Varieties of Participatory Security: Assessing Community Participation in Policing in Latin America
| Date | 01 May 2016 |
| Published date | 01 May 2016 |
| Author | Yanilda Gonzalez |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1002/pad.1752 |
VARIETIES OF PARTICIPATORY SECURITY: ASSESSING COMMUNITY
PARTICIPATION IN POLICING IN LATIN AMERICA
YANILDA GONZALEZ*
Harvard Kennedy School, USA
SUMMARY
The language of community and societal participation in the context of crime prevention has become ubiquitous throughout
Latin America, as governments increasingly turn to police–community partnerships as a means of addressing the seemingly in-
tractable problems of rising crime and insecurity. But to what extent has such “participatory security”had any influence on the
capacity of the state to provide security? I argue that in order to understand whether and how these participatory instruments
shape what police actually do, we must look to variation in institutional design and how community participation operates in
practice. I develop a typology of participatory security that considers how different institutional features may differentially affect
police and other state agencies by alternatively serving as channels for the flow of information and oversight mechanisms or
simply as a tool for improving the police’s image. Drawing on evidence from participatory security institutions in Argentina,
Brazil, and Colombia, I illustrate the impact of institutional design on police and state capacity to provide security. I conclude
by considering the unintended consequences of institutional design, including the degree of police resistance that different in-
stitutional models will generate. This opposition, may, in turn, affect the durability of the participatory institution. Copyright
© 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
key words—police reform; community participation; police–society relations; Latin America; participatory democracy;
institutional design; security
INTRODUCTION
On an early winter evening in a low-income community in the southern zone of São Paulo, the local Community
Security Council (Conselho Comunitário de Segurança, CONSEG) convened its monthly meeting to discuss local
security problems. A group of women in the audience identified a local park as the site of constant robberies, drug
use, and car theft. They complained about the lack of police presence in their neighborhood and requested that a mo-
bile police unit (base móvel) be placed alongside the park. The local Military Police commander initially responded
that he lacked the resources to provide adequate coverage of all areas. However, toward the end of the meeting, the
Military Police Captain, who had been making calls throughout the meeting, announced that he would place a police
car (viatura) on the corner. The women were, predictably, quite pleased and said they would return to the CONSEG
meetings in subsequent months to ensure that the police car would not simply be removed after a few days.
This exchange between the women and the police captain was notable for three reasons. First, it served as an
instance of shared governance between police and community. A small decision about the allocation of police re-
sources, which would normally be up to the discretion of the police, had now been opened up for community input.
Second, citizens asked an agent of the state for a service, and they were provided with a mechanism to hold police
accountable for the provision of that service. Finally, even in a context where fear of crime has led many citizens to
*Correspondence to: Y. Gonzalez, Ash Center for Democratic Governance and Innovation, Harvard Kennedy School, Harvard Kennedy School,
79 JFK Street, Mailbox 74, Cambridge, MA 02138, USA. E-mail: yanilda_gonzalez@hks.harvard.edu
This research was made possible by generous funding from the Drugs, Security, and Democracy Fellowship Program, a joint initiative of the
Social Science Research Council, the Open Society Foundations, and the International Development Research Centre, as well as the Bobst
Center for Peace and Justice at Princeton University.
public administration and development
Public Admin. Dev. 36, 132–143 (2016)
Published online in Wiley Online Library
(wileyonlinelibrary.com) DOI: 10.1002/pad.1752
Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
To continue reading
Request your trial