IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/crimin/v61y2021i3p690-709..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cultural Processes Shaping Stop-and-Check Practices and Interaction Dynamics in a Large Dutch City: Police Vulnerabilities, Thought Styles and Rituals
[‘Police Suspicion and Discretionary Decision Making During Citizen Stops’]

Author

Listed:
  • Patrick Brown
  • Nathalie van Eijk

Abstract

Existing scholarship on police decision-making notes the importance of categories and ‘governing mentalities’ in shaping front-line discretionary practices. Much of this work explores categories of race and ethnicity. Important questions remain regarding how micro-level practices connect to organizational dynamics and why ethnic profiling endures despite attempts to counter such practices. Drawing on critical approaches to uncertainty and risk, not least Mary Douglas’s cultural theory, we analyse data drawn from an ethnographic study of police work in a large city in the Netherlands. Our analysis emphasizes the multiple lines of accountability that render officers vulnerable in different ways, officers’ combining of different rationalities of decision-making and the influence of everyday rituals that cultivate and reinforce particular organizational thought styles and discretionary practices.

Suggested Citation

  • Patrick Brown & Nathalie van Eijk, 2021. "Cultural Processes Shaping Stop-and-Check Practices and Interaction Dynamics in a Large Dutch City: Police Vulnerabilities, Thought Styles and Rituals [‘Police Suspicion and Discretionary Decision ," The British Journal of Criminology, Centre for Crime and Justice Studies, vol. 61(3), pages 690-709.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:crimin:v:61:y:2021:i:3:p:690-709.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/bjc/azaa083
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gitte Sommer Harrits & Marie Østergaard Møller, 2014. "Prevention at the Front Line: How home nurses, pedagogues, and teachers transform public worry into decisions on special efforts," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(4), pages 447-480, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Hani Nouman & Nissim Cohen, 2023. "When active representation is not enough: ethnic minority street-level workers in a divided society and policy entrepreneurship," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 56(4), pages 777-795, December.
    2. Na Tang & Muyu He, 2023. "The times make a hero: Street‐level policy entrepreneurship in major crisis responses in China," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 40(4), pages 490-508, July.
    3. Helle Ørsted Nielsen & Vibeke Lehmann Nielsen, 2023. "Different encounter behaviors: Businesses in encounters with regulatory agencies," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 17(1), pages 61-82, January.
    4. Lisa Hansson & Åsa Weinholt, 2019. "New Frontline Actors Emerging from Cross-Sector Collaboration: Examples from the Fire and Rescue Service Sector," Public Organization Review, Springer, vol. 19(4), pages 519-539, December.
    5. Mathilde Cecchini, 2019. "Reinforcing and Reproducing Stereotypes? Ethical Considerations When Doing Research on Stereotypes and Stereotyped Reasoning," Societies, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-13, November.
    6. Nunes, João & Lotta, Gabriela, 2019. "Discretion, power and the reproduction of inequality in health policy implementation: Practices, discursive styles and classifications of Brazil's community health workers," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 242(C).

    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:oup:crimin:v:61:y:2021:i:3:p:690-709.. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/bjc .

    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.