USA: +1(669)289-8683 
Sign in
– Concept Paper
– Must be absolutely original and pass Turn It In, masters language command.
– Due not later than January 5th Mid Night
– I prefer teachers from/familiar with Kenya for this project.
The selected teacher will also help with the Final research paper, based on this concept paper once it will be approved and accepted.
– keep time.
see the attached instructions.
Department: Conflict, Peace and Strategic studies
Faculty: Masters of Science in strategic studies
Concept Paper
Research Topic:
Challenges of community policing in Kenya: a case study of Nyaribari Masaba Sub-County, Kisii, Kenya
Required:
Develop a concept paper as per the attached guidelines. You can modify and use data from the attached Teso County Study Case or any other relevant data of your choice to develop the concept paper.
N.B; THE PAPER SHOULD NOT BE MORE THAN 7 PAGES DOUBLE SPACING
Submit by January 5th before Midnight
PSY/GCP/01
Durham University
DEPARTMENT OF CONFLICT, PEACE AND STRATEGIC STUDIES
GUIDELINES FOR DEVELOPING CONCEPT PAPER FOR RESEARCH PROPOSAL
INTRODUCTION
This section is optional. You could introduce the topic and the sections to be covered in the paper
Background to the study
The purpose is to orient the reader of the context of the study. Specifically, it should operationalize the key variable showing clearly how they interact and the possible problematic aspects in the interactions often overlooked in relation to your topic. Then establish the problem leading to the study from global, regional and local perspective. The discussion should show the gap. Support your ideas with the existing literature in the area (please note that this is not a literature review section, so it is your ideas as you see the problem supported
The background should link the study to contemporary policy directions such as the international, regional, and national policies. It should be brief and to the point.
(About
2
– 3pages double spacing)
Statement of the problem
It should be precise and focused and should bring out what is known, what is not known and hence reveal the gap that the current research is trying to fill. (It should be a paragraph or two and generally not more than three thin paragraphs).
Purpose of the Study: This is a statement or two paraphrasing the topic, and giving the primary goal of the study.
Objectives of the Study
The objectives should be precise, clearly stated, and achievable and stated in measurable terms.
It should cover the study variables. ( Operationalize ( break up your study variables to form focused. Objectives. Remember that each objective answers the major research question
Research Questions/Hypotheses (where applicable)
These are the same as the objectives, only stated in question form.
Research questions should be used if the study is qualitative or descriptive.
Hypotheses are predictions about the relationship between variables.
They should be used when the studies are relational (seeking to establish relationship between variables or experimental (seeking to establish cause-effect).
Justification and significance
Why is the study important? ( Put this in your own words,; no references. This should be informed by the background and statement of the problem.( This section is mainly a paragraph written in a continuous prose)
The significance should address the key expected findings, who may benefit from these findings, and how may they benefit from the findings. This section could be bulleted. Please show how each group outlined will benefit
CHAPTER 2
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
Highlight the theory (theories) to be used and the justification for the choice. If you will use more than one theory clearly explain why.
For the concept; no literature is expected, but indicate the subheadings as guided by the objectives
METHODOLOGY
The research design and justification for the choice
Study variables must be operationally defined (be clear of which is independent and dependent variable
Site of the Study
The researcher describes the physical setting where the study will be undertaken and justifies the choice of site.
Target Population
The researcher describes the population being studied and justifies the population targeted.
Sampling and Sample size
The researcher describes the sampling technique/s used to arrive at the sample and justifies the technique/s chosen.
Instruments
Describe the instruments that you will use e.g. Questionnaire, interview and justify the choice of the instruments
Data analysis
Describe the methods that you will use for data analysis and justify your choice
N.B; THE PAPER SHOULD NOT BE MORE THAN 7 PAGES DOUBLE SPACING
2
Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3015740
Community Policing In Kenya: Examining the Challenges Derailing
Police-Civilian Relations in Teso South Sub-County.
Levis Amuya
Department of Social Work and Criminology, Kibabii University, Bungoma, Kenya
Abstract: There is still a staggering implementation level of community policing strategy many years after its
inception in Kenya. Part of the reason for dismal actualization is attributed to the controversial nature of the
police
as a public service institution. This research paper attempts to illuminate the challenges to the realization of
community policing (CP) initiatives in Teso South Sub-county. Specific emphasis was placed on how the roles of the
key players in CP together with the challenges they face in their service brings Community Policing (CP) as a whole
to its knees. Busia County government, where Teso South Sub-County is located, still pays lip service to the CP
initiative and it is not treated as a matter of urgency thus leading to its dormancy as a policing strategy. Data was
collected from 108 respondents that included police officers and community members and stakeholders.
Questionnaires, interviews, and focused group discussions were devised in collecting the data which was coded and
then analyzed using mode. The data was presented by use of frequency tables and pie charts. The study has reviewed
enough literature to help illuminate and understand the issues being studied appropriately. The findings of the study
address the problems of implementation, including poor police-civilian partnerships and unawareness of respective
roles among the public and the police who are the key players in CP. The study underscores that there is need for
increased civic education and capacity building among police officers especially on CP for it to achieve its intended
purpose.
Key Words: Community policing, crime, impediments, actualization, sustainability, engagement,
organizational commitment, police culture.
1. INTRODUCTION
Community policing (CP) has received increasing attention in the last decades as a viable strategy to improve the
way of life and public safety. The medieval African way of life had community policing concepts at the heart of
human relations. In traditional African society, crime was viewed largely as a violation of an individual by another.
From an African perspective, when crimes occurred, it was not the law that was broken; but people’s lives. When
colonialism emerged, it ushered in different crime control models since crime was no longer viewed as a conflict but
a violation of the state (Wambugha, 2010). However, the recent days have seen many African societies re-adopting
community policing due to the increasing need for community collective approaches to its problems. The concept
has enjoyed growing influence and popularity in recent years and a sharply increasing number of police agencies
around the world are employing it at the centre of their crime control efforts (Mwaniki, 2010). Through voracious
study of the concept, the researcher found that much has been written about community policing and that it has been
a dominant topic of diverse academic forums and studies.
Initial efforts in the introduction of community policing in countries like the United States in the 1960s was intended
to increase police-community contact and reduce the fear of crime (Cordner, 2007; Innes, 2003). The strategy
encouraged problem solving and community engagement as opposed to reactive style of policing (Innes, 2003). In
Teso, as elsewhere, police are colored by complaints of gross disservice to the public, arrogant application of the law
and blatant corruption which tarnishes the police civilian relationships and consequently prompting feelings among
civilians that administration of justice is an illusion (Kiprono, 2007). Community policing was enacted in Kenya in a
bid to improve public security and safety as well as strengthen the police-citizen relations (Finnegan, Hickson &
Rai, 2008). However, the strategy has failed in meeting most of its objectives. Previous studies have focused on
illuminating the prospects that have been made by the police in engaging the community in police work
Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3015740
(Wambugha, 2010). There is however a dim literature on the specific factors within the police organization and the
community that impact negatively on the success of community policing especially in a rural community like Teso.
Thus, the current study seeks to explore the nature of the challenges that confronts the implementation of this
program for possible lessons. Based on the identified impediments, the study will reflect on potential challenges in
implementing CP program in Teso South sub-county.
2. LITERATURE REVIEW
Community Policing (CP) is anchored on the normative sponsorship theory that stipulates that most people are
inherently benevolent and will accept working in cooperation with others in order to meet their own pertinent
desires. Such collaboration will only occur if all the parties involved in the cooperation accord can justify the
reaching of the common objectives whether it be for the same rationale or for different motivations (Kiprono, 2007).
The concept originated from the revelation that the police can’t able to reduce crime levels on their own as they can
barely deal with the key symptoms of crime and that community involvement is fundamentally necessary if
underlying causes of crime are to be rooted out (Patterson, 2007). Primarily, it requires that police integrate into
society and become its part and parcel during its interaction with the community in the course of their service work.
(Cordner, 2007). The community relies on the police to curb disorder and attend to the emergency situations. The
police, on the other hand, is reliant upon the community to report crime and furnish them with valid and actionable
leads necessary for them to intervene proactively and address community concerns (Innes, 2003). Innes(2003)
suggests that the concept is based on the assumption that if police and the community work together creatively and
symbiotically, it can lead to solving of problems that may be the underlying causes of crime, fear of crime,
lawlessness and general societal decay. This policing strategy thus centrally insists on the need for the police to
actively promote community safety and conversely, the community should dutifully accept shared responsibility in
this endeavor. The police are charged with the onus of devising workable strategies for community involvement in
the fight against crime (Patterson, 2007). In a nutshell, CP is considered a popular contemporary policing approach
that tries to respond to the steady decline in the public confidence in police and the ever mushrooming evidence that
police organizations could not fight crime by themselves (Skogan, 2006; Virta, 2006; Innes 2003;Tilley, 2008) and
neither should they allow the community to be a law unto themselves.
Amid the adoption of devolution in Kenya, most of the counties recognize that a key component of socio-economic
development of any county or area is having sustainable security. This has educated regional interest in formulation
and implementation of new police reforms as a pathway to attain secure counties (Kiprono, 2007). Some of the
counties have even gone step of formulating their own police that have the face of the public to promote their free
interaction with the public. Of course when there is security lapse in one county, the rest of Kenya would suffer
directly or indirectly. In other countries such as Uganda, the program was established at national level in 1993 and it
placed emphasis on neighborhood watch. It was revered as a prime method of policing in the country. Currently, CP
is the core of policing and the business of command at all levels in Uganda with its basis being both legal and
doctrinal in nature. Article 212 (d) of Uganda’s constitution emphasizes cooperation between the police and the
public, other security organs and the population generally. It is also the duty of citizens under Article 17 (f) of
Uganda’s constitution to cooperate with lawful agencies in the maintenance of law and order. Crime prevention is
hence at the heart of CP Uganda’s crime control model (Finnegan, Hickson & Rai, 2008).
The inception of CP in Kenya started with the business community in Nairobi. Together with the New York Institute
of Security, Nairobi Central Business District Association (NCBDA), Safe world- an NGO, Professionals, the Ford
Foundation and Kenya Institute of Administration (KIA) launched the first form of CP in 2003 to cater for the
security interests within the Central Business District (CBD). Though this collaboration with the police was taken to
have succeeded, marginal groups in the informal sectors were not incorporated in the launch and remain side-lined
and excommunicated, even though they also interact with the police on security matters in the same area (Ruteere,
2011). In 2005, despite this conspicuous difference, the government proceeded and established the National
Community Policing Strategy in Ruai. From this state of affairs, in can be argued that community policing in Kenya
begun due to commercial reasons. This situation has remained unchanged and it provides sufficient explanations as
to why the enactment of the Community Policing legal framework is taking a long period for Kenya as a whole
(Kiprono, 2007). In its recommendations, National Task Force on Police Reforms that was formed after the 2007-08
post-election violence made a strong case that CP should be strengthened in order to ensure participation of the
public in provision of public safety and security services. It also suggested that the National Community Policing
Policy (NCPP) needed to be fast tracked so as to provide an institutional and a legal framework for the actualization
of community policing in Kenya (Gok, 2009; Joshua, 2012). This has led to efforts aimed at establishing county
policing authorities in all the 47 counties in Kenya. In Teso south sub-county and Busia County as a whole, CP has
remained a motionless idea only taken as hearsay and its establishment has not taken root.
From literature, the ability to sustain commitment from the community and external agencies has been identified as
a barrier to CP. CP is highly dependent upon community involvement but maintaining their sustainability has always
been problematic for many police organizations (Skogan, 2009). Residents, unlike agencies involved, are not paid,
and in order to participate, people must take time away from work, family, friends, daily chores and personal interest
(Carroll Barracker& Associates Ltd, 2007). Diamond & Weiss (2009) observes that CP often implies that
individuals have common interests, values, integrity, demands and expectations but in practice, communities are
ambiguous. Skogan (2006) argues that community involvement is not easily achieved in areas of most need and
harder to reach parts of the community can become excluded in the ‘community effort’ because they have different
interests, values and expectations. Segrave & Ratciffe (2004) argues that community policing serves the interests of
the vocal minority and presence of strong personalities and influential groups can dominate discussion and control
the direction of an initiative. Other factors can limit community participation in addressing issues. For example, the
ethos of individualism may undercut attempts to work in partnership with the police. In addition, a lack of capital
investment is seen as a lack of social investment (Herbert, 2006). Herbert questions if economically and socially
desperate communities are capable of generating and sustaining themselves as ‘communities’ under the expectations
of the normative ideals of community policing. The conflicting values are also a problem for agencies working
together. The lack of sustained interagency cooperation is believed to be because agencies have traditionally viewed
community policing to belong to police rather than a community-wide responsibility (Skogan, 2006). Moreover,
Joshua (2012) argues that working in partnership can result in conflicting values and different social values being
promoted by different agencies, which creates inability to effectively work together.
Community meetings have been identified as mechanism for the community to identify and prioritize their problems
but have proven difficult to sustain. The Chicago Alternative policing strategy (CAPS) initiative experienced
difficulty in sustaining resident involvement because police often dominate the solution with enforcement-oriented
approaches limiting productive dialogue between police and residents (Skogan, 2009). Young &Tinsley (1998)
believe that in New Zealand, formal community consultation committees were not successful for similar reasons: the
police dominate the meetings, with the focus on their issues or concerns raised by the police or on issues of which
police had little knowledge or regarded as outside the scope of their work. In addition, the formal consultative
meetings were unrepresentative and poorly attended. Mastrofski et al (2006) argues beat meetings intended to help
community prioritize, participate in problem solving and discuss police services, were not successful in engaging
collective self-help behavior. Instead meetings become a place to advocate for more service delivery. However,
Bucqueroux (2007) raises an interesting research question: what does the community expect from
community
policing? If more was understood about community expectations, then they could be incorporated into the
development of initiatives.
The posture of the police organization is very pertinent in determining CP success. There are a number of reasons
why the police officer and the organization pose a barrier to CP. Community policing ‘…..requires a great deal of
training, close supervision, strong analytical capacity and organization wide commitment’ (Skogan & Stainer, 2004).
A national center for community policing study found that three out of four initiatives of community policing were
being conducted without the contribution of the community to identify, prioritize and solve problems (Bucqueroux,
2007). This indicates that it is possible for community police officers to work independently of the community when
identifying and providing solutions to community issues. The performance of police officers are based on
organizational measures rather than their aptitude to build relationship with the community, but, which results in the
ability to reward officers’ good work (Skogan, 2009; Diamond & Weiss, 2009; Green, 2000;Polzin, 2007).
Carroll Buracker & Associates Ltd (2007) suggests that most officers are not trained in the formation of
partnerships; nor do they have experience in organizing community involvement or empowering the community
with limited training, it is unlikely that police will realize the full potential of CP. Skogan (2006) suggests training is
often ‘short-changed’ because community policing is labor intensive. Mastrofski (2006) argues that in the United
States recruit training has not been substantially revised to promote community policing techniques. Green (2000)
highlights the fact that generally less than one week is devoted for America police officers to learn and function in
new police thinking roles and if results can be achieved with limited training then the of whether success comes
from a program/ organization or is due to individual officer.
Skogan (2009) argues that one of the key barriers to CP is sustaining organizational commitment. Skogan (2009)
concluded that where there is sustained commitment and community ownership the result was a decline in levels of
crime, social order and physical decay. Young & Tinsley (1998) suggest that traditional police structures have little
to foster the acceptance of responsibilities for analyzing a problem and seeking a resolution. Mastrofski (2006)
criticizes the general lack of a ‘whole-of-police’ approach with CP. Polzin (2007) argues that police need to employ
change management strategies to successfully implement CP. Similarly, Kiprono, (2007) indicates that: “the
initiatives associated with community policing cannot survive in a police agency managed in traditional ways. If
changes are not made, the agency sets itself for failure…Officers will not be creative……….if a high value
continues to be placed on conformity. They will not be thoughtful if they are required to adhere to regulations that
are thoughtless. And they will not aspire to act as mature, responsible adults if their superiors treat them like
children” (p 29 cited in Flynn, 2004).
Polzin (2007) believes that for CP to be successful all barriers need to be identified during the design face of CP
initiatives. According to Polzin (2007), some of the common organizational barriers include:
A lack of involvement by police management in the initiatives design, implementation and monitoring;
Disagreements about resources allocation and personnel deployment;
Confusion about in department systems and structures;
Middle management indifference;
Clashes between ‘command-and-control management styles and expanded decision making by line
officers;
Preferential treatment for community police officers.
Traditional law enforcement and criminal justice practices creates a lack of sympathy in understanding what
community policing is (Young & Tinsley, 1998). Ideas of ‘solidarity’ or ‘brotherhood’ are important in
understanding the resistance to community policing. It’s thought the police officers develop the need to protect one
another against signs of trouble, offence or threat and perceived of dangers (Diamond & Weiss, 2009). Skogan
(2006) argues there is resistance to CP within the ranks because it is seen as a soft policing or ‘social work’ and ‘just
politics’ due to the involvement from public officials. Some officers do not like civilian influence on operational
priorities. Scott & Jobs (2007) that traditionally, police are ‘formally trained and informally through the bureaucracy
of law enforcement, which provides a counter to CP and community engagement. However, police culture is often
resistant to change towards CP for several reasons, including: the potential loss of autonomy; there could be a
diversion of resources from traditional core functions; the community could impose unrealistic programs; and police
“tough-minded” status could be demeaned (Skogan, 2009; Green, 2000).
A debate at the police structural level focuses on whether the traditional organization structure of the police in terms
of its training and subculture can be transformed and whether it can be an agent of transformation as a result of
implementation of CP. A number of authors notably Finnegan, Hickson, & Rai, (2008) and Landau & Misago,
(2009), have argued that the structure of the police organization characterized by extremely centralized, hierarchical
and largely rigid bureaucracy is contradictory to the structure, values and process implied by CP. The argument is
that co-production of policing priorities that considers community input as central, requires a decentralized structure
that is flexible ,innovative and proactive, which is difficult in the traditional structure of the police. Police cultures
can undermine police-community relationships because police officers dominate as ‘crime and disorder experts’,
which disadvantages the community when offering solutions. Bucqueroux (2004) believes polices are doing a good
job of engaging with the community for help and support but are still reluctant to share power and decision making.
Furthermore, Herbert (2006) argues the police often decide on the terms of engagement for various social problems
because of the separation from the community due to their duties and powers, which disempowers the community
and limits their involvement.
As revealed by the literature above, the impediments to community policing implementation rotate around the roles
of the police as well as their organizational culture and its impact in combating crime. Several concepts of the
community/citizens as well as the police institution have been elaborately discussed with their limitations and
significance well painted
3. METHOD
The study chose descriptive survey study design since fact-finding enquiries of different kinds were conducted. The
research design included both quantitative and qualitative research methodologies since the researcher felt that the
approaches would minimize bias and maximize reliability of the data collected and analyzed when used
synonymously. The target population was very heterogeneous. It was made up of police officers and cardinal
members of the community based in Teso south sub-county. The total population of the police officers was 94 in
their various sub-sections and ranks which were categorized into three i.e. senior officers (OCPD, OCS, Sub-County
Commander, Deputy Sub-County Commander and Members Of The Inspectorate), members of the station
community policing committee, and low ranking officers (39 APs, 24 regular police, corporals, sergeants-SGT,
senior sergeants/SGT and police constables). The target population also involved community members and
stakeholders totaling to 235. They were categorized into two i.e. members of the community and stakeholders (2
5
Representatives of the community and stakeholders in the CPC and 100 senior elders of the community), members
of the CPC (40 Village Community Policing Committee members, 40 sub-locational CPC members and 30
locational CPC members). They were selected evenly from the two divisions in the sub-county. A combination of
probability and non-probability sampling methods were used. Since the region targeted had a large number of units
to be studied, probability sampling provided an efficient system of capturing heterogeneity that existed in the study
population. On the other hand, because the researcher focused on obtaining indebt qualitative information about
community policing implementation challenges and roles of key players, then non-probability sampling was
effected. Senior police officers and members of the CPC were purposively selected since the researcher felt that
they had vital information that any other respondent would not have knowledge of. The researcher used stratified
random sampling technique to have an equal strata representation across the target population. The sample
population was segregated into five homogeneous groups consisting of senior police officers, members of station
CPC, low ranking officers, representatives of the community and stakeholders and members of the CPC at all levels,
where the researcher randomly selected the samples. The researcher used 25 % sample from each strata since the
higher the percentage the closer the characteristics of the sample are to the target population. Hence, the total sample
size that was used for the study was 108 respondents. Representatives of the community and stakeholders and police
administrators were selected purposively.
The study used a number of research instruments. They include; questionnaires, guided interview schedules,
telephone interviews and use of focused group discussions. Two questionnaires were used for the study, one for low
ranking police officers and another one for community members and stakeholders. The questionnaires contained
closed-ended and open-ended questions. Closed ended questions were used so that the information could quantified
and used in marginal tabulation which sought to provide the researcher with a description of how the total sample
had distributed itself on the response alternative for each questionnaires item. Responses to individual items were
also used to explore possible relationships between two or more variables. The range was 5= strongly agree,
4=agree, 3= not sure, 2=disagree and 1= strongly disagree. On the other hand, open-ended questions were used to
obtain more indebt information that would lead to greater understanding of the situation regarding the impediments
to the actualization of community policing in Teso south sub-county. A guided interview schedule was used to target
senior police administrators and members of the station CPC in Teso south sub county. The schedule sought to
collect information relating to the methods used by the police in engaging the public as well as their experiences on
the strategies the police use in making themselves more accountable. Telephone interviews were used sparingly.
Due to the size of the study area and its nature, the researcher conducted a focused discussion groups with members
of the CPC. The respondents were organized in groups of 10 and questionnaires were purposefully formulated to
determine the level of partnership with the police. In order to improve validity, the researcher ensured that he used a
simple language that the respondents understood and also ensured that the research instruments were accurate. In
addition, expert opinion was sought from the supervisor to evaluate the validity of the research instruments
especially prior to the commencement of the research activity.
After data collection, the help of the various statistical measures were sought to help the researcher analyze and
present the collected data. A statistical analyst was thus used for the analysis of the data. The collected data was
edited to improve its quality for coding. The simplest and precise way to represent data collected was in frequency
and percentage table which summarizes the data about a single variable. Frequencies were converted to percentages
in order to make it easier to interpret, analyze and present findings of the research. The analyzed data was then
presented in form of tables which gave a quick and easy interpretation of the information to the user. Measures of
central tendency i.e. mode, pie charts and percentages were used to analyze the data. Qualitative data was
categorized into themes for easy analysis and others presented as plain narrations.
4. RESULTS
Table I shows that a great extent of respondents consented that the community faces a pool of challenges in CP
ranging from lack of education, mismanagement of confidential information by the police, poor implementation
approaches, poor customers service procedures by the police, community role not being recognized, disregard of
community contributions, harassment by the police to lack of support from the government all having a modal rating
of 4 (agree). Similar findings were those of Mastrofski (2007) who found that the traditional barriers of
organizational change, scarce resources and a resistant police culture still exists and will continue to jeopardize the
successful implementation of any community policing initiative.
Table 1 Responses on the challenges facing the community in
community policing.
Nature of challenge Mode
The police mismanage and assume the confidential information about crime provided to the by the
community
4
There is no civic education on community policing and so the community doesn’t understand it
fully
5
Community policing implementation approaches are unfriendly. 4
The community doesn’t trust the police 4
The police have poor customer service procedures and thus the community is discouraged from
reporting crime
4
The police brag since the community has an inequitable power with them 4
Community engagement in community policing goes unrewarded. 5
There is no training and clear definition for the community role in engagement 4
The police do not value community volunteer contributions 5
The police harass residents when conducting investigations. 4
There is no support from the government for local partnership safety projects 5
Table II shows that the majority of police respondents know the idea of community policing and fully understand
their roles. From the table, most of the challenges the police face are centred in the community and the government.
In my opinion, community policing training should not just be limited to the police but should also be extended to
the community who are co-partners with the police in CP. Most respondents were not sure and had narrow
information as to whether there was a historical lack of trust between the Teso community and the police.
Table II: Responses on the challenges facing the police in community policing.
Nature of challenge Mode
Poor public image of the police service 5
Persistence of perceptions by the residents that community policing is not an effective way of
fighting crime
5
There is no community ownership of the process 4
The police lack good quality information about crime provided by the residents 4
The police lack training on community engagement philosophy and methods. 2
The government is not recognizing the historical lack of trust between the community and the
police
3
The police don’t understand their roles in community policing 2
The residents misunderstand the community policing strategy. 4
The police are inadequately equipped 5
The police do not know the community expectations from them 5
The residents believe that crime is a source of livelihood for some people. 4
Fig I reveals that the implementation of CP in Teso South sub-county is dismal with a 56% of respondents rating it
as poor. 28% rated it as good while 11% rated it as very good. Only 5 % rated it as satisfactory. This state of things
in my opinion, is probably because of the little attention paid to the challenges of implementation, scarce resources
and a resistant police culture. This finding was also supported by Mastrofski et al (2007) who found out that the
traditional barriers of organizational change, scarce resources and a resistant police culture still exists and will
continue to jeopardize the successful implementation of any community policing initiative. This trend may lead to
unrealistic community expectations due to poorly planned engagements and community members may take
inappropriate illegal actions in response to problems in their midst.
Fig I. Rating the implementation of community policing in Teso South sub-county by police officers and
Representatives of the community and stakeholders.
5. DISCUSSION
The study revealed that CPCs just exist in name in Teso south sub-county. The researcher discovered from the field
that most members of the village CPC have only the vaguest and a very pedestrian idea of what CP is as a “working
relationship between the community and the police”, and no more than that. A senior police officer claimed that CP
was widely practised in the field and at the grass-root level with established and active CPCs in place all over Teso
south sub-county. Yet most senior members of the community were not able to define CP, nor had most of them
seen the guide book which was alleged to have been “largely distributed” in the sub-county in the words of a senior
police officer. Even the most affluent and senior community members only had a distant idea about community
policing. This means that there is no training and clear definition for the community role in engagement due to lack
of civic education on CP leading to most residents just hearing about it from a distance.
Where the CPCs are a bit established, the researcher discovered that the police do not value the contributions of the
community residents and volunteers. The study further noted that CPCs are dysfunctional although they are just
vehicles for fostering trust and cooperation between the police and the community. Previous findings by Brogden
(2002) and Wambugha (2010) identified the factors that make CPFs not successful as insufficient support and
protection from the police, CPC concept has not received enough publicity hence community members are not
aware of its existence and generally do not even know what it stands for, CPC members are being targeted by
criminals for working with the police, policemen see CPCs as watchdogs and thus feel threatened, policemen are not
sure of what role the community are expected to play in this structures and might regard it as intrusion into their
work, some CPCs are not representative of the community and that the police attempt to use CPC members as
informants and do not regard them as partners. In the light of Brogden’s (2002) findings, even the police in Teso
south sub-county have inequitable power relationships with the community in CP.
Also, the study established that community engagement in CP normally goes unrewarded. The position of volunteers
is difficult, since they provide round-the-clock policing but are not paid a salary. This means that control
mechanisms for this group cannot be vouched for in terms of transparency and accountability. Responses as to
whether CP was voluntary or not was negative and most community respondents claimed that some volunteers in the
CPC ask for bribes due to lack of facilitation money to enable movements for emergencies. It was clear that there
was no support from the government for local partnership safety projects. Similar findings by Mayhill (2007)
indicated that performance measurement frameworks do not reward community engagement. Because of the low
level of trust between the police and the community, the study found that police often assume confidential
information about crime provided to them by the community. This lands a big blow to the community in its attempt
to participate in CP due to a rigid police culture.
Implementation level of community policing in Teso South sub-county
Poor Satisfactory Very good Good
On the part of the challenges experienced by the police while implementing community policy, the study revealed
that most residents perceive that CP is not an effective way of fighting crime and hence lack ownership of the
process. The members of the community believe that at times, crime is a source of livelihood for some people.
During the study, it was established that the reason for this was the influence of the opposition party, ODM, which is
widely applauded in the larger Busia County. The opposition party feels that CP will turn the country into a police
state hence not an effective security strategy. Furthermore, most residents viewed the ‘Nyumba Kumi’ as a
retrogressive, backward-looking policing style. Most community respondents purported that the ‘Nyumba Kumi’
project is mainly used to fight local brews, their source of income, and identifying suspicious characters among the
residents but neglects other crimes committed by police themselves. This perception was revealed to be a barrier
towards successful implementation of CP by the police. Similar findings by Landau & Misago (2009) suggest that a
major concern is that most communities may in fact display a “communal complicity in crime” as a result of
extreme poverty. Moreover, the findings stipulated that communities are often portrayed as the ‘antithesis of
violence and crime’. The collective values cherished and enshrined by the community may serve to stimulate and
sustain criminal behaviour.
In addition, the study revealed that due to inadequate equipping of the police in Teso south and lack of
understanding of the community’s expectations by the police, there is poor public image of the police service. Police
officers are not conversant with the residential areas they were serving resulting to them having less awareness and
involvement of the residents that they are serving. This finding was also supported by Landau & Misago (2009)
when he stipulated that the institutional capacity of the police is another factor which may be detrimental to the
implementation of the policy. The police’s ability to empower the community by means of innovative programs, in
the face of severe resource limitations, is questionable.
The study revealed that police managers in Teso south assign police officers patrol areas on a rotating basis and
were instructed to change ways frequently, in an effort to thwart criminals. These patrols are only conducted at night
hence the residents lost their ability to predict when they may be able to interact with the local police and thus, the
police are viewed as strangers, disengaged from the community and its issues. This means that there is a lack of
good quality information about crime provided by the residents due to persistent mistrust between the police and the
community.
The study established, also, that the residents misunderstand the CP strategy and that most officers misinterpret their
roles in CP. This state of affairs bedevils the efforts of the police officers within Teso south to effectively implement
community policing.
6. CONCLUSIONS
The study has shown that community policing implementation approaches are unfriendly, there is no civic education
on CP, police mismanage confidential information provided by informants, and police adopt poor customer service
procedures. Also, traditional police cultures stood out to be the key challenge faced by the community. In my
opinion, the definition of community policing has just been copied from developed countries and there is no
operational definition to it given the context of Teso south sub-county. Although the police know what they are
supposed to do, they tend to assume such roles. Findings also indicate that resistance from the community due to
misunderstanding of CP strategy by the community is the central challenge that faces the police. The community
feels that CP is not an effective way of fighting crime and police officers don’t know what the community expects
from them. Often, information sourced from the community is unreliable and incomplete. Findings also brought out
the fact that the police is not sufficiently equipped to deal with crime and that the laxity by the government to fully
support the CP strategy is of great disadvantage to the police.
The study has highlighted the issue of indifference among the police and its effect on the public willingness to
cooperate with the police. Considering the context of police and public relations in Teso south sub-county, it might
be more relevant at the beginning to focus on what the program can do in making the police responsive to the public
and vice versa. This is relevant when it is considered that the key obstacle to the implementation of CP relates to the
attitudes of the public towards the police and that of the police towards the public. Also, the study highlighted the
point that CP structures are superimposed onto the existing administrative structures that historically have been used
to intimidate the public. In the frame of partnership, this raises serious doubts that CP in Teso south sub-county can
really transform the police or whether the relationship between the police and the community can entirely be of
equal partners. The community thus experiences a great deal of challenges. The study found that police managers in
Teso south sub-county assign police officers patrol areas on a rotating basis and were instructed to change ways
frequently. However, these patrols were only conducted at night hence the residents lost their ability to predict the
possibility of their interaction with the local police hence the policed are perceived as aliens who are not in the least
concerned with the community and its pressing concerns.
The police management should guide rather than order the actions of patrol officers. It should ensure that officers
are adequately supported in order to identify and solve problems. The management must also encourage creativity
amongst officers and be sensitive to the voices and requests of community engagement and develop a clear mission
statements and values that support community engagement and the problem solving role of Community Policing
Officers. These values should provide both the public and the officers with a clear sense of expanding focus and
direction of the police organization. Moreover, public education programs should be introduced and implemented
within community policing to garner general support for the police. Such programs will also help the police in
providing information to the members of the community on how they can minimize the chances of victimization, or
in the case of youth, how to avoid being tempted to indulge in criminal activities. Services of NGOs and the civil
society should be engaged in civic education so as to adequately empower the residents in matters of public safety
and security issues.
Future studies should focus on bringing to light the specific types of crime committed by the police within the
community for appropriate intervention. Community policing cannot be operationalized effective if police passivity
and criminality goes unnoticed.
REFERENCES
Brogden, M. 2002. ‘Implanting Community Policing in South Africa: A Failure of History, of Context, and of
Theory’, Liverpool Law Review.
Bucqueroux, B. 2004. ‘Community Policing in the Years Ahead: And Now for the Really Hard Part’ in
community Policing: The Past, Present and Future, eds L. Fridell& M. Wycoff, Police Executive Research
Forum: Washington.
Bucqueroux, B. 2007. What Community policing teaches us about Community Criminal Justice
http://www.policing.com/articles/pdf/ccj . Accessed 16thDecember, 2013.
Cordner, G. (2007). Community Policing: Principles and Elements, Regional Community Policing Institute: Eastern
Kentucky University. Retrieved on 16th December, 2013 from http://www.kycops.org/wcp.htm/PDF.
Carroll Buracker & Associates Ltd. 2007. Elements of Community Policing, Carroll Buracker& Associates Ltd.
Retrieved on 20th December, 2013 from http://www.buracker.com/sanfran.htm.
Kiprono, W. 2007. Challenges facing the implementation of community policing in Kenya: a case study of Kibera,
Nairobi (Doctoral dissertation, University of Nairobi).
Finnegan, L., Hickson, C., & Rai, S. 2008. Implementing community-based policing in Kenya. London: Saferworld.
Government of Kenya. 2009. Report of the National Task Force On Police Reforms, Available online at
http://www.khrc.or.ke/images/2010-01/Task%20Force%20Report%20Final last accessed on
11/12/2013
Herbert, S. 2006. Citizens, Cops and Power: Recognizing the Limits of Community, University of Chicago Press:
Chicago.
Innes, M. 2003. Understanding Social Control: Deviance, Crime and Social Order, McGraw-Hill.
Joshua, K. 2012. Factors Influencing Implementation Of Community Policing Programmes: A Case Of Thika
Municipality In Kiambu County.
Kimani, M. 2009. Security for the highest bidder: Shoddy policing for the many, costly private protection for the
few. United Nations Africa Renewal. Created by Africa Section, Strategic Communications
Division, Department of Public Information, United Nations. Accessed on 10/12/2013 at
http://www.un.org/ecosocdev/geninfo/afrec/vol23no3/233-security.html
Landau, L. B., & Misago, J. P. 2009. Who to blame and what’s to gain? Reflections on space, state, and violence in
Kenya and South Africa. Africa Spectrum, 44(1), 99-110.
Ministry of State for Provincial Administration and Internal Security (MoS-PAIS) (2009). Mwananchi Handbook
for Community policing. Government Printers.
Mastrofski, S., Willis, J., &Kochel, T. (2007) ‘The Challenges of Implementing Community Policing in the
United States’ in Policing, 2007; i1, pp223-234
Mayhill, A. 2007. Community engagement in Policing: Lessons from the literature
http://police.homeoffice.govt.uk/news-and-publications/community-
policing/community_engagement_lit_review ?view=Binary (13/12/2013)
Mugenda, O. M. and Mugenda, A. G. 1999. Research Methods: Quantitativeand Qualitative
Approaches.Nairobi: Acts Press.
Mwaniki, D. W. 2010. Community-Police Partnership: Reflections on Challenges of Community Policing in
Developing Countries and Implications for Kenya. A Research Paper presented in partial fulfilment
of the requirements for obtaining the degree ofMasters of Arts in Development Studies. International
Institute of Social Studies: The Hague, Netherlands.
http://www.policing.com/articles/pdf/ccj
http://www.kycops.org/wcp.htm/PDF
http://www.buracker.com/sanfran.htm
http://www.khrc.or.ke/images/2010-
http://www.un.org/ecosocdev/geninfo/afrec/vol23no3/233-
http://police.homeoffice.govt.uk/news-and-publications/community-
http://police.homeoffice.govt.uk/news-and-publications/community-
Patterson, J. 2007. Community Policing: Learning the Lessons of History, Lectric Law Library.
http://www.lectlaw.com/files/cjs07.htm
Polzin, M. 2007. A Labour-management Approach to Community Policing, Michigan State University – School of
Labour and Industrial Relations: Michigan http://www1.cjmsu.edu/~outreach/cp/labman.html (Accessed
20/12/2013)
Ruteere, M. 2011. More than political tools: the police and post-election violence in Kenya. African Security
Review, 20(4), 11-20.
Scott, J., & Jobes, P.C., 2007. ‘Policing in rural Australia: The country cop as law enforcer and local resident’
in Crime in Rural Australia, eds. Barclay, E., Donnermeyer, J., Scott, J. & Hogg, R., The Federation
Press: Sydney, pp. 127-137
Segrave, M. & Ratchcliffe, J. 2004. Community Policing. A Descriptive Overview, Australian Institute of
Criminology.
Skogan, W. 2006. ‘Advocate-The Promise of Community Policing’ in Police Innovations: Contrasting Perspectives,
ed. D. Weisburd and A. Braga, Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, pp. 27-43
http://www.ncjrs.gov/policing/use139.htm.
Skogan, W. 2009. Concern about Crime and Confidence in the Police: Reassurance or accountability. Police
Quarterly, Vol. 12 (1) pp. 301-318.
Skogan, W. G. &Steiner, L. 2004. Community policing in Chicago, Year ten. Chicago: Illinois Criminal Justice
Information Authority.
Diamond, D., & Weiss, D. M. 2009. Community Policing: Looking to Tomorrow. US Department of Justice, Office
of Community Oriented Policing Services, Police Executive Research Forum.
Tilley, N. 2008. Modern Approaches to Policing: Community, Problem-orientated and Intelligence-led. In T.
Newburn (ed.), Handbook of Policing. Cullompton: Willan
Virta, S. 2006. ‘Community Policing’ in The Sage Dictionary of Criminology, eds. McLaughlin, E & Muncie, J,
Sage: London.
Wambugha M.M. 2010. Community Policing In a Pastoral Community: A Case Study of West Pokot County,
Kenya. Unpublished MA Thesis, International Institute of Social Studies of Erasmus
University, Rotterdam.
Young, W. & Tinsley, Y. 1998. Option for the development of COP/Problem Solving in New Zealand, Victoria
University of Wellington: Wellington.
