Transcript Document

Safety in diversity: responding
to anti-social behaviour in areas
with large minority ethnic
populations
David Prior
Institute of Applied Social Studies
Questions from the academic literature
(Fitzgerald & Hale 2006; Isal 2006; Prior & Spalek 2008)




Are the ASB powers used disproportionately against
BME people?
To what extent are anti-terror priorities influencing the
use of ASB interventions?
Are the ASB powers used to protect BME people
against racial abuse?
How do official perceptions/constructions of cultural
difference shape ASB interventions?
The Research

Key question – what are the implications of ethnically
diverse populations for community safety & ASB work?

Exploratory research in three areas: Haringey,
Leicester, Birmingham

Analysis of 18 interviews – community safety staff, ASB
practitioners, police officers

Analysis of policy & strategy documents, & data reports
Population Profiles
Total Population: Haringey 222,000
Leicester 284,000
Birmingham 1.1 million
Ethnic Population %:
Haringey
Leicester
Birmingham
African-Caribbean
9.5
1.6
5
African
9
1.2
1
South Asian
7
28
17
White British
50
60
66
White Other
16
3
4
All Other
8.5
6.2
7
Perceptions of Cohesion & Difference in
Relation to ASB – 3 key dimensions

The settled BME communities

The new communities

Generational differences
ASB and the settled BME communities

Some variations in understanding between ethnic
groups of what is anti-social – but more differences in
what to do about it

Varying levels of tolerance – BME groups perceived
as more tolerant – but class significant here

Big differences in willingness/capacity to make formal
reports of ASB - esp Asian communities

Asian communities perceived as dealing with their
own problems – but little known about what & how
A: “I think that BME communities are much more tolerant and
accepting, they’re less likely to report incidents such as verbal
abuse.”
……………………………..
B: “We do minimal work in the high BME areas. We don’t get the
complaints from there and problems are dealt with within those
communities, the elders of the area will sort matters out. There
are different attitudes and values, it’s like a sub-culture in those
areas. We get nothing from those areas.”
DP: “Does it matter if you don’t get complaints from the BME areas?”
A: “It should matter if we’re not getting the calls but is it because
things are actually being dealt with locally or is it because of lack of
knowledge?”
B: “And lack of trust?”
ASB and the new communities

Key distinction between ‘settled’ and ‘new’
communities – site of cultural clashes

Major ASB concerns re new communities – e.g.
Somalis, Congolese, East Europeans

Lifestyle differences as a source of ASB complaints
(Poles, Congolese) – but some professional
ambivalence about how to categorise

Other behaviours shaped by experiences of conflict &
oppression (Somalis) – but response driven by need
to protect wider community
In relation to street drinking by large numbers of people from a particular
African ‘new community’:
“This was in a predominantly Black area so the complaints were coming
from Black residents. But I wouldn’t necessarily call this ASB, it’s an
example of cultural differences, of what people do as part of their normal life
that’s not really pushing the boundaries.”
“There are lots of reports about Polish young men in Asian communities.
They work and play hard, so we get a lot of calls from the Asian majority
about Polish workers partying and so on. But this is something that may
be tolerated in a different part of the city because of different attitudes to
drinking.”
“Somalis have become more of a problem over the last 18 months as they
move on from refugee status and get on to housing lists and move out of their
original area. We have a high use of ASBOs on Somali youths, it’s really
beyond prevention, it’s serious stuff……. There’s a major impact of their
behaviour on settled communities of all ethnicities, completely out of tune with
established standards, constant aggression and harassment.”
Generations (& genders)

Age differences within communities as a key factor in
ASB

Inter-generational tensions – perceptions of
breakdown of traditional controls over young people

Globalizing & westernizing influences coupled with
absence of guidance/role models

Young people creating their own cultural identities –
often based on local turf rather than ethnicity

Gender – a largely invisible issue
Dilemmas in Using the ASB Powers

Difficulties of definition – when does a cultural
practice become ASB?

Hierarchies of ASB and the drift to civil actions as
crime control – the police influence

Targeting crime (gangs; drugs) through ASBOs leads
to ‘hidden’ disproportionality (& some resource
conflicts)

Dealing with racially motivated incidents – does the
ASB route devalue the offence?
“More ASBO applications in [the area] are against adults rather than young
people and proportionally more of those are taken against BME individuals.
Stand-alone ASBOs are used a lot for criminal offences where a criminal
prosecution is not possible, usually because witnesses won’t go to court.
They’re typically to do with drugs and prostitution and they’re more likely to
involve Black individuals.”
“We deal with issues on a case by case basis, consider them on their
merits, the proportionality of legal action, is it just. But a lot of BME
perpetrators get to [the ASB unit] when issues are already serious so that
the questions about appropriateness of legal action can usually be
answered ‘yes’. The priority of gang issues means that more ASBOs are
used on Black and Asian youths……”
“The police are very rigorous on racially aggravated offences, people get
arrested for making a threat with a racial element to it for example. This
works all ways between different ethnic groups. You get a better response if
an offence is racially aggravated.”
Emerging Ways of Working

New forms of knowledge – local intelligence

New networks of communication – beyond the
‘community leaders’ – new forms of partnership

Building on successes – positive community
responses to anti-terror initiatives and gang busting

Re-balancing the prevention/enforcement relationship
Some theoretical/research issues
Meanings of cohesion and integration – and the
acceptable boundaries of difference
 The temporal dimension – how ‘settled’ is ‘settled’? How
‘new’ is ‘new’?
 The spatial dimension – governance implications of large
areas of majority ‘minority’ population
 Trajectories of change within communities and impacts on
behavioural norms - generational; social mobility
 Use of civil powers to deal with ‘ethnic crime’
 Development of new knowledge systems and relational
networks – ASB and deliberative policy analysis? Or
further ‘responsibilization’?
