Search results

This article explores the changing nature of social media use as a public engagement tool by police services.

A comprehensive review is conducted of academic studies from criminology and policing journals. Sources are identified from key academic databases and are analysed in relation to three decades (2000–2009, 2010–2019 and 2020 to present) to show how the use of social media has changed over time.

The way in which social media is used in policing has changed considerably over time. From initial enthusiasm, it is found that there is growing scepticism in the use of social media as a public engagement tool. After an initial proliferation in use, there is then increasing consolidation and control in response to concerns about reputational risk.

The research highlights underlying dynamics of engagement and retrenchment, which offer important insights for how we understand public engagement and value creation in policing and emergency services more generally. We draw on academic research from English-language academic journals, but we have endeavoured to include research from the broadest possible range of countries.

This study demonstrates how the police and other public services must respond to the growing use of social media by the public to maximise value creation whilst minimising the threats that come from potential value destruction.

This study is the first to comprehensively review the policing and criminology literature related to social media and to apply a public engagement lens to this analysis.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the form, content and reporting arrangements of “statements of assurance” required from Fire and Rescue Authorities in England since their introduction in 2012 and identify potential improvements for future implementation.

A multi-method approach was adopted which commenced with an analysis of the current official guidance, an exploration of the accessibility and structure of the current statements produced; followed by a review of those statements through a desk based analysis complemented by a series of elite interviews.

The current guidance was found to be too broad and open to interpretation to be fit for purpose. This has led to some significant variations in reporting, limiting the statements’ usefulness to key users and stakeholders. Most authorities provided some form of report on their website but inconsistencies in respect of length, structure, name and content, limit their value. The research found that 30 per cent of authorities did not have an up to date statement available online. These findings were supported by the series of interviews. The result has led to confusion amongst authorities as to the statement’s role and the risk of it being perceived as a “box ticking” exercise rather than a real contribution to public assurance.

This paper provides potential lessons which could be adopted to inform future guidance in respect of the preparation and publication of the statement of assurance and its role within the wider public assurance regime for fire and rescue authorities. If adopted, these would improve the accountability, transparency and public assurance of Fire and Rescue Authorities which is a key objective of their governance arrangements.

The statement of assurance has only been a requirement of authorities since the current National Framework for Fire and Rescue was published in July 2012 and has not been subject to independent research since its inception. The government have recently issued a consultation on a new national framework, but this proposes changes to the statements of assurance. The findings will therefore be of value to the government, the fire and rescue sector and the recently appointed regulators for the service Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire and Rescue Services.

This article aims to examine how users' involvement in value co-creation influences the development and orchestration of well-being ecosystems to help tackle complex societal challenges. This research contributes to the public management literature and answers recent calls to investigate novel public service governances by discussing users' involvement and value co-creation for novel well-being solutions.

The authors empirically explore this phenomenon through a case study of a complex ecosystem addressing increased well-being, focussing on the formative evaluation stage of a longitudinal evaluation of Sweden's first support centre for people affected by cancer. Following an abductive reasoning and action research approach, the authors critically discuss the potential of user involvement for the development of well-being ecosystems and outline preconditions for the success of such approaches.

The empirical results indicate that resource reconfiguration of multi-actor collaborations provides a platform for value co-creation, innovative health services and availability of resources. Common themes include the need for multi-actor collaborations to reconfigure heterogeneous resources; actors' adaptive change capabilities; the role of governance mechanisms to align the diverse well-being ecosystem components, and the engagement of essential actors.

Although using a longitudinal case study approach has revealed stimulating insights, additional data collection, multiple cases and quantitative studies are prompted. Also, the authors focus on one country but the characteristics of users' involvement for value co-creation in innovative well-being ecosystems might vary between countries.

The findings of this study demonstrate the value of cancer-affected individuals, with “lived experiences”, acting as sources for social innovation, and drivers of well-being ecosystem development. The findings also suggest that participating actors in the ecosystem should utilise wider knowledge and experience to tackle complex societal challenges associated with well-being.

Policymakers should encourage the formation of well-being ecosystems with diverse actors and resources that can help patients navigate health challenges. The findings especially show the potential of starting from the user's needs and life situation when the ambition is to integrate and innovate in fragmented systems.

The proposed model proposes that having a user-led focus on innovating new solutions can play an important role in the development of well-being ecosystems.

This chapter investigates the history, antecedents and drivers for the latest Fire and Rescue National Framework for England, published in 2018. It reviews the previous five national frameworks published since the first was introduced in 2004 and evaluates them against the model outline in Chapter 2. The authors suggest that that political expediency and speed of delivery have played a greater role in their development than improving services, increasing public safety and providing assurance to the public. It therefore highlights some key areas for improvement in both the national framework and in its implementation.

Theresa May in one of her final speeches as Home Secretary before becoming prime minister, laid bare what she considered to be the major inadequacies in the performance management regime for fire and rescue services. ‘There's no independent inspectorate; no regular audit of performance; and only limited available data on performance over time or between areas’. Based on her earlier reforms to the police she therefore proposed a series of reforms that have now been implemented. This chapter introduces her reform agenda and its antecedents. It also makes explicit the assumptions upon which the authors build their evaluation of the relevant reforms.

The UK has been a pioneer and international leader in the development of fire and rescue services and this has been based on a long attachment and strong adherence to empirical evidence at both the local and national levels. Policy makers, in close collaboration with practitioners, have also developed standards and practices and any changes have traditionally needed robust justification. Yet the evidence base and the tools and techniques for investigating and interrogating the evidence base have been significantly deteriorating over the last 10 years. This chapter sets out what is inadequate, what is missing and suggests what needs to be done about it.

Performance regimes attempt to bring policy development, service delivery and public assurance into a mutually supportive, coherent and joined-up approach. This chapter sets out a dynamic conceptual model that illustrates how the different parts of performance regimes are configured and how the individual parts interrelate with each other. It identifies the activities relevant to the three core domains of policy development, service delivery and public assurance and shows how they relate to situational and contextual factors, as well as the principle values and behaviour by which public service is conducted in the United Kingdom. This model forms the basis for the evaluations of the specific reforms in the following three chapters.

This chapter reviews the new inspectorate, Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services, and the new Inspection Framework for Fire and Rescue Services in England. It will look at the antecedents of the inspectorate and the history of inspections in both the police and in the fire and rescue services. Prior to the Policing and Crime Act 2017, Fire and Rescue Services in England were without a dedicated independent inspectorate for almost 10 years and the government promised a new independent and a rigorous inspection regime. This chapter critically evaluates the government's response and the early development of the new regime.

The final chapter summarises the conclusions from chapters three to five. Fire and rescue services are currently having to contend with a data-poor operating environment (Chapter 3); an inadequate national framework, which has eschewed some of the lessons from previous frameworks (Chapter 4), and a new inspectorate and inspections regime that are at best, at an early stage of development (Chapter 5). Theresa May's vision of a new and revitalised performance management regime based on better data, a renewed purpose, with improved governance and accountability has been severely damaged and tarnished in the course of implementation. The authors suggest what the government needs to do to get back on track.