residents barangay information system
Review of Related Literature
A review of widely published literature engaged in active and long-standing study in community safety led us to foreign scholarly works, especially to those in the United Kingdom. The UK has long decentralized their community safety platform to more local levels and this is similar with our own Local Government Code of 1991. The UK’s exemplary sophistication in community safety research, their prodigious output, vigorous scholarly collisions, and the prominence of community safety research in the UK may be attributed to the formal, published, occasionally state-commissioned research tradition which was already energetic even in the early 80’s. Unlike in the UK, there seems to be no heated crucible of peer critiquing, theory contestation and refinement in the Philippines’s community safety research – hence, we did not find readily available, published output. Fortunately, we found out that it is not uncommon for UK output in this area to be exported to other countries. In fact, the Australian Government’s Institute of Criminology and Latin American countries like Mexico benefit from British scholarly works like Paul Ekblom’s conjunction of criminal opportunity (CCO). These prove that leading works from the UK tradition have reputed applicability in other contexts worldwide. Furthermore, the wide acceptance of their most influential works gives credibility to an attempt to borrow their output for community safety research in the Philippines – such as this inquiry into a local patrol system.
It is convenient to assume that a patrol system is immediately aimed at community safety. But Paul Wiles and Ken Pease caution that community safety is a multi-pronged effort towards the minimization of the number and seriousness of harm in the community; not only crime, but also accidents, serendipitous misfortunes, social volatility, health risks, environmental undesirables, among others, constitute harm. Conversely, they argue that crime
A review of widely published literature engaged in active and long-standing study in community safety led us to foreign scholarly works, especially to those in the United Kingdom. The UK has long decentralized their community safety platform to more local levels and this is similar with our own Local Government Code of 1991. The UK’s exemplary sophistication in community safety research, their prodigious output, vigorous scholarly collisions, and the prominence of community safety research in the UK may be attributed to the formal, published, occasionally state-commissioned research tradition which was already energetic even in the early 80’s. Unlike in the UK, there seems to be no heated crucible of peer critiquing, theory contestation and refinement in the Philippines’s community safety research – hence, we did not find readily available, published output. Fortunately, we found out that it is not uncommon for UK output in this area to be exported to other countries. In fact, the Australian Government’s Institute of Criminology and Latin American countries like Mexico benefit from British scholarly works like Paul Ekblom’s conjunction of criminal opportunity (CCO). These prove that leading works from the UK tradition have reputed applicability in other contexts worldwide. Furthermore, the wide acceptance of their most influential works gives credibility to an attempt to borrow their output for community safety research in the Philippines – such as this inquiry into a local patrol system.
It is convenient to assume that a patrol system is immediately aimed at community safety. But Paul Wiles and Ken Pease caution that community safety is a multi-pronged effort towards the minimization of the number and seriousness of harm in the community; not only crime, but also accidents, serendipitous misfortunes, social volatility, health risks, environmental undesirables, among others, constitute harm. Conversely, they argue that crime