Building situated trust through “propinquitous policing”

Across Australia and New Zealand, police attract favourable perceptions of trust and legitimacy. Despite this a significant minority of the population - averaging between 10 to 15% - claim to have little or no trust in police and may not view them as legitimate. These numbers are often concentrated in certain communities, particularly LGBTIQ+, Indigenous, Torres Strait Islander, Māori, and Pasifika communities.  

In recognition of this many police jurisdictions have implemented initiatives to enhance trust and legitimacy. Yet by focusing on the pursuit of ‘perfect’ community perceptions of trust and legitimacy these initiatives can hinder long term trust and legitimacy by causing perceptions of under or over policing.  

Given this, we argue that ‘propinquity’ may serve as a better proxy for police-community relations, particularly in communities where trust and legitimacy have remained historically low. Propinquity captures the human tendency to form bonds with others due to nearness of place, time, relations, and affinity. In other words, familiarity may breed fondness and solidarity. By enhancing familiarity through relationships and micro-interactions, communities may be more likely to trust police in specific situations or under specific conditions, such as natural disasters.

In this paper we contrast traditional “trust” strategies developed by Australian and New Zealand police with the “situated trust” generated by way of rural propinquity in Tasmania. We suggest that for some communities, trust is too much to ask, and that propinquitous policing may be a more effective mechanism to engage those who may never trust police completely.