|
Field
Abstract
|
Before
The National Police of Colombia wants to raise their public trust and legitimacy by following procedural justice protocols in citizen-police day-to-day interactions. In our context, procedural justice refers to the idea of fairness in police decisions and interactions with citizens. We partnered with the Police to test an information campaign with police patrols across five Colombian cities: Barranquilla, Bucaramanga, Cali, Cartagena and Medellín---the largest Colombian cities excluding the capital Bogotá. The experimental sample consists of 351 police quadrants---a police patrolling area akin to a police beat, roughly 75 in each city. Because following procedural justice protocols requires increased interactions, we randomly assigned quadrants to either intensified interactions with citizens, intensified interactions with citizens plus procedural justice instructions, or neither. To randomize quadrants into treatment arms, we stratified by city, poverty level, and baseline public trust. We will measure impacts on police beliefs and public trust. Because patrolling areas are relatively large, we collect data on one street block within the quadrant, and ask police patrols to target it as a "pilot" block. We randomly sampled "pilot" street blocks within quadrants.
|
After
The National Police of Colombia wants to raise their public trust and legitimacy by following procedural justice protocols in citizen-police day-to-day interactions. In our context, procedural justice refers to the idea of fairness in police decisions and interactions with citizens. We partnered with the Police to test an information campaign with police patrols across five Colombian cities: Barranquilla, Bucaramanga, Cali, Cartagena and Medellín---the largest Colombian cities excluding the capital Bogotá. The experimental sample consists of 351 police quadrants---a police patrolling area akin to a police beat. Because following procedural justice protocols requires increased interactions, we randomly assigned quadrants to either intensified interactions with citizens, intensified interactions with citizens plus procedural justice instructions, or neither. To randomize quadrants into treatment arms, we stratified by city, poverty level, and baseline public trust. We will measure impacts on police beliefs and public trust. Because patrolling areas are relatively large, we collect data on one street block within the quadrant, and ask police patrols to target it as a "pilot" block. We randomly sampled "pilot" street blocks within quadrants.
|
|
Field
Trial End Date
|
Before
April 30, 2022
|
After
July 31, 2022
|
|
Field
Last Published
|
Before
March 04, 2022 09:12 AM
|
After
April 25, 2022 07:23 PM
|
|
Field
Intervention (Public)
|
Before
We are testing two interventions: (i) intensified interactions with citizens; and (ii) intensified interactions with citizens plus procedural justice instructions. In our context, procedural justice refers to the idea of fairness in police decisions and interactions with citizens. Our units of analysis are police quadrants or patrolling areas, akin to police beats.
The intensified interactions treatment arm consists of increasing police presence and the quantity of interactions with citizens within the patrolling area. Police patrols will be instructed to intensify their presence and interactions, with broad instructions on the importance of police contact with citizens. Following the beginning of the intervention, patrols in this treatment arm will receive weekly reminders to increase the quantity of interactions.
The intensified interactions plus procedural justice instructions treatment arm consists of increasing police presence and the quantity and quality of interactions with citizens within the patrolling area. Police patrols will be instructed to intensify their presence and interactions, with specific instructions on the importance of police contact with citizens. Following the beginning of the intervention, patrols in this treatment arm will receive daily messages on procedural justice protocols, e.g., to be fair and to listen to citizens' complaints and questions.
Because patrolling areas are relatively large, we collect data on one street block within the quadrant, and ask police patrols to target it as a "pilot" block. We randomly sampled "pilot" street blocks within quadrants.
|
After
We are testing two interventions: (i) intensified interactions with citizens; and (ii) intensified interactions with citizens plus procedural justice instructions. In our context, procedural justice refers to the idea of fairness in police decisions and interactions with citizens. Our units of analysis are police quadrants or patrolling areas, akin to police beats.
The intensified interactions treatment arm consists of increasing police presence and the quantity of interactions with citizens within the patrolling area. Police patrols will be instructed to intensify their presence and interactions, with broad instructions on the importance of police contact with citizens. Following the beginning of the intervention, patrols in this treatment arm will receive three weekly reminders to increase the quantity of interactions.
The intensified interactions plus procedural justice instructions treatment arm consists of increasing police presence and the quantity and quality of interactions with citizens within the patrolling area. Police patrols will be instructed to intensify their presence and interactions, with specific instructions on the importance of police contact with citizens. Following the beginning of the intervention, patrols in this treatment arm will receive daily messages on procedural justice protocols, e.g., to be fair and to listen to citizens' complaints and questions.
Because patrolling areas are relatively large, we collect data on one street block within the quadrant, and ask police patrols to target it as a "pilot" block. We randomly sampled "pilot" street blocks within quadrants.
|
|
Field
Primary Outcomes (End Points)
|
Before
We are mainly interested in changes in: (i) police beliefs about procedural justice protocols; and (ii) public trust in the police.
|
After
We have three main outcomes:
1. Public trust in the police
2. Demand for policing services
3. Police beliefs and appropriation of procedural justice protocols
|
|
Field
Primary Outcomes (Explanation)
|
Before
We will measure impacts on two primary outcomes:
(i) Police beliefs: We will survey all police patrols in the experimental sample, and will build a "procedural justice acceptance index," which is an additive index of questions on whether police patrols believe procedural justice protocols are useful for their performance and to increase public trust.
(ii) Public trust: We will survey residents from one street block in each experimental police quadrant, and build a "public trust index," which is an additive index of questions on whether citizens believe the police is fair, efficient and accountable.
We expect the intervention will increase both police beliefs about following procedural justice protocols and public trust.
|
After
We have three main outcomes:
1. Public trust in the police, measured through one single public trust question in the citizens survey
2. Demand for policing services, measured through a costly request (we will hand out instructions to citizens in the survey to ask for intensified police presence in their neighborhood by sending an email or filling an online form)
3. Police beliefs and appropriation of procedural justice protocols, which is an additive index of three sub-indices, measured in the police survey: take up of instructions, perceived effectiveness of procedural justice protocols, and perceived quality of interactions with citizens
We expect the intervention will increase public trust, demand for police services and police beliefs and appropriation of procedural justice protocols.
|
|
Field
Secondary Outcomes (End Points)
|
Before
Our secondary outcomes are: (i) reported crimes; (ii) reported calls for service.
|
After
Our secondary outcomes are:
1. A first stage measure of police activity
2. Four indices to better understand the mechanisms that change public trust in the police: procedural justice, perceived effectiveness, perceived accountability and transparency, and convergence of values
|
|
Field
Secondary Outcomes (Explanation)
|
Before
We will measure impacts on two secondary outcomes:
(i) Reported crimes: We will use administrative data on reported crimes.
(ii) Calls for service: We will use administrative data on reported calls for service (provided we can access information from local governments when the National Police is not the "data owner".
We do not have priors on the directions of these secondary outcomes.
|
After
We will measure impacts on two secondary outcomes:
1. A first stage measure of police activity, measured as an additive index of a set of questions on police presence and behavior, asked in the citizens survey
2. Four indices to better understand the mechanisms that change public trust in the police, all measured in the citizens survey
2.1. Procedural justice, measured as an additive index of a set of questions on police behavior
2.2. Perceived effectiveness, measured as an additive index of a set of questions on perceived effectiveness of the police
2.3. Perceived accountability and transparency, measured as an additive index of a set of questions on perceived accountability, corruption and other transparency outcomes
2.4. Convergence of values, measured as an additive index of a set of questions on values and the idea of police legitimate use of force
We do not have priors on the directions of these secondary outcomes.
|