Breaking Down Barriers with the Usual Suspects: Findings from a Research-informed Intervention with Police,Young People and Residents in the West of Scotland

Abstract

This article draws upon international research evidence that suggests that cyclical stereotyping can emerge among young people, the police and local residents in communities. The article examines the impact of a research-informed local intervention in one of the most deprived communities in Scotland, where local perspectives were drawn upon as the basis for designing integration workshops. Pre- and post- interviews were conducted with young male participants, residents, police officers and youth workers. Findings suggest that the workshops stimulated social capital and fledgling attempts to generate collective efficacy. The authors draw upon the findings to make recommendations for policy, practice and research.

Keywords

communities police praxis social capital youth

Introduction

This article focuses on work undertaken in one of the most deprived neighbourhoods in the west of Scotland, where unemployment is high, educational attainment low and the reported lack of trust and reciprocity between young people, local residents and the police has long been an issue. By drawing on the evidence arising from the impact of a research-informed local intervention implemented between 2011−2012, we explore the extent to, and ways in which, the promotion of open and deliberative dialogue centred around a focus on praxis (Freire, 1972) was able to foster higher levels of social capital, and stimulate the emergence of collective efficacy (Innes and Jones, 2006; Putnam, 2000).

Firstly, we examine the existing international literature that illustrates the cyclical distrust that can arise between local residents, police officers and youth, particularly in deprived communities. We explore the impact of recent legislative developments in Scotland on young people’s perceptions of local policing strategies. We also draw attention to research that suggests that promoting opportunities for deliberative dialogue between generations, and between local people and the police, can foster greater levels of social capital. Secondly, we outline the way in which we introduced a research-informed intervention in our focus community and examined its impact through semi-structured interviews. We summarize the way in which we drew upon a three-phase qualitative content analysis to explore both pre- and post-intervention views and attitudes among our local research participants. Thirdly, we present our insights from each phase of the data analysis process and – in so doing – illustrate the ways and extent to which bonding and bridging social capital was deepened and extended. And, fourthly and finally, we draw conclusions and implications for future policy, practice and research.

Anti-social Behaviour,Youth and Public Perceptions

It has been argued that young people’s relationship with their local communities and neighbourhoods is often complicated by stereotypes about anti-social behaviour (ASB) (Neary et al., 2013). Indeed, international research suggests that public concern about ASB among youth has continued to grow in recent years (Briers and Dickmann, 2011; Harber, 2008; Wacquant, 2008). However, the subjective nature of ASB makes it difficult to identify a single definition of the concept, and some have argued that ASB does not comprise a new set of problems but some very familiar crimes that have simply been re-defined through reference to a ‘new range of enforcement processes’ (Squires and Stephen, 2005: 35). Unsurprisingly, it is defined subjectively in legislative terms as behaviour that ‘causes or is likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress’ to others (Crawford, 2009: 5).

Within the UK, criticism has been directed at politicians and the general public for negatively stereotyping young people as anti-social (Egan et al., 2013). Under the Labour leadership of Tony Blair between 1997 and 2007, an emphasis was placed on creating a ‘moral discourse’ focused on drawing attention to perceptions of youth disorder and the need to enforce new standards of behaviour (Burney, 2009; Millie, 2009, 2010). Young people came to be viewed as being a risk to themselves and to the communities where they live, and the solution offered by successive governments was a demand for respect (Millie, 2009).

In England and Wales, new enforcement measures emerged within the context of both the Respect Action Plan (Respect Task Force, 2006) and the Youth Taskforce Action Plan (Youth Taskforce, 2008), placing an emphasis on authoritarian and paternalistic perspectives (Millie, 2009). In Scotland, there has always been a traditional focus on penal welfarism, with its origins in the Kilbrandon principles (Burney, 2009; Muncie, 2009). However, punitive elements crept into the criminal justice system as a result of the Anti-social Behaviour (Scotland) Act 2004 and Children (Scotland) Act 1995, with the introduction of Anti-social behaviour Orders (ASBOs) for 12−15 year-olds, electronic tagging for young offenders and new police powers to disperse groups of young people from designated areas (Burney, 2009). As a result, young people shouldered a substantial portion of the blame for ‘social disorganization, crime and disorder’ (Squires and Stephen, 2005: 24).

In recent years evidence suggests that, while youth crime rates have fallen, the percentage of people who view young people hanging around on the streets as ‘problematic’ has continued to grow (Crawford, 2009; Neary et al., 2013). Some research has suggested that those who live in deprived, densely populated urban areas are more likely to have high perceptions of ASB (Burney, 2009; Millie, 2008). This has been fuelled by the continuing focus by the Coalition Government on punitive populism, and the current Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, Iain Duncan Smith’s, continual attacks on the growing ‘underclass’ of people living unproductive lives (Millie, 2010; Slater, 2013: 9). Research in the area of ASB often draws on earlier work on labelling theory (Becker, 1963), and the way in which the majority may tend to label minorities as deviant from standard cultural norms (Neary et al., 2013). For instance, young people from deprived communities may often become unfairly labelled as being anti-social because they tend to travel around in crowds and congregate on the street (Neary et al., 2013). Millie (2010: 10) argues that politicians and policy makers need to recognize and acknowledge young people’s desire to explore boundaries without criminalizing them, and challenges the focus on moral politics centred on enforcing ‘proper behaviour’.

However, although research has illustrated the way in which young people are often demonized (Deuchar, 2009; Egan et al., 2013), Neary et al. (2013) also illustrate the way in which young people can also use visual cues to negatively stereotype adults. Further, a substantial body of work has illustrated the way in which relationships between young people and the police are often fraught with mutual distrust and stereotyping (Bowling and Phillips, 2007; Crawford, 2009; Loader, 1996; McAra and McVie, 2005; Sharp and Atherton, 2007).

Young People and the Police

Both the Anti-Social Behaviour Act 2003 (ss30−36) in England and Wales and the Anti-Social Behaviour (Scotland) Act 2004 (ss19−20) provided police officers with powers to disperse groups of two or more people from designated areas. It is recommended that such dispersal should take place where officers have ‘reasonable grounds’ for believing that there is significant and persistent risk of ASB (Home Office, 2003; Scottish Executive, 2004). In Scotland, the Criminal Justice (Scotland) Act 1980 (and consolidated by the Criminal Procedure [Scotland] Act [1995]) also gave police statutory powers to stop, search and detain individuals without arrest, charge or formal caution if there are ‘reasonable grounds to suspect’ that they are in possession of offensive weapons or that an offence has been, or is about to be, committed (McAra and McVie, 2005: 10; see also Deuchar, 2013a). In April 2013, Police Scotland became the national police force responsible for law enforcement in Scotland, following the merger of eight territorial police forces and the Scottish Crime and Drug Enforcement Agency (Donnelly, 2013). During the first three months of Police Scotland’s existence, it is estimated that over 180,000 stop and searches took place across the country – an average of over 2000 searches per day (Deuchar, 2013b).

International research evidence suggests that young people – and particularly young men − often feel unfairly stopped, that officers do not fully explain the reason for stopping them and that the attitudes of those who intercept them often alienate the youngsters involved (Clayman and Skinns, 2012; Hinds, 2007; Kennedy, 1997). In England and Wales, several studies have illustrated the way in which the use of stop and search often leads to flashpoints in community-police relations (Bowling and Philips, 2007; Loader, 1996; Sharp and Atherton, 2007). Negative views about police officers and experiences of prejudicial police practices may ultimately lead to perceptions among young people that they are being treated as ‘usual suspects’ (McAra and McVie, 2005: 9). In addition, it has also been found that some young people from deprived communities develop negative views of police officers that are passed on through generations of families and through peer networks (Clayman and Skinns, 2012; Deuchar, 2009).

However, Loader (1996) argues that many young people have ambivalent and contradictory views about the police. Even the most marginalized young people will often grudgingly acknowledge the necessity of the police as an institution, while also expressing the unacceptability of many of its practices. In addition, Loader argues that police officers are ‘rarely trained, encouraged or motivated to think about developing discursive relationships with the social groups they police’, particularly young people (Loader, 1996: 147). However, sufficient reciprocal ground may often exist between young people and the police that can be drawn upon to sow the seeds of a ‘more communicative future’ for police/youth relations (Loader, 1996: 145). Bringing about a focus on democratic communication will require the use of discursive and ‘ambient policing’ styles that promote a sense of equity and justice (Loader, 2006: 203).

Community Policing, Local Cohesion and the Building of Social Capital

It has been found that community-based approaches to policing, which foster a sense of familiarity, seek to neutralize asymmetrical power relations and trust between officers and young people, can enable police/youth encounters to become more positive (Clayman and Skinns, 2012; Loader, 1996; Tilley, 2008). In Scotland, there are now 55 Campus Police Officers involved with 65 secondary schools across the country. Some researchers have argued that the presence of campus officers brings about an increased focus on surveillance, and that the emphasis on authoritative control may create an ethos of fear and distrust and weaken the sense of community in schools (Na and Gottfredson, 2013; Teske, 2011). However, in the UK there is a growing body of research that argues that campus officers provide a familiar and positive presence in schools and engage in ‘pastoral policing’ (Brown, 2006; Black et al., 2010; Frondigoun et al., 2013: 43). This is particularly important in local communities where young people may have negative opinions about the police, and where public perceptions about ASB are common.

Attention has also been drawn to the need for wider interventions focused on promoting young people’s self-esteem and enabling inter-generational connectivity and community participation. It has been argued that interventions of this kind can help to reduce perceptions about ASB and fear of crime among adult residents in local communities (Burney, 2009; Neary et al., 2013). McCoy and Scully (2002: 117) argue that the building of strong engagement presumes the ‘active involvement of many people across society’ and that flourishing communities can only emerge where there is open and deliberative dialogue involving individuals listening to each other, engaging in critical thinking and reasoned argument (Loader, 1996). Indeed, it has been argued that local community members can build enhanced levels of resilience through focusing on collective resources and assets (Mathie and Cunningham, 2003; Whiting et al., 2012). In turn, collective efficacy can emerge, defined as the ‘capacity of a group of people to orient towards … shared objectives’ (Innes and Jones, 2006: 29; see also Burney 2009). Such efficacy is best fostered through social capital.

Coleman (1988) argues that social capital is ‘embodied in relations among people’ (cited in Western et al., 2005: 1096), defining it as ‘those aspects of a social structure that facilitate action’. Putnam (2000) focuses on a distinction between three basic forms of social capital: bonding, bridging and linking. Bonding social capital tends to be characterized by dense, multifunctional ties, localized trust and unity (Putnam, 2000; Western et al., 2005). Bridging social capital tends to be characterized by weak ties and thin levels of trust, but broadens identities and brings together people across diverse social divisions. The third dimension, linking social capital, is simply a particular type of bridging which enables people to forge alliances with authoritative organizations and individuals in positions of power (Western et al., 2005).

Generating opportunities for different forms of social capital will ultimately foster social connectedness and can stimulate collective efficacy, which may ultimately reduce negative perceptions about ASB and stereotyping within a community. Neary et al. (2013: 120) suggest that adults are more likely to interpret potentially harmless behaviour (such as young people hanging around street corners) as threatening when the act involves people who are ‘personally unknown to the observer’. Accordingly, the fostering of local social cohesion needs to draw upon bonding, bridging and linking social capital, characterized by both inter-generational connections and opportunities for formal social control agencies (such as the police) to engage and connect informally with the most oppressed and marginalized (Innes and Jones, 2006).

The Research Study and Local Intervention

Our research and subsequent intervention took place in a large post-war housing estate in the north-west corner of Glasgow (Scotland’s largest city). The estate is consistently ranked among the five most deprived areas in Scotland. Unemployment rates have long been higher there than the national and Glasgow City averages, and local residents are significantly disadvantaged in terms of educational attainment; there have also been reportedly high levels of public perceptions about ASB combined with a prevalent lack of trust and reciprocity between young people, local residents and the police (McKendrick et al., 2007).

The local secondary school is now the only one within the community and its ever-dwindling school roll indicates local families see a better education away from the local neighbourhood. In response to this, a bold plan was put in place in 2009 involving police, education, local councillors and other local partners to secure the funding to have a permanent Campus Police Officer placed within the secondary school. Accordingly, we drew upon one local neighbourhood close to the school as the site for conducting a local intervention based on the insights from initial research.

Initial data-gathering

Drawing upon an interpretative, qualitative approach (Strauss and Corbin, 1990), we firstly aimed to explore the views of local young people, police officers and adult residents in terms of their perceptions about the nature and impact of ASB and their relationships with each other. In so doing, we drew upon local gatekeepers to facilitate access to participants. We made initial contact with a local youth project that was created in the 1990s and which has had a long history of supporting oppressed and marginalized young people. Two youth workers from the project who had particular involvement in supporting local young people who were on the periphery of offending behaviour were approached and semi-structured interviews were conducted with each one. The emerging data provided an initial insight into the issues that commonly emerged for young people in the community. Since the local youth agency had two decades’ worth of experience of engaging with local young people within our focus community, we felt that these insights were both credible and authentic.

Through our initial discussions with youth workers, we established that particular issues of distrust and oppression were impacting on young men within the local area. The youth workers subsequently facilitated our access to various groups of young males (aged 14−16) who were known to have had a history of school exclusions and – in some cases – occasional involvement in local territorial street violence. During visits to the youth project, we spent time participating in a process of ‘deep hanging out’, where we engaged the young men in relaxed conversation (Geertz 1973: 5–6). We subsequently sought their potential willingness to participate in semi-structured interviews, and six of the young men ultimately agreed to participate. These particular young men had had some involvement in local gang violence, were known to the local police but were also regularly attendees at the local youth project. We therefore believed that their views could legitimately be regarded as representing those of the wider groups of young males with whom the youth project routinely engaged. The interviews we conducted with them aimed to explore their views about the local community, their relationships with local residents and the police.

A further set of semi-structured interviews was conducted with the local community Inspector, the Campus Police Officer who was based at the secondary school and four community police constables. While the Campus Officer belonged to the local community policing team, he was permanently based in the local secondary school; the Inspector and constables were regularly involved in local neighbourhood patrols. We sought the officers’ views about local perceptions regarding youth disorder, inter-generational trust and cohesion and the relationship between young people and the police. Finally, the researchers were also keen to access local residents to participate in interviews, but this created a considerable challenge. In spite of several attempts to access participants through local residents’ associations, community forums and leaflet drops, we managed to attract just three participants through snowball sampling. However, given that we intended to interview each participant twice and that each of the interviewees would potentially participate in workshops, a smaller number of participants from each category of the sample seemed to be appropriate.

Workshop design and implementation

We used a summative content analysis process, where key words, statements and salient themes were identified and interpretation of content brought together to create initial codes (Hsieh and Shannon, 2005). These initial statements, themes and insights were subsequently drawn upon as a means of designing community integration workshops that aimed to bring participating young people, local residents and police officers together to engage in open and transparent deliberative dialogue focused around common areas of concern and anxiety (McCoy and Scully, 2002).

We wanted the dialogue that was initiated to be led by the participants and to have the potential to become transformed into action − thus drawing upon the concept of praxis, where reflection upon action within the world is used as a means of transforming it (Freire, 1972). By relying upon praxis in the design of the study it was believed intervention/action could be achieved – that research participants could do more than just take part in discussion; they could act together on their environment, reflect upon the process and transform it through further action and critical reflection. To make certain that our participants were able to critically reflect upon their environment and ensure that the process of action/reflection was occurring, representatives from the police, youth work agency and local resident population who participated in first-stage interviews were also involved in the coding of anonymized transcriptions and designing of the workshops. Once themes were identified, each workshop was designed to address local issues and concerns emerging from the data.

Delivered across six evenings in the local community centre during the winter of 2011/12, the workshops were attended by all six of the young men who had engaged in interviews, the two lead youth workers from the local youth project, the Campus Police Officer, the three local residents we had recruited to interview and representatives from the local community policing team, including the local Inspector. During each evening, different participants took the lead in implementing the workshop content and so some sessions were delivered by local residents, others by youth workers or police officers as well as ourselves. Workshop content included ‘icebreaker’ activities where participants considered and critiqued local perceptions gathered during interviews in relation to ASB, territorial violence and ‘gang’ culture; role play activities where young people, officers and local residents swapped roles; and open-ended dialogue where each set of participants explored each other’s viewpoints on a range of local issues. The workshops became a way of creating a space that each group felt comfortable in and allowed each group to express their opinions and address their preconceived stereotypes of the other groups.

Accordingly, the intervention was grounded in the strategies associated with traditional forms of community learning and development work with a focus on developing action focused on concrete issues and concerns in the local community (Tett, 2010). However, the initiative also went beyond this, since we gathered the insights from initial, localized research to form the basis for designing the content of workshop sessions while also drawing on praxis to enable local participants to drive forward ideas. Although participants were small in number within the workshops, the innovative nature of bringing diverse, unconventional and potentially combative groups of people together to engage in shared dialogue means that some weight can be attributed to the emerging outcomes.

Follow-up interviews

Immediately following the implementation of the workshops, we conducted follow-up interviews with each of the participants. Transcribing of these interviews was followed by a conventional content analysis phase where we (the authors) immersed ourselves in the data and conceptual themes and sub-themes were identified. Thereafter, a directed content analysis phase was conducted, where emerging overarching themes were interpreted in light of the existing literature on social capital, community capacity-building and collective efficacy.

In the sections that follow, the initial and follow-up themes that emerged from the study will be outlined, drawing on key quotations that represented the participants’ views. Reflecting the overarching principles underpinning the three-phase qualitative content analysis that we used, we outline the keywords, statements and emerging sub-themes that began to emerge from the summative analysis of first-stage data from the perspective of each of our core participant groups: young people, police officers and residents/youth workers. Thereafter, we present the insights emerging from the conventional content analysis of second-stage interviews under the conceptual themes that emerged from the collective data set. And, finally, we present the overarching insights that emerged as a result of the directed content analysis in the form of a discussion, where we assimilate our insights with those emerging from the existing literature (Hsieh and Shannon, 2005).

Summative Content Analysis of Pre-workshop Insights

Young people: Ambitions, facilities, young teams, police

The young men who participated in the interviews had mostly grown up in the local community during a time when unemployment was common and poverty was high. However, although they acknowledged the lack of local apprenticeship schemes and opportunities for careers in heavy industry that would once have been open to them prior to deindustrialization, their local circumstances did not appear to constrain their aspirations (echoing earlier findings by McKendrick et al., 2007). During initial interviews, they articulated ambitions to find jobs in the carpentry, manufacturing and construction industries in the future. However, in terms of their present circumstances they also commonly highlighted the lack of recreational local youth facilities and the way in which this led to a sense of frustration and boredom (as in Deuchar, 2009). As a result, several admitted that they had drifted into participating in territorial violence, drinking alcohol and smoking cannabis:

We split into teams and kid on we’re gang fightin’ and batter each other. (Tom, young person)

See at the weekend, I drink jungle juice … me and my pal halved in for a twenty pounder and then we just let everyone smoke it. (Jack and Gordon, young people)

In addition, several of the young men felt that they were unfairly targeted by police; they described being stopped and searched regularly, even when they were not involved in any fighting:

I got searched the other day. I was with two lassies and four boys and they told the lassies to go away and they searched the boys. (Scott, young person)

The polis pull you up – they say ‘oh, it’s just wur job’. (John, young person)

Accordingly, although the young male participants displayed conventional attitudes in terms of their ambitions for the future, they felt that they had scant opportunities for accessing youth facilities and thus drifted into recreational violence as a way to alleviate boredom (McKendrick et al., 2007). Their experiences of policing appeared to be devoid of neutrality, dignity and respect (Hinds, 2007).

Police officers: Empathy, complainers, intimidation, communication

During initial interviews, police officers displayed empathy towards the challenges faced by young people in the community, and distinguished between those who were simply ‘hanging around’ and those who were potentially involved in ASB:

If you see a group of them sort of hanging around … the ones that are causing trouble are the ones that run away … the ones that hang around and talk to you are generally not up to anything. (Stewart, police constable)

However, some officers admitted that they would tend to routinely stop and intercept those young people who were standing around in groups of over three or four in number. Officers explained that they were duty-bound to approach groups of young people, since they often received calls from local residents that could include ‘repeat complainers’:

We get quite a lot of the local residents, particularly the elderly, that say … ‘I don’t come down here because of all the people who are hanging about’ … they feel intimidated. (Martin, police constable)

People have different tolerance levels … well, not everyone is sympathetic to young people … we have some repeat complainers. (Alex, Community Inspector)

However, although some officers clearly felt that some local complaints were unjustified, others felt that their reactions were understandable. Indeed, one officer admitted that he could feel intimated by large groups of young people congregating on the street when he was out of uniform:

If I was out of uniform and I had to walk past 20 or 30 youths I would be intimidated. (Kevin, police constable)

In response to the common perceptions that young people had about police interventions out on the street, the local Campus Police Officer clearly felt that there were misconceptions and that these could often be overcome by positive communication and simple explanations:

They will always have this idea that ‘I’ve been booked’ … but I try to explain to them ‘no, if I am taking your name I will note exactly what you are wearing, where I saw you, who you were with … if God forbid anything later on like you get reported missing …’ (Matthew, Campus Police Officer)

Officers’ views, therefore, were both sympathetic to, and critical of, young people’s perspectives. While they recognized that a small minority of young people were involved in ASB and that positive communication could overcome hostile attitudes towards the police, some believed that large groups of youngsters congregating on the street could be perceived as threatening. They recognized the presence of repeat complainers but were also sympathetic to some local people’s feelings of intimidation when walking past large groups of young people.

Local residents/youth workers: Paranoia, facilities, family, community

During interviews, youth workers who worked closely with the young men suggested that the youngsters were often exposed to excessive and unnecessary police intervention and that such intervention often came about as a result of public paranoia about ASB and gang culture:

There’s a couple of polis right and the young people say ‘he’s brand new’ but then the other ones say ‘they are pullin’ us up for nothing when I’m on the street’ … see, if you are in this area you expect to get searched. (Mick, youth worker)

I reckon that a lot of it’s been blown way out of proportion … residents … sitting watching Eastenders and they hear voices and they feel intimidated but then it’s ‘we need to respond to this gang culture’ sort of thing, and it’s blown way out of proportion. (Dave, youth worker)

The local residents provided insights into their views about what commonly stimulated young people to participate in what could be perceived as ASB. These views were mostly centred around the lack of local facilities, the loss of traditional family values and the tendency to use these issues as an excuse:

(The local) community centre and it’s closing at 8 o’clock the night. Where is the young people in here? I dinnae see any, they never come in really. (Jim, local resident)

I think there’s a breakdown in family values – you’ve got to be taught to respect … the excuse is you’ve no’ got a dad, well that’s a lot of rubbish, when I grew up I was without a father. (Jim and Barry, local residents)

However, although the residents recognized the issues that could sometimes stimulate ASB, they also felt that the levels of violence and crime in the local neighbourhood had fallen in recent years. But they were concerned about the lack of local cohesion and community values:

… The community has fell apart. (Jim, local resident)

Accordingly, youth workers recognized the public paranoia about young people, while residents acknowledged the lack of youth facilities. However, the latter group also dismissed young people’s experiences of family breakdown as a common excuse for engaging in ASB, and were concerned about the lack of local cohesion and community values.

Conventional Content Analysis of Post-workshop Themes

Theme 1: ‘I thought they were just out to get you’

Following participation in the community workshops, police officers reported that they had become more acutely aware of the widespread feelings of distrust that existed within the community between young people and the police:

For want of a better term, the distrust in the police was very disappointing and this came across in the workshops. (Alex, Community Inspector)

However, several of the young men and the youth workers clearly felt that the sessions had enabled the distrust of police officers to dissipate over the weeks. This seemed to come about because the young people had become exposed to local officers’ honest opinions, and began to view them as individuals rather than labelling them all negatively:

I thought they were just always out to get you … (but) I thought it was good, because you got a police opinion n’all. (Scott and John, young people)

(We learned) that each officer is different and stuff like that. (Dean, young person)

Indeed, youth workers felt that the workshops had enabled both them and the participating young people to begin to view issues from the perspective of the police, due to the explanations the officers had given about their practice within the sessions:

I mean I picked up a few different views from that to see it from the police’s point of view and that’s the thing we don’t ever really look at it from the police’s point of view. (Dave, youth worker)

It opens up your mind to different things … like when you get caught wi’ the polis and you get a reason. (Gordon, young person)

Police officers also felt that they had begun to understand local issues from the perspective of the young people, and recognized that they needed to have more of a voice and become respected by officers:

The sessions certainly opened up my views in relation to the needs and concerns of young people and what their opinions are about lots of different things … in relation to the hardships that they sometimes feel in relation to the authority of the police. (Matthew, Campus Police Officer)

We are in grave danger of completely and totally alienating the next generation. (Alex, Community Inspector)

Theme 2: ‘Young people are part of the solution’

As a result of the workshops, some of the participants gained a greater awareness of the lack of trust that existed between the younger generation and the older generation within the local community. For instance, the Community Inspector was astounded by the initial tension that existed between the different generations of people who participated in the sessions:

What upset me most was that – when you listen to Jim and what he was saying to them – he was almost extending them an olive branch across the table. Why are members of the same community who are – let’s face it – divided by nothing more than age having to do that with one another? (Alex, Community Inspector)

However, over the weeks inter-generational reciprocity grew and resulted in some young people appreciating the company of the older participants:

I thought his (local resident) patter was brilliant. (John, young person)

I went bowling with Jim not long after (the workshops). (Scott, young person)

Indeed, local residents had begun to realize that young people needed more support, and deserved to be consulted rather than negatively labelled and demonized:

Young people from (the community) need support … I hadn’t realized how bad it’s got, how the kids are really. (Jim, local resident)

Young people are part of the solution, you know? Everybody else sees them as a problem. (Barry, local resident)

Theme 3: ‘You canny build a community with outside interference’

Several of the participants talked about the way in which they had become more acutely aware of the lack of community voice within the local area, and the way in which the residents had suffered from new initiatives being imposed upon them without adequate consultation:

There’s no shortage of … organized clubs for them to attend but the main thing for me was how many youngsters were actually consulted when we built these things? (Alex, Community Inspector)

We have to make sure that projects that are up and running and ran by the people who live around the area … if it’s ran by people outside the area you don’t have a community. (Jim, local resident)

One other local resident believed that community capacity building could only be done from the inside. And one of the young men felt that he had seen the effects of the lack of youth consultation in the area in terms of the way in which money had been spent on the wrong facilities, rather than consulting with young people about the types of activities that would really address their needs and reduce territorial violence:

You canny build a community with outside interference, it doesnae work. (Barry, local resident)

Well if they want to solve the problem of gang-fighting then (the money) should have been better spent. (Tom, young person)

On reflecting upon the views of young people, the Campus Police Officer expressed his surprise about the way in which the participating young people had expressed negative reactions to the some of the ‘diversionary’ initiatives that had been put in place for them, and the way in which these facilities were not always welcomed:

I thought for young people to turn around and say that they don’t really want diversion activities on a Friday and Saturday night was an eye-opener … I thought, you know, it makes real logical sense. (Matthew, Campus Police Officer)

Theme 4: ‘Barriers got broken down throughout the sessions’

Towards the end of the sessions, the participants all indicated that they felt the workshops had broken down barriers and built greater social cohesion among disparate groups of local people. It was felt that this had been achieved through the role-play exercises and the focus on open and transparent dialogue that fostered more trusting relationships:

The big night for me was the role reversal night … I definitely noticed a breakdown in barriers that night. (Alex, Community Inspector)

They (young people) had the opportunity to speak to people that I never had – for example, the cops were in the room, that was unheard of in my day, absolutely unheard of. (Jim, local resident)

I think probably the biggest impact was how the relationships improved – barriers got broken down throughout the sessions, I think that was quite clear. (Matthew, Campus Police Officer)

Indeed, even with 20 years of service in the police, the Campus Police Officer still admitted that participating in the workshops had enabled him to become more familiar with young people’s views and to see things from another perspective:

Even although I’d always done my best as a police officer to be fair and to try and understand some of the situation, I don’t think you can really gain an understanding unless you hear it first-hand … sometimes in the police, we think we know everything, and to be honest certainly we don’t. (Matthew, Campus Police Officer)

The young people who participated indicated that they now had a greater understanding about the views of local officers and residents. On reflecting upon the way in which local people had admitted to feeling intimidated when passing large groups of young people on street corners, one young man admitted that he ‘didn’t even think about it’ before, while another felt that the role play exercises had stimulated greater awareness of other people’s perspectives:

At least we understand where they’re comin’ from now. (Jack, young person)

Discussion Based on Directed Content Analysis

Our initial insights reinforced McKendrick et al.’s (2007) earlier findings about young people in socially deprived communities in the west of Scotland: while they may have been deprived in key respects, the young men we worked with were by no means disaffected. Several were able to articulate specific ambitions and goals, in spite of the widespread unemployment that permeated their community. However, as we have found elsewhere, there was a clear sense of frustration about the lack of appropriate youth facilities, and young people drifted into territorial violence, heavy drinking and drug taking as a means of dealing with their sense of oppression and frustration (Deuchar, 2009, 2010, 2013a). And the majority of the young men we interviewed also felt that they were exposed to high levels of police intervention that was devoid of a sense of integrity, fairness and respect.

Against this backdrop, officers showed some empathy towards local youth, and conceded that not all young people who hung around on the streets were necessarily involved in ASB. However, they indicated that complaints from local residents often led them to disperse groups of youngsters and recognized that large groups of young people could lead to local feelings of intimidation. Among those local residents we interviewed, it appeared to us that there was initially an ambivalent attitude towards young people. They recognized the moral panic that existed about young people’s behaviour and the high levels of police intervention local youth became exposed to. However, they were also concerned about the breakdown in traditional family and community values, thus reflecting Putnam’s (2000) views about the demise of civic, social and associational life in mainstream societies.

Drawing upon the concept of praxis, we facilitated opportunities for local participants to be brought together in unconventional ways (Ritzer, 1996), and foster critical engagement that could be followed by action (Freire, 1972). Insights from follow-up interviews suggest that the community workshops fostered social interactions across both traditional and untraditional boundaries. During our early discussions, we found that the relationship between the local young men and the Campus Police Officer appeared to be built on strong feelings of trust from the outset (Frondigoun et al., 2013). This was compounded during the workshops, when the Campus Officer would occasionally act as a catalyst for bridging capital, creating trust between the young men and other police officers (Putnam, 2000). He helped to make police processes (previously unknown to the young people) more transparent while also making the young men’s viewpoints clear to fellow officers. This helped both groups to critically reflect upon their environment, bringing about a change in perspectives (Freire, 1972). Thus, a space was created where the young men and the police were able to shed their traditional street roles, and view each other as individuals. Local residents also became more intensely aware of the challenges faced by young people. Inter-generational barriers were broken down through role-play activities and the opportunity for the young men to become exposed to the views and opinions of local citizens.

Accordingly, both bonding and bridging capital emerged (Putnam, 2000): while localized trust was deepened between the participating young men and those with whom they were already familiar (such as youth workers and the local Campus Police Officer), the workshops also enabled previously unconnected people and organizations to communicate and collaborate in order to consider the way in which their quality of life could be improved (Mathie and Cunningham, 2003). Norms of support were expanded, socialization networks widened and trust, reciprocity and social cohesion deepened (Leonard and Onyx, 2004). As part of the bridging social capital that emerged, linking social capital also came to the fore through the active dialogue and engagement between local participants (including young people) and the traditional authoritative organization of the police (Putnam, 2000; Western et al., 2005). The reciprocity and trust that began to emerge had the potential to enable the participating young people to feel more supported by local individuals and organizations and to generate a deeper sense of integration within the local community.

In addition to the positive impact that the workshops brought about in terms of generating wider social capital, participation in the sessions also generated an increased awareness of the impact of the ‘managerialist turn’ (Neves, 2012). It has been argued that managerialism has invaded the core fields of many professions, including social work, youth work and education. Community interventions have become focused on the managerial language of ‘performance’, ‘targets’ and ‘customer service’, which has diluted the focus on social justice; and the rise of managerialism has brought about a stronger focus on external imposition of ideas on local communities, where people and neighbourhoods are defined by their deficiencies and external interventions are legitimized via securitarian concerns (Neves, 2012: 34).

The participants in our study confirmed this: while bemoaning the tendency towards community development initiatives that have been imposed upon them from outside, residents, young people and officers all agreed that local consultation was an essential means of community development. In articulating these views, our participants were beginning to express a need to build local autonomy and draw upon collective assets to foster community development from the inside (Whiting et al., 2012). Accordingly, facilitating local workshops based upon the concept of praxis led to early signs that collective efficacy was beginning to emerge: participants were beginning to demonstrate fledgling attempts to orient towards shared objectives for future localized change and development (Innes and Jones, 2006). This was most evident during the final workshop, where a local resident who was a strong community activist encouraged the young men to take steps to get their voices heard within the community.

Conclusion

We must be cautious about over-generalizing the insights from our small-scale research study and local intervention in the north-west of Scotland. However, the findings hold some potential to provide added value to future policy debates on how best to tackle public concern about ASB and the cyclical distrust that can often emerge between young people, adult residents and police officers – particularly in socially deprived communities. Our evidence confirms insights from earlier studies that have identified a link between the promotion of open, democratic dialogue among local groups of people, the presence of ‘pastoral policing’ via roles such as Campus Police Officers, the fostering of power-sharing processes and the building of social capital and promotion of collective efficacy (Coleman, 1988; Frondigoun et al., 2013; Gormally and Coburn, 2013; Innes and Jones, 2006; McCoy and Scully, 2002; Neary et al., 2013). They also add weight to other recent insights from Swansea by Haines et al. (2013) that demonstrate the way in which the combination of engagement, participation and informal action can ultimately help to challenge local perceptions regarding the criminalization of young people.

Further, our insights add to the existing body of literature by suggesting that integration initiatives based on the concept of praxis, where localized cooperative inquiry is followed by critical reflection and action, may be a highly effective means of generating genuine forms of social capital and a desire to draw upon collective resources to foster community development from the inside (Freire, 1972; Mattson and Kemmis, 2007; Whiting et al., 2012). We need to avoid both the tendency to impose ideas on local communities from the outside and to initiate research on local people’s perspectives without involving those who are the main focus of the research in the analysis and interpretation of findings. Instead, we need more opportunities for communities to be encouraged to see the value in their own assets and to drive evidence-led community development processes themselves (Freire, 1972; Mathie and Cunningham, 2003). In so doing, they may be more successful at breaking down barriers between the ‘usual suspects’ and the other individuals and agencies within their neighbourhoods.

Longer-term community-based interventions focused on praxis need to be put in place, and it would be useful for other researchers to examine whether such collaborative approaches to local interventions have the potential to generate bridging, bonding and linking social capital among young people, local residents and the police and the extent to which the emergence of collective efficacy can be sustained over time. It is hoped that the insights from this article might stimulate such research, as we continue in our attempts to build safe, inclusive and flourishing communities.

Footnotes

Funding

This research benefitted from funding from the University of the West of Scotland.

Author biographies

Ross Deuchar is Professor of Criminology and Criminal Justice at the University of the West of Scotland. He is known primarily for his work on youth offending and violence, and is the author of the books, Gangs, Marginalised Youth and Social Capital (2009) and Policing Youth Violence: Transatlantic Connections (2013).

Johanne Miller is a Doctoral research student at the University of the West of Scotland. She has been a youth work practitioner for the last ten years and is also an associate lecturer at the University. Her thesis explores the concept of Glasgow gangs.

Mark Barrow joined Strathclyde Police in 1994, working many community areas within North West Glasgow. In 2010, he was appointed as the first Campus Officer for the Drumchapel Learning Community. His approachable policing style and methods were mentioned within the Scottish Parliament and helped reduce youth disorder in the area.

References

Becker

(1963) Outsiders. New York: Free Press.

Black

Homes

Diffley

Sewel

Chamberlain

(2010) Evaluation of Campus Police Officers in Scottish Schools. Edinburgh: Scottish Government.

Bowling

Phillips

(2007) Disproportionate and discriminatory: Reviewing the evidence on police stop and search. The Modern Law Review 70(6): 936–961.

Briers

Dickmann

(2011) Safer school partnerships. In: Hayden

Martin

(eds) Crime, Anti-social Behaviour and Schools. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 160–175.

Brown

(2006). Understanding and assessing school police officers: A conceptual and methodological comment. Journal of Criminal Justice 34(6): 591–604.

Burney

(2009) Making People Behave: Anti-social Behaviour, Politics and Policy. Cullompton: Willan Publishing.

Clayman

Skinns

(2012) To snitch or not to snitch? An exploratory study of the factors influencing whether young people actively cooperate with the police. Policing and Society 22(4): 460–480.

Coleman

(1988) Social capital and the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology 94: S95−S120.

Crawford

(2009) Criminalizing sociability through anti-social behaviour legislation: Dispersal powers, young people and the police. Youth Justice 9(1): 5–26.

10.

Deuchar

(2009) Gangs, Marginalised Youth and Social Capital. Stoke-on-Trent: Trentham.

11.

Deuchar

(2010) It’s just pure harassment … as if it’s a crime to walk in the street: Anti-social behaviour, youth justice and citizenship – the reality for young men in the east end of Glasgow. Youth Justice 10(3): 258–274.

12.

Deuchar

(2013a) Policing Youth Violence: Transatlantic Connections. London: IOE Press/Trentham Books.

13.

Deuchar

(2013b) Stop searching for reasons and look at facts: Police methods work. The Herald, 7 October.

14.

Donnelly

(2013) The Scottish Police Officer. London: Routledge.

15.

Egan

Neary

Keenan

Bond

(2013) Perceptions of anti-social behaviour and negative attitudes towards young people: Focus group evidence from adult residents of disadvantaged urban neighbourhoods (Glasgow, UK). Journal of Youth Studies 16(5): 612–627.

16.

Freire

(1972) Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York. Seabury.

17.

Frondigoun

Smith

McLeod

(2013) The Campus Police Officer: Past, Present and Future. Dundee: SIPR.

18.

Geertz

(1973) The Interpretation of Cultures: Selected Essays. New York: Basic Books.

19.

Gormally

Coburn

(2013) Finding Nexus: Connecting youth work and research practices. British Educational Research Journal. doi: 10.1002/berj.3118.

20.

Haines

Case

Davies

Charles

(2013) The Swansea Bureau: A model of diversion from the youth justice system. International Journal of Law, Crime and Justice xx: 1–21.

21.

Harber

(2008) Perpetuating disaffection: Schooling as an international problem. Educational Studies 34(5), 457–467.

22.

Hinds

(2007) Building police−youth relationships: The importance of procedural justice. Youth Justice 7(3): 195–209.

23.

Home Office (2003) Anti-social Behaviour Act 2003. London: Home Office.

24.

Hsieh

H–F

Shannon

(2005) Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research 15(9): 1277–1288.

25.

Innes

Jones

(2006) Neighbourhood Security and Urban Change. York: Joseph Rowntree Foundation.

26.

Kennedy

(1997) Race, Crime, and the Law. New York: Pantheon Books

27.

Leonard

Onyx

(2004) Social Capital and Community Building: Spinning Straw into Gold. London: Janus Publishing Company Ltd.

28.

Loader

(1996) Youth, Policing and Democracy. London: Palgrave.

29.

Loader

(2006) Policing, recognition and belonging. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 605: 201–221.

30.

McAra

McVie

(2005) The usual suspects?: Street-life, young people and the police. Criminal Justice 5(5): 5–36.

31.

McCoy

Scully

(2002) Deliberative dialogue to expand civic engagement: What kind of talk does democracy need? National Civic Review 91(2): 117–135.

32.

McKendrick

Scott

Sinclair

(2007) Dismissing disaffection: Young people’s attitudes towards education, employment and participation in a deprived community. Journal of Youth Studies 10(2): 139–160.

33.

Mathie

Cunningham

(2003) From clients to citizens: Asset-based community development as a strategy for community-driven development. Development in Practice 13(5): 474–486.

34.

Mattson

Kemmis

(2007) Praxis-related research: Serving two masters? Pedagogy, Culture and Society 15: 2.

35.

Millie

(2008) Anti-social behaviour, behavioural expectations and an urban aesthetic. British Journal of Criminology 48: 379–394.

36.

Millie

(2009) Securing Respect: Behavioural Expectations and Anti-social Behaviour in the UK. Bristol: Policy Press.

37.

Millie

(2010) Moral politics, moral decline and anti-social behaviour. People, Place and Policy Online 4(1): 6–13.

38.

Muncie

(2009) Youth and Crime, 3rd Edition. London: Sage Publications.

39.

Gottfredson

(2013) Police officers in schools: Effects on school crime and the processing of offending behaviours. Justice Quarterly 30(4): 619–650.

40.

Neary

Egan

Keenan

Lawson

Bond

(2013) Damned if they do, damned if they don’t: Negotiating the tricky context of anti-social behaviour and keeping safe in disadvantaged urban neighbourhoods. Journal of Youth Studies 16(1): 118–134.

41.

Neves

(2012) The managerialist turn and the education of young offenders in state care. European Journal of Social Work 4(1): 32–49.

42.

Putnam

(2000) Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community. New York: Simon and Schuster.

43.

Respect Task Force (2006) Respect Action Plan. London: Home Office.

44.

Ritzer

(1996) The McDonaldization of Society. Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge Press.

45.

Scottish Executive (2004) Anti-social Behaviour etc. (Scotland) Act 2004. Edinburgh: Scottish Executive.

46.

Sharp

Atherton

(2007) To serve and protect: The experiences of policing in the community of young people from Black and other ethnic minority groups. British Journal of Criminology 47: 746–763.

47.

Slater

(2013) The myth of ‘broken Britain’: Welfare reform and the production of ignorance. Antipode 45: 1–22.

48.

Squires

Stephen

(2005) Rethinking ASBOs. Critical Social Policy 25(4): 517–528.

49.

Strauss

Corbin

(1990) Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques. London: Sage Publications.

50.

Teske

(2011) A study of zero tolerance policies in schools: A multi-integrated systems approach to improve outcomes for adolescents. Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychiatric Nursing 24: 88–97.

51.

Tett

(2010) Community Education, Learning and Development. Edinburgh: Dunedin.

52.

Tilley

(2008) Modern approaches to policing: Community, problem-oriented and intelligence led. In: Newburn

(ed.) Handbook of Policing, 2nd Edition. Cullompton: Willan Publications, 373–403.

53.

Wacquant

(2008) Urban Outcasts: A Comparative Sociology of Advanced Marginality. Cambridge: Polity Press.

54.

Western

Stimson

Baum

Van Gellecum

(2005) Measuring community strength and social capital. Regional Studies 39(8): 1095–1109.

55.

Whiting

Kendall

Willis

(2012) An assets-based approach: An alternative health promotion strategy? Community Practitioner 85(1): 25–28.

56.

Youth Taskforce (2008) Youth Taskforce Action Plan: Give Respect, Get Respect – Youth Matters. London: Department for Children, Schools and Families.