Uniform styles II: Police families and policing styles

International Journal of Phytoremediation

Volumn 21, Issue 1, 2005, Pages 1-18

  Hale, Christopher M ^a   Uglow, Stephen P ^a   Heaton, Robert ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF KENT   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Centralization; Effectiveness; Inspectorate; Intelligence led; Performance; Policing styles

Indexed keywords

EID: 85066218831     PISSN: 15226514     EISSN: 15497879     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/1043946042000338904     Document Type: Article

References (54)

1. Amey P, Hale C, Uglow S, (1996) The Development and Evaluation of a Crime Management Model (Police Research Series Paper 18) Home Office London
2. Audit Commission (1993) Helping With Enquiries: Tackling Crime Effectively, Audit Commission London
3. Burrows J, Tarling R, (1982) Clearing Up Crime (Home Office Research Study 73) HMSO London
4. Clarke R, Hough M, (1984) Crime and Police Effectiveness (Home Office Research Study 79) HMSO London
5. Cordner GW, (1996) Evaluating tactical patrol in: Hoover, L.T. (ed.) Quantifying Quality in Policing, Police Executive Research Forum Washington D.C. pp. 185–206
6. Eck JE, (1983) Solving Crimes: The Investigation of Burglary and Robbery, Police Executive Research Forum Washington D.C
7. Flood B, (2004) Strategic aspects of the UK National Intelligence Model in: Ratcliff, J. (ed.) Strategic Thinking in Criminal Intelligence, Federation Press Sydney pp. 37–52
8. Goldstein H, (1979) “Problem oriented policing” Crime and Delinquency Vol. 25 pp. 236–258
9. Greenwood PW, Chaiken JM, Petersilia J, (1977) The Criminal Investigation Process, D.C. Heath Lexington KY
10. Hale C, Heaton R, Uglow S, (2004) “Uniform styles? Aspects of police centralization in England and Wales” Policing and Society Vol. 14 no. 4 pp. 291–312
11. Heaton R, (2000) “The prospects for intelligence-led policing: Some historical and quantitative considerations” Policing and Society Vol. 9 pp. 337–355
12. HMCIC (1997) Revised Method for the Comparison of Force Performance Unpublished letter from Her Majesty's Chief Inspector of Constabulary to Chief Constables, 4 July
13. HMIC (1997) Policing with Intelligence (Thematic Inspection Report) HMSO London
14. HMIC (1998a) Beating Crime (Thematic Inspection Report) HMSO London
15. HMIC (1998b) Inspection Report: Cambridgeshire Constabulary, 1997–1998, HMSO London
16. HMIC (1998c) Inspection Report: North Yorkshire Police, 1997–1998, HMSO London
17. HMIC (1999a) Inspection Report: Cumbria Constabulary, 1998–1999, HMSO London
18. HMIC (1999b) Inspection Report: Dyfed–Powys Police, 1998–1999, HMSO London
19. HMIC (1999c) Inspection Report: Hampshire Constabulary, 1999, HMSO London
20. HMIC (1999d) Inspection Report: Leicestershire Constabulary, 1998–1999, HMSO London
21. HMIC (1999e) Inspection Report: Wiltshire Constabulary, 1998–1999, HMSO London
22. HMIC (2000a) Inspection Report: Avon and Somerset Constabulary, 1999–2000, HMSO London
23. HMIC (2000b) Inspection Report: Cheshire Constabulary, 1999–2000, HMSO London
24. HMIC (2000c) Inspection Report: Cleveland Police, 1999–2000, HMSO London
25. HMIC (2000d) Inspection Report: Durham Constabulary, 1999–2000, HMSO London
26. HMIC (2000e) Inspection Report: Gloucestershire Constabulary, 1999–2000, HMSO London
27. HMIC (2000f) Inspection Report: Lincolnshire Police, 1999–2000, HMSO London
28. HMIC (2000g) Inspection Report: Northamptonshire Police, 1999–2000, HMSO London
29. HMIC (2000h) Inspection Report: Suffolk Constabulary, 1999–2000, HMSO London
30. HMIC (2001a) Inspection Report: Derbyshire Constabulary, 2000–2001, HMSO London
31. HMIC (2001b) Inspection Report: Sussex Police, HMSO London
32. HMIC (2001c) Inspection Report: North Wales Police, 2000–2001, HMSO London
33. HMIC (2001d) Inspection Report: Nottinghamshire Police, 2000–2001, HMSO London
34. HMIC (2001e) Inspection Report: Thames Valley Police, 2001, HMSO London
35. HMIC (2001f) Inspection Report: West Mercia Police, 2000–2001, HMSO London
36. HMIC (2002) Inspection Report: Kent County Constabulary, 2001–2002, HMSO London
37. Home Office (1993) Police Reform: A Service for the Twenty-first Century, HMSO London
38. Home Office (2000) Calling Time on Crime (Thematic Inspection Report) HMSO London
39. Home Office (2001) National Intelligence Model: Providing a Model for Policing, Home Office London
40. Home Office (2002) The National Policing Plan, 2003–2006, Home Office London
41. Hough M, (1987) “Thinking about effectiveness” British Journal of Criminology Vol. 27 no. 1 pp. 70–79
42. Hough M, Tilley N, (1998) Getting the Grease to the Squeak: Research Lessons for Crime Prevention (Crime Detection and Prevention Series Paper 85) Home Office London
43. Kernaghan P, (2002) “The English quotient: One national force” Policing Today Vol. 8 no. 2 pp. 22–23
44. Leigh A, Read T, Tilley N, (1996) Problem-oriented Policing: Brit Pop (Crime Detection and Prevention Series Paper 75) Home Office London
45. Loveday B, (2000) “Managing crime: Police use of crime data as an indicator of effectiveness” International Journal of the Sociology of the Law Vol. 28 pp. 215–237
46. Loveday B, (2002) “The police reform agenda” Criminal Justice Matters Vol. No. 46 pp. 28–29
47. Loveday B, Read A, (2003) Going Local: Who Should Run Britain's Police?, Policy Exchange London
48. Morgan R, Newburn T, (1997) The Future of Policing, Clarendon Press Oxford
49. Morris P, Heal K, (1981) Crime Control and the Police (Home Office Research Study 67) HMSO London
50. Oakensen D, Mockford R, Pascoe C, (2002) “Does there have to be blood on the carpet? Integrating partnership, problem-solving and the National Intelligence Model in strategic and tactical police decision-making processes” Police Research and Management Vol. 5 no. 4 pp. 51–62
51. Phillips D, (2003) “Police politics” Police Review 17 January p. 26
52. Savage S, (2001) “Forces of independence” Police Review 11 May pp. 2021
53. Savage S, Charman S, Cope S, (2000) Policing and the Power of Persuasion: The Changing Role of the Association of Chief Police Officers, Blackstone London
54. Sherman L, et al (1998) Preventing Crime: What Works, What Doesn't, What's Promising, National Institute of Justice Washington D.C