National Academies Press: OpenBook
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2022. Policies and Practices to Minimize Police Use of Force Internationally. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26582.
×
PageR1
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2022. Policies and Practices to Minimize Police Use of Force Internationally. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26582.
×
PageR2
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2022. Policies and Practices to Minimize Police Use of Force Internationally. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26582.
×
PageR3
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2022. Policies and Practices to Minimize Police Use of Force Internationally. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26582.
×
PageR4
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2022. Policies and Practices to Minimize Police Use of Force Internationally. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26582.
×
PageR5
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2022. Policies and Practices to Minimize Police Use of Force Internationally. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26582.
×
PageR6
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2022. Policies and Practices to Minimize Police Use of Force Internationally. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26582.
×
PageR7
Page viii Cite
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2022. Policies and Practices to Minimize Police Use of Force Internationally. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26582.
×
PageR8
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2022. Policies and Practices to Minimize Police Use of Force Internationally. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26582.
×
PageR9
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2022. Policies and Practices to Minimize Police Use of Force Internationally. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26582.
×
PageR10

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Prepublication Copy Uncorrected Proofs Policies and Practices to Minimize Police Use of Force Internationally Committee on Evidence to Advance Reform in the Global Security and Justice Sectors Committee on Law and Justice Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education A Consensus Study Report of

PREPUBLICATION COPY, UNCORRECTED PROOFS THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001 This activity was supported by contracts between the National Academy of Sciences and the Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs of the U.S. Department of State, Award No. SINLEC20CA3213. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of any organization or agency that provided support for the project. International Standard Book Number-13: 978-0-309-XXXXX-X International Standard Book Number-10: 0-309-XXXXX-X Digital Object Identifier: https://doi.org/10.17226/26582 Additional copies of this publication are available from the National Academies Press, 500 Fifth Street, NW, Keck 360, Washington, DC 20001; (800) 624-6242 or (202) 334-3313; http://www.nap.edu. Copyright 2022 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America Suggested citation: National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2022. Policies and Practices to Minimize Police Use of Force Internationally. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/26582.

PREPUBLICATION COPY, UNCORRECTED PROOFS The National Academy of Sciences was established in 1863 by an Act of Congress, signed by President Lincoln, as a private, nongovernmental institution to advise the nation on issues related to science and technology. Members are elected by their peers for outstanding contributions to research. Dr. Marcia McNutt is president. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to bring the practices of engineering to advising the nation. Members are elected by their peers for extraordinary contributions to engineering. Dr. John L. Anderson is president. The National Academy of Medicine (formerly the Institute of Medicine) was established in 1970 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to advise the nation on medical and health issues. Members are elected by their peers for distinguished contributions to medicine and health. Dr. Victor J. Dzau is president. The three Academies work together as the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to provide independent, objective analysis and advice to the nation and conduct other activities to solve complex problems and inform public policy decisions. The National Academies also encourage education and research, recognize outstanding contributions to knowledge, and increase public understanding in matters of science, engineering, and medicine. Learn more about the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine at www.nationalacademies.org.

PREPUBLICATION COPY, UNCORRECTED PROOFS Consensus Study Reports published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine document the evidence-based consensus on the study’s statement of task by an authoring committee of experts. Reports typically include findings, conclusions, and recommendations based on information gathered by the committee and the committee’s deliberations. Each report has been subjected to a rigorous and independent peer-review process and it represents the position of the National Academies on the statement of task. Proceedings published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine chronicle the presentations and discussions at a workshop, symposium, or other event convened by the National Academies. The statements and opinions contained in proceedings are those of the participants and are not endorsed by other participants, the planning committee, or the National Academies. For information about other products and activities of the National Academies, please visit www.nationalacademies.org/about/whatwedo.

PREPUBLICATION COPY, UNCORRECTED PROOFS COMMITTEE ON EVIDENCE TO ADVANCE REFORM IN THE GLOBAL SECURITY AND JUSTICE SECTORS LAWRENCE W. SHERMAN, (Chair), University of Cambridge Institute of Criminology BEATRIZ ABIZANDA, Inter-American Development Bank YANILDA MARÍA GONZÁLEZ, Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University GUY GROSSMAN, University of Pennsylvania JOHN L. HAGAN, Northwestern University KAREN HALL, Rule of Law Collaborative, University of South Carolina CYNTHIA LUM, George Mason University EMILY OWENS, University of California, Irvine JUSTICE TANKEBE, University of Cambridge Institute of Criminology JULIE ANNE SCHUCK, Study Director SARAH PERUMATTAM, Senior Program Assistant (until October 2021) SUNIA YOUNG, Senior Program Assistant (from October 2021) ABIGAIL ALLEN, Associate Program Officer (from November 2021) EMILY P. BACKES, Associate Director, Committee on Law and Justice MEGAN SNAIR, Technical Writer v

PREPUBLICATION COPY, UNCORRECTED PROOFS COMMITTEE ON LAW AND JUSTICE ROBERT D. CRUTCHFIELD, (Chair), University of Washington (retired) SALLY S. SIMPSON, (Vice Chair), University of Maryland ROD K. BRUNSON, Northeastern University SHAWN D. BUSHWAY, University at Albany PREETI CHAUHAN, John Jay College of Criminal Justice KIMBERLÉ W. CRENSHAW, University of California, Los Angeles MARK S. JOHNSON, Howard University CYNTHIA LUM, George Mason University JOHN M. MACDONALD, University of Pennsylvania KAREN J. MATHIS, American Bar Association (retired), University of Denver THEODORE A. MCKEE, United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit SAMUEL L. MYERS JR., University of Minnesota EMILY OWENS, University of California, Irvine CYNTHIA RUDIN, Duke University WILLIAM J. SABOL, Georgia State University LINDA A. TEPLIN, Northwestern University Medical School NATACHA BLAIN, Director EMILY P. BACKES, Associate Director vi

PREPUBLICATION COPY, UNCORRECTED PROOFS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This report would not have been possible without the contributions of many people. First, we thank the sponsor of this study, the U.S. Department of State, Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs, for requesting and supporting this endeavor. We have admired the sponsor’s dedication to an evidence-led approach to further its programming. Special thanks go to the members of the study committee, who dedicated extensive time, thought, and energy to this report. In addition to its own research and deliberations, the committee received input from several outside sources, whose willingness to share their perspectives and experience was essential to the committee’s work. We thank Mark Berlin (Marquette University), Derryck Martin Espinoza (Trinidad & Tobago Police Service), Claudia Flores (University of Chicago), Sanja Kutnjak Ivkovich (Michigan State University), Sean Tait (African Policing Civilian Oversight Forum), and Stephen Williams (University of the West Indies). The committee also gathered information through two commissioned papers. We thank Geoffrey Alpert (University of South Carolina), Ignacio Cano (State University of Rio de Janeiro), Kyle McLean (Clemson University), and Seth Stoughton (University of South Carolina) for their papers and for contributing both to the discussion at the committee’s information gathering workshop and to findings in the report. The committee also wishes to extend its gratitude to the staff of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, in particular to study director Julie Schuck, who made critical substantive contributions to the conception, writing, and editing of the report and Jessalyn Brogan Walker who, as the study director through June 2021, identified and prepared commissioned paper authors and assembled suggestions of experts for the committee’s workshop. Thanks are also due to Emily Backes who provided substantive writing and editing contributions and critical oversight and direction for the project. Abigail Allen played an essential role in providing thorough and rigorous research and writing for the project. Sarah Perumattam and Sunia Young provided key administrative and logistical support and made sure the committee process ran efficiently and smoothly. The National Academies Research Center, particularly Anne Marie Houppert and Rebecca Morgan, provided valuable research assistance. From the Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education, we thank Kirsten Sampson Snyder, who shepherded the report through the review process, and Douglas Sprunger, who assisted with the report’s communication and dissemination. We also thank technical writer Megan Snair for quickly summarizing the presentations and discussions from the committee’s workshop and, with editor Marc DeFrancis, provided skillful writing and editing of the report manuscript. This Consensus Study Report was reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine in making each published report as sound as possible and to ensure that it meets the institutional standards for quality, objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to vii

PREPUBLICATION COPY, UNCORRECTED PROOFS the study charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process. We thank the following individuals for their review of this report: Cynthia M. Beall, Department of Anthropology, Case Western Reserve University; Felipe M. Goncalves, Department of Economics, University of California, Los Angeles; Ross Hendy, School of Social Sciences, Monash University, Australia; Edward Maguire, School of Criminology and Criminal Justice, Arizona State University; Louise Porter, School of Criminology and Criminal Justice, Griffith University; Gregory K. Ridgway, Department of Criminology, University of Pennsylvania; Nazli Yildirim Schierkolk, Independent Expert on Police Accountability, Europe; and Lucía Tiscornia, Center for Research and Teaching in Economics, Division of International Studies, Centro de Investigación y Docencia Económicas, Mexico City. Although the reviewers listed above provided many constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recommendations of this report nor did they see the final draft before its release. The review of this report was overseen by Alex R. Piquero, Department of Sociology and Criminology, University of Miami, and Philip J. Cook, Sanford School of Public Policy, Duke University. They were responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with the standards of the National Academies and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content rests entirely with the authoring committee and the National Academies. viii

PREPUBLICATION COPY, UNCORRECTED PROOFS CONTENTS Executive Summary 1 INTRODUCTION The Committee’s Charge Approach to the Study Scope of the Problem Levels of Analysis and Causes of Excessive Force Social Attitudes Toward Police Violence Organization of the Report 2 PRACTICES DESIGNED TO REGULATE AND CONTROL USE OF FORCE Laws and Standards External Oversight Bodies Police Training and Evaluations Barriers to Internal Control Mechanisms Technological Innovations Administrative Incentives Conclusion 3 COMMITTEE’S CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Data Needs Use of Force Policies Training for Police Officers Oversight and Supervision References Appendix Biographical Sketches of Committee Members and Staff ix

Next: Executive Summary »
Policies and Practices to Minimize Police Use of Force Internationally Get This Book
×
Buy Paperback | $15.00
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

Injury and death from use of excessive force by police officers remain a common concern in countries across the globe. Despite local, national, and international attempts to legislate and provide guidance for police use of force, there continue to be global accounts of excessive force by law enforcement. Reports of officer-involved killings, injuries to citizens, and attempts to control protests and demonstrations with chemical irritants, rubber bullets, and sometimes shooting into crowds with live ammunition frequently appear in the press worldwide. However, reliable data on and accounting for these incidents are both lacking.

A large network of international and regional organizations, bilateral donors, international financial institutions, and civil society organizations aim to work with governments to improve policing practices and reduce police use of excessive force. As a part of that network, the U.S. Department of State, through its Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs (INL), provides foreign assistance to and supports capacity building for criminal justice systems and police organizations in approximately 90 countries. Like many donors, it strives to direct its resources to the most effective approaches to achieve its mission.

Policies and Practices to Minimize Police Use of Force Internationally, the third in a series of five reports produced for INL, addresses what policies and practices for police use of force are effective in promoting the rule of law and protecting the population (including the officers themselves). This report looks at what is known about effective practices and their implementation and identifies promising actions to be taken by international donors in their efforts to strengthen the effectiveness of law enforcement agencies.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!