Vol. 10 No. 6 (June 2000) pp. 349-352.

 

TRAVELS THROUGH CRIME AND PLACE: COMMUNITY BUILDING AS CRIME CONTROL by William DeLeon-Granados.  Boston: Northeastern University Press, 1999. 179 pp.

 

Reviewed by William Lyons, Department of Political Science, The University of Akron. 

 

TRAVELS THROUGH CRIME AND PLACE is a refreshingly readable and thoughtful analysis of the stories Americans tell across the country about community and policing.  DeLeon-Granados provides a rich account of the political struggles played out when power-poor neighborhoods articulate concerns that challenge current police practice.  The analysis presented in

this volume is based on the authors' conversations with citizens and officers, observations of police work in different communities, and survey of relevant social science literature.  The central thesis of the book, that community building is the most pragmatic, cost effective, and just approach to crime control, emerges as the author successfully weaves these diverse sources of data together into a compelling and innovative argument about policing reform and community revitalization.  The result is a book that will almost certainly lead readers to think outside of the conventional box, and in doing this contribute to raising the level of discourse about community policing in the United States today.

 

TRAVELS THROUGH CRIME AND PLACE avoids one common weakness associated with arguments premised on the importance of community.  DeLeon-Granados does not romanticize community. Analyzing community policing from the perspective of those communities most victimized by crime remains the most often missing piece in debates about policing reform. This volume avoids simply assuming community or asserting a set of shared values constitutive of community

life. DeLeon-Granados recognizes and rejects simply nostalgic myths about traditional communities.  Instead, he focuses on the concrete resources and interpersonal relations - on the importance of investing in social capital - critical to using community as an analytical category and to mobilizing it as a political resource. This volume treats community as a democratic aspiration with empirical referents.  The analytical power of this standpoint is that is precludes discursive constructions that treat community as either singular, given, or symbolic.  It deconstructs the official stories about community policing making efforts to reconstruct these stories without attention to community revitalization more difficult. Traveling through crime and place inescapably means addressing the paradox that community policing partnerships continue to exclude the citizens living in those communities most victimized by crime.

 

According to DeLeon-Granados, "[p]eople stop crime by forming a community" (p. 6).  This statement is meaningful in two important ways. First, any gathering of folks does not necessarily constitute a community in the sense sought after as co-producers of public safety.  Since

 

Page 350 begins here

 

it is the capacity to mobilize informal social controls that contributes to stopping crime, the relevant communities are "coherent and interdependent" segments of those neighborhoods most victimized by crime.  Second, this statement is important as a clear statement of a fundamentally pragmatic insight.  Communities are formed and shared values achieved, not assumed or asserted.  For DeLeon-Granados this means that to the degree that those communities most victimized by crime are not coherent and interdependent, community policing must invest in their social capital.  Under these conditions communities are more likely to have "the potential to stop a great many crimes, from a street mugging to an industrial manufacturer's dumping pollutants in the lake.[and] people remain the most efficient and least noxious method to control crime, reduce fear, and limit disorder" (p. 6).  Without this investment, community policing will BECOME public relations--policing where communities

are absent.

 

This insight is a frequent refrain in the community policing literature. Since Wilson and Kelling (1982), advocates of community policing have repeatedly asserted that the police cannot do it alone and require assistance from communities.  A narrow focus law enforcement (arrest) handcuffs the police and alienates even law-abiding communities. More innovative policing tactics (reverse stings, problem solving, decentralization) and a re-orientation of patrol (foot patrol, bike patrol, beat integrity) are required.  The police, the argument goes, must partner with communities to reduce citizen fear and revitalize the informal social

controls that are only available in strong communities constituted by more reciprocal relational networks (Lyons 1999).  Policing, like governance in general, must invest in the social, political, and economic capital of those communities most victimized by crime if community policing is to be both innovative and effective.

 

DeLeon-Granados persuasively identifies three core problems faced by citizens, officers, and elected officials interested in preventing crime and reducing violence.  First, those communities most victimized by crime lack the resources needed to prevent crime and community policing to date has amplified these concentrated disadvantages.  "Although community members

often can provide the most appropriate response to problems in their communities, in this book I show how efforts to exploit citizens' informal abilities face numerous, perhaps insurmountable obstacles, especially in low- income communities.  Such communities lack the resources and structures needed to maintain long-term community stability.  Official crime prevention

can swallow up informal community-based responses, can alienate segments of the population, and can chew up police resources by focusing on arrest instead of strategies that can potentially stabilize a community's social ecology" (p. 7).  Partnerships are rarely established with those communities most victimized by crime.  Police tactics rarely change from an arrest-focus to a more integrated and community-friendly approach to crime control. Instead, "efforts to build community invariably anoint an arrest-centered criminal justice enterprise rather than reestablish connections and resources within and across communities" (p. 151).  An example that he uses to illustrate these points is the Santa Ana, California department.  It has a nationally recognized police department that adheres to a community-policing model that the department has successfully marketed.  Santa Ana also provides a case study of the

 

Page 351 begins here

 

inherent dilemma posed by current community policing. Its department produces innovative and aggressive community-based policing strategies, but it has failed to identify and exploit fully any latent problem-solving abilities indigenous to the neighborhoods (p. 44).

 

Second, what began as a wide variety of only loosely connected reforms designed to improve public safety by focusing on neighborhood problems (rather than responding to incidents) and enabling those communities most victimized by crime to emerge as co-producers of public safety has narrowed into police-dominated partnerships that justify more aggressive law

enforcement.  "[T]he original community-policing concept seems missing from most policies" (p. 13).  Citizens are often left out or included only to the degree that they provide additional resources for the police.  Rather than the police as one player in an integrated approach to revitalizing communities and achieving the shared meanings central to strong communities, citizen participation is "discouraged by a predefined notion of what crime control should mean" (p. 67).  Here DeLeon-Granados readily acknowledges that community building as crime control is not the path of least resistance, made even less so when community building is treated as merely an instrumental by-product of formal law enforcement.  Community building is the most effective and least toxic approach, but it "can develop into a messy project, made more so by relying too much on formal, top-down ideas about what it takes to control crime, and not enough on the long, sometimes uneasy road built on stories and narrative, dialogue and communication, trial and error, give and take" (p. 11).  This messiness is, however, assiduously avoided in current police practice.

 

The ease with which the community-policing model operates, the activist reasons, shows the police in a positive light and wins the backing of some local residents, but that is not what all the residents want or what can bring long-term change to the neighborhoods.  There is a central dilemma for policing, illustrated by the community-policing stories in this chapter. Despite much ballyhoo about community policing being more proactive, the policing culture tends toward a stranded position of reactive crime fighting and short-term rewards.  The activist outlines the dilemma thus: Suppose the new seed programs don't take, then the process will just repeat.  The chief says he polices based on a policy of community wellness, but all he's doing

is wiping our the youth of our community (p. 46).

 

Police and city inattention to community building and social capital is one obstacle to effective community policing.  Police preferences for practices that define community policing as simply more aggressive and less accountable professional policing are another set of obstacles.  Taken together these suggest a third obstacle: these foreseeable failures amplify existing geographically concentrated disadvantages--disadvantages that correlate with crime and victimization.  Although official stories highlight community building, prevailing practice undermines the coherence and interdependence of those communities most victimized by crime.  He states,

 "The policies I examine are all strategies intended to evoke community

 power.  The stories I present suggest that the strategies not only poorly

 serve those aims but also perpetuate dangerous, unhealthy divisions and

 tensions between race and class groups in communities.

 

 Page 352 begins here

 

 That they do so is my alternative hypothesis.  I argue that ongoing

 conceptual ruts that value programmatic inventions over community

 stability in the prevention of crime [sic] limit the ability of actors such

 as the police to exploit community problem-solving capabilities" (pp. 11-12).

 

DeLeon-Granados traces these "conceptual ruts" back to the police-centered reading of policing reform found in the broken windows thesis (Wilson and Kelling, 1982).  According to DeLeon-Granados, Wilson and Kelling correctly note that policing must address more than simply crime and law enforcement, but they retain an exclusive focus on police agency and bureaucratic imperatives.  Community agency and the social capital needed to build communities capable of preventing crime are systematically excluded from community policing efforts that, instead, seek to tap into communities as an additional resource for the police.  DeLeon-Granados argues that a more sober and pragmatic approach recognizes that participation from citizens in those communities most victimized by crime will not be forthcoming without genuinely innovative police practices and more reciprocal partnerships that manifestly invest in the social capital of their communities.

 

DeLeon-Granados highlights the importance of police leadership, concurring that innovative policing ought to focus on incivilities and environmental design, but that the essential criteria must be to do this in a way that "encourages interdependent behavior" not just to control deviance (p. 104).  The objective is not to simply re-assert Wilson's (1985) imaginary middle-class values.  There is plenty of evidence pointing to violence even in neighborhoods with porches (p. 108).  Also, the fear that DeLeon-Granados found in American neighborhoods reflects the "political nature of space" (p. 105) and is better understood as "a proxy for the loss of control" most apparent in our least advantaged neighborhoods (p. 114).

 

As DeLeon-Granados concludes, then, effective community policing will be a strategy that "values community and liberty, control and benevolence, and fashions relations that connect us rather than drive us further apart" (p. 145).  And this requires that authority be negotiated (p. 151), fears be confronted candidly (p. 155), and that efforts to reduce fear include efforts

to name and reduce fear of the police (p. 157).  And all of these practices must be conducted in ways that invest in community building as crime control. Current state-centered efforts "miss the real importance of connecting because they never articulate strategies to increase a variety of neighborhood and community resources that will establish informal social control in communities" (p. 152).

 

 REFERENCES:

 

 Lyons, William. 1999.  THE POLITICS OF COMMUNITY POLICING: REARRANGING THE

 POWER TO PUNISH. University of Michigan Press, 1999.

 

 Wilson, James Q. 1985. THINKING ABOUT CRIME, revised edition. New York:

 Vintage Books..

 

 Wilson, James Q. and George Kelling. 1982. "Broken Windows" THE ATLANTIC

 MONTHLY.

 

 



Copyright 2000 by the author, William Lyons.