Interview with Spencer Chainey: results of the Intelligence-Oriented Policing Project
Entrevista com Spencer Chainey: resultados do Projeto de Policiamento Orientado à Inteligência
Entrevista con Spencer Chainey: resultados del Proyecto de Vigilancia Orientada a la Inteligencia
Submitted on: 09.22.2022
Accepted on: 12.23.2022
Wellington Clay Porcino Silva
Polícia Federal, Brasília/DF, Brasil
<![if !vml]><![endif]> http://lattes.cnpq.br/5417710802577655
Interview given by Professor Spencer Chainey, Professor of Security and Criminal Science at University College London, to Federal Police Chief Wellington Clay Porcino Silva, through the Teams platform, on September 16, 2022, detailing the relationship between Prof. Doctor Spencer Chainey and the Revista Brasileira de Ciências Policiais, as well as the researcher's research and relationship with the Federal Police and the results of the Intelligence-Oriented Policing Project, carried out with support from the IADB and the Brazilian Federal Police.
Keywords: violence within Latin America; corruption; homicide; hot spots policing program; Intelligence-led policing project.
Entrevista concedida pelo professor Doutor Spencer Chainey, catedrático de Segurança e Ciência Criminal do University College London, ao Delegado de Polícia Federal Wellington Clay Porcino Silva, por meio da plataforma Teams, no dia 16 de setembro de 2022, detalhando a relação existente entre o Prof. Dr. Spencer Chainey e a Revista Brasileira de Ciências Policiais, bem como as pesquisas e a relação daquele pesquisador com a Polícia Federal e os resultados do Projeto de Policiamento Orientado pela Inteligência, realizado com apoio do BID e da Polícia Federal brasileira.
Palavras-chave: violência na América Latina; corrupção; homicídio; programa de policiamento de pontos quentes; projeto de policiamento guiado por Inteligência.
Entrevista concedida por el Profesor Spencer Chainey, Profesor de Seguridad y Ciencias Criminales en University College London, al Jefe de la Policía Federal Wellington Clay Porcino Silva, a través de la plataforma Teams, el 16 de septiembre de 2022, detallando la relación entre el Prof. Doctor Spencer Chainey y la Revista Brasileira de Ciências Policiais, así como la investigación y la relación de la investigadora con la Policía Federal y los resultados del Proyecto Policía Orientada a la Inteligencia, realizado con el apoyo del BID y la Policía Federal brasileña.
Palabras clave: violencia dentro de América Latina; corrupción; homicidio; programa de vigilancia de puntos calientes; proyecto de vigilancia dirigida por inteligencia.
<![if !supportLists]>1. <![endif]>INTRODUCTION
Professor and editorial advisor of the Revista Brasileira de Ciências Policias, PhD Spencer Chainey from the University College London (UCL) is interviewed by Professor and Delegate of the Federal Police, Doctor Wellington Clay Porcino Silva, who already have an academic partnership in research projects in common, as a result of an invitation made by management of the journal.
The invitation to this brief dialogue is contextualized in the interest of the Escola Superior de Polícia in presenting to the journal's readers, renowned national and international researchers, who serve as a paradigm for the necessary development of police science, public security and the criminal justice system in the context of worldwide.
The interview was carried out in a semi-structured way, using the MS Teams tool on September 16, 2022, and had as its main topics the beginning of the interviewee's relationship with the RBCP, his view on the journal and on research in the field of security public, including within Latin America, impressions on crime patterns, behavior of criminal groups, behavior of criminals in Brazil, in addition to some programs and projects developed over the years.
As per information available on his University College London page < https://www.ucl.ac.uk/jill-dando-institute/people/spencer-chainey>, Dr. Spencer Chainey is:
an Associate Professor at UCL’s Jill Dando Institute of Security and Crime Science (JDI), is Director of the JDI Latin America and Caribbean Unit, and JDI Director of Continuing Professional Development. Spencer’s work places him at the interface between academic research and the practical world of policing, public safety, citizen security and criminal investigation. His activities involve: research and analysis collaborations to counter organised crime; the application of research evidence to police/public safety practice; support in the creation and implementation of strategies and activities that improve crime reduction, criminal investigation and citizen security, and; furthering the education and professional development of current and future generations of practitioners and researchers. All these activities draw from his 20 plus years of international experience. In addition to activities in the UK, Spencer has worked closely with police agencies (from local to federal level), ministries and secretariats of security in Brazil, Uruguay, Argentina, Mexico, Colombia, Chile, Belize, Jamaica, New Zealand, Australia, Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Estonia, Germany, Austria, the Czech Republic, the Netherlands, China, the USA, Canada, South Africa, and Abu Dhabi. Prior to joining UCL in 2003, Spencer worked in local authorities and the Metropolitan Police in London, and as head consultant for an international software and services company specializing in community safety, regeneration and infrastructure management.
His expertise has been called upon to support the Government of Jamaica in developing a new national Citizen Security Plan, to author the UK Home Office’s national guidance on Information Sharing for Community Safety, to author a practice guide on hot spot policing for police officers in Latin America and the Caribbean, act as a consultant to the Inter-American Development Bank to advise the Argentinian government and several state governments in Brazil on the approval and use of loans totalling over US$100 million for improving police effectiveness and violence reduction, work with the Federal Police of Brazil to combat illegal gold mining and deforestation in the Amazon, improve the use of problem-oriented policing in the UK and Uruguay, conduct research that has helped to underpin a more intelligence-led approach to UK police forces’ use of stop and search, and author the UK Association of Chief Police Officer and College of Policing ’Geographical Analysis Workbook’.
Spencer has particular expertise in hot spot policing, community and problem-oriented policing (POP), intelligence-led policing (ILP), and evidence-based policing with these skills regularly called upon by police agencies who seek to improve their use of these approaches. Spencer also leads the training and mentoring of detectives and intelligence analysts on a serial crime investigation course, partnered with the UK National Crime Agency and supported by EuroPol.
Wellington Clay Porcino Silva: Well, they asked me to talk to you about your relationship with our journal, Revista Brasileira de Ciências Policiais, and how it began. And a little bit about yourself, if you have any plans concerning the journal.
I also would like to hear from you about our ILP project. What did you think about the program when you were here with us? How about the results? Also, if you plan something for the future with the teams that worked with you.
Spencer Chainey: Ok. So, in terms of my relationship with the journal, I remember it began, I think, from a series of visits that I made to Brasilia in about 2008-2009 when I was helping to organize an international symposium called “Environmental Criminology and Crime Analysis”. Now, in terms of environmental criminology, it’s not environmental criminology in terms of crimes that happen in the environment, it’s the criminology field of environmental criminology.
W. C. P. S.: In Portuguese we call it “Criminologia do ambiente”.
S. C.: I see, yes. So I was helping to organize a symposium in Brasilia on environmental criminology and crime analysis, looking to bring in a lot of scholars from different parts of the world, different academics. People who have written some of the key theories around aspects of environmental criminology. So Ron Clark, who has written the routine activities theory; Marcus Felson, who has written the rational choice; Paul and Patricia Brantingham, who are the key people around crime pattern theory. And there were various other academics who have studied lots of things about crime. And we managed to put it off.
That symposium happened in Brasília and during that time on the organizing committee for that symposium there were a couple of people from the Federal Police of Brazil on the organizing committee, and there were some other academics as well, one from the University of Brasilia; Claudio Beato, from UFMG, was on the committee as well to help organize it; and I was the British guy. I was the only British guy on the organizing committee. But I was helping to kind of pull this whole thing together from London with the occasional trips to Brasilia. And it was really through the contact that my involvement with the journal began.
And, you know, I get involved in several other academic journals. I would say that I don't necessarily have a huge role or a key role when it comes to the journal. But one of the things that I'm seeing, certainly in the last 2-3 years now, is more and more opportunities for certain research that is coming out of Brazil and other parts of particularly South America to be featured in the journal and featured in a way that brings more attraction and appeal to the journal. And what I mean by that is that, for me, the journal is often very much focused towards really what's happening in Brazil and very much in the context of crime in Brazil, which then many people from other parts of the world can't really see the relevance of some of the things that are covered in that journal compared to other wider international experiences. But where I think that things have been changing over the last four or five years is that there are certain new developments in crime analysis. There are certain new developments in policing of a whole range of different types that are happening in Brazil and further afield in South America, that are raising attention to other researchers, other police agencies in different parts of the world, learning about how things are being done in Brazil and other parts of South America, which they can actually learn from and how we’re doing things like testing theoretical principles that have been applicable for many, many years in Western industrialized contexts, but don't seem to necessarily always apply in a Brazilian context, or how we’re adapting theoretical principles, bearing in mind things that we have observed in terms of patterns of crime, behaviors of criminal groups, behaviors of offenders in Brazil.
So, for me, it’s good timing for us to chat about the journal because I see that there may even be potential for the journal’s profile to increase relevance on an international stage, because of several of the exciting new areas of research, empirical research that is being done in Brazil. And this is not just by researchers in what we call in English “the ivory towers of academia”. It’s people who are working in the field, who are practitioners. People who are policymakers.
So I see there’s potentially some good opportunities for the profile of the journal to be raised over the course of the next few years.
W. C. P. S.: Ok. And can you remember any specific research that you think is more suitable to this more international approach of our journal?
S. C.: Let me give you one example: violence in Latin America. Brazil being one of those countries, in particular Latin America, with the unfortunate ranking of being basically the most violent place in the world’s most violent region. There’s been a lot of research that has tried to understand why. But most of that research is very much replicated. The source of research that’s been done in other parts of the world and there are other things being done now, which is looking into a what is it about life in Latin America, in South America, in Brazil that explains the reasons for the high levels of violence. And it’s not as though, you know, you as Brazilians, you as South Americans, you as Latins just have this natural instinct within you to be more violent. It’s about “What are the circumstances that lead to that high level of violence?”. There have been several studies that have tried to replicate the reasons for variations in violence around the world, such as inequality, poverty, unemployment, educational attainment, all those sorts of things. And in the last 5-6 years, as more and more studies have begun to be done by researchers both in Brazil and on the international stage, looking at the issues of violence within Latin America, they began to see some inconsistencies in terms of those traditional socioeconomic reasons for explaining levels of violence. And I’m saying this because I think that if there’s one thing that chronological research can contribute in the next decade to life in Brazil, life in Latin America, it’s to contribute to better understanding patterns of violence, understanding violence, so that we can then develop more effective programs to deal with issues of violence.
And the sort of research that’s been done recently has begun to expose that these kinds of socioeconomic factors do have some form of role to play. There are often some inconsistencies in the extent to which they have a role to play. In the last 20 years, although there are still problems in Brazil with inequality, poverty, education, etc., inequality is reduced, education levels have improved. Brazilians are healthier, poverty levels have reduced. Like I said, there are still problems there, but all of these things have improved over the course of the last 20 years. The socioeconomic conditions have improved, but high levels of homicide, high levels of violence have persisted.
And some of the new things that are beginning to be exposed are that there is a relationship between what we do as policymakers, as practitioners, is what we do in terms of the effectiveness of interventions and programs is what our governments do in terms of the effectiveness of those government institutions that has a major role to play in influencing levels of violence and meaning that you know, governments, institutions fundamentally do matter when it comes to addressing violence.
So rather than just blaming on “oh, it has to do with inequality”, “it has to do with poverty”. There’s a key element that’s all to do with: it’s actually very much down to the effectiveness of government agencies. And the poorer the effectiveness of a government agency, the higher the homicide levels we tend to see in Latin America. And that is a pattern that began to be picked up about two or three years ago and is now being picked up to look at the relationships between the effectiveness of government agencies, government institutions and homicide patterns and violence patterns across the whole of the world.
And the other thing that has
to be spoken about as well is the undermining influence that corruption has.
It's very, very difficult for government agencies to be effective. And what I
mean by government agencies, you know, we think of it in relation to crime, the
justice system, police agencies, etc., Ministries of Security and Public
Safety. If we have this constant presence of corruption that fundamentally
undermines the effectiveness of those agencies. So
when we think about violence in Brazil and many other parts of Latin America,
we really have to begin a very serious conversation about recognizing that we
can’t just blame it on socioeconomic things. It has fundamentally to do with
how we as police agencies, government agencies, operators, the local level and
the national level, because what we do as individuals in the roles that we do
is what we do in the agencies that we work for. It is what governments do in
terms of the policies and strategies they set that can have a fundamental
influence with the levels of violence we then observe. And if we don’t pay
attention to things like corruption, then that is only going to continue to undermine
our efforts to deal with violence.
Now I raise this as an important factor in terms of research and what I think that research in Brazil and Latin America could begin to contribute to the wider world, because this is something which is really potentially being exposed as this is the thing that is unique about life in Latin America, that is providing a reason for explaining why there are high homicide levels.
But what’s beginning to be recognized as well is that even in those countries where low levels of homicide are present, it has very much to do with the effectiveness of those government agencies that continue to play a role in sustaining those low levels of violence.
W. C. P. S.: You know, I spent almost all my time as an operational officer working with internal affairs and counterintelligence, which here in the Federal Police really deals with corruption in the Federal Police. So it’s something that I spent almost half of my life as a police officer doing. It’s the job that I’m specialized in but I’ve never researched something like that. It’s something very interesting. Maybe sometime I can think of a research to try to measure the impact of this work on Federal Police. I’ve worked a lot on that and I think that’s a research I would really like to do. I’ve never linked this operational background to my life as a researcher.
S. C.: Yes. And if you think about it in terms of what can we do in Brazil, in Latin America, to really have an impact on violence. If you think of the last 20-30 years, there have been huge investments in those socioeconomic factors, thinking that modernization, social development is the cure for violence and it’s not because it has a role to play, but high levels of homicide have persisted. That is always my argument. You’ve seen these improvements in socioeconomic conditions in countries like Brazil over the last 20-30 years. I first went to Brazil in 2000 and I’ve seen in that 20, nearly 25 years, improvements within the country in terms of socioeconomic conditions. And yet it hasn’t really acted as the magic cure for violence that often people theoretically think that it will do. Violence still persists very much at high levels. There have been some countries in Latin America where we’ve seen homicide levels or violence levels reduced. But often what then has happened is after 2-3 years, those violence levels have gone up again. I mean, Colombia was a good example of that in a moment. Colombia achieved some good major reductions in violence, but then things have begun to go up again. Mexico: high levels of violence have persisted for decades now in Mexico, yet the country has significantly improved in many ways.
I think it is important to recognize that it is what we do as practitioners, as policymakers, as researchers working in the field of crime, criminal investigation, criminal intelligence, crime analysis, policing, etc. That is very much the role we can play in making improvements that lead to reductions in violence because it’s what we do that highly matters. And, yes, investments in things like education programs and reducing inequality are all important. But it’s the investments in the police agencies to be better, to have greater capacity and capability. It’s more capability, rather than anything, for the police to be smarter, for the justice system to be smarter, for the Ministries of Security, both at the national level and at the municipality level being smarter in doing things. Because that is what’s likely to have the major difference on reducing violence. And just one final point on this: one thing that would be really interesting for me to see, if research can be done on this, is to measure whether there is a cost benefit effect. I mean, investing in police and public security agencies to reduce violence rather than thinking that investments in socioeconomic conditions is going to act in reducing violence. I find that police agencies and other agencies that are trying to deal with crime are not necessarily given the same level of investment that we see in socioeconomic things. Yet, it could be that the answer to the issues of violence in countries like Brazil is to do with investments in police and public security agencies, continued investments to strengthen them, to professionalize them. And what I mean by professionalizing them is to ensure that those people working in those police agencies are well educated. We raise the bar of the entry level, for people to come into police agencies. We support police officers with their continual education as they are in the job and we will see more people who are in the middle rank of police actually having masters degrees, a MBA or a master’s degree in another discipline. Correct me if I’m wrong, but if you want to be a senior officer in Brazil, you have to have a master’s degree. But you have a master’s degree in law. And by having a master’s degree in law that again undermines the problem-solving more scientific brain that a police officer needs to have an impact on crime. If you only have a master degree in law, police are only ever gonna be enforcers of the law or lawyers. They’re not gonna be problem solvers. They’re not gonna be thinking about things in terms of solving problems. They’re gonna be thinking of things very much as a lawyer in terms of “how can we prosecute?”, or “how can we stiffen sentences?” to try to deal with these particular problems.
W. C. P. S.: It’s a problem of our system, because here in Brazil the police have some powers that in other countries are powers of the prosecution. So for us it’s important to have a low degree. But I agree with you that we can’t only have law degrees. That’s why I have taken a Master and a Doctorate degree not in law. I think that to be better at what we do we have to consider other fields of science, not just law.
Now changing the subject, I’d like to know a little bit about what you think of our ILP project. What were the results of that two-week work and if you are satisfied with them.
S. C.: This ILP (Intelligence-Led Policing) project involved three groups working on three different problems, which were identified as being key, pertinent issues associated with what the Federal Police’s responsibilities were. One was to do with illegal land grabbing, another one to do with illegal logging, particularly selective logging, and the other one to do with illegal gold mining. And a couple of things that particularly impressed me were, first of all, how the federal officers who attended that course came into it with an open mind, thinking “Ok, I think there’s some opportunity here for us to learn some things”. And I think that within the first day or two of that course. It was organized into two different blocks, each block about four days in length. Even after the first day or two, people were beginning to think slightly differently about how you can look at the sort of problems that I would refer to and that they were focusing on their particular projects. And we chose those three particular projects, but the content of the learning was applicable to any type of crime issue, any type of environmental crime, or form of violence, or types of criminal groups, or whatever. So I was really impressed with how the people who attended that course came onto it open-minded, seeking to learn new things, and actually began to learn things very quickly and could immediately apply them to things that they required to address.
And I think all three of those projects had successes, some couple of them more notable successes because of recent operations. And I know that with the land grabbing one, as a result of the ILP project, there was a major new operation that was launched which resulted in the creation of new intelligence, which fed into new operations to determine who to target and who to serve warrants against to, to start to disrupt some of this illegal land grabbing. I also know that with the illegal gold mining group. I was told that it was probably one of the biggest operations the federal police had run in recent years, which came very much from the ILP project, that began on this course, where people who were focusing on the illegal gold mining really began to grasp and reveal things that they had never never revealed before in relation to certain problems with illegal gold mining. That was one thing that particularly impressed me, but did not surprise me. I came into it anticipating that the groups and the individuals who were part of this whole Intelligence-Led Policing course were going to learn new things, even though they may be people who were very experienced working for the Federal Police or at police agencies for many, many years. They were going to learn something, new techniques, new things about how to look at data. They were going to start to think differently about how you go about examining problems, and it was actually, in some ways, no surprise to me, that they began to expose and identify things that they had never even thought of before, or had never found before, because that’s the whole point. Intelligence-Led Policing is about getting you to start to think about things differently, becoming different in terms of how you organize yourself to look at a particular crime issue. And even when you think there’s no intelligence out there, there’s no data out there on this particular topic. Revealing to them: “yes, there is!” It’s just that you weren’t looking in the right places. There are other places where we can look. To use an analogy, stones or rocks that we can find and lift up and see what’s underneath them. And that’s what the whole program did, really, that it just got them to. First of all, reveal things about the problem that they’ve never identified before, purely through a change of approach.
No sophisticated analytical
techniques were necessarily used. We were not using artificial intelligence or
anything like that. It was purely about getting them to think differently about
how you look at a problem, but then using techniques that they hadn’t heard of
before, one being like “crime script analysis”, for example. It doesn’t require
any software, it doesn’t require either the purchase of some expensive software
from a private company. It is purely about getting people to think differently
about how you look upon a problem.
To the one part of it was very much to do with helping them to better understand certain issues in a smarter, intelligent way. And, as a result of that, beginning to think differently about how you counter those things. And I think in particular, what people recognize is that, when we use an ILP approach it's not just about using that intelligence that criminal intelligence to identify the people to arrest or or more people to arrest and seek to prosecute. It is also about “how can we use this information then to target disruption activities?”, “how can we do things to make life more difficult for these criminal groups or these individuals involved in crime?”, “how can we do things to deter activity?”.
When we recognize that actually catching these people and prosecuting them can be incredibly tough and bureaucratic and we may not always end up with success. So it was getting them to recognize that if you develop a much clearer picture and richer understanding about the problem you’re looking at, there are other opportunities available to us as Federal Police officers, local police officers. There are other ways that we can intervene and deal with these problems, which are not solely relying upon arresting people and prosecuting them. It’s also thinking about alternatives to that, such as other mentioned: disruption, deterrent, and other forms of prevention.
W. C. P. S.: Ok. And do you have any plans to come back to Brazil in the future? Do you have any research related to Brazil?
S. C.: I think there are two particular things that are worth mentioning. One thing I’m very keen to do is to see if we can repeat the ILP program with the Federal Police again. But this time on different types of crime issues, in particular violence. I think there's a potential for repeating the ILP program with a different group of intelligence analysts, focusing on violence. I don’t know of any plans at the moment to do, but I think that could be a good thing to do over the course of the next year.
One thing that I am involved in which leads to me coming back to Brazil at some point within the next 3-6 months is that I’m part of a team that is coordinating a series of hot spots policing initiatives across about five different cities in Brazil. We are in the process at the moment, finalizing the analysis of hot spots. This has mainly to do with hot spots of robbery against pedestrians on the streets and we’re finalizing the analysis that relates to identifying where the hot spots are, to then lead to the design of these new programs, with several new municipalities or state agencies in an attempt to use the hot spots policing. And the cities include Florianópolis, Curitiba, Fortaleza, Belo Horizonte. And by November, I anticipate, some of those programs will be commencing. There are four or five of us working on it. I’m the only non-Brazilian. All the rest are people based in Brazil who are leading on this. People like Joana Monteiro, José Macedo, from the Federal University of Ceará. I’m leading the one in Florianópolis and working with the people at the municipality level in Florianópolis to introduce this hot spots policing program. So I anticipate that if not before the end of this year, certainly next year I’ll be back in Brazil helping to coordinate this whole new hot spots policing program. And for me what’s exciting about it are two things: one is that it’s the first real proper occasion when hot spots policing has been introduced in Brazil. Some people may say “oh, we do that sort of thing targeting petrol”, but they’re not really doing proper hot spots policing. So that's one thing that’s exciting about it.
The second thing is that these programs are being set up as what we call Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs). RCTs are the sorts of experiments that are at the highest scale of evidence-based policing in terms of evaluating their impact. So this is not just about introducing programs like PADO (Programa de Alta Dedicación Operativa) in Montevideo, which was very successful when introduced, but wasn’t a RCT. The experiments in these five cities in Brazil will be RCTs, introducing hot spots policing, experimenting and testing a whole number of different things that relate to hot spots policing. So, I anticipate, this time next year, thinking again of a point I started with: countries, researchers, police agencies outside of Brazil, beginning to look to Brazil to see what’s going on.
The results of these randomized controlled trials in Brazil, I can anticipate, will start to feature on the world stage this time next year when the results start to come out of this, to learn what did work, but also what did not work. What were the ways in how it worked most effectively? What lessons can we learn from these programs in Brazil that we can share with the rest of the world, police agencies across the world, about how we deal with these problems of violence on our streets.
So, just to give you an example, little things like “how many police officers do you actually need to patrol the streets in a city which has high levels of violence that compared to the streets in cities like that in the United Kingdom or other parts of Europe or the United States, where levels of violence are a little bit lower?” This is what we call the kind of dosage. What level of dosage is required in terms of police patrols in these high-violent situations? How long do the police need to be there? How important is it for the police to actually speak to people, members of the public while they’re on patrol, rather than just standing on street corners, looking mean and tough? We hypothesize that speaking to people when you’re on patrol is a vital component of hot spots policing. But that hasn't really been tested. And this is where these experiments in Brazil can potentially test these sorts of things and provide, share the results on the world stage.
Brazil, as I mentioned at the beginning of our chat today, will begin to feature more and more on the international stage in terms of doing research, doing effective policing that other police agencies around the world begin to recognize more and more. And, think, we can learn some stuff here.
Going back to the journal then I think this is where there’s a great opportunity for the journal and the profile of the journal to be raised by being a center place for the results of these studies, this sort of new work, to be published.
W. C. P. S.: I think that will be a great piece of research. Something that is very rare in our field of public security: Randomized Controlled Trials. It is very hard to see one out there.
So thank you very much for your time and for sharing your experiences with us.
S. C.: You’re welcome.
Wellington Clay Porcino Silva
He holds a PhD in Geography from the Federal University of Rio Grande do Norte and a Master’s in Science and Geographic Information Systems from the Nova University of Lisbon and in Military Sciences from the School for the Improvement of Army Officers. He held a Post-Doctoral internship in Computer Science at the Federal University of Ceará. He is a Federal Police Chief. He has experience in the areas of Public Management, Data Science and Artificial Intelligence, Formulation of Public Security Policies, Intelligence and Law, with an emphasis on the use of Data Science in the Management of the Judiciary Police. He is a professor responsible for the disciplines of Judicial Police Management and criminal analysis at the Graduate Program in Police Science at the National Police Academy and an external professor at the Graduate Program in Geography at UFRN. He held several management positions during his professional life, including Regional Superintendent of the Federal Police in Roraima and Rio Grande do Norte and Director of the National Secretariat of Public Security. He currently holds the position of Strategic Management Coordinator for the Federal Police.
CHAINEY, S. (2001) Combating crime through partnership; examples of crime and disorder mapping solutions in London, UK. In: HIRSCHFIELD, A.; BOWERS, K. (eds) Mapping and analysing crime data - lessons from research and practice. Taylor and Francis, London.
CHAINEY, S. (2004). The police role in community cohesion. In Proceedings of the Association for Geographic Information Conference, London.
CHAINEY, S. (2008). Identifying priority neighborhoods using the vulnerable localities index. Policing: A Journal of Policy and Practice, 2(2), pp. 196-209.
CHAINEY, S. (2011) Advanced hotspot analysis – spatial significance mapping using the Gi* statistic. In: Presentation at the 2011 international crime and intelligence analysis conference. Disponível em: http://www.ucl.ac.uk/jdi/events.
CHAINEY, S. (2012). Improving the explanatory content of analysis products using hypothesis testing. Policing: A Journal of Policy and Practice. Disponível em: http://iris.ucl.ac.uk/iris/publication/402455/1.
CHAINEY, S. (2012) JDI Briefs: Predictive mapping (predictive policing). (JDI Briefs). UCL Jill Dando Institute of Security and Crime Science, University College London: London, UK.
CHAINEY, S. (2016) A preliminary review of PADO, examining its impact, range of impact, crime displacement, diffusion of benefit and cost-benefit. Project report prepared for the Inter American Development Bank: Washington D.C.
CHAINEY, S.; CURTIS-HAM, S.; EVANS, R. M.; BURNS, G. J. (2018) Examining the extent to which repeat and near repeat patterns can prevent crime. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies and Management, 41 (5) pp. 608-622. 10.1108/PIJPSM-12-2016-0172.
CHAINEY, S.; DESYLLAS, J. (2008) Modelling pedestrian movement to measure on-street crime risk. In: LIU, L.; ECK, J. (Ed.) Artificial Crime Analysis Systems: Using Computer Simulations and Geographic Information Systems. Hershey: Idea Group Inc. Disponível em: http://www.irma-international.org/viewtitle/42401/
CHAINEY, S.; MACDONALD, I. (2012) Stop and search, the use of intelligence and geographic targeting: Findings from case study research. London: National Policing Improvement Agency.
CHAINEY, S.; MONTEIRO, J. (2019) The dispersion of crime concentration during a period of crime increase. Security Journal. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41284-019-00165-x.
CHAINEY, S.; PEZZUCHI, G.; GUERRERO-ROJAS, N. O. et al. Crime concentration at micro-places in Latin America. Crime Sci 8, 5 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40163-019-0100-5
CHAINEY, S.; RATCLIFFE, J. (2005) GIS and Crime Mapping. John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/9781118685181.
CHAINEY, S.; REID, S.; STUART, N. (2002) When is a Hotspot a Hotspot? A Procedure for Creating Statistically Robust Hotspot Maps of Crime. In Higgs, G. (ed.) Innovations in GIS 9 Socio-economic Applications of Geographic Information Science. London: Taylor & Francis.
CHAINEY, S.; SERRANO-BERTHET, R.; VENERI, F. (2018) Evaluando el impacto del Programa de Alta Dedicación Operativa (PADO) en la reducción de robos violentos en Montevideo, Uruguay. ¿Cómo evitar el delito urbano?: el Programa de Alta Dedicación Operativa en la nueva Policía uruguaya. Washington DC: Inter-American Development Bank and Uruguay Ministry of Justice.
CHAINEY, S.; SERRANO-BERTHET, R.; VENERI, F. (2020). The Impact of a Hot Spot Policing Program in Montevideo, Uruguay: An Evaluation Using a Quasi- Experimental Difference-in-Difference Negative Binomial Approach. Police Practice and Research, 22(5), 1541-1556. https://doi.org/10.1080/15614263.2020.1749619.
CHAINEY, S.; SILVA, B. (2016) Examining the extent of repeat and near repeat victimisation of domestic burglaries in Belo Horizonte, Brazil. Crime Science. 5. 10.1186/s40163-016-0049-6
CHAINEY, S.; TOMPSON, L.; (2012) Engagement, empowerment and transparency: publishing crime statistics using online crime mapping. Policing: A Journal of Policy and Practice, 6 (3) pp. 228-239. 10.1093/police/pas006
CHAINEY, S.; TOMPSON; L.; UHLIG, S. The Utility of Hotspot Mapping for Predicting Spatial Patterns of Crime. Security Journal, n. 21, 2008. Disponível em: www.eeducation.psu.edu/geog884/sites/www.eeducation.psu.edu.geog884/files/image/lesson2/Chainey%20et%20al.%20(2008).pdf
CHAINEY, S.; TOMPSON, L. (2008) Crime mapping case studies: practice and research. Chichester, England: John Wiley & Sons. Disponível em: http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/9780470987193
ECK, J. E.; CHAINEY, S.; CAMERON, J. G., LEITHER, M.; WILSON, R. E. (2005) Mapping Crime: Understanding Hot Spots. U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs National Institute of Justice, USA.
HART, T. & ZANDBERGEN, P. (2014) Kernel density estimation and hotspot mapping: Examining the influence of interpolation method, grid cell size, and bandwidth on crime forecasting. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies and Management. 37. 10.1108/PIJPSM-04-2013-0039.
TOMPSON, L.; CHAINEY, S.; (2011) Profiling Illegal Waste Activity: Using Crime Scripts as a Data Collection and Analytical Strategy. European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research, 17 (3) 179 - 201.10.1007/s10610-011-9146-y
Additional information and author’s declarations
Conflict of interest declaration: the author confirms that there are no conflicts of interest in conducting this research and writing this article.
Declaration of authorship: all and only researchers who comply the authorship requirements of this article are listed as authors; all coauthors are fully responsible for this work in its entirety.
Declaration of originality: the author assures that the text here published has not been previously published in any other resource and that future republication will only take place with the express indication of the reference of this original publication; he also attests that there is no third party plagiarism or self-plagiarism.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License