European Urban and Regional Studies

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (1)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Paskell, C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
European Urban and Regional Studies, Vol. 14, No. 4, 349-361 (2007)
DOI: 10.1177/0969776407081167

`Plastic Police' Or 'Community Support'?

The Role of Police Community Support Officers Within Low-Income Neighbourhoods

Caroline Paskell

London School of Economics, London, UK, c.a.paskell@ lse.ac.uk

Since 2002, English and Welsh police forces have been able to employ a new form of staff to assist police with street patrols, transport duties, local monitoring and enforcement. These Police Community Support Officers (PCSOs or, as in this article, CSOs) were introduced in the Police Reform Act 2002 to address lower-level crime and disorder and to reassure the public. This and subsequent Acts designated limited police powers for CSOs, and most forces actually granted even fewer. The CSO role is therefore one of a high-profile, frontline police worker linking between police and the public, but without powers typically associated with policing. This limitation has cast doubt on CSOs' ability to address disorder or to reassure the public. This article argues that CSOs were able to offer valuable support both to police and the areas they serve despite these limited powers. Indeed, the research indicates that having few powers actually enhanced CSOs' ability to engage with local residents, workers and organizations. The article traces how CSOs were operating in low-income areas with low-grade environments and above-average crime rates. These areas are considered because they would benefit most from efforts to address disorder and insecurity. Not only should local quality of life be enhanced in the short term, but such reductions could also help to foster and sustain longer-term renewal. Using evidence from eight low-income areas in England and Wales, the article assesses CSOs' contribution to reducing environmental disorder, promoting order and reassuring local people. The research finds that, although referred to as `plastic police', CSOs were in fact contributing to policing and to the area more broadly in ways which could be expected to aid renewal.

Key Words: community policing • low-income areas • neighbourhood policing • PCSOs


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
European Urban and Regional StudiesHome page
G. Helms, R. Atkinson, and G. MacLeod
Editorial: Securing the City: Urban Renaissance, Policing and Social Regulation
European Urban and Regional Studies, October 1, 2007; 14(4): 267 - 276.
[PDF]