Citation

Sarre R, Prenzler T. Crime Prev. Community Safety 1999; 1(3): 17-28.

Affiliation

School of International Business, University of South Australia, Adelaide, South Australia (rick.sarre@unisa.edu.au); Griffith University, Brisbane, Australia

Copyright

(Copyright © 1999, Holtzbrinck Springer Nature Publishing Group -- Palgrave-Macmillan)

DOI

unavailable

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

While the reasons for, and the history of, shifts to more diversified and privatised policing in Anglo-Western societies have been widely examined, the formal and informal mechanisms of accountability and regulation of private sector policing have rarely been explored in any systematic way. Often, sweeping statements are made asserting that accountability for private security operations is either non-existent or, at the very least, inferior to that attaching to public policing. The industry, it is often asserted, remains unregulated by the government and is hence largely unaccountable. To the contrary, in some security industry circles it is often asserted that the sector is adequately accountable and thus needs little further regulation. The true picture is thus somewhat confused. This confusion may be seen as a result of the failure of the literature to explore the accountability issue directly. This essay attempts to address that need, suggesting reasons why accountability questions are rarely answered satisfactorily. In addition, drawing mainly on Australian studies, the essay examines theoretically the relative merits and demerits of the regulatory models often cited in support of arguments in favour of increased privatisation of security operations and practitioners.