Search results

This paper is an in‐depth analysis of community policing in Hong Kong. It includes an outline of the evolution of community policing in Hong Kong, identifies the structural arrangements for the practice of community policing, examines major community‐based programs that have been launched, evaluates the performance of this strategy, and considers constraints on these policy initiatives. It shows that this community effort has already gone beyond the confines of promoting community relations in Hong Kong. The results have been encouraging. They include a significant improvement in the quality of police‐public interactions, the engagement of the public and their increased support in crime control and prevention, and the beginning of the conversion of traditional police enforcement to that of police services. However, the Force's use of community policing schemes predominantly for the pragmatic purpose of crime control has accounted for the lack of breakthroughs in forging a strategic partnership with the public to promote a secure and harmonious environment.

This article addresses the relationship of universities to their changing regulatory environments internationally.

This article updates analysis published in 2004 exploring the contrasting modes of, and key trends in, regulation of higher education across eight OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) states. The article offers a wider analysis of the changing patterns of regulation rooted in mutuality, oversight, competition and design, and the implications for the management of higher education institutions.

Since 2004, higher education has seen more growth in oversight-based and competition-based regulation, but also some decentralization of regulation as an increasing cast of actors, many international and transnational in character, have asserted themselves in key aspects of the regulatory environment. This article explores the implications of these changes in the regulatory mix over higher education for the ways that universities manage their regulatory environment, arguing first, that there is significant evidence of meta-regulatory approaches to regulating universities, and second, that such a meta-regulatory approach is consistent with an emphasis on university autonomy, raising a challenge for universities in how to use the autonomy (variable by country) they do have to manage their environment.

This article offers an original analysis of how universities might most appropriately respond, deploying their autonomy, however variable, to address their external regulatory environment. The author suggests we might increasingly see the external regulatory environment as meta-regulatory in character and universities making more use of reflexive governance processes.