conventional responsive policing model contended that focusing on the need for tackling criminals would be more effective as opposed to addressing their crimes. As a result, the report documented by the UK Audit Commission in 1993 alongside the comprehensive investigation of constabulary in 1997 advocated for rapid changes in policing to effectively address the challenge of rising crime (Burcher & Whelan, 2018). The report advocated for an increase in the use of intelligence, surveillance, and key informants to successfully target recidivist offenders to help police officers to fight crime in the UK effectively. Kent Constabulary, which operates as the current territorial police force for Kent County in England, was the first agency to implement ILP as a strategic response to a continuous reduction in budgets and rising trends in property crime. Police officers at Kent Constabulary focused on targeting predefined property crimes and their corresponding offenders. This strategic focus on crime prevention in the Kent police department helped to reduce property crime in the country by 24% (Rich, 2018). Other countries began to adopt ILP because of its success in the UK.

Police departments and officers across the United States adopted the ILP model following the positive effects reported in various comparative studies conducted in the 1990s (Carter & Fox, 2018). However, findings from comparative studies indicate that ILP was not a popular policing model until the occurrence of the terrorist attack on September 11, 2001 (Burcher & Whelan, 2018). Before this historical terrorist attack, the branches of the federal government would often neither share nor divulge any information with each other. However, the need for continuous collaboration and cooperation between various stakeholders, including the three arms of government, inspired them to begin sharing information promptly. This communication became crucial to facilitating effective strategies that would lead to crime prevention (Cowan, Burton, & Moreto, 2019). As a result, most of the police agencies in the United States implemented the ILP model using a top-down approach.

Currently, ILP operates as a typical information-based system that helps police units and their officers to effectively prevent the occurrence of crime and related activities across the United States. According to Rich (2018), the United States' ILP model entails a simple approach to crime prevention in which crime analysts and analysis agencies collect data from different records, databases, and statements to establish the existing regional and national trends and patterns. Crime analysts collaborate with different units within the United States' police departments to transform the data collected from various sources into strategic, actionable knowledge to help in effective decision-making. This intelligence allows the police department to undertake appropriate actions, strategies, as well as efficiently utilize available resources to enhance crime prevention (Peterson, 2005). Data collection is also crucial in the development of a targeted plan that can help in combating specific crime issues alongside recidivism among offenders through continuous investigations.

Analysis of Current Intelligence Related Methods

ILP remains one of the most popular strategies used across the world in ensuring the effective prevention of crimes. Zercoe (2018) noted that ILP thrives on a continuous collection of information from a wide range of sources while trying to analyze to help in predicting and understanding threats in a particular community. There are various current intelligence related techniques that police officers need to use to ensure effective implementation of the ILP model. Some of these techniques include community-oriented policing, hot spot policing, the partnership model of policing, and the problem-oriented policing approach (Jones, Ruddell, & Summerfield, 2019), as discussed below.

Community Oriented Policing

Community-oriented policing (COP) is a vital component of ILP that focuses on building sustainable ties and working closely with various community members to help in the prevention of crimes (Waddington, 2007). The primary goal of COP is to help police officers to create long-lasting relationships with the community via continuous interactions with local agencies as well as members of the public. Such engagements are crucial in building sustainable partnerships alongside strategies for reducing, preventing, and controlling crimes and related activities. The overall appraisal of COP is positive, as both community members and police officers attest to its effectiveness in enhancing the sense of security across the United States and minimizing crime. For instance, community policing helps in building skills and improving competence among contemporary law enforcement officers (Jones et al., 2019). Most of these skills have a direct relationship with the process of directly collecting and sharing information as well as intelligence sharing, which is a crucial component of ILP.

The first skill, environmental scanning, refers to the process of collecting information about various crime incidents in the community and their interrelated threats. Environmental scanning is crucial because it helps police officers to develop appropriate crime counterstrategies (Waddington, 2007). As a result, police officers perform routine patrol in the community using various means, including vehicles, walking on foot, motorbikes, and horses to identify potential threats and their control measures. The second skill, effective communication, entails sharing information between various stakeholders, including the public, law enforcement officers, and agencies (Cowan et al., 2019). Effective communication helps officers to develop a comprehensive understanding of the prevalence of crime in a community before developing appropriate counterstrategies. The third approach, citizen involvement in crime identification and control, requires every member of the community to remain vigilant and report all forms of suspicious activities witnessed (Jones et al., 2019). Lastly, COP entails continuous sensitization and mobilization of the community to ensure that people remain dedicated to ascertaining that all strategies taken by law enforcement officers in preventing crime are successful.

Hot-Spot Policing

Hot spot policing is an ILP-related crime prevention strategy that entails the targeting of resources as well as activities to places with high rates of crime. According to Braga, Papachristos, and Hureau (2012), hot spots are specific places where the occurrence of crime tends to be so frequent to the extent that it is highly predictable for at least one year. Therefore, hot spot policing works on the strategy that crime and disorder occur in small geographic locations as opposed to being evenly spread within neighborhoods. Findings from comparative studies indicate that focusing essential resources and activities in hot spots works with the primary aim of preventing crime in the predetermined areas while, potentially, reducing overall crime rates in the broader geographic region (Jones et al., 2019). Police agencies usually implement a plethora of activities in areas identified as hot spots while trying to prevent crimes.

Maintaining of general law and order is the most common approach used by various police departments across the United States. However, this process begins with a thorough assessment of the needs of the target location before developing appropriate counterstrategy. For instance, a police agency may increase the number of officers available in the identified region to scale up crime prevention initiatives (Braga et al., 2012). These officers conduct continuous patrols, drug enforcement crackdowns, and increase searches and seizures for illegal guns as strategic approaches towards preventing crimes. Law enforcement officers in other regions, including the state of New York, execute the legal mandate of stop and frisk to identify potential offenders and bar them from committing suspected crimes (Fallon, 2013). Lastly, the use of zero...