Re-imagining the Police? Start with International Benchmarking: 4 Strategies for U.S. Police Leaders to Examine in other Nations

In the wake of George Floyd’s death, we are starting to see many cities enact changes to their policing models. Some are pursuing the “defund” approach (e.g. Minneapolis); others are seeking ways to decrease the number of interactions between police and citizens (e.g. San Francisco).

Seeking to improve policing is an important and worthy cause. There is much work to do! However, when seeking meaningful and sustainable change, it is imperative that we also deeply understand policing and the systems that support and control it.

With that being said, why not take a dose of humility and look at other nations around the world that have different versions of policing. Every nation has a different history, different system of governance, and different challenges. As a result, it is only natural that each nation’s policing system will evolve differently over time. However, even with these differences, it can’t hurt to be curious about how these other systems work in comparison to our own.

So let’s go on a mini world tour and examine a few ways that policing in the US differs from other countries. Am I saying that we completely adopt one of these systems? No. However, perhaps there is a lesson for us to learn by examining a system other than our own. The idea of benchmarking and researching how others do the same thing is simply doing your due diligence. Can you imagine in the private sector, if you were interested in improving a product or testing a new product, in an industry with many other companies that had already made this product? Wouldn’t you almost certainly research those companies, their methods, the strengths and weaknesses of their approach? We are at a crossroads with “American Policing.” Let’s take a look beyond our borders for some context.

What are 4 approaches to policing in other countries that we should study?

1) Understand the Effects of Centralization vs. Decentralization

The United States is literally the most decentralized version of policing in the world. There are 18,000 police agencies in the U.S. Half of the police departments in the U.S. have less than 10 police officers. By contrast, nations like Iceland, Norway, and Holland have one national police agency. Australia has 8 police agencies. There are 43 police agencies in England.

The structure of American policing is important to understand before making statements about changing policing. One could argue there is no such thing as “American” policing. There is a different version of policing in every state, and sometimes large differences between cities within a state. Each state has its own standards and requirements. Based on the way the U.S. constitution is written, policing is largely seen as a local responsibility. So, before proposals are made to establish national standards for policing, in various arenas, one must first understand the constraints that exist under a decentralized system. In nations with a centralized, or simply more centralized system than the U.S., likely find it much easier to enact broad reforms, policies, and standards. This can even boil down to topics like equipment, weapons, and vehicles. In a system like Iceland, there is national authority to determine what weapons the police can use, as well as under what circumstances they can use them. A centralized system like Iceland, or Norway, has the ability and authority adjust policy, or move resources around the country, based on need. Centralization vs decentralization should not be seen as making a choice between two options. There is a broad spectrum of versions in this scale (basically between 1 – 18,000).

2) Training Length and Consistency

A highly decentralized approach also means hundreds of independent police academies spread across the United States (664 to be exact). This means that training standards largely vary at the state level, and sometimes, even vary within a state. For example, recruits in San Francisco receive 1,080 hours of training (almost 7 months of training); whereas recruits in Los Angeles receive 828 hours. In examining some other nations, there are a couple of key differences. Number one, the more centralized models tend to have a singular training academy or training standard. For example, officers in Denmark, Norway, and Sweden all go through the same training academy and curriculum. In terms of the actual training, there are some interesting differences in the actual length and style of training in other countries. For example, in Denmark, all officers go through a four stage training process. This process begins with all recruits attending eight months of schooling at the National Police College. The second portion of training is one year of training at an actual police district. The third stage requires returning to the academy for eight more months of schooling. The fourth stage requires recruits to spend a period of time at the Copenhagen police district. All in, a Danish police recruit receives about three years of training. (Norway and Sweden have similar approaches with a 3 year training requirement)

3) The Use of Technology to Reduce Confrontation

In a time period where mayors and police chiefs are grappling with issues related to the number of times that police officers are finding themselves in confrontations with citizens, one must ask what role technology can play. If we take a look at London, we see an interesting reliance on CCTV cameras. In fact, some estimate that there may be almost 1 million surveillance cameras in London, monitored by the Metropolitan police. When a city has such extensive camera coverage, it opens the possibilities of detecting and observing incidents from the safety of a control room, and formulating a plan for a safe and strategic response. These cameras also capture the events of what unfolds on camera, both from an evidentiary perspective and an accountability perspective. Another form of technology that has been employed in many European locations is cameras used for traffic enforcement. Did you know that Italy has 10,000 speed cameras? Great Britain has 6,500 cameras. As of 2015, The U.S. had 3,699 red light cameras and 1,413 speed cameras in the entire country. Now, do I enjoy receiving a speed camera ticket in the mail? No. However, it is interesting to wonder what the impacts would be on police/citizen encounters if much of the traffic enforcement duties were absorbed by cameras instead of officers in person.

4) The use of Guns

 Before I start writing this one, let me just be clear, I recognize every nation is different, and has different risks. There is no such thing as an apples to apples comparison when you compare policing models from country to country. However, it is worth exploring the role of guns in other countries. We are well aware that most police departments in the U.S. are armed with guns. The exceptions are usually specialty departments such as campus police or hospital police. There is an interesting group of nations that have police forces that are routinely unarmed. This does not mean guns don’t exist within the police. It is just more nuanced. In the UK, the average officer is only armed with less lethal weapons. However, scattered throughout cities like London are armed response units, with specialized officers, who are armed with, and used in very specific circumstances. In Norway, officers are issued guns but the guns must remain in the trunk of their patrol cars, and are only removed in specific scenarios. Iceland, Ireland, and New Zealand are more nations that do not routinely arm their regular patrol officers. Police officers in these nations are often armed with a range of less lethal weapons like pepper spray, batons, or taser weapons, just not guns. Ultimately, the area to dig deeper here is, how are these officers trained to handle violent confrontations? If they do not have guns available, what are they trained to do? What skills do they rely on, if a gun is not available as a last resort? I don’t have all of the answers to that, but I’d like to find out.

The point of this article is not to say, “Let’s scrap 17,999 of our police departments and create 1 U.S. Federal Police!” I am also not on the brink of saying “Let’s take guns away from all of our nations police officers!” The point is, there are many different versions of policing. We are a young nation and it is ok to be humble, and look to others for inspiration, best practices, and lessons learned. It does not mean we need to replicate other systems, or even feel obligated to try them. However, it will serve us well to be curious and seek to deeply understand the many different approaches to public safety and policing.

Burke Sigurdur Brownfeld