The Effect of Various Police Enforcement Actions on Violent Crime: Evidence From a Saturation Foot-Patrol Intervention

• Author: Eric L. Piza
• Date: 01 July 2018
• DOI: 10.1177/0887403417725370
• Published date: 01 July 2018
• Subject Matter: Articles

https://doi.org/10.1177/0887403417725370

Criminal Justice Policy Review

2018, Vol. 29(6-7) 611 –629

© The Author(s) 2018

Reprints and permissions:

sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

DOI: 10.1177/0887403417725370

journals.sagepub.com/home/cjp

Article

The Effect of Various Police

Enforcement Actions on

Violent Crime: Evidence

From a Saturation Foot-

Patrol Intervention

Eric L. Piza1

Abstract

The current study tests the crime prevention effect of different police actions

conducted during a foot-patrol saturation initiative in Newark, New Jersey. Police

actions were categorized into two typologies: enforcement actions (i.e., arrests,

quality of life summonses and field interrogations) and guardian actions (i.e., business

checks, citizen contacts, bus checks, and taxi inspections). Logistic regression models

tested the effect of enforcement and guardian actions on crime during daily (i.e.,

24-hr) periods as well as the intervention’s operational (6:00 p.m.-2:00 a.m.) and

nonoperational (2:00 a.m.-5:00 p.m.) periods. Analyses were conducted twice, once

for the Operation Impact target area and once for a surrounding catchment zone (to

measure spatial displacement). Findings suggest that guardian actions had a greater

crime prevention effect than enforcement actions on crime occurrence. Policy

implications of the findings are discussed.

Keywords

crime and place, foot patrol, police enforcement, hot spots policing, guardianship

Introduction

While traditional police activities can be classified as largely reactive, recent decades

have seen increased emphasis on proactive strategies incorporating high levels of

focus and a diversity of approaches (Weisburd & Eck, 2004). This change in mission

1John Jay College of Criminal Justice, City University of New York, New York City, USA

Corresponding Author:

Eric L. Piza, John Jay College of Criminal Justice, City University of New York, 524 W. 59th Street,

Haaren Hall Room 636.15, New York, NY 10019, USA.

Email: epiza@jjay.cuny.edu

725370CJPXXX10.1177/0887403417725370Criminal Justice Policy ReviewPiza

research-article2018

612 Criminal Justice Policy Review 29(6-7)

has resulted in the emergence of police strategies with significant evidence of effec-

tiveness, with the strongest evidence found for geographically focused police practices

(Braga, Papachristos, & Hureau, 2014; Skogan & Frydl, 2004; Weisburd & Eck,

2004). While there is general consensus on the effectiveness of geographically focused

practices, namely hot spots policing, much less is known regarding the precise actions

police officers should take when engaged in such practices.

There is general agreement that proactive police actions generate greater crime con-

trol benefits than the predominately reactive standard model of policing. However,

police proactivity is not a singular action, but rather includes a “wide gamut of activi-

ties” (Wu & Lum, 2016, pp. 1-2). On one hand, proactivity can take the form of formal

enforcement actions such as arrests, summonses, or field interrogation tactics (Piza,

Caplan, Kennedy, & Gilchrist, 2015; Rosenfeld, Deckard, & Blackburn, 2014; Sherman

& Rogan, 1995b). On the other hand, police could affect crime through their visual

presence in hot spots and informal engagement with residents, relying less on punitive

enforcement (Nagin, Solow, & Lum, 2015; Sherman & Weisburd, 1995; Telep, Mitchell,

& Weisburd, 2014). Little is known regarding which of these types of proactivity most

directly affects crime occurrence. This is an important gap in the literature for several

reasons. First, despite observed typologies of police practices (e.g., Hot Spots Policing,

Problem-Oriented Policing, etc.), individual interventions can vary greatly in terms of

police officer enforcement expectations. Second, police officers are afforded a great

deal of discretion in addressing public safety concerns, with a number of enforcement

options typically available in any given situation. For these reasons, knowing the spe-

cific officer actions that maximize program effect can greatly inform police strategy.

The current study contributes to the literature by testing the crime prevention effect

of various police officer enforcement actions during the Newark, New Jersey Police

Department’s (NPD) Operation Impact, a foot-patrol saturation initiative. Police

actions were categorized into two typologies: official “enforcement actions” and less

punitive, more informal “guardian actions.” Logistic regression models tested whether

these enforcement typologies differentially affected violent crime levels in target and

catchment areas. Findings on the relative effect of various enforcement actions can

have important implications for the design and implementation of geographically

focused police strategies. Specifically, such findings can help police determine whether

traditional law enforcement activities can be de-emphasized in favor of less invasive

actions, which may help strike a balance between crime prevention and fostering posi-

tive police/community relations. This issue is particularly salient in the current study

setting of Newark, as a recent investigation conducted by the Department of Justice

(DOJ) found that aggressive enforcement activities disproportionately affected minor-

ity communities and impinged upon civil liberties in certain contexts (U.S. Department

of Justice Civil Rights Division, 2014).

Review of Relevant Literature

Contemporary policing has seen an increased understanding of the programs and prac-

tices that effectively prevent crime and disorder. The National Academy of Sciences’