Abstract
This paper contributes to research on the reporting of hate crime/incidents from a critical socio-spatial perspective. It outlines an analysis of third party reporting of hate crimes/incidents in the North East of England, based upon the work of Arch (a third party hate crime/incident reporting system). The data set is one of the largest of its kind in the UK and therefore presents a unique opportunity to explore patterns of reporting across different types of hate crimes/incidents through a system designed to go beyond criminal justice responses. Whilst not downplaying the significance of the harmful experiences to which this data refers, we are very aware of the limitations of quantitative and de-humanised approaches to understanding forms of discrimination. Therefore the paper adopts a critical position, emphasising that interpretation of the data provides a partial, yet important, insight into everyday exclusions, but also cultures and politics of reporting. While the data records incidents across the main ‘monitored strands’, analysis here particularly focuses on those incidents recorded on the basis of ‘race’ and religion. Our analysis allows us to both cautiously consider the value of such data in understanding and addressing such damaging experiences - but also to appreciate how such an analysis may connect with the changing landscape of reporting and the politics of austerity.
Highlights
This paper considers the value and limits of third party recording of hate crimes/incidents1 and its fit with an approach which takes seriously both the social construction of knowledge and the human damage wrought by such incidents
The use of quantitative approaches in understanding experiences of violence that are categorised as hate crimes/incidents is problematic in that through categorisation we achieve simplification
There are clearly implications here in relation to specialist services and resistance to more generic forms of third party reporting, such as that recently suggested by the previous London Mayor
Summary
This paper considers the value and limits of third party recording of hate crimes/incidents and its fit with an approach which takes seriously both the social construction of knowledge and the human damage wrought by such incidents. The data references experiences not captured through other data sources As such it offers a unique opportunity to explore cultures of reporting through an analysis of the patterns in and between different categories of reported incidents in this geographic context. We outline the historical context of third party recording more broadly and in relation to our case study area/project, before setting out our critical approach to the data collected through Arch. Following this we provide an analysis in two forms. It is contended that the implications of this go beyond just a more accurate appreciation of societal trends
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
