The Significance of Private Security in Contemporary Society - Literature review Example

The Significance of Private Security in Contemporary Society Introduction The private security industry has an important role to play in security provision in today’s world. However, when not regulated and accountable, the activities of uncontrolled and improperly managed private security industry can pose serious problems for policing too by inhibiting peace-keeping and development processes. Admittedly, the private security industry is very vast with private security companies, private military companies, internal security divisions, and non-lethal service providers. This work intends to look into the role played by private security in the present-day society. Literature review The very first point that proves the important role played by private security is the growth in the private security involvement in the European Union. Steden and Sarre (2007) point out that according to recent figures, over a period from 1999 to 2007, the number of people employed in private security rose from a mere 600,000 to more than a million. Despite this growth in number, it is difficult to have a clear idea about the growth of the industry because the services offered by such agencies vary greatly. According to the writers, some commonly seen services are manned guarding, alarm monitoring, security equipment production, transport of cash, investigation of crime, advice on risk management, forensic services, and so on. Thus, it has become a difficult task to estimate the exact strength of private security and its social role (ibid). However, the work provides a table showing the presence of private security in various states in European Union. A look into the table proves that in many states ranging from Estonia, Hungary, Ireland, Luxembourg, Poland, and United Kingdom, there are more private security personnel than total police (ibid, 225). The scholars point out two reasons behind this increase in the presence of private security. The first reason, according to the scholars, is the natural growth as a result of the belief that private security is a suitable way of dealing with the increasing threat of lawlessness in the society. According to Steden and Sarre (2007), the second reason is the ‘marketisation’ and ‘commodification’ of security that allowed transnational security firms to take birth. As a result of this diversification of commercial security activities, it has become possible for such private security firms to enter such national and sub-national institutions like fire departments, ambulance services, car assistance services, custodial services, and even military operations (ibid, 228). Steden (2007), in his Privatizing policing: describing and explaining the growth of private security looks into the reasons that resulted in the increasing role of private security, and points out that the first reason behind this trend is the increasing crime and related problems. It is pointed out by the scholar that there is a universal sensitivity towards lack of safety and insecurity that is exploited by the private security industry. As a result, the present day people live in a constant fear of crimes, giving more and more roles to private security. Another thought-provoking revelation comes from the scholar that the excessive level of freedom enjoyed by the westerners too is a reason behind this increase in crime, and thus in private security. For example, it is this freedom to be blamed for the increased violence among the ego-focused youth (ibid, p. 36). Another important point as put forward by Steden (2007) is the growth of mass private property over these years along with changes in spatial ordering. To illustrate, in the modern societies, there are separate airport terminals, business parks, shopping centers, entertainment districts, and residential areas. Evidently, these all areas possess various security needs. Life in city means closer contact on the one hand, and on the other, it also means isolation, alienation, and anonymity. For example, modern multiplexes in cities are vast places which are publicly accessible but are privately owned. As a result, there is a limit in the policing service expected from the public police, and hence, security needs are met using private agencies. According to Jones and Newburn (1999), the strongest proof of mass private property is seen in the retail sector in the United Kingdom. To illustrate, the period after 1970s has seen a sharp rise in the presence of supermarkets, superstores, retail parks, and shopping centers. Thus, the number of private shopping malls rose from mere 200 to more than 1000 in the twenty year period from 1970s to 1990s (ibid, p. 234). Another groundbreaking revelation comes from Steden (2007) that the development of communal spaces too is a factor that leads to the increasing involvement of private security personnel. For example, today’s urban space is full of such capsular residential areas which are rightly called gated communities, restrictive clubs, and pubs where only members are allowed access. Thus, here, the need of private security is not only to prevent crimes, but also to restrict access. There are various other important factors that influence the increasing dependence on private security agencies today other than rising wealth. One of them is the influence of insurance companies. For example, the companies that provide insurance coverage are likely to insist on certain tight security measures that cannot be expected from governmental policing. In addition, such companies may offer attractive discounts to such customers who own preventive technologies. Here, one has to remember the fact that companies that have not ensured adequate security measures are in danger of getting sued for the costs of criminal deeds. So, no one loves to risk ones fortunes for the possible crime. Another point that leads to increased private security involvement is ‘Disneyisation’ of society as propounded by Bryman (2004, pp. 1-3). These Disneyised societies are marked by the ideology of capitalism, commercialisation and consumption. However, to run these systems in their full potential, there is the need for control; a control that is both strict and soft-handed at the same time; a task presently being undertaken by private security (ibid). Two other points as identified by Steden (2007) are the overburdened public police force and the limited budget governments offer to policing. Admittedly, present day police forces are marked by their limited ability to communicate with communities and to identify the problems there. This general notion about the inability of the police force gives birth to more and more private security agencies. According to Bryman (2004), there is one more reason that leads to increased privatisation of security sphere. That is the central government policy that is aimed at privatising policing tasks. To illustrate, it is pointed out by the scholar that several European governments have started contracting-out important security tasks to private contractors (ibid). Thus, according to a Reuter report (Evans, 7 July 2011), there are more private security guards than police in the world. However, the situation is not well accepted by all the critics. There are a large number of people who believe that there is the need to have adequate provisions through legislative, regulatory and oversight safeguards. It is claimed that without such provisions, the quality of service provided by such private agencies is likely to go down, at least in some cases. Secondly, without adequate state control over such agencies, such organisations may pose a threat to state law enforcement. Thirdly, with such power and weapons in hand, these organisations can become fronts of organised crime if there is no governmental supervision. In order to meet the needs of the time, it is suggested by Richards and Smith (2007) that all states should come up with a national policy that regulates the role of private security sector and also its relationship with the state security agencies. The policy should clearly mention such points as the elements of eligibility for license, the period of license, firearms to be allowed, the arms restricted, and codes of conduct (ibid). Findings and recommendations From the review, it becomes evident that private security involvement in the sphere of providing protection has become even greater than that offered by governmental agencies. So, presently, there are innumerous numbers of private security agencies who engage in a variety of services. Considering the varied nature of the present day societies’ security needs, it is rather impossible for the governmental agencies to meet all those expectations. Also, considering the ever increasing number and complexity of crimes, it is not possible for individuals or businesses to wait for governmental protection and risk their business. So, private security is a sphere whose time has come. Now, it is for governments to ensure that these agencies are assimilated and well-knit to the public criminal justice system so that the abilities of these agencies are utilised for the public welfare. In addition, it is necessary for governments to control the activities of these agencies as security agencies often get access to and utilise such weapons that are not allowed for civilians. In order to meet the needs of the time, it is suggested that rules and regulations be made by the states regarding the qualifying criteria and background checking, the time period for which agencies can be given license at a time, the kind of arms that can be allowed safely, the relationship between state police and the private agencies, and finally the codes of conduct for such private agencies. Conclusion It becomes evident from the literature review that presently the private security services have such a great role in offering and maintaining security in nations around the world, especially in the western nations. Now, it is for the governments to effectively utilise this trend as an opportunity to reduce the overburden on state police at the same time ensuring better public safety to people’s satisfaction. References Bryman, A 2004, The Disneyization of Society, SAGE. Evans, R 7 July 2011, World has more private security guards than police, Reuters, viewed 9 Dec 2011 Jones, T & Newburn, T 1999, “Urban change and policing: Mass private property re-considered”, European Journal of Criminal Policy and Research, Volume 7, Issue 2, pp. 225–244. Richards, A & Smith, 2007, H Addressing the role of private security companies within security sector reform programmes, Saferworld, viewed 9 Dec 2011 Steden, RV & Sarre, R 2007, “The growth of private security: trends in the European Union”, Security Journal, volume 20, pp. 222-235. Steden, RV 2007, “Privatizing policing: describing and explaining the growth of private security”, Doctoral Theses-Social Sciences. Read More