GODIAC - Field Study Handbook 2013

7/27/2019 GODIAC - Field Study Handbook 2013

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/godiac-field-study-handbook-2013 1/34

Field Study HandbookGODIAC – Good practice or dialogue and communication

as strategic principles or policing political maniestations

in Europe

With the fnancial support rom the Prevention o and Fight against

Crime Programme o the European Union

European Commission-Directorate- General Home Aairs.

HOME/2009/ISEC/AG/182



Field Study Handbook2




Preace

This handbook orms part o the “Good practice or

dialogue and communication as strategic principles or

policing political maniestations in Europe” (GODIAC)

project. The handbook is one o our documents pro-

duced by the GODIAC project. The other documents

include a booklet summarising the feld study results,

a researcher anthology and ten individual feld study

reports.

The purpose o the project was to identiy and

spread good practice in relation to dialogue and com-

munication as strategic principles in managing and

preventing public disorder at political maniestations

in order to uphold undamental human rights and

to increase public saety at these events in general.

The overall idea o the project has been to integrate

operative police work, research and training within

the feld and to build international and institutional

networks.The main target group or the handbook is police

commanders, researchers and trainers that come

in to contact with the evaluation o policing major

events.

The project co-ordinator was the Swedish National

Police Board. There were twenty partner organisa-

tions in twelve European countries. These consisted

o twelve police organisations and eight research/edu-

cational organisations.

The project ran between 1st August 2010 until 31st

July 2013 with grateul fnancial support provided by

the Prevention and Fight against Crime Programme

o the European Commission-Directorate-Gener-

al Home Aairs and the Swedish National Police

Board.

Our aim and aspiration is that the material pro-

duced by the project will serve as a contribution

towards a European approach on how to police

crowds and political maniestations through eective

dialogue and communication.

Stockholm in May 2013

Lena Tysk

Deputy Head o Department or Police AairsChairman o the GODIAC project

Swedish National Police Board

Christian Wessman

Police SuperintendentManager o the GODIAC project

Swedish National Police Board




Preace ........................................................................................... 3

Introduction .................................................................................. 5

Theoretical rame o reerence ................................................... 7

Human Rights .................................................................................. 7

Crowd research and its implications or public order policing .......... 7

EU Handbook .................................................................................10Changes in protest and protest policing .........................................10

The feld study ............................................................................ 13

Field study ocus .............................................................................13

The Peer Review method – background ..........................................13

Beore the feld study – planning and frst data collection ...............14

The work process during the feld study days ..................................15

The write-up process o the feld study report .................................19

Reerences................................................................................... 21

Appendices ................................................................................. 22

A) GODIAC project goals .............................................................. 22

B) Checklist or planning a feld study............................................. 22

C) Checklist or a pre-meeting ....................................................... 24

D) Checklist or Responsibilities during a feld study ....................... 24

E) Checklist or the eedback meeting ............................................ 25

F) Saety and insurance matters during feld studies ....................... 26

G) Field study report structure ....................................................... 27

H) Data collection by host reerence person beore the event ......... 28

I) Guideline or observations .......................................................... 29

J) Guideline or feld study interviews ............................................ 30

K) Data collection ater the event ....................................................31

L) Evaluation orm o a feld study process ...................................... 32

Table o content




Introduction

This handbook describes the peer review method-

ology that was applied at the GODIAC project feld

studies1. The peer review evaluation method as initi-

ated by Otto Adang in the Netherlands and urther

developed in a European ootball context (Adang

& Brown, 2008) involves experienced police ofcers

cooperating with researchers to perorm observation-

al feld studies to identiy good practices and learning

points or public order management.

The handbook builds on the GODIAC seminars

and workshops, or the feld study members, which

took place in September 2010, January 2012 and

January 2013. The handbook has been discussed in

the project group and in the steering committee.

It is primarily written or the GODIAC feld study

members as background material or understanding

the feld study process and or clariying the dierent

responsibilities that enable active participation in thefeld study. The handbook has been developed during

the project period and incorporates learning points

and developments o the peer review method. The

handbook aims at promoting the use o feld studies

or evaluation o policing major events.

The purpose o the GODIAC project was to con-

tribute to the development o a European approach

to policing political maniestations. The strategic

objectives o the GODIAC project were:

Analyse and disseminate good practices o apply-

ing research-based principles ocusing on commu-nication and dialogue as strategic principles or

de-escalation and prevention o public order dis-

turbances at political maniestations in Europe.

Increase knowledge on the social identities o

demonstrators and activists, their motivation,

mobility and strategies.

1 This publication reects the views o the project organisation,

and the European Commission cannot be held responsibleor any use which may be made o the inormation contained

therein.

Stimulate the use o research-based knowledge in

policing political maniestations.

Promote evaluation o policing major events at a

European level.

Stimulate lessons to be learnt, disseminated and

used nationally and internationally.

Develop institutional co-operation and net-

works at a European level between practitioners,

researchers and trainers.

Facilitate collaboration between law enorcement

agencies and research networks. (appendix A)

Communication and dialogue were chosen as the

projects ocus because o developments in crowd

psychology and o policing major events in dierent

countries in this respect. The Conict Management

approach in Germany, Dialogue Police ofcers in

Sweden, Event Police in Denmark, a Peace Unit inthe Netherlands and Dialogue/Liaison Ofcers in the

UK are examples o this.

In order to learn more about how the developments

o dialogue and communication can be integrated

into the policing o crowds, the project work process

included:

Use o the peer review methodology or studying

the policing o political maniestations in real time.

Demonstrators at the London feld study




Theoretical rame o reerence

Because the ocus o the feld study is the communi-

cation and interaction be-tween demonstrators and

the police in connection with political maniesta-

tions, there are several knowledge areas to consider.

We chose to relate to the legal ramework (human

rights), crowd psychology and the globalisation o

protests.

Human RightsThe present human rights ormulation, whose history

goes back only 60 years, can be said to represent a

regulation o the relationship between the state and

the individual, where the state and the international

community have certain obligations. The rights are

regulated at a number o dierent levels and have var-

ious sources, such as international agreements and

established practice, regional agreements (or exam-ple, the European Convention on Human Rights and

the EU treaty), national legislation and established

practice. Freedom o assembly is considered one o

the undamental rights and is regulated at all o these

dierent levels. For understanding the legal content

o the human rights ormulation, it is important to

know that there exists no strict hierarchy in the area,

as there is within a state. With respect to Europe

within the EU, this implies that there are three juris-

dictions that all have responsibility or protecting

these rights: the European Court o Human Rights(ECtHR), the European Court o Justice (ECJ) and

the national courts, especially in the orm o constitu-

tional courts in many member countries. The ECtHR

has, to be sure, jurisdiction over the others” applica-

tion o the European Convention on Human Rights,

but has in a well-known legal case (the Bosphorus

case) stated that it intends to use that right only in

relation to the ECJ in exceptional circumstances. The

relationship between the EU and the member states

is also complicated. When an authority in a member

state – or example, a police authority – is to put rules

regarding reedom o assembly into practice; it is

natural to ollow frst o all the ormulation that this

right has been given nationally in in the country’s

constitution, law, practice, and so orth. When, on

the other hand, it comes to other violations o human

rights such as genocide, torture, and the like (oten

reerred to as jus cogens), international law has a

direct impact. In an undertaking such as the GODIAC

project, it is o great importance that when one par-

ticipates in another member country’s activities, one

respects that country’s regulations and interpretation

o the reedom o assembly. I one thinks that wrong

is being done, then this is primarily an international

issue or an issue or the individuals who are aected

by the loss o a right.

Crowd research and its implications or

public order policingThe theoretical rame o reerence or the project

work is built upon modern crowd research and

draws in particular on research fndings related to

the Elaborated Social Identity Model (ESIM) o

crowd behaviour that ormulated explanations or

the escalation o crowd conict. The ESIM suggests

that crowd events are characteristically encounters

between groups during which crowd members act in

accordance with their social identity.

Demonstrators at the Aarhus feld study




The style o interaction that takes place during an

event can substantially alter these identities. Accord-

ing to the model, undierentiated police intervention

can instigate unifcation o crowd members against

them, involving those with no prior conrontational

intentions. From these fndings emerge implications

or public order policing: assuming that (as the model

suggests) crowd events are intergroup encounters

where one o the participants is the police, and i the

groups inuence each other, then the police have a

major role within this scenario; the way the police

act must have a huge impact on the behaviour o the

crowd. Four principles o public order policing are

suggested to avoid such processes: education, acilita-

tion, communication and dierentiation (Reicher et

al. 2004; 2007). “The guidelines are not mere “add-

ons” which can be tacked on to existing practices.

Rather, they represent an alternative perspectivewhich needs to be taken into account in each and

every decision that is made about policing crowds”

(2007, p. 410).

Parts o the recommendations have been incorpo-

rated into the development o Special Police Tactics

(SPT) in Sweden (Stott, 2009, the Swedish National

Police Board 2009, 2010) and the Association o Chie

Police Ofcers Manual o Guidance “Keeping the

Peace” (2010) in the UK and into the EU Handbook

(EU 2010a), with recommendations or the policing o

ootball games with an international dimension.

Education

Reicher and colleagues (2007) stress the importance

o intelligence on known troublemakers. While con-

sidering the circumstances in which “the violence o

the ew does (or does not) become collective” (2007,

p. 409), they urther see the need or police – during

preparation and in intelligence briefngs – to educate

themselves about the social identities o the whole

crowd that is expected to attend an event. This would

involve knowledge o their “values, standards aims

and goals, their sense o what is right and proper,

their stereotypes and expectations o other groups,

their history o interaction with these groups andanything (dates, places, objects, orms o action)

which has particular symbolic signifcance” (2004,

p. 566). These aspects are seen as a basis or police

to build up the ways in which they will support and

handle crowd members.

Facilitation

In the course o this, police strategies should ocus

on maximising the acilitation o those parts o the

crowd that hold entirely legal aims and intentions.

As a result, “the police will not only avoid violence

rom these participants, they will also gain their

Demonstrators at the Bratislava feld study




cooperation in dealing with the minority o others”

(2007, p.409). Facilitation should incorporate all

stages o the police operation; this means that in

risky situations in particular, police should seek to

enable the legitimate parts o the crowd. In doing so,

it is expected that the majority o the crowd members

“do not react to police presence as something which

im-pedes them but rather as something which ena-

bles them” (2007, p. 410).

Communication

Communication as the third principle is used at

dierent stages and in dierent ways. During the

planning phase, talks and agreements should take

place between the organiser o the event and the

police. This may include issues like the intended aims

o the crowd members and the way the police will be

able to acilitate them. Agreements made here shouldthen be communicated to all crowd members. Beore

the event, this can be done by a wide range o com-

munication channels, like classical media (TV, radio,

newspapers) as well as the Internet or leaets. During

the event communication is more direct – or exam-

ple, ace-to-ace communication that can be ampli-

fed by loud-speaker systems and/or megaphones or

visual channels such as huge LED screens.

Communication is particularly important to

ensure transparency o police action and – in doing

so – to avoid uncertainty that may provide “a spacein which those drawing on historical distrust o the

police can gain inuence” (2007, p. 410). This applies

especially in potential conict situations. Reicher

and colleagues (2004) argue that in addition to what

is communicated, one should also consider how one

communicates. Preerably this would be through

“people who are trusted and respected by the groups

within the crowd” (2004, p. 566). In this respect, spe-

cial mention is made o the deployment o “commu-

nity mediators”. Their work should be pro-active and

be “available to communicate at points o incipient

violence”.

Dierentiation

Dierentiation reers to the awareness o the vari-

ous identities o crowd members and their dierent

behaviours and reactions. Based on that awareness,

Reicher and colleagues argue not to treat all crowd

members as the same. Especially in situations o

increasing risk and when violence starts, they stress

the importance o not dragging in uninvolved per-

sons. “It is precisely in order to stop the violence

o the ew that one must be permissive towards the

many” (2004, p.568). Uniorm police behaviour, on

the other hand, may set o perceptions o illegitimacy

and instigate identity change towards opposition and

conrontation, also among the “many” riendly. It is

acknowledged, however, that dierentiation is not

easy and is subjected to dierent impediments. Even

when there is knowledge o crowd heterogeneity, there

is a ten-dency or people to perceive crowd membersas the same. Other obstacles may relate to tactical or

organisational issues, or example, that there is no

time or dierentiation once interventions start. Need

is seen or the development o dierentiation tactics.

The authors also argue that dierentiation should not

be just one o many options; rather “it is a considera-

tion that must be built into every tactical or strategic

decision, into training, planning, equipping, briefng

and operating in crowds” (2004, p. 569).

Team member approaching demonstrators during the

Lisbon feld study




Rethinking crowd control and management

Implications rom this development also inuence the

way a police orce approaches a major event. Tradi-

tionally, crowd policing involves dierent stages: In

riot control the police ocus is on disorder and crime,

there is a distance between the police and the public,

police tactics do little to dierentiate between di-

erent (groups o) participants and contribute to an

us-versus-them relation between police and the pub-

lic/protestors. A show o orce is used, emphasis is on

police equipment and the police are mainly reactive.

In crowd control there is a ocus on restrictions or

limitations o group behaviour, or instance, through

envelopment or containment, the use o ences and

lines, and so orth. In crowd management and public

order management the emphasis is on order and on

the systematic planning or and supervision o the

orderly movement and assembly o people.

Adang (2010) challenges the view o these approaches

as dierent stages, both practically and conceptually.

Based on the view that the crowd is not one whole but

consists o various actions and groups with dierent

behaviours and attitudes (above), dierent policing

approaches may be applied at the same time. Public

order or crowd management thus comprises all types

o measures (rom preparation onwards) including

those that are taken as part o crowd control or riot

control. Police should always try to dierentiate andcommunicate and not discard a large part o their

toolbox when conrontation concerns only a part o a

crowd.

EU HandbookResearch carried out within the GODIAC Project

also relates to guidelines in connection with major

events that the Council o the European Union has

agreed on. The Handbook or police and security

authorities concerning co-operation at major events

with an international dimension (EU 2010b) empha-

sises an overall police approach at international

events, which include policies such as:

the police actions are characterised by guarantee-

ing the protection o peaceul demonstrations

the police should, through dialogue and a credi-

ble stage o preparedness, maintain the initiative,

thereby limiting or preventing riots or larger

disturbances

the police should, at its discretion and when

appropriate, demonstrate a low level o police

visibility and a high level o tolerance regarding

peaceul gatherings and demonstrations

It is recommended that the dialogue with individuals

and groups (including activist groups and demonstra-

tors) is initiated at an early, preparatory stage and be

utilised as a tool beore, during and ater an event. It

urther says that the establishment o a constructiveand mutually respectul network will serve to prevent

potential disturbances as well as serve as an instru-

ment or mediation in a conrontational situation. It

is urther recommended that dialogue structures or

teams should be established at the national level and

take into account the dierent cultures in the dier-

ent Member States in the preparation and implemen-

tation o their tasks.

Changes in protest and protest policingDierent ways o the policing o protests have been

observed over the last decades. In the 1960s a style

o “escalated orce” was common mainly among

police services. It was characterised by a negative

view o the protesters, little or no communication

and escalating use o orce. Being criticised or the

use and instigation o violence, many services in the

1980s and 1990s underwent a change towards a more

cooperative style based on negotiations and agree-

ments between police and protestors, and the use o

orce became a last resort (McPhail, Schweingruber

& McCarthy, 1998; Waddington, 2007). Following




this “quiet” era, Noakes and Gillham (2006) describe

a change in protest, where protesters no longer ol-

lowed the co-operational “agreements” and became

less predictable. Examples o this are the EU summit

held in Amsterdam in 1997 and, more globally, the

demonstrations against the WTO Ministerial Con-

erence in Seattle in 1999, considered “the start o a

new genre o protests” (Noakes & Gillham, 2006:98).

Protesters thwarted police planning by appearing

ar earlier than expected and blocking access to the

conerence building, leading to a partial shutdown o

the conerence. Protesters using the “black bloc” tac-

tic in Seattle (initially coming rom protest groups in

Germany) gained worldwide attention. Responding

to this new approach on the protesters” side, many

police services have turned to the use o paramilitary

tactics in order to maintain public order (c. Björk &

Peterson, 2006; Vitale, 2005). Noakes and Gillham

(2006) observed that police dierentiated between

“good” and “bad” protesters and tactics were used

in order to contain the “bad” ones, an approach they

labelled “strategic incapacitation”. Della Porta and

Reiter (2006) note that coercive tactics were ar more

requently used, however, targeted at merely “trans-

gressive” protesters.

Globalization o protests and the use

o social media

The events and consequences o Seattle are also seen

as the activation o the worldwide anti-globalisation

movement. Smith’s (2001) examination o the protest

group structure in Seattle suggests that “protests

around global trade liberalization involve extensivetransnational mobilizing structures that are likely to

(and, indeed, already appear to have) develop urther

as a consequence o the Seattle mobilization and its

impact on collective identity ormation” (p. 16). In

that way, critics o globalisation became globalised.

In addition, the Internet catalysed the development o

a globalised protest culture by spreading inormation

and by promoting and organising demonstrations

and activities (Kahn & Kellner, 2004).

As a consequence, police services are now acing

a growing internationalisation o protest in dierentaspects. On the one hand, demonstrations and inter-

national summits can attract protesters rom a num-

ber o countries. On the other hand, such events may

trigger – again, acilitated by modern communication

technology – protest in countries where the event is

not taking place. In addition, social networks ena-

ble the synchronisation o actions. Examples o this

are concerted actions against the anti-piracy treaty

ACTA that took place on 11 February 2012 in 55 cit-

ies in Europe or the act that the “occupy movement”

has moved rom Wall Street to the fnancial centres o

Europe in London, Frankurt and Rome.Demonstrators at the Barcelona feld study




The technological revolution – smart mobile phones,

e-mail, the Internet and social media, especially

Facebook and Twitter – can have a direct impact on

protest behaviour, or example, by organising ash

mobs or spreading inormation on police deployment

or movement.

Police organisations are addressing these develop-

ments and have started to use Twitter and other social

media as part o their communication strategies dur-

ing day-to-day business but also around public order

events to inorm the public and the demonstrators

beore, during and ater an event (e.g., NPIA 2012;

see also the GODIAC feld study report on the TUC

March 2011).

Consequences or (GODIAC) research

The GODIAC project takes on the on-going interac-

tion between protesters and police services” strate-gies and tactics. It aims to study how police services

react to current challenges in globalisation and “tech-

nologisation” o crowd events. And it urther looks at

how dierent types o demonstrators – ranging rom

ordinary protesters to activist/extremists – react to

the changed strategies and how they in turn change

their strategy towards the police.




Field study ocus

Selection criteria

The criteria or selecting feld study events in the

GODIAC project were:

Political maniestations

Risk or conict/conrontations or potential or

conict/conrontations

The ability to plan the feld study at least six weeks

in advance

Selection based on invitations provided by 10

dierent partner organisations

Five events the frst year and fve the second year

The overall research questions o the GODIAC project

were:

1. How can communication and dialogue strategies

contribute to prevent public order disturbances orhelp to de-escalate tense situations in demonstra-

tions?

2. What are the motives o, dierent tactics and

strategies used by dierent kinds o protest

groups?

3. What police strategies and tactics can be seen as

good examples?

During the feld studies the ollowing questions were

thereore in ocus.

Field study questions:

1. What is the political, legal, societal and organisa-

tional context o the event? (Preparation work)

2. How do demonstrators, police and the general

public interact and communicate beore, during

and ater the event?

3. Are there specifc demands or instructions on

police behaviour related to communication?

4. How do demonstrators and the general public

perceive the role and behaviour o the police in

this event, and in relation to past experiences o

similar events?

5. Question rom host organisation.

To obtain answers to the feld study questions, thefeld studies in the GODIAC project were the peer

review evaluation methodology (Adang & Cuvelier,

2001; Adang & Brown, 2008). The peer review meth-

od has been used or comparative studies o policing

international ootball matches and during a three-

year development project in Sweden.

The Peer Review method – backgroundPeer review evaluations consist o observations in real

time and ocus on the dynamic o events. A main ea-ture o this approach is to bring together public order

researchers and police practitioners in the observa-

tion o an event, in order to acilitate mutual learning.

The “peer aspect” reers to the act that the research

is carried out in the sense o a review by colleagues

rom other police services that are dealing with

similar problems in their own work. The researchers

involved will contribute methodological aspects to

the data collection and integrate theoretical aspects

in the analysis.

A urther point is the utilisation-ocused and vol-

untary character o a peer review because it will take

The feld study

Team members conducting interviews during the

Aarhus feld study




place only when a police organisation has asked or a

feld study to be carried out. The peer review evalu-

ation seeks to address issues that are relevant to the

host organisation (Adang & Brown, 2008; Schreiber

& Adang, 2009).

In the GODIAC project, an observation group is

composed o seven to nine members o the GODIAC

feld study group and a feld study co-ordinator. All

the members were prepared or the feld study work

through participation in a feld study seminar and

workshop on the theoretical rame o reerence and

the methodology or the feld studies.

Beore the feld study – planning and frstdata collectionCarrying out a study o a crowd event requires a great

deal o planning and preparation. The preparationwork consists o both collecting inormation on the

context o the event and managing logistical issues. In

order to ease the process, there are designated tasks

or the reerence person o the host organisation, the

feld study co-ordinator, the project management and

the feld study members. The tasks are described in

detail in appendix B.

Ater the host organisation has suggested a

suitable event, the project manager will make contact

in writing with the operational command/national

commissioner. The letter describes the purpose o the project, includes inormation on the feld study,

the members, the feld study questions and the

process.

A letter is also sent to the hosting feld study

reerence person clariying the inormation needed

beorehand, or example, guidelines on policing

major events, strategies and tactics as well as urther

contextual inormation (see appendix H) and other

organisational tasks related to the feld study. The

reerence person is also asked to enquire what issue

the hosting organisation wants to have evaluated (the

“host question”).

The inormation gathering o the host reerence

person is also complemented by data gathering by

the feld study co-ordinator, who is responsible or

planning the feld study together with the project

management and the host and leads the feld study

work during the event.

For the feld study members the GODIAC Inter-

net platorm provides inormation on the event. The

members also are encouraged to fnd out more inor-

mation about the event themselves.

Pre-meeting

The preparation work may include a meeting beore-

hand with the host organisation. The purpose o this

is to present the project to the hosting organisation in

particular when the responsible persons are not active

GODIAC members and are not amiliar with the pro-

ject goals and processes. The visit can urther serve toclariy possible questions, gather inormation on the

event, arrange or interviews that may be conducted

during the feld study and discuss a possible host

question.

Data collection beore the feld study

The contextual inormation about the event (above),

the police strategies and intentions and the demon-

strations will be used to answer the feld study ques-

tion: What is the political, legal, societal and organisa-

tional context o the event? This inormation also shall ensure that the feld study

members are aware o the context in order or them to

be able to analyse the observations and interviews.

This material is urthermore necessary or the fnal

comparative analyses o the feld study fndings. This

also enhances the learning in the project about the

conditions in other countries or policing political

maniestations.




The work process duringthe feld study daysThe work process during the feld study is carried out

according to the ollowing structure:

Day 1 – Arrival, meeting with host and frst

briefng

Day 2 – Briefng and planning

Day 3 – The event takes place

Day 4 – Analyses and report writing

Day 5 – Analyses and report writing continue

Day 6 – Analysis and report writing continue, internal

evaluation o the process

Because the events that will be studied may dier in

terms o duration, the planning o the feld study days

will have to be adjusted accordingly. Appendix D

describes the dierent responsibilities o the involvedmembers during the feld study.

Day 1 – Arrival, meeting with host and frst briefng

The feld study members arrive in the aternoon. The

frst briefng rom the host reerence person takes

place.

Day 2 – Briefng and planning

The briefngs continue. This includes inormation by

the host and the host reerence person, an overview

on the theoretical background o the project, meth-odological issues and the context o the specifc event

and a briefng on saety matters (appendix F).

Based on the collected inormation and the feld

study questions, the feld study group develops its

plan or observations and interviews, identifes what

data will be gathered, in what way and by whom.

Briefng by host during the Budapest feld study




The feld study questions serve as a guideline

to prepare or this plan:

The course o events

observations

How do demonstrators, police and the general

public interact and communicate during the event? observations

Dierentiation

observations

Facilitation

observations

Good practices and points o attention

observations

How did demonstrators, police and the general

public interact and communicate beore the event?

interviews with the organiser

interviews with the police/permission unit

Facilitation

interviews with organisers and police

How do demonstrators and the general public

perceive the role and behaviour o the police in

this event – and in relation to past experiences o

similar events?

interviews with demonstrators

Are there specifc demands or instructions on

police behaviour related to communication?

interviews with senior police ofcers

(possibly beore the event)

interviews with operational police ofcers

during the event

Inormation/education

interviews with police

The feld study group is divided into pairs. One pair

may be assigned to the group o protesters, ocusing

on their behaviour and attitudes, one team concen-

trating on the work o the dialogue ofcers, one team

on the police work in general, and so orth.

It is urther decided what locations are most useul

or the data gathering and which persons should be

interviewed, including members o the hosting police

organisation, representatives o demonstrator groups

and other parties that are relevant with regard to the

event, or example citizens” organisations or mediators.

The members amiliarise themselves with the

surroundings, inrastructure and possible hot spots.

They also meet with the scouts (these may be local

police ofcers or police students), who will translate

during interviews and also help to fnd the way during

the observations.

Day 3 – The event

The feld study group will start the actual data gath-

ering according to the evaluation plan that has been

agreed on.

In the feld, the feld study group must inuence the

situation as little as possible. Two important princi-

ples regarding the behaviour o the feld study mem-

bers are related to this:

1. Not to interere with the police operation

2. To put their own saety beore the interest o the research

In order to answer the feld study questions, the team

conducts observations and interviews. The questions

and aspect o the study that are mainly answered by

observationsobservations during the event are

The course o events

How do demonstrators, police and the general

public interact and communicate during the event?

Facilitation

Dierentiation

Good practices and points o attention




Box 1: Observation notes

For all observations it is important to record the

time and location o the observation. Without

these administrative data, one cannot analyse

the event in a correct way, and this is impor-

tant to be able to describe the general course o

events.

The most important questions are

What is happening? and Who is doing what?

It is also o great value to supplement the obser-

vations with photos.

It is important to describe the local situation,

not the demonstration in general.

Example

Time: 14.50. Photos taken.

Place: Intersection West rd and Queens rd.

Situation: Police ofcer in uniorm talking to

our demonstrators, two male and two emale

juveniles. The juveniles are taking part in the

demonstration. The demonstration is at a stand-

still because o counter demonstrators.

A detailed guideline or observations is provid-

ed in appendix I.

Other questions can be answered only by interview-interview-

inging the relevant persons. Some reer to situations that

happen directly at the event, whereas other aspects

can also be addressed besides the event because the

persons may be too busy once the event started.

Demonstrators, public

How do demonstrators and the general public

perceive the role and behaviour o the police in this

event (and in relation to past experiences o similar

events)?

What are the motives and strategies used by the

demonstrators?

Organiser



Facilitation

Police/permission unit

Are there specifc demands or instructions on police

behaviour related to communication?



Facilitation

Inormation/education

So-called semi-structured interviews will be con-ducted. This means that an interview schedule is used

that contains important key areas to discuss and deal

with in the interview. The interview nonetheless also

can deal with issues that arise during the conversa-

tion. The above list can be used as a guide or this;

a detailed guide is provided in appendix J. Partici-

pation in an interview is voluntary, o course. The

names o the persons being interviewed are not asked

or or recorded.

During the event two approaches are employed:

1. The observers ask set questions i the opportu-nity arises on aspects that cannot be observed,

or instance, how participants look at the event,

their motives or their action and their previous

experiences – things that might inuence their

actions (feld study question 4).

2. Follow-up questions to learn more about an

observed interaction/ incident.




Interview notes

Just as important or observation is note taking

o the interviews, where details o time, location

and person interviewed make later analyses pos-

sible. Writing down quotes gives good illustra-

tions o what has been said and meant.

It may be useul to divide the task between the

pairs: one interviews while the other takes notes.

Sometimes the respondent is a bit “short” in

answering the questions. I possible try to get

him/her to give examples or illustrations; or

example, when you say you have had good expe-

riences with the police, what do you mean, can

you give me an example?

Introduction o yoursel and the projectIt is important to be open and truthul; there is

no reason to hide anything!

Example

“Hi, my name is XX. I am working on an EU

research project and we are studying events like

this. I would like to ask you a couple o questions.

You will not be asked to tell me your name or

anything like that; we are interested in people’s

opinion on police work at the demonstration and i you have any experiences rom previous or similar

demonstrations or events.

I appreciate your time; the interview will take a

couple o minutes.”

You may also make use o the GODIAC cards

i persons are interested in the project or have

urther questions.


The collected data is then discussed and analysed by

the feld study group, which in itsel requires clarity

regarding procedures. A pre-set structure (appendix

G) is used. As a frst step, the feld study pairs note

their observations, interviews and pictures onto

single Post-it note sheets. An advantage is that going

through the pictures can trigger memories and helpto put things into the correct order.

Examples or observations noted on post-it

notes

Please note

your observations o single events and

incidents

interviews conducted

pictures taken

These notes are also written into a digital presenta-

tion ormat (e.g., PowerPoint). The collation o these

data rom all dierent teams then provides a chrono-

logical overview o the course o events in note orm

and serves as the basis or the section “The course o

events” in the fnal report.

The Post-it notes are displayed in chronological

order onto a timeline. This provides an illustrative

overview o the event and makes it easier to discuss

and analyse specifc incidents and helps to ease the

write-up process o the feld study report, or exam-

ple, to allocate pictures to the respective observations.




Example o a time line using the ”Post-it”

method

Ater this, the pairs type the notes o the interviews

that they have made and make a list o who was

interviewed and when. The documents are stored on

a USB stick.

Based on the time line that has been established,

the feld study coordinator then presents a summary

o the course o events. The team discusses this and

agrees on a joint version.This overview then provides the basis or the main

discussion and analysis o the feld study observa-

tions. The discussion is led by the feld study co-or-

dinator; it ollows the feld study questions. At frst,

the group discusses in what way the question “How

do demonstrators, police and the general public

interact and communicate beore, during and ater

the event?” can be answered according to the obser-

vations and interviews that this group has made. The

results o this discussion are noted (this is part o the

drat report), and the team agrees on these notes.When this question has been completed, the discus-

sion moves on to the next question.

Oten during discussions and analyses, important

ideas are mentioned that better ft a section that will

be discussed at a later stage. In order not to lose such

contributions, notes are taken on a ip chart and are

reerred to at a later stage o the team discussion. The

discussions may also lead to urther questions to the

host and commanders that had not been answered in

the interviews. These questions are also made note

o, and the team seeks to have them answered by the

relevant persons during their stay.

In order to avoid too laborious discussions, it may be

useul to split the group and let smaller teams discuss

dierent points separately. Their discussions are

then presented to and discussed by the whole team.

Likewise, as in the other procedures, notes are taken

and agreed on.


The discussions and report writing continue. Fol-

low-up interviews with commanders and organisers

are an option. The conclusions are drawn out o the

conict-reducing principles.

Day 6 – Analysis and report writing, internal

evaluation

The discussions and report writing continue. At the

end o the day the feld the study process is evaluated

individually on a orm (appendix L) and the experi-ences discussed in order to keep improving the feld

study methodology.

The feld study members depart in the early ater-

noon.

The write-up process o the feld studyreportWithin a ew weeks ater the observations, the feld

study co-ordinator develops the drat report urther,

using the feld study members” notes and backgroundinormation such as police command orders, Internet

and Web pages. I accessible, inormation rom police

debriefngs is included (appendix K).

The report is then sent to the feld study members

or comments and then to the host organisation to

check actual correctness. The report will be ready as

a working document one month ater the feld study

took place.

Then there will be a eedback meeting between the

commanders, the GODIAC project reerence group

member and feld study members o the host organ-

isation, and the project management team and the




feld study co-ordinator. The purpose is to discuss

the feld study results and how they can be o use or

the host organisation. There is also the possibility o

having an equivalent meeting with the organisers o

the event.

The report remains a working document during

the project period, because new inormation might

be added. The individual stages are displayed in theollowing table:

The Report Writing Process

Report is written by researcher ater discus-

sions o feld study group→ version 1

Report version 1 is sent to all members o the

feld study

Members o feld study provide commentsand possible additional remarks to researcher

Researcher considers comments

and remarks→ version 2

Researcher sends version 2 to the other

researcher, the project manager and the pro-

ject advisor

The other researcher, the project manager and

the project advisor provide comments and

possible additional remarks to researcher

Researcher considers comments

and remarks→ version 3

Version 3 is sent to host or actual correction

Researcher considers actual correction

o the host→ version 4

During a eedback meeting, version 4 is

discussed with the host and subsequently putonto the platorm




Adang, O. (2010). Public Order Management. Presenta-

tion to the frst GODIAC feld study group meeting.

Swedish Police Academy, Solna.

Adang, O., & Brown, E. (2008). Policing ootball in

Europe. Experiences rom peer review evaluation

teams. Apeldoorn: Policieacademie.

Adang, O., & Cuvelier, C. (2001). Policing Euro 2000.

Beek-Ubbergen: Tandem Felix.Adang, O., & Schreiber, M. (2009). Avalució de la gestió

de l’ordre públic – una nova iniciativa: avaluació col·lab-

orativa d’equips. In Institute or Public Security o Cat-

alonia (Ed.), Mayor Events, Public Order and Crowd

Management (pp. 100-107). Mollet del Vallès: Institute

or Public Security o Catalonia.

Björk, M., & Peterson, A. (2006). Policing contentious

politics in Denmark and in Sweden. Maastricht: Shaker

Publishing.

Della Porta, D., & Reiter, H. (2006). The Policing o

Transnational Protest: A Conclusion. In D. Della Porta,A. Peterson & Herbert Reiter (Eds.), The Policing o

Transnational Protest (175-189). Aldershot, Burlington:

Ashgate, 2006.

EU (2010a). Council resolution o 3 June 2010 con-

cerning an updated handbook with recommendations

or international police cooperation and measures

to prevent and control violence and disturbances in

connection with ootball matches with an interna-

tional dimension, in which at least one Member State

is involved (2010/C 165/01) Retrieved rom http://

eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=O-

J:C:2010:165:0001:0021:EN:PDF

EU (2010b). Handbook or police and security author-

ities concerning cooperation at major events with an

international dimension. Council o the European

Union. 10589/1/07 REV1. Retrieved rom http://register.

consilium.europa.eu/pd/en/07/st10/st10589-re01.en07.

pd

Kahn, R. & Kellner, D. (2004). New media and Inter-

net activism: rom the “Battle o Seattle” to blogging.

New media & society, 6(1), 87-95. Retrieved rom

http://webarchives.cdlib.org/wayback.public/NYUL_

ag_6/20090329042805/http://nms.sagepub.com/cgi/

reprint/6/1/87.pd

McPhail, C., Schweingruber, D., & McCarthy, J. (1998).

Protest Policing in the United States. 1960-1995. In D.

Della Porta & H. Reiter (Eds.), Policing Protest: The

Control o Mass Demonstrations in Western Democra-

cies (pp. 49-69). Minneapolis: University o Minnesota

Press.

Noakes, J. A., & Gillham, P. F. (2006). “Aspects o the

“New Penology” in the Police Response to Political

Protests in the United States, 1999–2000.” In D. Della

Porta, A. Peterson & H. Reiter (Eds.), The Policing o

Transnational Protest (97-115). Aldershot, Burlington:

Ashgate, 2006.

NPIA (2012). Engage – Digital and social media engage-

ment or the police service. National Police Improve-

ment Agency. Retieved rom http://cnp.npia.police.uk/

fles/dm_engage_v6.pd

Reicher, S. (1996). “The Battle o Westminster”: devel-

oping the social identity model o crowd behaviour in

order to explain the initiation and development o col-

lective conict. European Journal o Social Psychology,26, 115-134.

Reicher, S., Stott, C., Cronin, P., & Adang, O. (2004). An

integrated approach to crowd psychology and public

order policing. Policing: An International Journal o

Police Strategies & Management, 27,

558-572.

Reicher, S., Stott, C, Drury, J., Adang, O., Cronin,

P., & Livingstone, A. (2007). Knowledge based public

order policing: Principles and practice. Policing. 1: 403-

415.

Smith, J. (2001). Globalizing Resistance: The Battle o

Seattle and the Future o Social Movements. Retrieved

rom http://depts.washington.edu/pcls/documents/

research/Smith_GlobalizingResistance.pd

Vitale, A.S. (2005). From Negotiated Management

to Command and Control: How the New York Police

Department Polices Protests. Policing and Society: An

International Journal o Research and Policy, 15(3),

283-304.

Waddington, D.P. (2007). Policing Public Disorder:

Theory and Practice. Devon: Willan Publishing.

Reerences




A) GODIAC project goalsThe purpose o the GODIAC project is to contribute

to the development o a European approach to polic-

ing political maniestations. The project objectives

are to:

Analyse and disseminate good practices o apply-

ing research-based principles ocusing on commu-

nication and dialogue as strategic principles or

de-escalation and prevention o public order dis-

turbances at political maniestations in Europe.

Increase knowledge on the social identities o

demonstrators and activists, their motivation,

mobility and strategies.

Stimulate the use o research-based knowledge in

policing political maniestations.

Promote evaluation o policing major events at a

European level.

Stimulate lessons to be learnt, disseminated andused nationally and internationally.

Develop institutional co-operation and net-

works at a European level between practitioners,

researchers and trainers.

Facilitate collaboration between law enorcement

agencies and research networks.

B) Checklist or planning a feld studyBeore the feld study

Responsibility o the project management

Composes an observation group out o the

GODIAC feld study group

Sends letters to the host commissioner, host

reerence person and the feld study group

Makes travel and accommodation arrangements

General saety planning

Checks the practical preparations with the host

(meeting room, local transport, etc.)

Makes the overall programme

Puts inormation on the GODIAC Internet

platorm

Keeps in close contact with the feld study

coordinator on the planning issues

Responsibility o the reerence person o the hostorganisation

Suggests a feld study event

Makes contact with police commissioner,

Gold Commander to acilitate the feld study

Identifes the host feld-study question (through

the Gold Commander).

Provides background and contextual inormation

and sends it to the project management

(appendix H)

Attends police briefngs related to the police

operation Arranges or interviews with commanders and

other relevant persons

Practical matters

Gets permit to interview police ofcers and take

photos (i needed)

Gets accreditation, access to restricted areas and/

or passing through restricted area

Arranges airport pickup/drop-o

Arranges local logistics, local transports i

necessary

Appendices




Arranges a meeting room

Provides maps, digital or report and hand-outs or

feld study members (tourist maps will usually do)

I necessary, arrange or interpreters and/or

stewards

Makes local saety arrangements i needed

Recommends clothing and equipment, or exam-

ple, warm clothing and wellies, and inorms i

there are any clothes or accessories not suitable,

i, or example, oten used by demonstrators

Produces a note with inormation on the project.

The note should include the phone number o a

local police contact. The note should be in the

local language and in English and carried by all

feld study members.

Responsibility o the feld study co-ordinator

Keeps in close contact with the project manage-ment and the host in the planning process

Gathers all content inormation that is provided

by the host on the event

Conducts urther own research in relation to the

event (reports about previous events, police press

releases, Internet sites o police and participating

groups, etc.)

Summarises the context o the event in the feld

study report

Prepares a preliminary plan or the feld study

activities Prepares an introduction to the feld study group

on the theoretical background o the project,

methodological issues and the context o the

specifc event

Responsibilities or the reerence persons o the

participating feld study members

Ensures that their feld study member has ade-

quate insurance throughout the duration o their

deployment. Finds out rom the employer what

the member needs or working abroad.

Ensures that the feld study member brings his/her

European Health Insurance Card

Discusses the feld study beore and exchange

o experiences ater the feld study with the feld

study member

Responsibilities o the feld study members

Inorm themselves on the event through the

GODIAC platorm and other sources

Studies the Field study handbook

Ensures they have adequate insurance throughout

the duration o their deployment. Finds out rom

their employer what is needed or working abroad.

Brings their European Health Insurance Card

Submits contact details to the project manage-

ment prior to travelling to the event. This includes

mobile number, contact details to next o kin or

colleague and ensuring they have sorted out insur-ance and saety.

Brings suitable clothing and feld study

equipment.




C) Checklist or a pre-meetingResponsibility o the project management

Arranges ight tickets

Responsibility o the reerence person o the host

organisation


Arranges local transport (i necessary)

Arrange meeting acilities

Introduces the team to the local liaison ofce

Arranges meeting with commander, dialogue/

permission unit and the organiser o the event

Introduces the host

Makes introduction to hot spots

D) Checklist Responsibilities during a feldstudy

Project management

Takes overall responsibility or the feld study

Represents/is the spokesperson or the project in

relation to the host organisation and the media

Ensures everybody is aware o the saety matters

Evaluates the feld study process

Makes checklist o mobile numbers, contact

numbers to hosts

Brings laptop, memory stick, adapters, notepads,

pens, cameras, and batteries

Field study co-ordinator

Makes hotel reservations

Provides an introduction to the feld study group

on the theoretical background o the project,

methodological issues and the context o thespecifc event

Plans the feld study work together with the

feld study group and in co-operation with the

reerence person

Leads and monitors the feld study work

Leads the discussion o the feld study group on

the observations and interviews

Ensures the writing o a drat report

Reerence person o the host organisation

I possible provides a meeting room and a beamer I needed provides translators, stewards

Keeps in contact with the feld study co-ordinator

and the project co-ordinator or update inorma-

tion

Gives an updated briefng at the beginning o the

feld study days

Arranges or ollow-up interviews, i possible

Field study members

Develops a feld study plan together with the feld

study co-ordinator




Keeps to the feld study plan and stays with his/

her partner

Keeps in contact with the feld study co-ordinator

Brings suitable clothing

Brings insurance papers

Brings useul feld study equipment:

• A bottle o still water (actually against thirst,

but can also be good to wash o tear gas)

• Energy or ruit bars

• GPS-capable PDA/Smartphone (i available)

• Spare clothes (sweatshirt, rain jacket, baseball

cap)

• Money (coins and banknotes in small

denominations)

• Sunscreen

E) Checklist or the eedback meetingResponsibility o the project management

Arranges ight tickets

Responsibility o the reerence person o the host

organisation


Makes hotel reservations

Arranges local transport (i necessary)

Arranges meeting acilities

Arranges meeting with commander




F) Saety and insurance matters duringfeld studies

The steering committee decided the ollowing guide-

lines or the feld study and that the saety issues will

be monitored.

Saety during feld studies

The peer review methodology is a participant-

observation methodology, where the intention is to

inuence the situation as little as possible. There are

two important principles regarding the feld study

members” behaviour related to this: Not to interere

or disturb the police operation and to put their own

saety beore the interest o the research.

The observers need to be able to sense and read

the situation and keep a distance i things are being

assessed as getting violent or dangerous. In each pair

o observers, there is a police ofcer trained in publicorder management. The host organisation may also

provide a scout, who also will be particularly helpul.

Each feld study pair will have a letter rom the

host organisation explaining who they are and why

they are there. Accreditation will also be arranged i

needed by the host.

The experiences rom prior feld studies are that

there have been very ew instances o violence when

the feld study members have been in danger, because

o the points described above. It is important, how-

ever, to have discussed these matters beorehand andto have a mental preparedness o how to act should

instances occur.

Dress code

It is essential that feld study members wear neu-

tral clothes to deect attention rom them as being

connected with a policing organisation or a protest

group. To do so would be counterproductive and may

lead to instances where they could be targeted by

protestors or the police.

Saety briefng prior to deployment

There will be a saety briefng during the plan-

ning day or all feld study members regarding the

potential that they may fnd themselves in a volatile

situation.

Non-police ofcer study members will be remind-

ed that when deployed they should take cognisance

o any direction given by their police ofcer partner.

This might involve sel-protection or a requirement

to vacate immediately a particular location i it is

assessed as becoming too volatile. The situation then

needs to be observed rom a sae distance. Police

ofcers are trained, or should be, in dynamic risk

assessment, which brings control measures to poten-

tially volatile incidents. At all times, members must

adhere to instructions or orders given rom the police

ofcers in the police operation.

Field study members should also be aware o the potential or conrontation rom police ofcers

policing the event because feld study members could

be misidentifed as part o the demonstration. It is

important that the observers tell the truth about why

they are there.

When out on the feld, any saety issues should be

raised by the feld study members through the feld

study coordinator. The coordinator will give saety

directions to members and raise saety concerns with

the host and project management.

Use o Overt Photography

Whilst photos are very useul tool in terms o captur-

ing data to inorm the feld study, members will be

reminded o the potential that this could be misinter-

preted by protestors as police evidence gathering. A

control measure is to ensure that whilst one member

o the team is taking photographs, the other is keep-

ing an active lookout or potential trouble and target-

ing rom protestors.




Contact Details prior to deployment

Each feld study member will be asked to give next-

o-kin contact details or contact details o a work

colleague who can act as liaison, the details o which

will be lodged with the project manager/project

co-ordinator.

Saety debriefng

At the end o each feld study, saety issues will be

discussed in the feld study group in connection with

the exchange o learning rom the methodology.

Insurance matters

Prior to deployment

The reerence person will need to ensure that his or

her feld study members have adequate prior insur-

ance through their employer. Rules and regulations

are dierent in dierent countries. (In, e.g., the UK,police ofcers are covered under Police Regulations,

although they do need to seek out what is called a

Section 26 Authority, which ensures that insurance

is provided throughout the duration o their deploy-

ment.)

The reerence person also needs to ensure that their

feld study group members have a European Heath

Insurance Card, which he or she will bring to the feld

study event.

Each feld study member will be asked to sign a

declaration indicating and acknowledging that theyhave adequate personal insurance in place.

Inormation package

The points mentioned above will be part o the inor-

mation package provided beore arriving to the feld

study.

G) Field study report structure1 Introduction

2 Objectives

3 Methodology

4 Context o the event

5 Overview o the course o event

6 Observations related to the feld study

questions

7 Conclusions and good examples




H) Data collection by host reerenceperson beore the event

1. Describe the event

Please include time, place and the physical context

(pictures and maps are useul), earlier experiences

o similar events, the most likely scenarios, any hot

spots or critical points.

2. Describe the demonstrators

Please describe the reasons or the demonstrations,

what groups/organizations and how many will par-

ticipate, the goals and tactics o the demonstrators

and any communication and/or agreements with the

police regarding the event.

3. The legal context

Please note the rights that citizens hold with regard to

demonstrations in your country (e.g., Law o Assem-bly, and the like)

police legislation in relation to demonstrations

rules to handle demonstrations and public order

4. The permit process and the contact with the organiser

Please describe the structure o the permit process

(Responsible unit/administration, timeline o

registration)

In what way do the police keep in touch with the

organisers rom the day o the registration until

the end o the event?

5. Police organisation

Please describe shortly

the structure o the police in relation to the

policing o a public order event (i possible, please

provide an organisational chart with the respec-

tive areas o responsibility)

any guidelines or policing major events

6. The Police operation in relation to this event

Please describe the goals, strategy, and philosophy o

this operation

The risk- and threat-level assessment

The tactical options that you have at your disposal

and how they will be used in relation to this event

(e.g., containment and dispersion, use o tear gas,

pepper spray, water cannons, horse/dog units)

Are there specifc instructions on police behav-

iour in relation to this event? (e.g., a behavioural

profle or ofcers)

7. Are there any demands or the police/police ofcers

concerning communication and dialogue?

Do you use a specifc dialogue unit/communica-

tion team?

I so, please describe the position o the teams

within your organisation

How are the ofcers trained?

What is their task beore and during the event?

What is their role within the organisational struc-ture o this event? (e.g., are they connected to the

Gold Commander?

What rights/responsibilities do they hold in

relation to other parts o the police service?)

8. Social Media

Do you ollow social media in relation to this

event?

Do you actively make use o social media in order

to communicate with the crowd participants?

I so, how?




I) Guideline or observationsObservations can be carried out based on a number

o dierent conditions, or instance, related to the

degree o participation. In the GODIAC project the

observers will be in close proximity to the various

events, but they will not be participants themselves in

the sense o “participant observations” (e.g., Stott &

Drury, 2000). The reasons or not participating in the

event is that the observers need to collect inormation

rom dierent parties and cannot be seen as belong-

ing to a specifc group in order to get access to other

groups.

In order to be able to observe a situation, the

observers need to get close enough to be able to get

a good view o the situation and i possible listen to

what is said. This has to be balanced to avoid inu-

encing the situation as well as or the saety o the

observers. There are some rules worked out in theproject or protecting the security issues (see appen-

dix F). The feld study members will have a GODIAC

card and when needed a letter rom the Gold Com-

mander explaining their business; they may also be

accompanied by a scout.

It is important that observers are aware o how hab-

its and their own experiences inuence what they see

and also the dierence between observing, interpreting,

and valuing it. Focus should be on describing obser-

vable behaviour and happenings.

1. What is the situation, what is happening?

It is important to describe the local situation, not the

demonstration in general.

Example



Situation: Police ofcer in uniorm talking to

our demonstrators, two male and two emale

juveniles. The juveniles are taking part in the

demonstration. The demonstration is at a stand-still because o counter demonstrators.

2. Describe the participants

Numbers in the local groups, which are being

observed.

Gender, age, clothes, and type o uniorm and

equipment/ attributes.

Rank and unctions (or the police).

3. How does the situation develop?

Describe in as many observable details as possible

how the situation develops, who is doing what, and so

orth.

Example



Situation: Two police ofcers and three dem-

onstrators at the ront o the demonstration

are talking to one another. They look calm. In

all our corners o the intersection, uniormedpolice ofcers are hindering people rom getting

to the demonstration by orming a chain and

telling people not to get close.

4. What are the outcomes – consequences – results o

the local situation?

How was the situation solved? Was there reinorce-

ment rom others? How long did it take? Escalation or

de-escalation? Describe the role o communication in

the outcome o the situation.

5. What kind o communication is used? How does the

interaction take place?

Describe continuously both the verbal and non-verbal

communication. Remember that there will be combi-

nations o dierent communication in an event!

Examples o verbal communication

Talking or use o words to someone, directly or

indirectly. Note the wording and orm o commu-

nication (instructions, orders, discussions, media-

tion, negotiation).




Directed to a person/persons, or rom a number

o persons, with or without megaphone or loud-

speakers

Flyers or leaets; i possible, get one!

Banners, posters and signs with writing

Threats, shouting, chanting (verbal abuse)

Examples o non-verbal communication

Body language, acial expressions

Uniorm and equipment, including weapons,

sticks, freworks and other oensive and deensive

equipment

Clothing, masks and attributes

Banners and ags, symbols

Music and noise, whistles, dancing

Formation, movement, by individuals or groups

Use o horses, dogs, vehicles, riot ences, barri-

cades, roadblocks

Note i there is any violence. By violence we mean

physical violence against a person, with or without

actual contact (attempt). Note i there are visible inju-

ries and i “weapons” are used.

Note i there is any criminal damage. By criminal

damage we mean intentional damage to any prop-

erty. I the participant uses any “weapons or tools”

please note.

Action and reactionPlease note who started the communication or

interaction. Please be aware o dierent combina-

tions – that, or example, a nonverbal sign can trigger

a verbal reaction. What was the response and what

happened ater?

Aggressive vs. nonaggressive communication,

positive and negative communication. It is difcult to

describe; it has to be a subjective observation to some

extent. But i you describe the event and note the

wordings, at least you can indicate the meaning o the

content.

J) Guideline or feld study interviewsInterview ocus

How do demonstrators and the general public per-

ceive the role and behaviour o the police in this

event and in relation to past experiences o similar

events? (Field study question 4)

What are the motives and strategies used by the

demonstrators?

Are there specifc demands on or instructions

or police behaviour related to communication?

(Field study question 3)

Host question?

It is important as an interviewer to be aware o the

so-called interviewer eect, that the situation and the

respondent can be inuenced by the way the inter-

view is conducted, through the way questions are

ormulated or presented as well as by the conditionsand context around the interview. The willingness o

the respondent to tell the truth or to say what he or

she believes is socially desirable are also actors that

can inuence the answers.

The feld study questions contain aspects relating

to how participants in various groups (including the

police) perceive one another and the incidents that

occur during a crowd event. There is also the need

to complement the observations with interviews in

order to understand and add perspective to what the

observers have captured.

Remember

Objectivity – dont interpret any inormation; ocus on

collecting data.

Selectivity – try to fnd people rom dierent

groups to talk to.

Social desirability – they will sometimes tell you

what they think you want to hear!

Inormation vs. disinormation – sometimes they

will not tell you everything or even the truth!

Take photos! You will remember more o the situa-

tion and rom the interview as well.




Make notes o quotations that illustrate points made.

Note place, time and sex, age, rank and unction o the

respondent, at the event.

1. Interview as a ollow up on an observed

interaction, incident

What happened?

What do you think about it?

2. Interviews related to feld study questions

Demonstrators and persons rom the general

public

Why are you here, what do you want to achieve

and how?

How did you fnd out about this event?

What do you think o the police at this event?

Have you talked to the police or have they talked

to you? Have you been at events like this beore; i so,

which and where?

Can you compare this event with the previous

ones, how the police work, how they communicate

and interact with other groups?

The police

What is your task here at this event?

What is your experience o this kind o events?

Training?

Are there any specifc instructions on policebehaviour/communication?

What do you know about the demonstrators,

their aims and their tactics?

How did you learn this?

How is communication used (as a strategy, tactics,

and method)?

Have you talked to demonstrators, protesters

or the general public? I so what about?

Give examples.

K) Data collection ater the eventMedias views on the event

Demonstrators

Social media communication

Contacts with the police

Positive and negative experiences

Complaints

Injuries

Police

Debriefngs and lessons learnt

Face-to ace-interaction and communication with

the demonstrators

Communication on social media

Media inormation

Number o arrests

Number o injuries, complaints

Assessment o the use o social media




L) Evaluation orm o a feld study process

1= Do not agree at all 5= Agree to a high degree

1. The inormation supplied on the platorm beore

the feld study was very helpul

1 2 3 4 5

Comments:

2. I was well prepared or the feld study tasks.

1 2 3 4 5

Comments:

3. The feld study observations points and interview

questions worked out well.

1 2 3 4 5

Comments:

4. Were there any incidents when you did not eel

sae during the feld study?

Yes No

Comments:

5. Advice or the planning and management o the

next feld study

6. Advice or the next feld study group members

7. Any other comments or advice



Utgivare

Rikspolisstyrelsen

Produktion

GODIAC-projektet i samarbete med

Polisens verksamhetsstöd,

inormationsenheten

Beställning

Rikspolisstyrelsen

Kundcentrum, teleon 114 14

Diarienr.

PoA-109-4029/09

ISBN

978-91-86791-02-5

Upplaga

1:a tryckning: Apr 2013, 300 ex

Tryck

Rikspolisstyrelsens eget tryckeri,

Stockholm, 2013

Grafsk orm

Citat

Foto

GODIAC-projektet



www.polisen.se

With the fnancial support rom the Pr evention o and Fight against

Crime Programme o the European Union

European Commission-Directorate- General Home Aairs.

HOME/2009/ISEC/AG/182

GODIAC - Field Study Handbook 2013

Documents

Transcript of GODIAC - Field Study Handbook 2013