Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Access Criminology and Criminal Justice journals now

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Criminal Justice
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Cherney, A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Contingency and Politics

The Local Government Community Safety officer role

Adrian Cherney

Australian National University, Australia

Community safety officers have become central to the delivery of crime prevention and community safety policy both in Australia and elsewhere. This article reviews the community safety officer (CSO) role in local government and provides results from interviews with CSOs in the Australian state of Victoria. The experiences, challenges and problems faced by CSOs in implementing Victorian schemes are outlined. It is argued that the focus by governments and criminologists on developing training packages, competencies and identifying ‘what works’ discounts the administrative and political environments in which local level CSOs work. These contexts present obstacles to strategy development and implementation. Likewise a similar criticism is made of the governmentality thesis, that it too fails to engage with and interrogate local practice, overlooking issues of contingency and agency that encompass the CSO role. It is concluded that this role is one concerned with change management, and that building CSO capacity requires the devolution of authority, resources and decision-making powers. Understanding how CSOs manage the barriers and ‘crisis’ they face in crime prevention and community safety will tell us more about ‘what works’ that is germane to effective policy development and implementation.

Key Words: Australia • capacity building • community safety officers • competencies • crime prevention • governmentality thesis

Criminal Justice, Vol. 4, No. 2, 115-128 (2004)
DOI: 10.1177/1466802504044911


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Criminal JusticeHome page
G. Hughes and M. Rowe
Neighbourhood policing and community safety: Researching the instabilities of the local governance of crime, disorder and security in contemporary UK
JCriminology and Criminal Justice, November 1, 2007; 7(4): 317 - 346.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Criminal JusticeHome page
G. Hughes and D. Gilling
'Mission Impossible'?: The Habitus of the Community Safety Manager and the New Expertise in the Local Partnership Governance of Crime and Safety
JCriminology and Criminal Justice, May 1, 2004; 4(2): 129 - 149.
[Abstract] [PDF]