How Law Enforcement Can Enhance or Detract From an Economic Development (Cluster)?

Clusters will likely be an important part of national growth going forward as they are tools to spur national innovation. Clusters can be seen as an interconnected network of different types of activities/transactions where they influence, enhance, or detract from each other to create a ripe economic environment for innovation and growth. Ensuring each of the inputs is functioning well is helpful for the health of the whole system which must maximize the return on the resource expenditures.

Where there is alignment between elements we are likely to see improvement in economic performance and outcomes through equilibrium/optimization/synergy. Law enforcement, justice systems, etc. are part of that discussion because they lay at the institutional foundations (societal-institution assumptions/contracts) that allow commerce to occur in relative safety and security (i.e. physical and economic existence. One might relate them to life & liberty. ).

First let us look at this very informative but slightly older article posted by Harvard that discusses some of the fundamentals of cluster lines of scientific development. Clusters and Economic Policy: Aligning Public Policy with the New Economics of Competition 

(Let me say I found an excellent discussion and analysis of economic clusters that predates mine by like 5 years or something. I'm curious going forward as I finish my how similar/different they are. There is a good chance that I likely read some of this work at some point and integrated it into my own. However, there are likely going to be aspects that will be unique so that will be interesting.) 

Positive Contributions of Policing:

Strong policing that has societal trust and adapts upward in performance will set the foundations for growth. For example, if you have lots of ordinance issues and blight that detracts from visitors, the local law enforcement can enforce codes and zoning restrictions in a way that has a positive effect on economic activities. The same can be said for drug use, theft, violence and other types of behaviors. You will see in this study that crime has an impact on the local economy and damages local credit worthiness. We might further conclusion that effective policing reduces crime and improves the economic underpinnings. Crime and credit: The empirical study of how crime affects credit ratings of large U.S. cities

The Negative Contributions of Poor Policing

When there are elements that are in misalignment between law enforcement and society there will be consequences. The Economics Policing discusses funding for departments and some of the challenges of how relying on ticketing often focuses more on minorities when compared to others. The same discriminatory behavioral multiplier would likely exist in clanship and/or hyper political-extremist environments where some are given benefits not available to everyone (i.e. two systems of justice where the application of law may be different. For example, providing constructive criticism of inappropriate behaviors could lead to violations of freedom of speech through the use of 3rd world intimidation tactics. Power over dynamics might be a more likely tool when dealing with people of religious minorities so as to create violations of freedom of religion. The two systems are based not on the actual laws, or the intent of law, but on the application of law as a symptom of biased filtered processes that quickly come to erroneous conclusions. A single officer could be addressed through training and/or removal but a departmental default would likely need an overhaul with greater outside oversight.). 

It would be fair to say that any intentional or unintentional discriminatory multiplier would likely have an adverse impact on local relationships and economic outcomes (This is one argument of potential likelihood not a justification. There are studies that show various aspects of that problem. One might denote this in a future formula as DM, or something similar, that can be measured and then determine to what extent that multiplier impacts decision making. A little like 'Fairness, Equality, and Power in Algorithmic Decision Making'). 

Thinking About What It Means

Policing can be a positive or a negative contributor to the economy (In my case I'm looking at clusters). Where it is done well it will likely improve the economic environment by ensuring the safety and security that allows commerce to function unimpeded. That will include fair and impartial treatment of our fellow citizens. Where it has adversarial relationships it might become less functional and/or less aligned to the needs of the greater society and thus incur economic penalties. A closed system without community engagement and/or without trust leading to lower economic activity (The case for that isn't really built here, but its the possibility.) We might say that human capital development relies on positive societal engagement and environmental prompting for performance. Policing can have a positive or negative impact on the environment based on their ability to meet the needs of society and the greater economic system.

(A couple of quick observations I have seen thus far. Policing that is highly engaged in community activities and maintains high standards seems to have more trust levels. I have seen in at least one case where policing becomes more squad like with its own rules and codes it creates barriers with the public. At the same time, there may be other issues with clannism and racial-religious undertones to behaviors and that can cause significant derailment in decision making. Thus, stronger department policies and redesigning aspects of the system may be helpful. The ultimate issue is to what? For this we should look to locations where policing has high community trust and performance. Sometimes we have to adjust the metrics. Briefly I think increased transparency/independent review of complaints might be helpful as well as greater training and diversity of recruitment. There is a lot lot more to this so we can discuss in the future.)

(I have a disclaimer here. I have a few reasons why I'm writing about this. Anytime we can improve a system, especially an area that has received significant concerns, we should set upon that path to be proactive. Also, there are beneficiaries and victims to good and bad policing. I have seen police do wonderful things and I have seen them mock our values and give a free pass to dangerous behaviors. So we want to create systems that encourages positive growth in a way that raises up good officers and curbs poor behaviors. To improve a system we should think about its wider influence in our society and our long term prospects. It is only one factor out of many factors that influence a successful nation. It is an important factor so we should consider any tweaks, adjustments or improvements when they appear to be beneficial. I support shared sense of direction and universal conception of democracy. I'm a light right Republican, not a politician, but certainly think working with diverse perspectives from major political perspectives is helpful to national development. i.e. the purpose of the blog. Probably not important in the grand scheme of things. 🤔🤷‍♂️)