Introduction to the Special Issue on Plural Policing in the Global South

Abstract

The articles in this Special Issue explore case studies from Global South contexts to show how plural policing is negotiated and navigated. They highlight variances in law-and-order maintenance arrangements, primarily in contexts where state policing is recognized as an adapted colonial import that exists alongside local and indigenous governance mechanisms, which at times exist in parallel or in conflict with each other. Collectively, the articles explore issues of globalization, legitimacy, hybridity, plurality, security privatization, and non-conformity with colonial ideas about policing in former colonies. Each article provides insight into scholarly acknowledgement of an ideological shift away from the recognition of state police serving as the sole stakeholder organization with a responsibility for maintaining law, order, and peaceful communities across diverse spaces in the Global South context. They further highlight the importance of understanding plural policing mechanisms in larger discussions about security governance in the Global South.

Across much of the Global South, the provision of security extends well beyond the remit of the state police. Instead, policing functions are distributed across a wide range of actors, including private security providers, community organizations, customary authorities, religious leaders, and international partners (Watson et al., 2022). These arrangements reflect what scholars increasingly describe as plural policing, a governance landscape in which multiple actors contribute to the production of security, order, and justice (Berg, 2021; Jones & Newburn, 2006). While plural policing is often framed as a contemporary response to state capacity constraints or the expansion of private security markets, in many Global South contexts, it reflects much longer histories of governance shaped by colonial legacies, legal pluralism, and locally embedded systems of authority.

Plural policing is particularly visible where formal policing institutions operate alongside informal governance systems and community-based mechanisms of dispute resolution. In many parts of Africa, Latin America, the Caribbean, and the Pacific, policing is better understood as a negotiated process involving multiple actors and overlapping sources of authority (Watson et al., 2022). Hybrid policing arrangements frequently bring together public police, private security providers, traditional leaders, faith-based institutions, and civil society organizations. The coexistence of these actors produces complex governance environments in which institutional constraints, social norms, and community expectations of justice shape policing practices.

Despite the growing prominence of plural policing in criminological scholarship, much of the literature remains dominated by research from Global North contexts. While this work has produced important theoretical insights, it often overlooks the historical trajectories and institutional diversity that shape policing systems across the Global South. In many countries, plural policing is not simply an emerging governance innovation, but a long-standing feature of security provision embedded within broader systems of hybrid governance. Understanding these systems, therefore, requires attention to the interaction between formal and informal institutions, as well as the ways in which communities negotiate and interpret policing authority.

This special issue responds to these gaps by bringing together empirical research from a diverse range of Global South contexts. The contributions examine how policing responsibilities are distributed among state and non-state actors, how citizens perceive and engage with different security providers, and how partnerships between actors shape the governance of safety and justice. Collectively, the articles demonstrate that plural policing is not a singular institutional model but a set of governance arrangements that vary across political, social, and cultural contexts.

The special issue begins with Logan Puck’s article, The Shadow Police: User-Pays Policing in the State of Mexico. Drawing on qualitative fieldwork and archival research, Puck examines the operations of the Cuerpo de Vigilancia Auxiliar y Urbana del Estado de México (CUSAEM), a large auxiliary security force that provides policing services for a fee. The article demonstrates how the organization’s ambiguous legal status enables state actors to participate directly in the security market while avoiding full regulatory oversight. Rather than presenting private security as a challenge to state authority, the case illustrates how governments may strategically maintain hybrid security arrangements that blur the boundaries between public policing and private security provision.

The second article, by Michael K. Dzordzormenyoh and Dennis Sarpong, examines the historical and contemporary evolution of plural policing in Ghana. Through a historical analysis of policing institutions, the authors trace how colonial governance structures, institutional reforms, and social change have shaped the development of plural policing arrangements. Their analysis shows that plural policing in Ghana reflects a layered governance structure in which state police institutions coexist with community-based actors and private security providers. The article highlights how plural policing systems evolve through historical processes rather than emerging solely as contemporary policy innovations.

The third article, authored by Francis D. Boateng, Daniel K. Pryce, and Nabi Youla Doumbia, examines plural policing in Cote d’Ivoire through an analysis of citizens’ perceptions of public police and private security providers. Using survey data collected from university students, the authors explore levels of trust and confidence in both institutions. Their findings suggest that procedural justice plays a central role in shaping public trust across both public and private security actors, while respondents reported greater confidence in private security providers. The study underscores the importance of legitimacy and public perceptions in shaping plural policing systems.

The fourth article, by Wendell C. Wallace and Russel S. Mason, shifts attention to the Caribbean by examining plural policing in Trinidad and Tobago. Drawing on qualitative interviews with private security personnel, the study explores the expanding role of private security providers in maintaining safety within public and commercial spaces. The findings illustrate how private security actors have become integral to everyday security provision while also raising questions about coordination, accountability, and governance within plural policing environments.

The fifth article, by Casandra Harry, Edward R. Maguire, and Ericka Adams, further examines plural policing in Trinidad and Tobago by focusing on collaboration between police and non-state actors in violence-reduction initiatives. The study examines the Hearts and Minds program, a community policing initiative that worked alongside community-based violence intervention actors. Drawing on interviews with police officers involved in the program, the authors show how partnerships between police and community actors can contribute to violence prevention in high-risk communities. The findings highlight the potential of collaborative governance models within plural policing systems.

The sixth article, authored by Anand Chand, Maureen Karan, David Mapuru, Jone Lako, and Karalaini Tubuna, examines the customary bulubulu reconciliation process used to address intimate partner violence in Fiji. Using a mixed-methods approach combining surveys and qualitative interviews, the authors explore Indigenous iTaukei perceptions of this traditional dispute-resolution mechanism. The findings highlight tensions between communal reconciliation practices and contemporary human rights frameworks, particularly in relation to women’s rights and survivor agency. The article contributes to broader debates on legal pluralism and the role of customary justice mechanisms within plural policing systems.

The final article, by Danielle Watson, Loene M. Howes, Tanya Trussler, and Sara N. Amin, examines plural policing and access to justice in Pacific Small Island Developing States through a case study of Tuvalu. Drawing on interviews with police officers, religious leaders, and community leaders, the authors explore how policing operates within a plural regulatory environment where state law enforcement coexists with customary governance structures and religious authority. The findings highlight the significant role of informal networks in shaping policing decisions and dispute-resolution practices in small island contexts. The study demonstrates how plural policing arrangements influence pathways to justice and raises important questions regarding fairness, accountability, and equitable law enforcement in resource-constrained governance environments.

Taken together, the articles in this special issue demonstrate the diversity of plural policing arrangements across the Global South. Rather than presenting plural policing as a uniform institutional model, the contributions show how security governance emerges through the interaction of state institutions, market actors, and community-based systems of authority. The cases presented here illustrate that plural policing is not simply a consequence of state weakness but often reflects negotiated governance arrangements shaped by historical, political, and social dynamics. By bringing together empirical research from Latin America, Africa, the Caribbean, and the Pacific, this special issue contributes to a growing body of scholarship examining how security is governed in hybrid institutional environments. The contributions highlight the importance of context in shaping plural policing systems and demonstrate the need for research that engages with the institutional diversity and historical legacies influencing policing practices across the Global South.

Collectively, the articles underscore the importance of examining plural policing as a dynamic and contextually embedded form of security governance. We hope this special issue contributes to ongoing debates on plural policing and stimulates further research on hybrid security systems, governance partnerships, and access to justice in diverse global contexts.