Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Richness, Retrievability and Reliability–Issues in a Working Knowledge Base for Good Practice in Crime Prevention

  • Published:
European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper focuses on descriptions of crime prevention projects identified as ‘good practice’, and how they are captured and shared in knowledge bases, with the purpose of improving performance in the field as a whole. This relates both to evidence-based approaches to practice, and to growing attempts at explicit knowledge management. There are, however, fundamental issues in the transfer of effective practice in the crime prevention field, which few working knowledge bases have properly addressed. Evaluation often remains weak and descriptions of successful projects do not always contain the right information to help practitioners select and replicate projects suitable for transfer to their own contexts. Knowledge remains fragmentary. With these concerns in mind this paper systematically examines the projects contained in the UK Home Office ‘Effective Practice Database’, a repository of project descriptions volunteered and self-completed on a standard online form by practitioners. The Home Office descriptions (and their equivalents elsewhere) reveal significant limitations of richness, retrievability and reliability. Ways of addressing these issues are discussed, ranging from the media and processes of ‘knowledge-harvesting’ to the use of more purpose-designed frameworks such as 5Is. But the fundamental issue remains one of taking knowledge management seriously and investing sustained time, money and leadership effort to make it work.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. www.crimereduction.homeoffice.gov.uk/

  2. www.popcenter.org/problems/

  3. Available at: www.crimereduction.homeoffice.gov.uk/epd/index.cgi

  4. Since this research was conducted the HOEPD has made various improvements, some on the basis of our observations. These include allowing registered users to view and add ratings in addition to providing comments on the project summaries. These ratings are based on the overall strategy, transferability and impact the initiative has made to address the original problem. Stronger links have also been made with the Tilley Award (these reward good practice in problem-oriented policing). Further changes are planned.

  5. Simply, a systematic review is a synthesis of existing evidence related to a particular topic.

  6. A volume in the crosscutting ‘problems solving tool’ series of COPS (Brown and Scott 2007) does make more of the kind of information needed to guide selection and replication but this has yet to percolate through the problem-specific guides.

  7. See http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs07/rdsolr1107.pdf

  8. Ekblom (2002a) distinguishes between ‘know-about, know-what works, know-where, know-who, know-how and know-why’).

  9. The database allows search on key words or there is an advanced search facility which enables you to search by ‘operational topics’ along with characteristics of victims and offenders and location type. You can also search on ‘organisational topics’ (e.g. governance of initiatives or cross cutting solutions) and ‘hallmarks of effective partnerships’ (e.g. skills and knowledge, community engagement, intelligence-led processes, effective leadership).

  10. Discussion with the Home Office reveals an intention for the headings to evolve on the basis of consultation with users and reviews.

  11. The ‘Distington project’ www.crimereduction.homeoffice.gov.uk/cgi-bin/epd/index.cgi?action=viewidea&ideaid=1061), ‘Walsingham project’ www.crimereduction.homeoffice.gov.uk/cgi-bin/epd/index.cgi?action=viewidea&ideaid=1065)

  12. see www.beccaria.de/nano.cms/en/Home1/Page/1/

  13. http://www.asb.homeoffice.gov.uk/members/case-studies/article.aspx?id=8634

  14. www.eucpn.org/goodpractice/index.asp

  15. http://www.crime-prevention-intl.org/filebin/Documents%20ajouts%202008/Septembre%202008/Basse_resolution_International_Compendium_of_Crime_Prevention_Practices.pdf

  16. The system is described in Ekblom (2002b, 2005, 2007) and a range of further guides and case studies is at www.designagainstcrime.com/crimeframeworks. An example of a detailed project description, on preventing underage drinking and antisocial behaviour, is at www.designagainstcrime.com/web/5iscco.docs/gpps05.doc. A simplified format for capturing project information using 5Is is at www.crimereduction.homeoffice.gov.uk/ipak/evidencebase/burglary005.htm. A trial knowledge management system based on 5Is is under development by the Australian Institute of Criminology at www.aic.gov.au/research/projects/openaxis.html. Other good examples include a description, in a report for the New Deal for Communities programme (Adamson 2004) of a youth crime project using intensive supervision; and a domestic burglary reduction project from the Home Office’s own Crime Reduction Programme (undated) which can be found at www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs04/r204sup5bacup.pdf

  17. www.crimereduction.homeoffice.gov.uk/ipak/ipak01.htm

References

  • Adamson, S. (2004). Youth crime-a case study of intensive supervision in a neighbourhood context. Research Report 42. London: New Deal for Communities.

    Google Scholar 

  • Australian Government Attorney General’s Department. (2003). The national research project into good practice in community crime prevention. Canberra: Australian Government Attorney General’s Department.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, R., & Scott, M. (2007). Implementing responses to problems. Problem-oriented guides for police problem-solving tools series no. 7. Washington: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Community Oriented Policing Services.

    Google Scholar 

  • BSI. (2001). PAS 2001 Knowledge Management. A Guide to Good Practice. London:BSI available at www.bsi-global.com/en/Shop/Publication-Detail/?pid=000000000030042924.

  • Bullock, K., Erol, R., & Tilley, N. (2006). Problem-oriented policing and partnership. Cullompton: Willan Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davidoff, F., Batalden, P., Stevens, D., Ogrinc, G., & Mooney, S. (2008). Publication guidelines for improvement studies in health care: Evolution of the SQUIRE project. Annals of Internal Medicine, 149, 670–677.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eck, J. (2002). Assessing responses to problems: An introductory guide for police problem-solvers. Problem-oriented guides for police problem-solving tools series no. 1. Washington: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Community Oriented Policing Services.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eck, J., & Spelman, W. (1987). Problem-solving: Problem-Oriented Policing in Newport News. Washington DC: Police Executive Research Forum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ekblom, P. (2002a). From the source to the mainstream is uphill: The challenge of transferring knowledge of crime prevention through replication, innovation and anticipation. In N. Tilley (Ed.), Analysis for crime prevention, Crime Prevention Studies 13: 131–203. Monsey, N.Y.: Criminal Justice Press/ Devon, UK: Willan Publishing.

  • Ekblom, P. (2002b). ‘Towards a European Knowledge Base’ and ‘The Five I’s: Experimental Framework for a Knowledge Base for Crime Prevention Projects’ in European Crime Prevention Conference 2002 vol 1: 62–97. Copenhagen: Danish Crime Prevention Council. www.designagainstcrime.com/web/towards_european%20_k_base.pdf.

  • Ekblom, P. (2004). Shared responsibilities, pooled resources: A partnership approach to crime prevention. In P. Ekblom & A. Wyvekens (Eds.), A partnership approach to crime prevention. Strasbourg: Council of Europe Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ekblom, P. (2005). The 5Is framework: Sharing good practice in crime prevention. In E. Marks, A. Meyer, & R. Linssen (Eds.), Quality in crime prevention. Hannover: Landespräventionsrat Niedersachsen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ekblom, P. (2006). ‘Identification and application of Best Practice in Crime Prevention-some fundamental questions and some attempted answers.’ European Crime Prevention Network (EUCPN) Best Practices Conference, Hämeenlinna, Finland. www.rikoksentorjunta.fi/uploads/m9i8l0e09.ppt.

  • Ekblom, P. (2007). Appropriate complexity: Capturing and structuring knowledge from impact and process evaluations of crime reduction, community safety and problem-oriented policing. In E. Hogard, R. Ellis, & J. Warren (Eds.), Community safety: Innovation and evaluation. Chester: Chester Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ekblom, P. (2008). ‘Capturing, assessing, transferring and applying knowledge of good practice in crime prevention: the 5Is framework’, Irish Youth Justice Service first biennial conference ‘Best Practice for Youth Justice, Best Practice for all’, Ballyconnell, Irish Republic. www.iyjs.ie/en/IYJS/Pages/NE08000086.

  • Ekblom, P. (in preparation). The 5Is framework for crime prevention and community safety. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

  • Ekblom, P., & Pease, K. (1995). Evaluating crime prevention. In M. Tonry & D. Farrington (Eds.), Building a safer society: Strategic approaches to crime prevention, crime and justice 19:585–662. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilling, D. (2005). Partnership and crime prevention. In N. Tilley (Ed.), The handbook of crime prevention and community safety. Cullompton: Willan Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldblatt, P., & Lewis, C. (Eds.) (1998). Reducing Offending: an Assessment of Research Evidence on Ways of Dealing with Offending Behaviour. Home Office Research Study No. 187. London, UK: Home Office.

  • Kent, A. (2006). What works for domestic burglary crime prevention techniques and context (Tables 1–6 Part II). London: Home Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knutsson, J. (2009). Standard of evaluations in problem-oriented policing projects: Good enough? In J. Knutsson & N. Tilley (Eds.), Evaluating crime reduction initiatives. Crime prevention studies volume 24. Monsey: Criminal Justice Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • NHS. (2005). ‘Knowledge Harvesting’. Entry in NHS Evidence-knowledge management. Online library. www.library.nhs.uk/knowledgemanagement/ViewResource.aspx?resID=93815.

  • Pawson, R., & Tilley, N. (1997). Realistic evaluation. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Read, T., & Tilley, N. (2000). Not rocket science?: Problem-solving and crime reduction. Crime Reduction Research Series Paper 6. London: Home Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sampson, R., & Scott, M. (2000). Tackling crime and other public-safety problems: Case studies in problem-solving. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Community Oriented Policing Services.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, M. (2000). Problem-oriented policing: Reflections on the first 20 years. Washington D.C: US Department of Justice, Office of Community Oriented Policing Services.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sherman, L., Gottfredson, D., Mackenzie, D., Eck, J., Reuter, P., & Bushway, S. (1997). Preventing Crime: What Works, What Doesn’t and What’s Promising. A Report to the United States Congress. Washington DC: US Department of Justice.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tilley, N. (1996). Demonstration, exemplification, duplication and replication in evaluation research evaluation 2(No. 1), 35–50.

  • Tilley, N. (2006). Knowing and doing: guidance and good practice in crime prevention. In R. V. Clarke & J. Knuttson (Eds.), Putting theory to work: implementing situational prevention and problem-oriented policing, vol. 20 (pp. 217–252). Monsey: Criminal Justice Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Welsh, B., & Farrington, D. (2007). Closed-circuit television surveillance and crime prevention. A systematic review. Stockholm: Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

For helpful comments we are grateful to Jessica Anderson, Jason Roach and Aiden Sidebottom, plus an anonymous referee

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Surrey, Guildford Surrey, GU2 7XH, UK

    Karen Bullock

  2. University of the Arts London, London, UK

    Paul Ekblom

Authors
  1. Karen Bullock
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Paul Ekblom
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Karen Bullock.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bullock, K., Ekblom, P. Richness, Retrievability and Reliability–Issues in a Working Knowledge Base for Good Practice in Crime Prevention. Eur J Crim Policy Res 16, 29–47 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10610-010-9116-9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10610-010-9116-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation