Authors: Kat Smith, Ruth Friskney and Liz Aston
The Scottish Government’s Chief Scientist Office (CSO) funded Health-Justice Nexus research project has published the transcript of a witness seminar exploring the origin and implementation of Scotland’s decision to make the ‘safety and wellbeing’ of people, places and communities the main purpose of policing.
This transcript provides a valuable resource, particularly for those interested in public health and how police can take a more preventative approach, and the apparent tensions in doing so at a time of significant constraints on public finances.
The witness seminar finds no single rationale motivated the creation of the new articulation of the main purpose of policing in Scotland and rather that there were four distinct but sometimes overlapping narratives. These differences matter because they reflected different assumptions about the anticipated degree of change to policing practice. The discussions also suggest that early implementation of work reflecting this purpose was hampered by the (simultaneous) organisational change required to create the new, single, police service. While prevention and wellbeing-oriented policing work has not disappeared from Scotland, it appears to be fragmented, rather than driven by comprehensively embedding the new policing purpose. We hope the five-year CSO funding project will help shine a spotlight on some of this work, mapping and sharing examples of good practice in this space.
What did Scotland do?
In 2012, Scotland introduced a set of policing principles that remain internationally distinct. Rather than defining policing primarily in terms of crime control and law enforcement, Section 32 of the Police and Fire Reform (Scotland) Act 2012 states that the main purpose of policing is to improve the safety and wellbeing of people, places and communities. It also places an emphasis on prevention, community engagement and collaboration with others.
More than a decade later, what difference have these principles made?
This question sits at the heart of a new witness seminar transcript (Scottish Policing and Community Wellbeing: Past and Present ) that we are publishing as part of The Health-Justice Nexus: Crime and Justice as Social Determinants of Health in Scotland, a research programme examining relationships between health, justice and inequality.
The brought together senior police leaders, colleagues working in national and local government, academics, broader public services, third sector representatives and others who have been involved in shaping, implementing or scrutinising policing in Scotland over the past two decades. The aim was not to reach consensus, but to create a space for collective reflection on why these principles emerged, how they have been interpreted, and how they have influenced policing in practice.
The resulting discussion provides a fascinating insight into how different actors understand the evolution of Scottish policing and how policing work incorporates prevention, partnerships and community wellbeing.
Why were Scotland's policing principles introduced?
One of the strongest themes to emerge from both the witness seminar and the interviews we conducted beforehand (summarised in a short report at the start of the transcript) was that there is no single agreed explanation for why Section 32 was introduced.
Some participants viewed the legislation primarily as a codification of changes that were already taking place. From this perspective, partnership working, violence prevention, harm reduction and broader concern with community wellbeing had been developing within Scottish policing for many years. The legislation therefore reflected an existing direction of travel rather than creating a new one.
Others located the principles within wider public service reform. The Christie Commission's emphasis on prevention, collaboration and early intervention provided an important backdrop, alongside efforts to position policing as one contributor within a wider system of public services working to improve outcomes for communities via a shift towards prevention.
A third (related) explanation focused on fiscal pressures. Following the 2008 financial crisis, prevention was increasingly viewed as both a social and an economic imperative. If public services could prevent harm occurring in the first place, the hope was that demand on emergency and reactive services, including policing, might be reduced.
Finally, some participants saw Section 32 as part of a broader attempt to articulate a distinctive Scottish approach to public policy and policing, one that emphasised prevention and partnerships.
These narratives are not mutually exclusive. Indeed, many participants drew on several simultaneously. Yet they matter because they imply different expectations about what this aspect of the legislation was intended to achieve. Was it designed to support existing practice? To transform policing? To help reshape public services more broadly? To save money? Or to signal a particular vision of what policing should be?
From legislative principle to operational reality
The witness seminar also explored what happened after the legislation was passed.
Participants reflected on the tensions involved in translating broad principles into day-to-day practice, particularly in the context of the creation of Police Scotland and wider police reform (embedded within the same 2012 Act). While the principles emphasised prevention, wellbeing and collaboration, implementation took place during a period characterised by organisational restructuring, financial pressures and competing operational demands.
Many participants described the early years of Police Scotland as a period in which organisational reform was the priority. Some suggested that local partnerships and preventative initiatives lost momentum during this period. Others emphasised the scale of the challenge involved in bringing together eight legacy police forces while simultaneously managing budget reductions and maintaining public confidence.
Yet the discussions also highlighted multiple examples of preventative and partnership-based work that continued throughout this period, often driven by local relationships, committed individuals and collaborative networks.
More recently, participants pointed to a wide range of innovative developments, from police officers carrying Naloxone to prevent deaths from overdose, trauma-informed approaches to engaging with some communities, violence prevention initiatives, mental health pathways and the engagement with research initiatives such as the Scottish Prevention Hub. There was, therefore, plenty of evidence of ongoing efforts to undertake prevention and wellbeing-oriented work within policing.
At the same time, however, renewed concerns about reduced police budgets hinted that innovative, prevention and wellbeing focused practices may come under renewed pressure, going forward. While national policymakers often say that a shift towards prevention is unavoidable, given fiscal pressures, seminar conversations suggested that budget constraints risk informing a retreat to what is viewed as ‘core’ police business, with a focus on crime control. The seminar highlighted several key areas of policing work that could be understood as opportunities for prevention-oriented approaches and, potentially, reduced demand on services, particularly substance use harm reduction and streamlined mental health pathways. Yet these possibilities received less attention than discussions focused on the challenges of sustaining services in a context of ongoing resource pressures.
What difference has Section 32 made?
Perhaps unsurprisingly given the apparent lack of consensus on the rationale behind section 32, there was little agreement about impact.
For some participants, Section 32 has provided an important source of legitimacy for prevention-oriented and partnership-based approaches. It was framed as helping create space for conversations about vulnerability, wellbeing, trauma and public health, and action across these areas, all of which sit outside traditional, narrow, understandings of policing.
Others questioned how far legislative principles alone can drive organisational change. Participants repeatedly highlighted the importance of leadership, accountability, resources, culture and partnership working in determining whether preventative ambitions are realised in practice.
One recurring theme concerned the risk of police becoming the service of first and last resort, responding to problems that originate in poverty, addiction, mental ill-health, homelessness and wider social inequalities. Participants were broadly supportive of collaborative approaches to addressing these challenges, while also recognising that policing cannot substitute for adequately resourced health, social care and community services.
Why this discussion matters
Although the seminar focused on Scotland, many of the issues discussed have wider relevance, especially in the context of ongoing policy efforts to take a more preventative and collaborative approach to public services in the context of budgetary pressures. The seminar highlighted both conceptual questions, such as the role of police, and practical issues of implementation, such as the challenges of information sharing across organisations and recognition of preventive activity in performance management systems.
Across many countries, police organisations are increasingly responding to challenges that are not easily addressed through enforcement alone. Questions about prevention, vulnerability, partnership working and community wellbeing are becoming central to debates about the future of policing (and we are currently exploring the supporting evidence-base). For researchers, policymakers and practitioners interested in policing, prevention, public health and public service reform, we hope the transcript provides a useful resource for understanding both the ambitions and the complexities involved in pursuing safety through wellbeing and prevention.
As our wider research continues, we look forward to building on these discussions and exploring what they can tell us about the future of policing and community wellbeing in Scotland. Next steps for the research include exploring some ongoing examples of community wellbeing-oriented work in Scotland and what we can learn from them. If you are aware of a particularly promising initiative in Scotland, please get in contact with the project team:
- Professor Kat Smith: katherine.smith.100@strath.ac.uk
- Dr Ruth Friskney: ruth.friskney@strath.ac.uk
- Professor Liz Aston: L.Aston@napier.ac.uk