POLICING
Policing the Divide: A tale of many neighbourhoods
Public dissatisfaction with UK policing is widespread, whereas crime concentrates. We explore implications for the new Crime and Policing bill.
Ipsos MRP Model
Comparison data
Note: For optimal experience, we recommend browsing maps on desktop.
Key findings
Public dissatisfaction with UK policing is widespread, particularly in deprived urban areas with high crime rates.
net satisfaction with policing across the UK.
net satisfaction with policing in areas with high levels of crime.
10/10
London and the West Midlands account for all 10 local authorities with the lowest satisfaction scores.
Satisfaction with policing across the UK
19%
satisfied
52%
dissatisfied
UK policing faces a crisis of trust
The British police force enters 2025 burdened by a multitude of challenges. Public trust, once a cornerstone of the institution, has eroded. While measuring trust is complex, various metrics point to a decline. Less than half (48%) of the population viewed their local police as “trustworthy” in 2023 – an 8 point drop from 2022. Potential factors behind this decline include the impact of the misconduct scandals, concerns about procedural justice, and lack of personal connections with officers.
This decline in trust is reflected in our new data on the public’s overall satisfaction with the police’s ability to tackle crime and anti-social behaviour (ASB). A depressing -33% net satisfaction score paints a worrying picture, with only 19% satisfied and 52% dissatisfied with the quality of policing across the UK. This should be a cause for serious concern for the new Government. Plan for Change (published December 2024) and the upcoming Crime and Policing bill (announced in the King’s Speech in July 2024) should aim to address these issues and make good on Labour mission to “take back our streets”. While the devil is in the detail, the Plan for Change has already promised 13,000 more bobbies on the beat and a focus on community policing.
This national picture needs to be grounded in an understanding of local differences. Our MRP reveals a diverse geographical tapestry of satisfaction levels – with significant variance by Police Force Area (PFA). While all PFAs have negative net satisfaction scores, they are particularly low among larger metropolitan urban areas. For instance, six of the ten bottom net satisfaction scores are covered by the Metropolitan Police in London (e.g. -53% in Tower Hamlets, -49% in Barking and Dagenham), or City of London Police (-50%), with the other four in the Staffordshire PFA (-49% in Stoke-on-Trent, -46% Tamworth) and West Midlands Police (-49% in Birmingham, -47% Sandwell). Some of the least negative net satisfaction scores were reported among rural areas covered by the Police Service of Northern Ireland (e.g. -9% in Mid Ulster, -13% in Fermanagh and Omagh), Police Scotland (e.g. -10% in the Shetland and Orkney Islands), and Dyfed-Powys Police (e.g. -16% in Ceredigion).
In addition to urbanity, deprivation appears to be a key factor behind these mixed satisfaction rates with policing. Those in the most deprived quintile had a net satisfaction score of just -45%, compared with -23% for those in the least deprived quintile. These most deprived areas all experience high levels of deprivation across multiple factors, including income, employment, education and health.
London, the North of England and the West Midlands experience the lowest satisfaction scores, while rural areas, particularly in Northern Ireland and Scotland, report higher satisfaction.
The reality of crime
Our MRP reveals that satisfaction with policing broadly correlates with recorded crime statistics. Nationally, over half (56%) of residents in PFAs with the highest crime rates (over 90 offences recorded per 1,000 people) express dissatisfaction with policing effectiveness on crime and ASB, resulting in a net satisfaction score of -40%. In contrast, dissatisfaction is lower (-49%) in areas with lower crime rates (under 80 offences per 1,000 people ), with a -28% net satisfaction score. This link appears stronger at the local level. For example, high crime areas like Cleveland, West Midlands, the Met, and West Yorkshire all report high levels of public dissatisfaction with policing. Conversely, areas like Norfolk, Suffolk, and Thames Valley experience lower crime rates and correspondingly lower dissatisfaction.
However, crime rates don’t tell the whole story. Other factors clearly influence satisfaction levels, including individual perceptions of safety, direct interactions with police officers, procedural justice, community relations, and socioeconomic conditions. This is illustrated by our data: Staffordshire, despite relatively low crime rates (75 offences per 1,000 people), report high dissatisfaction, potentially due to the riots experienced during Summer 2024.
Satisfaction levels broadly correlate with recorded crime statistics, with higher crime areas reporting greater dissatisfaction.
Hyper local crime requires hyper local interventions
Given the local nature of crime and ASB, the Government’s focus on neighbourhood and community policing, as outlined in Plan for Change, seems to be a step in the right direction. Crime concentrates – there are numerous studies confirming that crime and ASB are not uniformly spread across the UK, but tend to reoccur within particular neighbourhoods and streets, or to certain people.
Our MRP data, while not perfectly mirroring crime rates at the local authority or police force area level, underscore this hyper-local nature of crime. Our research on ASB “hotpots” reveals that crime and ASB can be a hyper-localised issue – at an even more granular level than our MRP - impacting a very small geographical area (e.g. a section of streets, a green area, a shopping centre, or even one specific pub or club). This aligns with the Youth Endowment Fund’s finding that 50% of violent crime in England and Wales occurs in just 2% of street segments. These findings suggest that a truly localised policing strategy, with clear and systematic mapping of crime hotspots could be highly effective. The introduction of the Neighbourhood Policing Guarantee in the Plan for Change could further support this targeted approach. Local police officers, often possessing the best intelligence on these specific locations, can deploy resources with greater precision.
However, public dissatisfaction with policing is complex and driven by multiple factors. Beyond the local variations in deprivation and satisfaction, issues such as police performance, culture, funding levels, public misperceptions of police work, and broader criminal justice system challenges all play a role. Simply increasing boots on the ground or employing more targeted patrols, is unlikely to be the one-size-fits-all solution to British policing’s public relations crisis. Local police forces need a deep understanding of their local neighbourhoods, the drivers of crime, and the specific issues residents face. Assigning named, contactable police officers to each neighbourhood could be a positive step towards helping police foster better connections with local needs and improve community engagement.
How police engage with their communities is also crucial. Experience with, and confidence in the police vary across different groups in society, with ethnic minority communities often facing biased and unfair treatment. A single performance framework for all police force areas, while welcome in addressing inequalities, must be supported by timely and consistent hyper-local data. Folding the responsibilities of the Police and Crime Commissioners (PCCs) into mayors (as proposed in the England Devolution White Paper) could support more holistic policing while maintaining public accountability.
Building trust and improving satisfaction requires a collaborative, local problem-solving approach from police forces. This involves understanding the interplay of local issues and developing tailored solutions. Ultimately, the goal is tackling local problems with local solutions.
Local police forces need a deep understanding of their local neighbourhoods, the drivers of crime, and the specific issues residents face.
Hanah Shrimpton Research Director, Ipsos
Susan Jensen Research Manager, Ipsos
