Helen Wells

Risk and expertise in the speed limit enforcement debate: Challenges, adaptations and responses

This article explores the changing role of expertise within a society increasingly subject to policies justified by a ‘risk’ narrative. It uses the ongoing debate around the use of speed cameras to enforce speed limits as a lens through which the twin challenges of the ‘demonopolization’ and ‘democratization’ of expertise can be understood. Drawing on empirical research conducted with those who view themselves as experts in relation to the issue of speeding it proposes, first, that traditionally conceived experts such as government officials, police officers and road safety practitioners have had to adapt to the reality of a ‘marketplace’ of expertise in which their own expert product must be marketed in order to compete with that of other self-proclaimed expert voices. Second, and drawing on research conducted with drivers themselves, this research proposes that these marketing strategies are being deployed for the benefit of a public which actually sees itself as emancipated from such external sources of expertise and able to claim expert status in its own right. The findings are of potential relevance to any policy maker, practitioner or pressure group seeking to use a risk narrative to legitimate or oppose a policy stance.

Grey areas and fine lines: negotiating operational independence in the era of the police and crime commissioner

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to explore the negotiation of boundaries of strategic vs operational responsibility between Chief Constables and Police Crime Commissioners (PCCs). Design/methodology/approach – The discussion reflects on interviews with Chief Constables (n=11) and PCCs (n=11) in matched pairs, exploring the relationship between the two figures, specifically in relation to the issue of the operational independence of the Chief Constable in the new accountability structure. Findings – The findings demonstrate that experiences vary and depend on the particular personalities and experience of the individuals involved. PCCs were particularly likely to test the boundary of operational vs strategic responsibility in relation to issues which had been brought to their attention by members of their electorate. Research limitations/implications – Future research could seek a larger sample as it is possible that those areas where real tensions existed declined to participate. Given the findings...

Persecution or protection? Understanding the differential public response to two road-based surveillance systems

Over the past decade, drivers in the UK have become subject to increasing amounts of surveillance as they go about their daily activities. Both speed cameras and Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) systems watch over ever-expanding portions of the road network with a view to the identification of motor vehicles being used in an illegal manner, potentially leading to the offending individual being traced and punished and the protection of ‘law-abiding’ road users. Both technologies also generate large volumes of data which could be used to increase the State’s knowledge about our movements. As such, the two systems have many similarities. However, the public reception of the two technologies has shown marked differences. This article combines the findings of two separate research projects, one of which focused on speed cameras and the other on ANPR, but both of which included an exploration of the surveillance experience of UK drivers. The findings suggest that, while both forms of surveillance have their supporters and opponents, the ways in which these positions are justified show some significant difference. It is proposed that this can be explained in terms of differences in the ‘criminal’ nature of the populations who constitute their respective behavioural foci, along with strategies adopted in the marketing of the two systems. Drivers, as a result, occupy a complex role which veers between the dominance of the identities of offender and victim, alternatively protected by and problematized by state surveillance of their activities which increasingly intrudes into their lives.

Scrutinising the appeal of volunteer Community Speedwatch to policing leaders in England and Wales: Resources, responsivity and responsibilisation

ABSTRACT This article focuses on ‘Community Speedwatch’ (CSW) – a particular volunteering approach that has apparently attracted the attention of senior police decision-makers in England and Wales over recent years. It considers the significance of decisions by many Police and Crime Commissioners (PCCs) and Chief Constables to embrace CSW as a response to calls from the public for action against speeding motorists. CSW is apparently an option that ticks many boxes in a new era characterised by the increasing democratic accountability of the police. Whilst frequently promoted using the popular language of ‘empowerment’, ‘localism’, ‘self-help’ or ‘ownership’, and seemingly well-suited to current trends towards the increasing responsibilisation of the public, CSW should not be looked at as a straightforward example of a concerned public gifting their time to a grateful police. Rather than consider the road safety merits of the scheme, this paper views CSW as something of a tool which PCCs and Chief Constables can use to negotiate the often conflicting demands placed upon them in straightened economic circumstances. The paper draws on 22 interviews conducted with PCCs (during their first tenure) and Chief Constables in England and Wales.

Keeping up, and keeping on: Risk, acceleration and the law-abiding driving offender

Roads policing is the most likely generator of an adverse-outcome encounter between the general public and the police and is therefore one of the most likely situations in which individuals are confronted with their own ‘law-abidingness’, or lack of it. Despite this, it has so far failed to excite much criminological interest. The article will propose that the concepts of ‘risk’ (as a political as well as sociological concept) and ‘acceleration’ (of technological change, as well as everyday life) can be used to explain the controversial and apparently unsettling image of roads policing in recent years. This article reflects on how speeding offences (researched between 2002–2006) and mobile phone use by drivers (researched between 2013–2016) reveal much about how drivers see themselves, their priorities and the law.