Guardianship in the Digital Age

• Published date: 01 March 2019
• DOI: 10.1177/0734016818813693
• Date: 01 March 2019
• Subject Matter: Articles

Article

Guardianship in the Digital Age

Danielle M. Reynald

1

Abstract

This conceptual article focuses on the potential to advance and extend guardianship using new

digital crime prevention applications that have been developed as a consequence of technological

advancements in communication and social engagement. The new opportunity structure for informal

guardianship through active citizen participation and involvement in crime prevention and control

efforts using the Internet and smartphones is discussed to emphasize how this has changed in the

digital age. Specifically, the article highlights how the fundamental tenets of guardianship (i.e., what it

means to be available, how supervision or monitoring is carried out and ways of intervening) have

evolved due to neighborhood watch/community safety mobile applications. Based on what we have

learned about guardianship, this article considers the potential for these digital crime prevention

applications to extend and support guardianship. It also assesses these applications critically by high-

lighting someof the concerns and risks that need to be considered amid the proliferation of these new

platforms for crime control. The article concludes by weighing up the pros and cons with a view to

focusing on key issues in the continued development of such applications so their potential can be

maximized.

Keywords

guardianship, technology, digital applications, crime prevention

Guardianship has been established as an important strategy for crime prevention and control

within communities (see Reynald, 2011b). Recent technological advancements have led to the

proliferation of digital crime prevention applications as tools to help enable citizens to guard

against crime and disorder through social networking with other community members. Growing

use of these digital crime prevention applications have been observed in the United States, Europe,

Australia, and South Africa (e.g., Naber [United States], Safeland [Sweden, UK], Coyards [Swe-

den], OurHood [South Africa]). However, very little is known about how these applications are

used by citizens to help combat crime-related activity and whether they function as effective

platforms to facilitate effective guardianship within various communities. This article presents

a review of what we know about citizen guardianship against crime and disorder and digital crime

1

School of Criminology and Criminal Justice, Griffith Criminology InstituteGriffith University, Queensland, Australia

Corresponding Author:

DanielleM. Reynald, School of Criminology andCriminal Justice, Griffith CriminologyInstitute, Griffith University,176 Messines

Ridge Road, Mt Gravatt 4122, Queensland,Australia.

Email: d.reynald@griffith.edu.au

Criminal Justice Review

2019, Vol. 44(1) 11-24

ª2018 Georgia State University

Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions

DOI: 10.1177/0734016818813693

journals.sagepub.com/home/cjr