Neil Fraser
May 28, 2004
"THE greatest domestic-policy success of the last generation has been the slashing of the urban crime rate, led by the innovative policing tactics of New York City."
So says the introduction to 'What We've Learned about Policing' by William J Bratton and William Andrews.
As the authors say, crime had been the number one cause of urban decay, driving the law-abiding to the suburbs and causing businesses to flee.
"But then New York discovered that it could prevent crime rather than just trying to solve it after it had already occurred. In six years, crime fell by half, murder by nearly two-thirds, and as a result businesses began to flourish and dying neighbourhoods, especially poor ones, sprang back to life as people stopped being afraid to go out."
The long-term economic vision for metropolitan Johannesburg, Joburg 2030, reflects just how critical it is for the city to deal with crime - actual and perceived.
Crime, it states, has a major impact - not only on efficiency and profitability, but also on new investment. An econometric model reflected that 61 percent of any decision to invest in Johannesburg was determined by the view of crime in the city. That's a huge motivator.
Joburg 2030 has three priorities: first, to develop an environment conducive to investment; second, to increase the efficiency of investment and; third, to accelerate organic and endogenous growth generated by the first two.
In turn, 2030 identifies two keys to creating an environment for growth: addressing crime and bridging the skills gap. The document stresses that crime is the most important.
Although it appears there is still too much crime, my perception is that there is a lot less in most parts of the city centre than there was 10 years ago. Still, there could be less.
The city centre has been the beneficiary of a number of major initiatives - such as city improvement districts and CCTVs - that have required co-operation between the public and private sectors.
Yet, if one looks dispassionately at the past decade, there has been very little sustained integration or co-ordination. And that's plain dumb because a unified approach to crime would have had an even greater impact.
What is it about human nature that dilutes potentially potent effort into mediocrity? Pride and arrogance? The need to be acknowledged as the champion? Inferiority complexes? Fear, or just plain incompetence?
Whatever the answer, the City, through its Economic Development Unit, has taken the initiative by developing a city safety strategy. The strategy seeks to reduce the actual incidence of crime and the negative perceptions of crime that threaten business confidence and affect. It defines a common approach for all role-players and aims to align the roles of the SA Police Service, the Metro Police and other agencies.
So how is all of this going to be achieved?
The safety strategy sets out six key programmes: winning back the streets; focused surveillance; creating an orderly city; recovering guns used in crime and creating gun-free zones; tackling the organised crime that drives street crime and keeping young people away from crime.
It's an excellent focus. All are essential; I particularly like the first one - to win back the streets so that the perception of public safety will promote a street culture that in turn promotes commercial and residential vibrancy. That's a great objective because it addresses the issue of civility - where lies the difference between a well-ordered and disordered liberal democracy.
In his book 'Leadership', Rudy Giuliani, New York City's zero-tolerance mayor, says: "Reducing the number of crimes wouldn't be enough: people had to see an improvement, not just hear about it. If crime went down but the existing amount of pushing and shoving, urinating on the streets, and other quality-of-life issues remained the same, we would never have a convincing case that life was better. We had to get people to be safe and to feel safe."
And so the strategy spells out three steps to make these programmes succeed.
First, there needs to be accurate information and analysis. This was certainly one of New York's tools. Compstat, or Comparative statistics, provided the focus and direction for all police activity.
One senior policeman involved in the New York success says: "Compstat is the greatest accountability tool ever. It's an instrument for holding precinct commanders responsible for crime in their areas, rewarding them if they push crime down and removing them if they don't come up with plans to do so."
Second, there needs to be an integrated, multi-agency approach.
Agreed, but is our fragmented structure capable of being integrated? If this is to be achieved it is going to require great or ruthless leadership skills - in the manner of Giuliani.
Our situation is much more complex than that in New York. We have a police force accountable at national level and at provincial level, a metro force accountable at local-government level and then private-sector initiatives largely accountable to their funders.
Who is the boss, who takes responsibility? The strategy suggests the mayor, as was the case in New York. But will our fragmented system allow him to be effective? And are the components themselves functioning properly?
Third, sustainable results will require sustained effort. I couldn't agree more, but this one is going to require a major change in mind-set.
Here's an example: some months ago Metro Police officers appeared on city street-corners and issued tickets to jaywalkers. It was the first time in 10 years; most pedestrians didn't know what jaywalking was.
But the exercise lasted a day or two and hasn't been repeated since. We can't expect behavioural changes to occur when enforcement comes once every 10 years.
Every three months I see traffic vehicles parked in the emergency lanes of the M1 when I drive to and from work; the other 361 days of the year these lanes are used by kombi-taxis as their own private racetracks.
This has a disastrous psychological effect on law-abiding drivers. Instead of a sustained onslaught on the entire industry, dozens of officers are tied up issuing tickets for cellphone misdemeanours.
I do believe we have more political will in the city than ever before. But do we have the enforcement will?
Don't get me wrong: the safety strategy creates an excellent platform. But the test is whether competing systems, structures, ideologies, ambitions and conceits can be overcome for that common goal.
But they must be. Let's hope the city safety strategy will be the vehicle!
