The Impact on Technological Innovations in Crime Prevention and Policing

Information Technology

New technological innovations have been developed to prevent crime and to improve the performance of the police, but we know about how and why certain innovations are adopted, and the consequences –both intended and unintended—of technology-driven solutions to the problem of crime. Innovations in criminal justice technology can be divided into two broad categories, firstly hard Technology (new materials, devices, and equipment that can be used to either commit crime or prevent and control crime) and secondly, soft Technology (software programs, classification systems, crime analysis techniques, and data sharing/system integration techniques). Crime prevention is a concept that has been applied to the problem of crime in a variety of methods. Understanding crime prevention requires an examination of both intentions and outcomes. Even broader is the definition of crime prevention when novel factors, such as the reduction of crime risk factors, are considered. Changes in both technology of policing appear to be transforming local, state, and federal policing departments in a number of fundamental ways. Two recent reviews of technology and the police describe this transformation process, review the evidence of its impact on police practices and outcomes, and discuss the technological changes in policing for the public. Research and evaluation should determine policy, according to the concepts presented in schools of public administration regarding the rational development of policy. That is hardly the case for the various types of hard and soft technology innovations, which challenges the new professionalism model of policing. Recent changes in the technology area generally – and in the area of information technology in particular that they deserve special attention and critical review. It is important to consider new technology developed to support crime prevention generally because by focusing on innovations in only one area, we would likely miss the consequences – both intended and unintended. Individual practitioners may have the knowledge and motivation to maximize the effectiveness of surveillance and crime-reduction technologies. In terms of the latter, this study especially highlights the negative impact of a lack of technical interoperability of different systems, and unclear guidelines and procedures.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.