Responses of the Population to Insecurity

• Author: Randy Seepersad/Dianne Williams
• Profession: Criminologist in the Department of Behavioural Sciences at the University of the West Indies, St Augustine, Trinidad and Tobago/Coordinator of the Unit for Social Problems Analysis and Policy Development (USPAP)
• Pages: 138-153

In democracies policy is inluenced by the responses of the

population to crime. These responses may set the agenda for action

and demand greater responsiveness by state agencies and the political

administration. They may, however, also instigate negative outcomes.

The responses of the public are not always well informed and, even

when informed, are not always governed by reason. Violent crimes

tend to evoke strong emotions. Reactions may be conditioned by the

prejudices and biases of the population. These emotions, biases and

prejudices may fuel ineffective responses and even undemocratic ones.

Out-groups are easily made scapegoats, instant solutions are demanded,

and the underlying causes of the problem and well-designed prevention

programmes that are based on these are neglected. If policy is to be

inluenced in socially constructive and value appropriate ways then

the responses and policy orientation of the population must be better

understood.

This trend is not restricted to Trinidad and Tobago. The Central

American Human Development Report (UNDP 2009), for example,

identiies several myths that are generally accepted by sections of the

populations of Central American countries. Population orientations of

this type must be closely monitored because such myths may, for example,

be politically manipulated and used to inform the implementation

of hardline policies that support increasingly punitive responses to

criminal activity without addressing the root causes of crime. On the

other hand, a more strategic approach to improve the provision of

services by government institutions to improve and better manage the

overloaded security and justice systems may not always ind popular

support, and policies that do not have popular support are unlikely to

be implemented. This trend may reduce the existing system to a simple

triangle of police, judges, and jails, and ignore the missing links to civil

society and to other state institutions, including those at the local level.

In an attempt to come to terms with the impact of the population on

crime and security initiatives, this chapter evaluates the opinions of the

Responses of the Population

to Insecurity

139Responses of the Population to Insecurity

Trinidad and Tobago population on crime, violence and insecurity. It also

examines other aspects of citizens’ subjective responses to insecurity,

including levels of conidence in state institutions which are integral to

the provision of citizen security. This chapter concludes by arguing that

success in the ight against crime must not only rely on the functioning

of the criminal justice system, but must employ preventative approaches

which go beyond the remit of law-enforcement agencies.

The level of insecurity experienced in any country is tied to the level

of development. Insecurity is a broad term and refers, not only to those

psychological and other outcomes of crime, but also to the general

condition and quality of human life. As such, human development

impacts on human security, which in turn has implications for the policy

orientation of the population under consideration. The link between

human development and security is thus critical. Human development not

only refers to the growth of per capita income but is also related to critical

factors such as freedom and justice, which are also essential for human

beings to lead better lives. The level of human development is also tied to

the availability of factors ranging from nutrition and education to income

and employment selfesteem and to freedom of expression In the inal

analysis, these factors should all be enjoyed on a peaceful and permanent

basis, in a safe and secure way.

The United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) (2009, iii)

deines human security as the liberation of human beings from those

intense, extensive, prolonged, and comprehensive threats to which their

lives and freedom are vulnerable’. Human security is reinforced when

the state retains the ultimate power of coercion and uses this power to

support its commitment to fostering respect for the rights of its citizens.

When other groups usurp control of instruments of force or in any

way reduce the level of control wielded by the state, whether in real or

perceived terms, human security and the perception of such security

are negatively impacted. An important component of human security is

citizen security This relates speciically to the risk of becoming a victim

of violence or of dispossession. There can be no human development

without protection against violent and predatory crime. Citizen security,

like the broader construct of human security, is a necessary precondition

for human development.

Fear of crime reduces liberties and the ability to live a normal life. Crime

causes the state and all citizens to divert their scarce resources to pay for

hospitals jails police oficers insurance premiums and other expenses

needed to prevent crime or to correct its adverse effects. Additionally,