Fairness, relationships and perceptions of police legitimacy in the context of integrated offender management

ABSTRACT

Integrated Offender Management (IOM) involves the police in England and Wales working closely with other criminal justice agencies to reduce the criminal activities of prolific offenders. The work involves traditional policing methods, but also police officers engaging in meaningful rehabilitative work with IOM participants. However, there may be a tension between aspects of IOM policing and procedural justice theory. Research has shown strong links between citizens’ perceptions of fair treatment and their beliefs about police legitimacy, yet at the same time some IOM policing efforts emphasise hostile and disciplinary practices. These types of approaches can threaten police legitimacy if perceived by citizens as unfair. This paper examines the self-described experiences of people subject to IOM policing. Study findings revealed that, whilst participants viewed aspects of IOM policing as unfair, they broadly accepted the legitimacy of IOM policing. This would run counter to many of the core claims of procedural justice theory. However, one plausible explanation for this reaction lies in the dynamic nature of police legitimacy and its antecedents in IOM. In this context, perceptions of police legitimacy are more firmly grounded in the relational (treatment) dimensions of procedural fairness than in other more decision-orientated aspects of the concept. This reflects the multidimensional nature of procedural justice within which the balance shifts, depending on the criminal justice setting.

KEYWORDS:

• Police Legitimacy
• Procedural Justice
• Integrated Offender Management
• Perceptions of fairness

View correction statement:

Correction

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank Stewart Field and Justice Tankebe for their comments on drafts of this article.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Correction Statement

This article was originally published with errors, which have now been corrected in the online version. Please see Correction (http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10439463.2024.2305003)

Notes

1 For the larger study, I interviewed Sunnyvale police officers (n = 15), probation staff (n = 8), criminal justice intervention workers (n = 3) and prison officers (n = 2). Due to ethical concerns, supporting data cannot be made openly available. Further information about the data and conditions for access are available at Cardiff University Research Data Archive at: http://doi.org/10.17035/d.2023.0289644896.

2 At the outset of the fieldwork the Sunnyvale scheme had a total of 688 participants; although, it should be noted that the notion of participation is not synonymous with engagement.

3 For a more detailed personal/autobiographical account of the fieldwork and the various challenges I encountered, see Cram (2016).

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by Economic and Social Research Council [grant number EF/H011382/1].