1932

Abstract

Fifty years ago, the 1967 President's Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice urged the rapid adoption of information technology to improve the effectiveness, efficiency, and fairness of the criminal justice system, including policing. They predicted that we could make great progress on the challenge of crime if only we could deliver the right information to the right police officer at the right time. In this twenty-first century era of Big Data, all the technologies described in the 1967 Commission report are widely available and accessible to police departments. This review characterizes what Big Data means for policing, discusses the technologies making Big Data possible, describes how police departments are putting Big Data to use, and assesses how close we are coming to realizing the vision offered in 1967. Although police may be rich in data, we still need to improve the extraction of information and knowledge from that data and put them to use to decrease crime and improve clearance rates.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-criminol-062217-114209
2018-01-13
2024-05-27
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/criminol/1/1/annurev-criminol-062217-114209.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-criminol-062217-114209&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

Literature Cited

  1. Aguilar E. 2014. LAPD to track how safely officers are driving patrol cars. KPCC Dec. 22, http://www.scpr.org/news/2014/12/22/48820/lapd-to-track-how-safely-officers-are-driving-patr/
  2. Ariel B, Farrar WA, Sutherland A. 2015. The effect of police body-worn cameras on use of force and citizens’ complaints against the police: a randomized controlled trial. J. Quant. Criminol. 31:3509–35 [Google Scholar]
  3. Ariel B, Weinborn C, Sherman LW. 2016. “Soft” policing at hot spots—Do police community support officers work? A randomized controlled trial. J. Exp. Criminol. 12:3277–317 [Google Scholar]
  4. Barocas S, Selbst AD. 2016. Big Data's disparate impact. Calif. Law Rev. 104:3671–732 [Google Scholar]
  5. Blattman C, Green D, Ortega D, Tobon S. 2016. Pre-Analysis Plan forThe Impact of Hotspot Policing and Municipal Services on Crime: Experimental Evidence from Bogotá Nashville, TN: AEA RCT Regist https://www.socialscienceregistry.org/trials/1156/history/10745 [Google Scholar]
  6. boyd d, Crawford K. 2012. Critical questions for Big Data: provocations for a cultural, technological, and scholarly phenomenon. Inform. Commun. Soc. 15:5662–79 [Google Scholar]
  7. Braga AA, Bond BJ. 2008. Policing crime and disorder hot spots: a randomized controlled trial. Criminology 46:577–608 [Google Scholar]
  8. Braga AA, Flynn EA, Kelling GL, Cole CM. 2011. Moving the Work of Criminal Investigators Towards Crime Control Washington, DC: Natl. Inst. Justice
  9. Casady TK, Cottingham I, Ramírez JP, Samal A, Tomkins AJ. et al. 2015. A Randomized-Trial Evaluation of a Law Enforcement Application for Smartphones and Laptops that Uses GIS and Location-Based Services’ to Pinpoint Persons-of-Interest Lincoln, NE: Univ. Neb https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/248593.pdf
  10. Castro D, Korte T. 2015. Open Data in the G8: A Review of Progress on the Open Data Charter Washington, DC: Cent. Data Innov http://www2.datainnovation.org/2015-open-data-g8.pdf
  11. Chaiken JM, Dormont P. 1978. A patrol car allocation model: background. Manag. Sci. 24:121280–90 [Google Scholar]
  12. Chisholm JP. 1968. Mobile emergency unit location system. US Patent No. 3419865
  13. Crowther RF. 1964. The Use of a Computer System for Police Manpower Allocation in St. Louis, Missouri Bloomington, IN: Dep. Police Adm.
  14. Davenport TH. 2014. Big Data @ Work: Dispelling the Myths, Uncovering the Opportunities Boston, MA: Harv. Bus. Sch. Publ. Corp.
  15. Dean J. 2014. Big Data, Data Mining, and Machine Learning: Value Creation for Business Leaders and Practitioners Hoboken, NJ: Wiley
  16. DHS Cent. Vis. Anal. Command Control Interoper. 2015. Chicago LTE Video Pilot Final Lessons Learned and Test Report West Lafayette, IN: Purdue https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/Chicago%20LTE%20Video%20Pilot%20Lessons%20Learned%20Test%20Report.pdf
  17. Dixon TL, Schell TL, Giles H, Drogos KL. 2008. The influence of race in police-civilian interactions: a content analysis of videotaped interactions taken during Cincinnati police traffic stops. J. Commun. 58:530–49 [Google Scholar]
  18. Doumi T, Dolan MF, Tatesh S, Casati A, Tsirtsis G. et al. 2013. LTE for public safety networks. IEEE Commun. Mag. 51:2106–12 [Google Scholar]
  19. Eck JE, Guerette RT. 2012. Place-based crime prevention: theory, evidence, and policy. The Oxford Handbook of Crime Prevention DP Farrington, BC Welsh 354–83 New York: Oxford Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  20. Ecma Int. 2013. The JSON Data Interchange Format Geneva: Ecma Int.
  21. Etzioni A, Etzioni O. 2016. Keeping AI legal. Vanderbilt J. Entertain. Technol. Law 19:1133–46 [Google Scholar]
  22. Farmera JD, Lafonda F. 2016. How predictable is technological progress?. Res. Policy 45:3647–65 [Google Scholar]
  23. Garicano L, Heaton P. 2010. Information technology, organization, and productivity in the public sector: evidence from police departments. J. Labor Econ. 28:1167–201 [Google Scholar]
  24. GBM Dev. 2017. Generalized Boosted Modeling (source code) https://github.com/gbm-developers/gbm [Google Scholar]
  25. GEOS. 2017. Geometry Engine Open Source https://trac.osgeo.org/geos/
  26. Goud R, de Keizer NF, ter Riet G, Wyatt JC, Hasman A. et al. 2009. Effect of guideline based computerised decision support on decision making of multidisciplinary teams: cluster randomised trial in cardiac rehabilitation. BMJ 338:b1440 [Google Scholar]
  27. Gracia IS, Suarez OD, Garcia GB, Kim T-K. 2015. Fast fight detection. PLOS ONE 10:4e0120448 [Google Scholar]
  28. Harmon R. 2012. Why do we (still) lack data on policing?. Marquette Law Rev 96:41119–46 [Google Scholar]
  29. Hollywood JS, Winkelman Z. 2015. Improving Information-Sharing Across Law Enforcement: Why Can't We Know? Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corp.
  30. Howard RA. 1966. Information value theory. IEEE Trans. Syst. Sci. Cybern. 2:122–26 [Google Scholar]
  31. Int. Assoc. Chiefs Police. 2015. Guiding Principles on Cloud Computing in Law Enforcement Alexandria, VA: Int. Assoc. Chiefs Police http://www.theiacp.org/portals/0/documents/pdfs/cloudcomputingprinciples.pdf
  32. Ioimo R. 2016. Introduction to Criminal Justice Information Systems Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press
  33. Joh EE. 2014. Policing by numbers: Big Data and the Fourth Amendment. Washington Law Rev 89:135–68 [Google Scholar]
  34. Kitchin R. 2014. The real-time city? Big Data and smart urbanism. GeoJournal 79:11–14 [Google Scholar]
  35. Knickel ER. 1971. Vehicle locator system. US Patent No. 3568161
  36. Koper CS, Lum C, Hibdon J. 2016. The uses and impacts of mobile computing technology in hot spots policing. Eval. Rev. 39:6587–624 [Google Scholar]
  37. Koper CS, Lum C, Willis JJ, Woods DJ, Hibdon J. 2015. Realizing the Potential of Technology in Policing: A Multisite Study of the Social, Organizational, and Behavioral Aspects of Implementing Policing Technologies Fairfax, VA: Cent. Evid.-Based Crime Policy George Mason Univ. Police Executive Res. Forum
  38. Laney D. 2001. 3D data management: controlling data volume, velocity, and variety. Appl. Deliv. Strateg. 949:1–3 https://blogs.gartner.com/doug-laney/files/2012/01/ad949-3D-Data-Management-Controlling-Data-Volume-Velocity-and-Variety.pdf [Google Scholar]
  39. Levine ES, Tisch J, Tasso A, Joy M. 2017. The New York City Police Department's domain awareness system. Interfaces 47:170–84 [Google Scholar]
  40. Lim N, Matthies C, Ridgeway G, Gifford B. 2009. To Protect and to Serve: Enhancing the Efficiency of LAPD Recruiting Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corp.
  41. Liu JL, Wyatt JC. 2011. The case for randomized controlled trials to assess the impact of clinical information systems. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 18:2173–80 [Google Scholar]
  42. Los Angel. Police Dep. 2016. 2017–18 Fiscal Year Proposed Budget Los Angeles, CA: City Los Angel http://www.lapdpolicecom.lacity.org/112216/BPC_16-0417.pdf
  43. Lum C, Merola L, Willis J, Cave B. 2010. License Plate Recognition Technology (LPR): Impact Evaluation and Community Assessment, Final Report Fairfax, VA: George Mason Univ Cent. Evid.-Based Crime Policy [Google Scholar]
  44. Lum K, Isaac W. 2016. To predict and serve?. Significance 13:514–19 [Google Scholar]
  45. Marz N, Warren J. 2015. Big Data: Principles and Best Practices of Scalable Realtime Data Systems Shelter Island, NY: Manning Publ.
  46. McLaughlin M. 1994. Automatic vehicle location for law enforcement SEARCH Tech. Bull. 3, SEARCH Sacramento, CA.:
  47. Meriwether K. 2014. Privacy, storage questions loom as NYPD begins camera pilot. Gotham Gaz Dec. 3. http://www.gothamgazette.com/index.php/government/5455-privacy-storage-questions-loom-as-nypd-begins-camera-pilot
  48. Merola LM, Lum C, Cave B, Hibdon J. 2014. Community support for license plate recognition. Polic. Int. J. Police Strateg. Manag. 37:130–51 [Google Scholar]
  49. Mohler GO, Short MB, Malinowski S, Johnson M, Tita GE. et al. 2015. Randomized controlled field trials of predictive policing. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 110:5121399–411 [Google Scholar]
  50. MongoDB Inc. 2017. MongoDB https://github.com/mongodb
  51. Moody DL, Walsh P. 1999. Measuring the value of information: an asset valuation approach. Proc. Eur. Conf. Inf. Syst., 7th, Copenhagen June 23–25 496–512 Guimarães, Port.: ECIS [Google Scholar]
  52. Näsholm E, Rohlfing S, Sauer JD. 2014. Pirate stealth or inattentional blindness? The effects of target relevance and sustained attention on security monitoring for experienced and naïve operators. PLOS ONE 9:1e86157 [Google Scholar]
  53. Natl. Inst. Justice. 2015. Developing a Method to Valuate Law Enforcement Data Washington, DC: Natl. Inst. Justice https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/sl001135.pdf
  54. Obama B. 2009. Transparency and Open Government: Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies Washington, DC: White House https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/transparency-and-open-government
  55. Office Justice Progr. 1998. The Challenge of Crime in a Free Society: Looking Back…Looking Forward: An Overview for the Symposium on the 30th Anniversary of the President's Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice Washington, DC: US Dep. Justice
  56. Open Knowl. Int. 2017. Global Open Data Index http://index.okfn.org/
  57. O'Reilly T. 2010. Government as a platform. Open Government: Collaboration, Transparency, and Participation in Practice D Lathrop, L Ruma 11–39 Sebastopol, CA: O'Reilly Media [Google Scholar]
  58. Papachristos AV, Braga AA, Hureau DM. 2012. Social networks and the risk of gunshot injury. J. Urban Health Bull. N. Y. Acad. Med. 89:6992–1003 [Google Scholar]
  59. Police Executive Res. Forum. 2012. How Are Innovations in Technology Transforming Policing? Washington, DC: Police Executive Res. Forum http://www.policeforum.org/assets/docs/Critical_Issues_Series/how%20are%20innovations%20in%20technology%20transforming%20policing%202012.pdf
  60. Police Executive Res. Forum. 2014. Future Trends in Policing Washington DC: Police Executive Res. Forum
  61. Police Found. 2015. 5 Things You Need to Know About Open Data in Policing Washington, DC: Police Found.
  62. Police Found. 2017. Police Data Initiative Washington, DC: Police Found https://publicsafetydataportal.org/
  63. Ponemon L, Gould J, Roberts DJ. 2013. Leveraging the Cloud for Law Enforcement Alexandria, VA: Int. Assoc. Chiefs Police https://www.ncjrs.gov/App/Publications/abstract.aspx?ID=263661
  64. Pres. Task Force 21st Century Polic. 2015. The Final Report of the President's Task Force on 21st Century Policing Washington, DC: Office Community Oriented Polic. Serv.
  65. Pres. Comm. Law Enforc. Adm. Justice. 1967. The Challenge of Crime in a Free Society Washington, DC: Gov. Print. Office
  66. Python Softw. Found. 2017. Python Language Reference, version 3.6.1. http://www.python.org
  67. R Core Team. 2017. R: A language and environment for statistical computing Vienna: R Found. Stat. Comput https://www.r-project.org/ [Google Scholar]
  68. Ratcliffe JH. 2002. Intelligence-led policing and the problems of turning rhetoric into practice. Polic. Soc. 12:153–66 [Google Scholar]
  69. Ratcliffe JH. 2008. Intelligence-Led Policing Cullompton, UK: Willan Publ.
  70. Ratcliffe JH, Taniguchi T, Groff ER, Wood JD. 2011. The Philadelphia Foot Patrol Experiment: a randomized controlled trial of police patrol effectiveness in violent crime hotspots. Criminology 49:3795–831 [Google Scholar]
  71. Ridgeway G. 2013. Linking prediction and prevention. Criminol. Public Policy 12:3545–50 [Google Scholar]
  72. Ridgeway G. 2016. Officer risk factors associated with police shootings: a matched case–control study. Stat. Public Policy 3:11–6 [Google Scholar]
  73. Ridgeway G, MacDonald JM. 2009. Doubly robust internal benchmarking and false discovery rates for detecting racial bias in police stops. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 104:486661–68 [Google Scholar]
  74. Ridgeway G, MacDonald JM. 2014. A method for internal benchmarking of criminal justice system performance. Crime Delinq 60:1145–62 [Google Scholar]
  75. Ridgeway G, MacDonald JM. 2016. Effect of rail transit on crime: a study of Los Angeles from 1988–2014. J. Quant. Criminol. 33:2277–91 [Google Scholar]
  76. Roman JK, Reid SE, Chalfin AJ, Knight CR. 2009. The DNA field experiment: a randomized trial of the cost-effectiveness of using DNA to solve property crimes. J. Exp. Criminol. 5:345–69 [Google Scholar]
  77. Saunders J, Hunt P, Hollywood JS. 2016. Predictions put into practice: a quasi-experimental evaluation of Chicago's predictive policing pilot. J. Exp. Criminol. 12:3347–71 [Google Scholar]
  78. Taniguchi T, Gill C. 2013. The Mobilization of Crime Mapping and Intelligence Gathering: Evaluating Smartphone Deployment & Custom App Development in a Mid-Size Law Enforcement Agency Washington, DC: Police Found http://www.policefoundation.org/content/mobilization-crime-mapping
  79. Taylor B, Koper C, Woods D. 2012. Combating vehicle theft in Arizona: a randomized experiment with license plate recognition technology. Crim. Justice Rev. 37:124–50 [Google Scholar]
  80. Telep CW, Mitchell RJ, Weisburd D. 2014. How much time should the police spend at crime hot spots? Answers from a police agency directed randomized field trial in Sacramento, California. Justice Q 31:5905–33 [Google Scholar]
  81. Ustun B, Rudin C. 2016. Supersparse linear integer models for optimized medical scoring systems. Mach. Learn. 102:3349–91 [Google Scholar]
  82. Walker S. 2001. Searching for the denominator: problems with police traffic stop data and an early warning system solution. Justice Res. Policy 3:263–95 [Google Scholar]
  83. Walter C. 2005. Kryder's law. Sci. Am., Aug. 1. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/kryders-law/# [Google Scholar]
  84. Watson RT, Boudreau M-C, Li SS, Levis J. 2010. Telematics at UPS: en route to energy informatics. MIS Q. Exec. 9:11–11 [Google Scholar]
  85. Weisburd D, Green L. 1995. Policing drug hot spots: the Jersey City drug market analysis experiment. Justice Q 12:4711–35 [Google Scholar]
  86. Weisburd D, Groff ER, Jones G, Cave B, Amendola KL. et al. 2015. The Dallas patrol management experiment: Can AVL technologies be used to harness unallocated patrol time for crime prevention?. J. Exp. Criminol. 11:3367–91 [Google Scholar]
  87. Welsh BC, Farrington DP. 2009. Public area CCTV and crime prevention: an updated systematic review and meta‐analysis. Justice Q 26:4716–45 [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-criminol-062217-114209
Loading
  • Article Type: Review Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error