Swapping Carrots for Sticks: Forensic science provider views of the Forensic Regulator Act 2021.

Accreditation Forensic Science Regulator Act Forensic science regulator Quality Statutory powers

Journal

Science & justice : journal of the Forensic Science Society
ISSN: 1876-4452
Titre abrégé: Sci Justice
Pays: England
ID NLM: 9508563

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
09 2022
Historique:
received: 04 06 2022
revised: 10 07 2022
accepted: 28 07 2022
entrez: 6 11 2022
pubmed: 7 11 2022
medline: 9 11 2022
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

In April 2021, the Forensic Science Regulator Act 2021 received Royal Assent, providing new statutory powers for the Forensic Science Regulator (FSR) of England and Wales. These powers are intended to enable the FSR to compel forensic science providers (FSPs) comply with quality standard requirements. The FSR has until now relied upon 'soft power' and arguments of benefits to be gained if FSPs achieve accreditation and adhere to the Code of Practice. Reaching the limits of persuasive powers, the FSR Act now introduces powers to penalise FSPs who remain unaccredited or fall below published standards. To gauge the potential impact, forensic scientists were asked to anticipate effects of the Act. Practitioners indicated that the new statutory powers could instil a sense of urgency among police force forensic science units in particular, in prioritising quality and investing in accreditation. However, there are significant capacity limitations which may hamper more widespread and sustainable change, such as financial pressures faced by FSPs, as well as resource constraints within the FSR role. Changing from a regulatory approach focussed upon voluntary cooperation, support and encouraging intrinsic motivations (i.e 'carrots'), for one reliant upon deterrence in the forms of threats of sanctions and punishment ('sticks'), could prevent real improvements in quality and undermine the achievement of regulatory aims. The FSR Act is unable to address problems with forensic science provision, that militate against the quality of forensic science services. Thus, benefits accrued from swapping carrots for sticks may be illusory and may ultimately prove counterproductive.

Identifiants

pubmed: 36336443
pii: S1355-0306(22)00099-5
doi: 10.1016/j.scijus.2022.07.010
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

506-514

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Auteurs

Emmanuel Nsiah Amoako (E)

Forensic Science (Department of Applied Sciences), University of the West of England, Bristol, UK.

Carole McCartney (C)

School of Law, University of Leicester, UK. Electronic address: carole.mccartney@leicester.ac.uk.

Articles similaires

Humans Male Female Adult Professional Competence
Humans Public Health COVID-19 Disaster Planning Curriculum
Internship and Residency Humans Dermatology Quality Improvement United States

Work stress and burnout among active correctional officers in Puerto Rico: A cross-sectional study.

Lisyaima Laureano-Morales, Nashaly Saldaña-Santiago, Nitza Malave-Velez et al.
1.00
Humans Male Burnout, Professional Cross-Sectional Studies Female

Classifications MeSH