Goldstein's Criticism Of The Problem-Oriented Policing Model

It all started in 1979 when Herman Goldstein made criticizing comments on police practices of that time in a Crime and Delinquency article noting that the police are more so focused on the “means” of policing than its “ends.” Due to Goldstein’s criticism a number of studies were done to figure out the level of effectiveness concerning policing methods of that time. Goldstein then introduced a new policing model called “problem-oriented policing” or POP for short, to empathize the call for police to focus more on problems instead of the everyday management of police agencies. POP was widely adopted and accepted by a large number of policing agencies. In 1987 John E. Eck and William Spelman elaborated and extended Goldstein’s model idea to create a straightforward model for implementing POP. Eck and Spelman created

POP was adopted by major federal agencies and national policing groups as well as numerous policing agencies. POP was widely praised and acclaimed being named as “a powerful tool in the policing arsenal” and even named an award after the method. While the method was widely practiced and praised no one bothered to really review and test out POP is a systematic manner. In the literature I am reviewing, the authors synthesized both published and unpublished practical evidence on the effects of POP on crime and disorder. They went beyond studies performed before theirs by taking on more of a comprehensive approach, identifying POP studies instead of narrative reviews and summing up knowledge about previous studies using “metaanalytic statistical approaches” (Lipsey and Wilson, 2001), they also didn’t rely on counting the number of studies that reach a specific level of evidence, which is common in prior reviews (“vote counting approach”). This literature review whether or not POP is effective in reducing crime and disorder by responding to the following