Â鶹ÒùÔº

Police spending will rise by a real-terms between now and 2028–29, the government announced in its latest spending review, drawn from local . The government says this will help its mission to put 13,000 neighborhood police on the streets, and "keep communities safe."

Police say this is to meet the government's , particularly on cutting knife crime and violence against women, and that it is likely to be by pay rises for police.

The awkward truth, however, is that marginal changes to police funding and hiring make little difference to crime either way. to policing budgets in the 2010s were accompanied by declining crime, including and antisocial behavior.

Widespread security improvements were responsible for the close to 90% reductions in many crime types. For example, engine immobilizers , and secure household doors and windows .

Crime has been across developed countries for decades. But those countries vary greatly in policing practices and funding, so it is clear more policing was not the cause.

American policing researcher pioneer David Bayley wrote : "The police do not prevent crime. This is one of the best-kept secrets of modern life. Experts know it, the police know it, but the public does not know it. Yet the police pretend they are society's best defense against crime and continually argue that if they are given more resources, especially personnel, they will be able to protect communities against crime. This is a myth."

This does not mean we don't need police—we do. If there were no police, crime rates would soar. The issue here is diminishing marginal returns (we're at the level where more funding doesn't have the same effect).

But it means the spending review debate had little to do with crime prevention. Rather, it was about how senior staff in public services routinely seek more for their departments. And following the spending review, police chiefs gave themselves an escape clause by claiming the increase is .

In recent years, we've learned can reduce some crimes in . For , burglary at construction sites can often be the theft of building materials and tools, so the crime problem can be reduced through improved site management (rather than just more arrests).

However, problem-solving is not easy and so is not widely applied. Simply patrolling hotspots does not affect the crime opportunity structure (factors that tempt, facilitate or precipitate a particular cluster of crimes).

Additionally, all types of crime, except homicide, are more likely to recur, and relatively soon, after prior victimization. And while policing to repeat victimization can reduce crime, it has in recent years.

A recent review by crime scientist Shannon Linning and colleagues examined the effect of on crime, concluding: "When a sensational crime happens, residents demand action. Often someone will cry for more police and more arrests … neither approach is likely to be helpful."

This makes it rather awkward that the government has recently committed to recruiting .

Since most people don't know the limitations of policing, both the government and the police have been able to maintain the illusion that more police means less crime. Academic police researchers will rarely admit it in case it risks their funding, and the media enjoy a perennially newsworthy topic. Taxpayers foot the bill as well as the emotional, and other costs of crime.

How to stop crime

There is, however, some room for optimism. What we have learned from the long-term international crime drop and against different crime types is that reducing crime opportunities is the best approach. With some , there is much that police and government can do.

A particular focus for the government and police should be encouraging businesses to take more responsibility for crime. Knife manufacturers and retailers should be involved in introducing a , the most common homicide weapon in England and Wales. The gradual approach over many years that (in which I was involved) recommended is too long: it should be done within this government's term.

A lot of other crimes, including computer-enabled crimes, are generated, facilitated or hosted by businesses. Internet service providers and network providers benefit from advertising and payments, including when they are being used for crime (from stalking and sexual victimization to fraud and terrorism).

Manufacturers benefit from theft of phones and other products that need replacing. Online marketplaces profit from usage and advertising when stolen goods are sold, which inadvertently , theft and robbery. Online banking and financial services also host significant amounts of fraud, and are now sometimes required to .

Government and police should develop a portfolio of incentives and disincentives to promote , to include and . When businesses have an economic incentive they are at preventing crime, as car manufacturers showed by improving security that brought .

Reducing crime opportunities is also the . When young people do not get involved in easy crimes like shoplifting, they do not progress to further crime, .

In short, extra police funding will not reduce crime. A shift in strategy is what is really needed.