Subjective assessment London 29/09/06 Citizen satisfaction as indicator of police effectiveness Ben Vollaard CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis September 29, 2006

Subjective assessment London 29/09/06 detection rate sickness absence response time citizen satisfaction fear of crime Finding out how well the police perform without being knowledgeable about police work

Subjective assessment London 29/09/06 Outline of presentation Why subjective performance assessment? How useful a performance indicator is citizen satisfaction? Conclusions

Subjective assessment London 29/09/06 1.Why subjective assessment?

Subjective assessment London 29/09/06 Ex ante (objective) vs. Ex post (subjective) assessment Define good performance ex ante, rule-based, no room for subjective judgment Subjective assessment ex post, incl. customer satisfaction/ professional judgment NL E&W ex ante ex post choice differs between police tasks

Subjective assessment London 29/09/06 England & Wales vs. the Netherlands: two styles of performance assessment English approach: mostly subjective (incl. citizen satisfaction and professional judgment), no overall judgment, comparative Dutch approach: mostly objective, overall judgment, force-specific

Subjective assessment London 29/09/06 3. How useful a performance indicator is citizen satisfaction?

Subjective assessment London 29/09/06 Citizen satisfaction: advantages Link between broad set of (hard-to-observe) police actions and safety The police react on problems in the neighbourhood Information on specific hard-to-observe dimensions of police work The police dont intervene sufficiently aggressive

Subjective assessment London 29/09/06 Reliability of citizens' perceptions Do citizens have any idea of police work? Patterns in perceived police performance correspond with anecdotal evidence (overall performance) and police data (police fining) Arent citizens responses biased by the local safety situation? Across municipalities: judgment in (low-crime) rural areas just as likely to be negative as in (high-crime) urban areas Over time: , declining crime; growing dissatisfaction with police work

Subjective assessment London 29/09/06 NL: matching two local policing strategies with survey questions Disorder policing: dissatisfaction with lack of proactive/ aggressive police intervention Hot spots policing: is the police visible in those places where people appreciate it most? See police once a week See police too little

Subjective assessment London 29/09/06 Relation between perceived disorder and hot spots policing and safety Crime and disorder go down more rapidly in municipalities that follow a pro-active approach to policing Tougher, more targeted policing during reduced disorder by 5%, property crime by 3%, violent crime by 2% Might be underestimation because of simultaneity that has not been controlled for

Subjective assessment London 29/09/06 Conclusion

Subjective assessment London 29/09/06 Do we get value for money? Ask customers; subjective evaluation of police strategies and how they contribute to safety Citizen satisfaction provides meaningful information on local policing Relation between citizen satisfaction with police work and local safety Citizen satisfaction is a useful performance indicator for police tasks visible to the public BCS citizen satisfaction questions currently very limited

Subjective assessment London 29/09/06 Dutch Victimisation Survey vs. British Crime Survey () Set of questions about police contact of victims of crime The police do a good job The police react on problems in the neighbourhood ! The police do not intervene sufficiently forcefully ! The police are too little visible ! See the police at least once a week ! The police offer protection The police fine too little The police do not arrive quickly when called The police get out of the car too little The police have too little time for all kinds of things The police maintain contact with people in the nhood The police are too little approachable The police address problems efficiently