| dc.description.abstract | ICT in the field of Community Policing (CP) may improve the performance of the interventions, crime prevention plans, the effectiveness of communication, the social engagement or even the public image of police forces, among many other aspects. Nevertheless, it may also bring undesired and/or unexpected consequences and risks in the context of security management, which affects both police officers and citizens. Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) can contribute to achieve an inclusive and ‘democratic’ style of community policing that facilitates police officers to better respond to communities’ needs and expectations in a fair manner. On the other hand, the intensiveness of the data processing, their networked nature and the uncontrolled flows of information expose not only the most directly involved participants but also any identifiable person affected. Facing such challenges requires a thorough analysis and assessment of the planned innovations, with a multi-step approach that intervenes before, during and after the implementation. The prior evaluation of the project helps to avoid the most remarkable incompatibilities; the oversight of the work in progress addresses the effects of elements and details that only appear once the project is being developed; finally, a periodic replicable assessment of the new systems provides a picture of the actual results on the long term. Measuring the impact of ICT in CP is a necessary action that ensures the achievement of beneficial outcomes, nourishing positive community-police relationships while minimizing negative externalities such as bias, discrimination or a negative impact on social cohesion. The present work aims at filling this gap through the construction of an ethical framework in this field based on both the results of desk research activities and empirical fieldwork. The first provide an ethical framework for technology-mediated community policing by identifying, compiling and analysing preceding cases, successes and failures, and key factors to be considered. The second sheds light on specific ethical considerations and socio-cultural settings. | en_US |
