IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/reggov/v8y2014i2p246-268.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

What price fairness when security is at stake? Police legitimacy in South Africa

Author

Listed:
  • Ben Bradford
  • Aziz Huq
  • Jonathan Jackson
  • Benjamin Roberts

Abstract

The legitimacy of legal authorities – particularly the police – is central to the state's ability to function in a normatively justifiable and effective manner. Studies, mostly conducted in the US and UK, regularly find that procedural justice is the most important antecedent of police legitimacy, with judgments about other aspects of police behavior – notably, about effectiveness – appearing less relevant. But this idea has received only sporadic testing in less cohesive societies where social order is more tenuous, resources to sustain it scarcer, and the position of the police is less secure. This paper considers whether the link between process fairness and legitimacy holds in the challenging context of present day South Africa. In a high crime and socially divided society, do people still emphasize procedural fairness or are they more interested in instrumental effectiveness? How is the legitimacy of the police influenced by the wider problems faced by the South African state? We find procedural fairness judgments play a key role, but also that South Africans place greater emphasis on police effectiveness (and concerns about crime). Police legitimacy is, furthermore, associated with citizens' judgments about the wider success and trustworthiness of the state.

Suggested Citation

  • Ben Bradford & Aziz Huq & Jonathan Jackson & Benjamin Roberts, 2014. "What price fairness when security is at stake? Police legitimacy in South Africa," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 8(2), pages 246-268, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:reggov:v:8:y:2014:i:2:p:246-268
    DOI: 10.1111/rego.12012
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12012
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/rego.12012?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jackson, Jonathan & Hough, Mike & Bradford, Ben & Hohl, Katrin & Kuha, Jouni, 2012. "Policing by consent: understanding the dynamics of police power and legitimacy," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 47220, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    2. Jonathan Crush & Belinda Dodson, 2007. "Another Lost Decade: The Failures Of South Africa'S Post‐Apartheid Migration Policy," Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, Royal Dutch Geographical Society KNAG, vol. 98(4), pages 436-454, September.
    3. Rita Abrahamsen & Michael C. Williams, 2008. "Public/Private, Global/Local: The Changing Contours of Africa's Security Governance," Review of African Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(118), pages 539-553, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Abril, Veronica & Perez-Vincent, Santiago & Tobon, Santiago & Vanegas-Arias, Martin, 2022. "How to measure public trust in the police? A framework with an application for Colombia," SocArXiv 89shw, Center for Open Science.
    2. Alvaro Morcillo, 2013. "Cooperation with the police in a diverse society: the case of South Africa," NCID Working Papers 09/2013, Navarra Center for International Development, University of Navarra.
    3. Maxwell Haurovi & Alouis Chilunjika, 2023. "Assessing the prevalence of unethical behaviour in the South African police service," Insights into Regional Development, VsI Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Center, vol. 5(4), pages 36-48, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Thomas C. O'Brien & Tom R. Tyler & Tracey L. Meares, 2020. "Building popular legitimacy with reconciliatory gestures and participation: A community‐level model of authority," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 14(4), pages 821-839, October.
    2. Takam Tiamgne, Xavier & Kalaba, Felix K. & Nyirenda, Vincent R., 2022. "Mining and socio-ecological systems: A systematic review of Sub-Saharan Africa," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    3. Jackson, Jonathan & Bradford, Ben & Hough, Mike & Carrillo, Stephany, 2014. "Extending procedural justice theory: a Fiducia report on the design of new survey indicators," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 62237, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    4. Alvaro Morcillo, 2013. "Cooperation with the police in a diverse society: the case of South Africa," NCID Working Papers 09/2013, Navarra Center for International Development, University of Navarra.
    5. repec:lib:00johs:v:16:y:2020:i:2:p:165-178 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Steven Lawrence Gordon, 2017. "Shutting the Gates in South Africa: National Identification and Popular Attitudes towards Closing Borders to Immigration," Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, Royal Dutch Geographical Society KNAG, vol. 108(6), pages 821-835, December.
    7. Breetzke, Gregory Dennis, 2010. "Modeling violent crime rates: A test of social disorganization in the city of Tshwane, South Africa," Journal of Criminal Justice, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 446-452, July.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:reggov:v:8:y:2014:i:2:p:246-268. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1748-5991 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.