Historically, the Police have had a leading role among the institutions responsible for security. Striving for improvement of security, coupled with the growing awareness of the Police limitations has led to seeking out new forms of action (primarily the growing importance of crime prevention), and to a growing number of partners that act to increase the feeling of security and security itself among the members of the public. In the past few years, the local government has proven to be one of the key partners in this area.
"Partnership" – described in the criminological and criminal policy literature as cooperation between all entities that by virtue of their profession, interests, competencies or resources (material, financial etc.) may/ are willing to/ought to (depending on legal framework of the relevant country) work for local security – became the key point of reference for the description of the current state of affairs and changes taking place. The creation of ‘local partnership for security' has led to a revision of rules governing the division of responsibility between the government, the police, and local self-government, and between public and private groups and institutions at the local level.
The currently prevailing European model of local crime prevention coordination is evolving from spontaneous voluntary activities to a legally defined, institutionalised form of community security partnership. Research conducted to date (mostly British) shows that such multi-service partnership may have a limited effectiveness. Therefore, at present some of the key research goals are seeking the optimal form of local partnership organisation, identification of the underlying causes of difficulties with the coordination of local action for security and ways to eliminate or alleviate such causes.
Therefore, the main goal of this research was an interdisciplinary (legal, sociological, criminological) analysis of the local action for security coordination methods employed in Poland, and their comparison to those of other European countries. The analysis covers: a diagnosis of the current state of affairs, explanation of the causes leading to choosing a particular form of coordination, the mechanisms of the chosen form of coordination and any difficulties arising from them, and the forecast of possible future developments. The research focused on the state of coordination of action for security in Poland. In this respect, the implementation of legal solutions became the subject of empirical studies. Particular attention was given to county security and order commissions, and an evaluation of their work.
In accordance with article 4, paragraph 1, points 15-16 of the County Self-Government Act, the county executes legally prescribed public supracounty tasks. Their scope involves, among others: public order and security, and prevention of any extraordinary threats to the lives and health of the people and the environment. The role of the county is not limited to preventing threats and reducing their number. The county should serve as an important focal point for coordination of all preventative and reactive actions within the bounds of the county. It should also organise cooperation of various county entities involved in actions to improve public order and security. For this reason, the County Self-Government Act prescribes the creation of county security and order commissions, detailing, among others, the ways and means of their cooperation with the Police and other services, inspections, and guards, as well as the county and communal organisational units performing tasks relating to public order and security, local government bodies , and associations, foundations, churches and other religious groups, and other organisations and institutions (a similar approach can be found in a white paper by the Ministry of the Interior "Funkcjonowanie komisji bezpieczeństwa i porządku, Wydawnictwo WSPol w Szczytnie, Szczytno 2008).
Apart from the goals set out in the Act and the literature, commissions' activities may be analysed from the perspective of countrywide security programmes, such as the currently enforced "Razem bezpieczniej" aiming at the reduction of crime and anti-social behaviour. The main drive of the programme is the reduction of the number of events and behaviours that cause general social objection and fear, and one of its priority goals is activation of partnerships of various entities working towards the improvement of public order and security. The programme allows voluntary participation of counties and municipalities. At the county level, the county starost should have the leading role as the chairman of the security and order commission. Therefore, the commission – as a group of experts working under the leadership of the starost – should serve as an inspiration in the field of public order and security in the county. However, in light of the laws regulating commission's activities, a commission is nothing more than an advisory body, and its task is to offer opinions. Because of this, conducting a practical evaluation of the level of coordination and the extent of cooperation between entities committed to providing security at the county level, and of the effectiveness of their actions was deemed necessary. This evaluation allowed for drawing conclusions regarding the practical functioning of county coordination of action for security and order, the obstacles it encounters in terms of systemic regulation, organisational, financial and other aspects, as well as the real level of effectiveness of its actions.
The main research question that arises from the above mentioned aim regards the expediency of appointing county security and order commissions, and in the broader sense – the role of the law and legally appointed institutions in creating an effective coordination of local action for security (particularly crime prevention). This general question has been supplemented by the following detailed questions regarding the role of entities legally responsible for crime prevention, particularly the Police and municipal guards, and the role of the country, local government and private organisations in coordination provision. Another important goal was describing the cases of effective creation of such cooperation, to serve as a source of best practices for the counties, and determination of the ways science can aid local crime prevention.