Impact Of Colonisation On First People Population In Australia

The Aboriginals and Torres Strait Islander communities are the indigenous inhabitants of Australia. The Aboriginals and Torres Strait Islander communities have undergone discrimination, segregation and unequal representation in all sectors of the economy since the First Fleet in 1788 (Falls & Anderson, 2022). The Aboriginals and Torres Strait Islanders have shaped Australia’s face through a rich history. However, they have been socio-economically marginalised and neglected (Jones et al., 2020). Therefore, this report examines the impact of colonisation on First People in my local area by discussing their history and status on indicators such as health, education, employment, criminal justice and victimisation.

First People

My local area is the City of Casey, Australia. The original people that inhabited the City of Casey were the Aboriginals. For more than 60,000 years, two clans of the Aboriginal community occupied the Casey area (Casey Catch Up, 2023). The two clans were the Bunurong people and the Wurundjeri people. The identity of these clans was disrupted by British settlement in the 1780s.

Aboriginal Culture and Practices in Casey

The Aboriginal culture contained educational, socio-economic and health ties for the local communities before interruption by the First Fleet (AAPA, 2021). The educational culture was tied to gender roles and life skills (Altman & Fogarty, 2017). The socio-economic culture of the Aboriginal community was art and craftsmanship. The art and craftsmanship practised were weaving and visual arts (Vanessa, 2011). However, the British settlement in Australia modified arts to incorporate Western traits and culture. Music culture practised by the Aboriginal community was the folklore, sang and danced using the didgeridoo (Queensland, 2020).

Another cultural aspect that has been modified is health. The Aboriginals treated the sick using herbal medicines administered by traditional healers (Al-Yaman, 2017). However, with time aboriginal healthcare systems have been phased out with modern medicine and newer diagnostic techniques. Finally, conflicts were solved by community elders through special sittings governed by customary law. Crime and offences were punished by elders (Cunneen, 2020). Casey is now an administrative area governed by the Australian Constitution and used in court to solve conflicts and crimes.

Current Status

A disparity exists in all sectors for the Aboriginals and Strait Islander communities, as highlighted in the study “Closing the Gap” (Rudd, 2008). The First Peoples have been neglected with minute opportunities in health, education, employment, victimisation and the criminal justice system.

Health and Mortality

The Aboriginal and Strait Islander communities have been subject to declining health status and increased mortality because of preventable conditions. The decline in health is associated with the Aboriginal belief that health is governed by physical, social, cultural and spiritual factors (Salmon et al., 2018). The non-indigenous population is healthy because they practise Western medicine based on symptomatology. Treatment of symptomatology has led to Aboriginals and Strait Islander communities seeing Western medicine as an infringement on their cultural identity. Hence, a decline in health status and an increase in mortality rates. According to Panaretto et al. (2014), the Australian Government implemented the Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Service Sector (ACCHS) that integrates Aboriginal and Strait Islander community cultures in healthcare services.

Education and Employment

The First People’s education has been based on apprenticeship, novice, and real-life experience. This education modality often aligns with cultural and gender roles within the communities, with boys and girls being taught various responsibilities (Perry & Holt, 2018). On the other hand, the non-indigenous practice in-class context teaching focuses on scientific, mathematical and theoretical principles. The differences in educational systems have led to a knowledge gap between the First Peoples and the non-indigenous (Dillon et al., 2020). The gap is exhibited because most of the skills learned in the Aboriginal context cannot be used in modern forms of employment in the digital era, such as operating computers.

Employment disparities exist in Casey. Most people employed are non-indigenous because their job profiles demand in-class teachings and conceptual frameworks absent in the Aboriginal educational culture. Additionally, the First People’s training level needs to meet the standards for employment in most jobs (Finlayson, 2018). To bridge the gap, the Australian Government has introduced learning and teaching of Aboriginal and Strait Islander culture in schools (Harrison et al., 2019). The introduction targets an all-inclusive curriculum to ensure Aboriginals and Strait Islander communities get the same skill levels as the non-indigenous. This change was incorporated in the “Closing the Gap” framework.

Victimisation and Offending

The incidences of victimisation and offending are typical for the First People compared to the non-indigenous. According to Bryant and Willis (2022), the First People are subject to victimisation and offending rates resulting from home-based violence such as assault. Western Australian Aboriginal Child Health Survey (2012) argues that, on average, 49% of the First People have been subject to some form of victimisation and offence before 25 years. Non-indigenous rates of victimisation and offending are low in Australia because of laws that govern and prohibit victimisation. The primary reason the rates of victimisation are high amongst the First People is their low socio-economic status (Bryant & Willis, 2022). The Non-indigenous have fewer victimisation rates because of better social status, education and health systems.

Criminal Justice System

The First People in Casey are arrested regularly because of involvement in crime rates. According to the Australian Bureau of Statistics (2018), most prisoners are First People, accounting for approximately 28% of prisoners. The Aboriginals are involved in criminal activities through reiteration for colonisation, as explained in Stolen Generations (National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Legal Services, 2023). Additionally, high poverty rates among the First People make them involved in criminal activities. The non-indigenous are less involved in criminal activities because they understand the repercussions, unlike the First People. Also, involvement in criminal activities has been attributed to ontological, ethical theories evidenced in Aboriginal and Strait Islander culture.

How First People’s Experience in My Area Been Impacted by Colonisation

The educational experience for the First People in Casey has been affected by colonisation. Morgan (2019) argues that the First Fleet brought new education to Australia, leading to a decline in the First People’s educational culture. The advocacy for including Aboriginal and First Islander teaching in the curriculum has been met by adopting First People teaching conceptualised in the colonialist view and not the local communities’ view (Kennedy et al., 2019). The impact has been the inclusion of some Aboriginal and First Islander teaching and the exclusion of some, which lead to the omission of vital educational cultures (Markwick et al., 2019). Moreover, the current educational system needs to pay more attention to vital First People teaching, such as hands-on skills, and focus on fixed lessons that limit exploration. The First People’s educational culture focussed on exploratory skills to ensure socio-economic reprieve and upholding values. Therefore, this experience of omission of some First People teaching from the curriculum as non-essential has created a disconnect (Bodkin-Andrews & Carlson, 2014). Disconnection from the educational system has led to low employment rates for the First People in Australia because they need to meet the minimum employment criterion.

The healthcare experience of First People from colonisation has affected the delivery of healthcare services in Australia. The First People are concerned that modern health does not embrace their cultural multi-dimensional view of disease and the healing process (Dossetor et al., 2019). The First People see non-indigenous people delivering healthcare services in Australia as needing to understand their needs and culture because they came as colonisers. As a result, they tend to avoid seeking health, leading to deteriorating health status and high mortality rates (Kingsley et al., 2018). Moreover, the ethnocentrism concept has affected health delivery in Casey because non-indigenous view themselves as having superior beliefs to the Aboriginals and First Islander communities (Değer, 2018). This experience has led to a decline in health status.

Finally, colonisation has led to an increase in victimisation, offences, and crimes in Casey. Involvement in crime and victimisation has been associated with low socio-economic status (Douglas & Fitzgerald, 2018). The First People believed that colonisation took away their resources. Therefore, they engage in crime, victimisation, and offence is reiterating, especially in the suburbs of Casey (Tatz, 2017). Moreover, the invasion of the First Fleet was met with resistance from the First People. The First People that resisted were subjected to a brutal force that included exiling and purging the locals. Therefore, this tendency leads to high crime levels, victimisation and offences amongst the Aboriginals and First Islander communities.


The First Fleet in Australia led to the colonisation of the First People leading to discrimination, segregation and unequal representation in all sectors. The First People hold strong beliefs about their cultural ties, such as land rites, socio-economic, conflict resolution, medicine, and music. The First Fleet disrupted their culture, leading to health, education, employment, victimisation, offences, and crime imbalances against non-indigenous. The Australian Government has tried bridging the gap between the First and non-indigenous people through the “Closing the Gap” framework. Although these efforts are working, significant work must be done to ensure equal opportunities for the First People.


AAPA. (2020). Protecting Sacred Sites Across the Territory. Northern Territory Government.

Altman, J., & Fogarty, B. (2017). Indigenous Australians as ‘No Gaps’ Subjects Education and Development in Remote Australia. The Australian National University.

Al-Yaman, F. (2017). The Australian Burden of Disease Study: Impact and causes of illness and death in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, 2011. Public Health Research & Practice27(4).

Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2019). National and state information about adult prisoners and community-based corrections, including legal status, custody type, Indigenous status, and sex. Corrective Services, Australia.

Bodkin-Andrews, G., & Carlson, B. (2014). The Legacy of Racism and Indigenous Australian Identity within Education. Race Ethnicity and Education, 19(4), 784–807.

Bryant, C., & Willis, M. (2022). Risk factors in Indigenous violent victimisation. Australian Government. Australian Institute of Criminology.

Butler, R., & Ben, J. (2021). Centring settler colonialism in rural Australian multicultural: race, place and local identities. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies47(9), 2179-2197.

Casey Catch Up. (2023). Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Communities in Casey. The City of Casey.

Cunneen, C. (2020). Conflict, politics and crime: Aboriginal communities and the police. Routledge.

Değer, V. B. (2018). Transcultural Nursing. Nursing.

Dillon, A., Craven, R. G., Kaur, G., & Yeung, A. S. (2020). Support for Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal Australian students’ wellbeing at school. International Journal of Educational Researchp. 99, 101520.

Dossetor, P. J., Thorburn, K., Oscar, J., Carter, M., Fitzpatrick, J., Bower, C., … & Martiniuk, A. L. (2019). A review of Aboriginal child health services in remote Western Australia identifies challenges and informs solutions. BMC health services research19(1), 1-15.

Douglas, H., & Fitzgerald, R. (2018). The domestic violence protection order system is entry to the criminal justice system for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people—International Journal for Crime, Justice and Social Democracy7(3), 41. DOI:10.5204/ijcjsd.v7i3.499.

Falls, T., & Anderson, J. (2022). Attitudes towards Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in Australia: a systematic review. Australian Journal of Psychology74(1), 2039043.

Finlayson, J. (2018). Aboriginal employment, native title and regionalism.

Fogarty, W., Riddle, S., Lovell, M., & Wilson, B. (2018). Indigenous education and literacy policy in Australia: Bringing learning back to the debate. The Australian Journal of Indigenous Education47(2), 185–197. doi:10.1017/jie.2017.18.

Harrison, N., Tennent, C., Vass, G., Guenther, J., Lowe, K., & Moodie, N. (2019). A systematic review of curriculum and learning in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander education. The Australian Educational Researcher46, 233-251.

Jones, B., Heslop, D., & Harrison, R. (2020). Seldom heard voices: A meta-narrative systematic review of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples healthcare experiences. International Journal for Equity in Health, 19(1), 1–11.

Kennedy, J., Thomas, L., Percy, A., Dean, B., Delahunty, J., Harden-Thew, K., & de Laat, M. (2019). An Aboriginal way towards curriculum reconciliation. International Journal for Academic Development24(2), 148–162.

Kingsley, J., Munro-Harrison, E., Jenkins, A., & Thorpe, A. (2018). “Here we are part of a living culture”: understanding the cultural determinants of health in Aboriginal gathering places in Victoria, Australia. Health & Placepp. 54, 210–220.

Markwick, A., Ansari, Z., Clinch, D., & McNeil, J. (2019). Experiences of racism among Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander adults living in the Australian state of Victoria: a cross-sectional population-based study. BMC Public Health, 19(1).

Morgan, B. (2019). Beyond the guest paradigm: Eurocentric education and aboriginal peoples in NSW. Handbook of Indigenous education, pp. 111–128.

National Aboriginal & Torres Strait Islander Legal Services. (2023). Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander experience of law enforcement and justice services. Australian Government.

Panaretto, K. S., Wenitong, M., Button, S., & Ring, I. T. (2014). Aboriginal community controlled health services: leading the way in primary care. The Medical Journal of Australia, 200(11), 649–652.

Perry, L., & Holt, L. (2018). Searching for the Songlines of Aboriginal education and culture within Australian higher education. The Australian Educational Researcherpp. 45, 343–361.

Queensland. (2020). Aboriginal Ceremonies. Queensland Government and Queensland Studies Authority. Perspectives: Res008.

Rudd, K. (2008). ‘Apology to Australia’s Indigenous Peoples’. House of Representatives, Parliament House, Canberra. Speech as Prime Minister of Australia, 13 February. Accessed 20 October 2009. Available from:

Salmon, M., Doery, K., Dance, P., Chapman, J., Gilbert, R., Williams, R., & Lovett, R. (2018). Defining the indefinable: Descriptors of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples’ cultures and their links to health and wellbeing.

Tatz, C. (2017). The destruction of Aboriginal society in Australia. In Genocide of Indigenous peoples (pp. 87–115). Routledge.

Vanessa, M. (2011). Weaving magical baskets and sharing Aboriginal knowledge. ABC Local.

Incidence Of Asymmetric Information In The Decision-Making Of Market Economic Agents


Asymmetric information is a scenario where one of the parties in an economic transaction or business agreement (usually the seller) possesses superior knowledge than the other party (usually the buyer) (Asymmetric information problem, n.d). In capital markets, it refers to a situation where one economic agent (typically the seller) of financial securities possesses more privileged information than the other agent (usually the buyer). Asymmetric information can significantly impact the agent’s investment decision-making process.

Figure 1: Asymmetric information

How Information Asymmetry Impacts Decision-Making

Asymmetric information

Source: Corporate Finance Institute

Types of Asymmetric information

Asymmetric information can be classified into adverse selection and moral hazard. The effects of asymmetric information on decision-making for capital market economic agents can range from higher costs and market inefficiencies to reduced financial liquidity (Asymmetric Information, n.d). Mitigation strategies include disclosure regulation, anti-insider trading laws, and due-diligence research. Secrets and Agents; Information Asymmetry (2016) affirms the need for agent signaling, stating that “The capital market is known for the existence of information asymmetry between sellers and potential buyers.” (p.10). This assertion suggests that capital markets perpetually exist in a state of information asymmetry.

Asymmetric Information vs. Adverse Selection

Adverse selection is a scenario that arises when one of the parties in an economic transaction possesses better information regarding the features of a financial asset than the other party. Adverse selection is a scenario where one economic agent can access accurate but different information than another (Mailath & Sandroni, 2003). Still, information asymmetry triggers market pricing inefficiency. A case example is when one party (seller) possesses insider information regarding the poor financial health of a company and leverages this information to offload their stocks to an unsuspecting party (buyer) oblivious of the company’s financial state. The result is information asymmetry that can trigger market imbalance and suboptimal outcomes for the disadvantaged party.

Asymmetric Information vs. Moral Hazard

The moral hazard occurs when one agent in an economic transaction willfully provides misleading information or alters behavior by leveraging their asymmetry information, believing they cannot face the consequences of the outcome. In the financial markets, moral hazard may occur when the company’s management engages in insider trading. According to Secrets and Agents; Information Asymmetry (2016), corporate executives have an information advantage and have access to classified corporate secrets. Subsequently, there are high chances of their involvement in insider trading, thereby disadvantaging agents who lack privileged access to company information.

Asymmetric information vs. Market Efficacy:

Asymmetric information can partly be blamed for inefficiencies witnessed in the financial markets, such as market price distortions. Market prices ought to reflect publicly accessible information. Inefficacy arises when some traders possess privileged insider information not indicative of the company’s share prices (Asymmetric information problem, n.d). Consequently, the resulting situation causes mispricing, share price misrepresentation, and market inefficiencies. Privileged economic agents leverage asymmetric information to exploit the other party, causing market inefficiency.

Incidence of Asymmetric Information in Decision-Making

Financial Markets

The problem of asymmetric information can manifest in the financial markets during lending and borrowing. A case example is where the borrower possesses better knowledge and information concerning his financial state than the lender. In such a case, the borrower can exploit the asymmetric information to the lender’s disadvantage. Given the scenario, the lender will be incapable of accurately deciding the borrower’s creditworthiness, thus increasing the risk of a loan default. Kalou et al. (2013) concur that the problem of asymmetric information distorts financial markets, making it difficult for lenders to access accurate consumer information. Nevertheless, he affirms that the problem of information symmetry can be solved through information sharing and exchange. Given the limited information, lenders usually charge high-interest rates to compensate for the asymmetric information risk.

The Insurance

The information asymmetry problem also plays a vital role in insurance purchase decision-making. For instance, when insuring a car, the insurer needs more information on whether or not the customer will take good care of the car. In this case, if the insurer has advance information that the customer is careless with locking the car or that the tracking device will frequently malfunction, the insurer would not insure it. Subsequently, this scenario can lead to the problem of adverse selection and also presents a moral hazard (Nikolaou et al., 2013). The person insuring his car knows that his actions can lead to theft and ignores the risks involved, e.g., parking in risky places or leaving the car unlocked.

Similarly, someone buying health insurance possesses more information regarding their health than the insurer. Notwithstanding the multiple screening tests, the insurer cannot accurately identify all health problems. As a result, there is information asymmetry between the insurance buyer and the insurer. To deal with this problem, insurers raise health insurance premiums to compensate for the risk of information asymmetry (Barbaroux, 2014).

Stock market

The problem of asymmetric information can also adversely affect stock market investment decision-making. For instance, managers of Company A could have insider information about the company’s financial health. For instance, they may know the company’s share price is over-valued or under-valued (Asymmetric Information, n.d). Leveraging this knowledge, the managers may engage in insider trading, given their information asymmetry.

Asymmetric Information Analysis

According to Sloman (2006), asymmetric information is central to the principle-agent relationship. Principles can employ agents to transact on their behalf. He opines, “The crucial advantage agents have over their principles is specialist knowledge and information.” (p.11). However, considering information asymmetry, it is hard to determine in whose best interest the agent is acting.

In competitive asset markets, economic agents with accurate information typically drive agents with inaccurate information from the market. This long-standing belief is supported by market selection theory stating that agents possess exogenous knowledge. According to Mailath & Sandroni (2003), economic agents can use information asymmetry to alter commodity prices. Nevertheless, the privileged information that agents possess may not necessarily be accurate. Nevertheless, information accuracy is crucial in investment decision-making. Superior information grants an agent information advantage, helping them increase wealth. According to Kalou et al. (2013), information asymmetry would cease if economic agents shunned opportunistic behavior. He states, “Financial markets need more complete and accurate information about the financial structure and the daily operation of the firms….” (Nikolaou et al., 2013; p. 617).

Lack of information permits unscrupulous traders to operate—the more the information asymmetry between the agents, the higher the scope of deception. Sloman (2006) concurs that adverse selection can cause buyers to select poor suppliers. Still, a lack of information for insurance companies can cause higher risk consumers buying health insurance. He asserts that moral hazards permit rogue traders to exploit a gap in the contract to their advantage. Still, the moral hazard problem arises when a person who ensures a house takes significant risks knowing that the property is insured (Sloman, 2006).


Information asymmetry can significantly impact investment decision-making for market economic agents. Besides, it can lead to adverse selection or moral hazards responsible for market failure, inefficiency, and a high cost of economic transactions. Therefore, markets must eliminate information asymmetry to provide sellers and buyers with a level playing field to enable them to make sound economic investment decisions.


Asymmetric Information. (n.d.). Corporate Finance Institute. information/

Asymmetric information problem – Economics Help. (n.d.). Economics Help.

Barbaroux, P. (2014). “From market failures to market opportunities: managing innovation under asymmetric information,” Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 3 (1), pp. 1-15.

Mailath, G. J., & Sandroni, A. (2003). Market selection and asymmetric information. The Review of Economic Studies, 70(243), 343-368. Retrieved from information/docview/204333407/se-2

Nikolaou, I. E., Chymis, A., & Evangelinos, K. (2013). Environmental information, asymmetric information, and financial markets: A game-theoretic approach. Environmental Modeling & Assessment, 18(6), 615-628. doi:

Secrets and agents; Information asymmetry. (2016). The Economist, 420, 55-56. asymmetry/docview/1806159028/se-2

Sloman, J. (2006). Asymmetric information and market failure. Teaching Business & Economics, 10(3), 11-12. Retrieved from journals/asymmetric-information-market-failure/docview/231304782/se-2

New Strategies To Improve Public Trust And Legitimacy


Walker began the text with the notion that police were in a “National Crisis” and needed new strategies to improve public trust and legitimacy. He identifies many recent “best practices” in policing as the foundation for a “New Conversation” about police reform. Walker provides a clear “roadmap for the future “of police reform around principles, policies and practices necessary to achieve professional, respectful and lawful policing (Walker, 2018). This essay critically discusses one practice from each of Walker’s three areas, such as principles, policies and practices and how each impacts the future of police accountability and reform. I will also consider the strengths and weaknesses of each of the three practices and examine whether each practice would have limited success as many of the past or will the practice endure the challenges of an undetermined future.

Policing accountability and trust concerns

Despite the Trump Administration’s cancellation of two accountability-related police-reform programs initiated by the U.S Department of Justice (DOJ), signs suggest continued efforts to improve policing practices in law enforcement are still alive. For several reasons: both broader social-political environments surrounding these matters-and internal contexts within the profession offer cause for hope (Walker, 2018). The National Police Crisis currently afflicting the United States resulted from events occurring across the nation relating to Ferguson (Missouri) circa August 2014, initiating a heightened level of public awareness or concern over matters concerning policing accountability which would ultimately set the foundations necessary for future reforms. The passionate debates over required changes caused by this crisis occurred primarily among national law-enforcement entities; these gradually coalesced into a “New Conversation” around necessary policing reforms (Walker, 2018). Central to this conversation are three primary sources that offer a success blueprint: the President’s Task Force on 21st Century Policing, the Police Executive Research Forum (a professional association of police chiefs), and court-enforced settlements issued by the Civil Rights Division of DOJ.

The way that the Trump Administration handled two policing reforms caused worry and alarm among a range of community activists who work on initiatives related to policing issues and experts in law enforcement reform. One such reform was what is often referred to as the “pattern or practice program” that came into being under Section 14141 of the 1994 Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act and was located explicitly within The Civil Rights Division’s Special Litigation Section (SLS) (Walker, 2018). This marks a significant moment in American history concerning policing because it saw federal authorities intervene directly in numerous local police departments to end unconstitutional practices while establishing broad governance reforms supported by judicial oversight. Over twenty years, SLS played a crucial role in revamping how police operate, earning acclaim from civil rights advocates and police reform experts alike. William J Stuntz hailed it as “the most important legal initiative for improving police regulations within twenty years” back in 2006. The program conducted almost seventy investigations into various law enforcement agencies since 1997, ultimately cutting deals with forty of them through consent decrees or memoranda of understanding (MOA), making sweeping policy changes concerning officer behaviour regarding the use of force, accountability measures related to unconstitutional behaviour like racial profiling and stopping individuals for searches without following proper protocols which were all geared towards ensuring better constitutional management within policing requirements (Walker, 2018). The program has yet to go without scrutiny from critics who are troubled by what they view as potential intrusiveness in local police affairs, exorbitant financial expenditures at the cost of municipalities, and exacerbation rather than the mediation of tensions between community members and those responsible for their protection. Despite these setbacks or shortcomings in efficacy demonstration, it should be noted that several evaluations from past settlements reveal positive outcomes for the program’s goals.

The National Police Crisis sparked significant action at a national level. In December 2014, President Barack Obama launched an exclusive task force under his leadership dubbed “the President’s Task Force on 21st Century Policing,” focusing exclusively on issues related to law enforcement agents. This marked a milestone as it was unprecedented in presidential history. The National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders, known as the “Kerner Commission”, was established to probe riots between 1964-1967, barely scratched the surface and only dedicated two chapters specifically to policing challenges (Walker, 2018). Consequently, many were concerned about how information regarding fatal shootings of young African American men by police officers had been handled previously.

Bolstering current policing practices hinges on addressing issues encompassing multitudinous aspects related to policing strategies. The recent legislation implemented constitutes wide-ranging rules under the auspices of three overarching categories specified in the Vera Institute’s Report. The foremost one revolves around” Improving Police Operations” (Walker, 2018). It endeavours to check problematic elements such as unwarranted use of force. It forbids chokeholds while also curbing racism and individual-based biases prevalent within law enforcement circles enforced by eleven states mandatorily. The second concentrates upon “Documenting Police Operations”, which primarily concerns itself with body-worn cameras, setting up guidelines that enable recordings, possibly protecting those who record interactions between civilians and officers, alongside wanting all police-involved shootings made public with laws governing this practice passed in twenty-eight separate states (Walker, 2018). “Increasing Accountability “bolsters independent investigations into cases wherein an officer’s firearm engagement results in fatalities or the creation of written policies to investigate deaths involving law enforcement officials. Utilizing a plethora of legislative statutes introduced during this period reflects an evident shift towards improving policing practices.

Principles, practices and Policies in future policing reform

Policing reached a juncture marked by public protests, investigative research, and intense debates resulting from the National Police Crisis. The Development of the New Conversation emerged as an answer to this crisis; it forms a critical transformative dialogue providing important guidelines necessary for governance to hold police accountable for their actions. A rough consensus is now visible regarding fundamental principles, policies, and practices required to steer future accountability-focused police reform endeavours. The main focus of this conversation revolves around addressing systemic issues like excessive violence, racial categorizations, and lack of transparency which plague the modern law enforcement system (Walker, 2018). The essence behind this renewed conversation is community engagement, increasing officer training programs and implementing effective oversight mechanisms. Additionally, this conversation highlights how resources could be reallocated toward social services and mental health initiatives to alleviate pressure on already overworked law enforcement agencies.

One notable achievement of the SLS program is its creation of a concise list of “best practices” for constitutional policing, which are now considered a fundamental aspect of both the New Conversation and police reform roadmap. According to the Civil Rights Division’s 2017 report, settlements often comprise similar reforms. Some investigations have even been conducted to establish reform standards that can assist agencies facing similar issues (Feeley and Rubin, 2021). Constitutional standards were implemented as best prison practices during the prisoners’ rights movement.

One of the best practices recommended by Walker (2018, p. 1824) in the New Conversation is “accountability procedures for command level review of the use of force incidents, including primarily a use of force review board (“UFRB”) dedicated to identifying problems in a department’s use of force policies, training, and supervision;” and it has a more significant impact on the future of police accountability and reform. Walker’s (2018) recommendation to establish an accountability procedure for reviewing the use of force incidents at a command level presents promising opportunities for advancing police accountability and reform. One proposed solution is to create a designated Use of Force Review Board (UFRB), which could enhance transparency via structured examination and evaluation processes while providing additional oversight over law enforcement activities. A significant advantage is that such a measure would go beyond typical investigations during incident responses; it could build greater public trust if completed impartially with external experts and community representatives participating as stakeholders on board reviews via inclusive membership appointments underlie this design structure. By intensifying compliance, mentoring subtleties like Use-of-Force Policies or training or supervision modules may be warranted when exposed as unacceptable practices or tendencies within organizations reviewed by board evaluations to guide implementations on predictable outcomes (Walker, 2018). Command-level personnel participation through such a UFRB is consistent with responsible decision-making, beginning at the top and enabling lessons to drive towards continuous improvement in policing culture. Thus, the UFRB can be critical in shaping future policy reforms via accountability and responsible leadership, engendering trust and improving practices. Accountability measures such as the use of force review board recommended by Walker greatly influence police accountability and their overall reformation process.

Accountability procedures like force review boards (UFRBs) carry strengths and weaknesses. While these procedures can enhance transparency, oversight, and meaningful reform efforts, there are concerns over their adoption in police departments due to resistance or limitations in maintaining adequate resources for UFRBs’ functioning (Breckenridge, 2018). In addition to this challenge is ensuring an independent and impartial review board process. This practice’s success depends on many factors, such as law enforcement agency dedication towards improvement along with continued public support for policing advancement combined with periodic assessments leading to modification while keeping up with evolving needs towards achieving improved outcomes in uncertain future circumstances. Increased transparency, along with elevated oversight and purposeful improvements, enable UFRBs to help strengthen responsible training methods for law enforcement agencies in using force, providing better community stability.

The most notable principle articulated by Walker relates to legitimacy. To improve policing practices and reform in America, The President’s Task Force on 21st-Century Policing issued fundamental principles in 2015. Simultaneously partnering groups such as PERF represented more prominent city Police chiefs while advancing policy recommendations around areas such as using force; de-escalation; tactical decision-making; training, among other relevant matters (Walker, 2018). The significant contribution of The President’s Task Force report was emphasizing legitimacy at the forefront of discussions around American policing. This issue had been concerning Police experts for some time and was later dubbed “New Conversation.” To attain legitimacy among citizens is one critical aspect identified by The President’s Taskforce report, which highlighted “Procedural Justice” as central to interactions between Police departments and members of society.

Procedural justice demands respect in how officers handle people, including introducing themselves, providing clear explanations of the reason for contact, actively listening to the individual’s concerns or queries they may have and addressing them promptly. The encounter concludes when an officer explains what the outcome of that interaction means. Importantly, these principles must apply internally within police operations. The Task Force’s efforts extended beyond its initial focus on legitimacy and procedural justice principles by devising ways to address polarization within police internal operations between management-level personnel and rank-and-file officers (Walker, 2018). With several notable contributions towards governing policing practices and addressing reform initiatives, including implementation of independent investigations for police shootings incidents; making information publicly available regarding stops or arrests recorded by local law enforcement agencies; sharing procedures documented within departmental policies; engaging citizens’ inputs during its approach towards policymaking; imparting de-escalation tactics onto its staff in active environments involving residents from diverse cultural backgrounds whilst also providing awareness into unconscious bias.

Legitimacy principles have both strengths and weaknesses. To establish solid relationships between law enforcement agencies and their communities, creating trust is paramount; this is where President’s Task Force on 21st Century Policing comes in with its core value of legitimacy. The legitimacy principle promotes actions deemed just, fair and respectful by police officers to create goodwill with the community they serve. However, creating such an equitable system could require breaking profoundly entrenched institutional practices or cultural biases within communities as roadblocks. Despite these challenges, it still validates how crucial maintaining trust is for policing’s future growth. Sustained efforts must work to resolve systemic issues while adapting needs through transparency into all processes for continued success.

The notions of policing recommendations delineated in PERF reports demonstrate significant potential and are highly relevant to forthcoming police reform accomplishments. The policies PERF recommended concerning control of police officer use of force included enhanced training opportunities, de-escalation techniques, and tactical decision-making implementation. Police departments are contemplating adopting de-escalation policies as part of their tactics to reform how they hold themselves accountable when committing excessive violence or brutality against citizens (Engel et al., 2020). Typically, such facilities perpetually emphasize aggressive methods when dealing with crime or conflict, which can lead to tragedy if left unchecked. De-escalation mechanisms prioritize non-lethal policing practices above other tactics, which may trigger unnecessary physical violence between defensive authorities and suspects as they have potential impacts on pushing police units towards better frameworks for exemplary conduct, especially where community-oriented policing is given priority leading to evolving levels of trust between the public and law enforcers (Engel et al., 2022). Additionally, de-escalation measures may help counter some of the issues perpetuated by a “warrior” mindset, such as officer training and cultural issues that contribute to partiality towards using overly aggressive tactics to resolve altercations. Re-orienting their attention towards maintaining peace among citizens and upholding a practical guardian mentality during policing would be a significant shift. It is important to note that enforcing de-escalation policies comes with obstacles that should be noticed as pointed out by Walker (2018), police agencies within law enforcement oppose utilizing de-escalation methods due to concerns surrounding officer safety.

Furthermore, factors could influence policy efficiency, including but not limited to officer discretion quality of training programs provided by departments (Tummers & Bekkers, 2014). To ensure successful implementation in reducing potentially hazardous situations safely, officers must be equipped with the necessary skills and empowerment through proper training, and resources must be allocated adequately. Nonetheless, implementing non-lethal alternatives and fostering a culture based on peaceful resolution has incredible potential when addressing topics such as police responsiveness while building a robust community trust network for future reforms.


The National Police Crisis ignited an essential conversation about police accountability and reform: a “New Conversation.” This dialogue culminated in better approaches to restoring public trust & legitimacy; Walker outlined critical principles, policies and practices guiding this transformation. One vital recommendation from Walker is the Use of Force Review Boards (UFRBs). Through impartial monitoring & evaluating use-of-force occurrences independently, UFRBs can improve transparency while enhancing accountability in policing departments. Implementing them would only be with hurdles like cultural or logistical ones, but overcoming them would guarantee their effectiveness. Even more critical are de-escalation measures emphasizing legitimacy as the foundation of acceptable policing. These are necessary for fostering public trust and non-lethal alternatives to thrive when met with prevailing cultural opposition or inadequacy in training & resource allocation. Thus, the effective deployment of these strategies is crucial to achieving genuine change regarding police accountability and reform.


Breckenridge, J. (2018). Civilians on Police Use-of-Force Review Boards: A Delphi Study of Six Police Departments. Homeland Security Affairs.

Engel, R. S., Corsaro, N., Isaza, G. T., & McManus, H. D. (2022). Assessing the impact of de‐escalation training on police behaviour: Reducing police use of force in the Louisville, KY Metro Police Department. Criminology & Public Policy21(2), 199-233.

Engel, R. S., McManus, H. D., & Herold, T. D. (2020). Does de‐escalation training work? A systematic review and call for evidence in police use‐of‐force reform. Criminology & Public Policy19(3), 721-759.

Rubin, E. L., & Feeley, M. M. (2021). Criminal Justice through Management: From Police, Prosecutors, Courts, and Prisons to a Modern Administrative Agency. Or. L. Rev.100, 261.

Tummers, L., & Bekkers, V. (2014). Policy implementation, street-level bureaucracy, and the importance of discretion. Public Management Review16(4), 527-547.

Walker, S. (2018). Not dead yet: The national police crisis, a new conversation about policing, and the prospects for accountability-related police reform. U. Ill. L. Rev., 1777.