By Galen Lamphere-England

Gaming is now the most profitable form of entertainment worldwide, with over 3.42 billion people playing some form of games, accounting for a market of $187.7 billion engaging across consoles, PCs, and mobile devices.1 Nearly nine in ten children in middle and upper-income countries play online games2 . While online multiplayer games foster social connection, creativity, and communitybuilding, they are also increasingly exploited by violent organizations, ranging from non-state armed groups in conflict-affected settings to hybrid criminal networks. These actors use gaming spaces to propagandize, groom, recruit, and organize, leveraging gaming platforms' social and technical features to target children and young players. This policy brief examines how gaming ecosystems are being exploited to socialize and recruit children to participate in organized violence and provides recommendations for policymakers, practitioners working with children, and the gaming industry to safeguard children in online gaming environments. Online gaming is neither inherently harmful nor a direct cause of violence, but its social and technical infrastructure is being exploited at scale by malign actors. 3 Indeed, as the American Psychological Association framed the issue in a 2020 resolution, “attributing violence to violent video gaming is not scientifically sound and draws attention away from other factors.”4 At the same time, specific harms are affecting children via online gaming today. To protect children and young players, industry leaders, regulators, law enforcement, and practitioners working with children must act now, establishing robust prevention, detection, and response strategies that ensure children can enjoy their right to play and their right to be protected from violence. Gaming’s prosperous future depends on ensuring its spaces remain safe, inclusive, and free from children being targeted by violent actors and organizations. This report provides a series of recommendations to help achieve that aim.

By Sarah Ferencz, Alissa Greer, Amanda Butler

This qualitative study examines how frontline police officers in British Columbia experienced and adapted to Canada's first formal drug decriminalization policy 1 year after implementation. Drawing on 30 semi-structured interviews and using thematic analysis with a policy alienation and street-level bureaucracy lens, we analyzed how officers felt alienated from the policy process and coped with this experience as frontline implementers. Key themes show that frontline officers experienced processes of policy alienation in various ways: they felt that the policy was misaligned with their frontline perspectives; the Policy undermined their ability to help people in their communities; and legal ambiguity surrounding the Policy was challenging to navigate. Their coping strategies revealed that officers interpreted and executed decriminalization in divergent ways.

Policy Implications

These findings have important implications for policymakers and police leadership considering drug policy reforms. Officers’ feelings of disempowerment and policy meaninglessness, especially in contexts of legal ambiguity, may lead to inconsistent or inequitable enforcement. Strengthening communication across police ranks is critical. Middle managers may help translate reform goals, identify resource gaps, and support effective coping strategies. Legal clarity should extend beyond policy updates to help officers reconcile overlapping laws and reduce liability concerns. While there are limits to policy consultation with frontline officers within the hierarchical structure of police institutions, reform efforts should still engage with frontline officers’ working logics. Training should address harmful attitudes and misunderstandings of drug use, clarify legal boundaries, and mitigate unintended harms of enforcement. Ultimately, effective drug policy reform in a multi-jurisdictional system requires acknowledging how frontline officers interpret and shape 

 policy within institutional constraints.

By John M. MacDonald, Aaron Chalfin, Maya Moritz, Brian Wade, Alyssa K. Mendlein, Anthony A. Braga, Eugenia South

Street crimes are thought to be inBy John M. MacDonald, Aaron Chalfin, Maya Moritz, Brian Wade, Alyssa K. Mendlein, Anthony A. Braga, Eugenia South

Street crimes are thought to be influenced by changes in ambient lighting; yet, most studies have focused on small-scale interventions in limited areas. It remains unclear whether enhanced lighting can improve safety on a larger, jurisdiction-wide scale. This study examined the first 10 months of Philadelphia's citywide rollout of enhanced street lighting. Between August 2023 and May 2024, 34,374 streetlights were upgraded across 13,275 street segments, converting roughly one third of the city's street segments to new LED (light-emitting diode) fixtures that provide clearer and more even lighting. We assessed the impact of these upgrades on total crimes, violent crimes, property crimes, and nuisance crimes. Our findings reveal a 15% decline in outdoor nighttime street crimes and a 21% reduction in outdoor nighttime gun violence following the streetlight upgrades. The streetlight upgrades may have contributed to 5% of the citywide decline in Philadelphia gun violence during the study period. Qualitative data also suggest that resident perceptions of safety and neighborhood vitality improved after new streetlights were installed.

Policy Implications

Although prior research has mostly focused on small-scale implementations, our study demonstrates that improvements in street lighting can significantly reduce crime rates across large urban areas. These results support the adoption of energy-efficient LED street lighting as a crime reduction strategy for cities. Further research is needed to explore the impact of enhanced streetlight interventions on other types of crime and to determine whether the crime reduction benefits are sustained when these upgrades are implemented across the entire City of Philadelphia for an extended period

fluenced by changes in ambient lighting; yet, most studies have focused on small-scale interventions in limited areas. It remains unclear whether enhanced lighting can improve safety on a larger, jurisdiction-wide scale. This study examined the first 10 months of Philadelphia's citywide rollout of enhanced street lighting. Between August 2023 and May 2024, 34,374 streetlights were upgraded across 13,275 street segments, converting roughly one third of the city's street segments to new LED (light-emitting diode) fixtures that provide clearer and more even lighting. We assessed the impact of these upgrades on total crimes, violent crimes, property crimes, and nuisance crimes. Our findings reveal a 15% decline in outdoor nighttime street crimes and a 21% reduction in outdoor nighttime gun violence following the streetlight upgrades. The streetlight upgrades may have contributed to 5% of the citywide decline in Philadelphia gun violence during the study period. Qualitative data also suggest that resident perceptions of safety and neighborhood vitality improved after new streetlights were installed.

Policy Implications

Although prior research has mostly focused on small-scale implementations, our study demonstrates that improvements in street lighting can significantly reduce crime rates across large urban areas. These results support the adoption of energy-efficient LED street lighting as a crime reduction strategy for cities. Further research is needed to explore the impact of enhanced streetlight interventions on other types of crime and to determine whether the crime reduction benefits are sustained when these upgrades are implemented across the entire City of Philadelphia for an extended period

By David Spencer

Summary of Recommendations 1. Given the very poor performance of the Metropolitan Police across a wide range of areas for an extended period – including prior to the present Commissioner’s term of office and particularly in relation to the fight against crime – the Home Secretary should become the “policing body” for the Metropolitan Police. This would remove the Mayor of London’s role in relation to oversight of policing in the capital. Shifting direct political oversight to the Home Secretary, as the minister principally responsible to Parliament for policing and crime, will enable both Government and Parliament to exercise far greater scrutiny and influence over the force’s performance in a way which has the potential to deliver the significant improvements which are required. 2. To enable the Metropolitan Police to shift the force’s principal focus to local crime fighting, the Government should transfer responsibility for the national leadership of the police counterterrorism network from the Metropolitan Police to a national Counter-Terrorism Policing body led by a Chief Constable. 3. The Chief Inspector of Constabulary should return the Metropolitan Police to the “Engage” process – more commonly known as “Special Measures”. The force was, based on performance across several areas, erroneously removed from the “Engage” process inmore commonly known as “Special Measures”. The force was, based on performance across several areas, erroneously removed from the “Engage” process in January 2025. There should be a presumption that all materials relating to the “Engage” process should be made publicly available. The current lack of transparency provides the public with little confidence that the necessary steps are being taken to deliver substantial improvements in the force’s performance. 4. The Home Secretary should order an inspection of the Metropolitan Police’s approach to protest policing using section 54 (2B) Police Act 1996. This should include consideration of both the strategic approach and operational tactics used, including what new strategies and tactics are required to more effectively deal with large-scale and widespread protests. This should consider the strategies and approaches used in other jurisdictions to determine what might be learned and adopted by the force – in particular the willingness of police chiefs to use non-human based means of “creating distance” between officers and protestors. 5. The Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police should review the performance of his most senior leaders and where individuals have been found to have failed to perform to the necessary standard, in some cases over very long periods, they should be replaced at the earliest opportunity. There should also be a substantial change in the approach to performance management for middle and senior leaders in the organisation – including being prepared to more willingly remove officers and staff who fail to deliver the necessary levels of performance, particularly in relation to fighting crime. Data should be published on every senior officer’s performance on crime-fighting throughout their leadership career. There should be a substantial increase in the transparency of the force’s Frontline Policing performance meetings, where local police commanders are questioned on their performance. This should include the publication of performance data, the publication of the meeting’s minutes and the option for members of the public to attend these meetings through online hosting. 

London: Policy Exchange, 2025. 52p.

By Justice

1. Artificial intelligence (“AI”) is rapidly reshaping public services, and policing is no exception. The pace of innovation, the scale of private sector investment, and the UK Government’s explicit ambition to “mainline AI into the veins of the nation” mean that AI deployment in policing is not a distant prospect but an accelerating reality. This brings significant opportunities: enhanced investigative capability, faster processing of digital evidence, improved risk assessment, and the potential to intervene earlier to prevent harm. Yet it also carries profound risks for human rights, the rule of law, and public trust. The police occupy a uniquely powerful position in our democratic society; integrating AI into that environment without the right safeguards risks entrenching discrimination, undermining lawful decision making, and eroding communities’ confidence in policing2. This report asks a central question: what must be in place for AI in policing to be trustworthy, value for money, effective in achieving policing goals, and compliant with human rights and the fair administration of justice? To answer this, JUSTICE carried out international research, examined domestic developments, and convened stakeholders across policing, government, civil society, regulators, academia, and industry. Across this work, five lessons emerged, each of which signals not only what must be done, but the urgency of acting now while the UK remains at a crossroads.

London: Justice, 2025. 62p.

Operational Challenges and Solutions for Supporting People on the Move

By Guadagno, Lorenzo (editor), Robles, Lisette R. (editor)

Forced population movements are a defining feature of almost any humanitarian crisis, shaping the design, targeting, and delivery of emergency responses. This book investigates how the evolving situation of different forced migrants is accounted for and addressed in humanitarian action in order to improve their access to support and assistance. Bringing together case studies from Africa, Asia, Europe, and the Pacific, this book focuses on a diversity of operational modalities and types of assistance provided by both traditional and non-traditional humanitarian actors to address the specific needs of displaced children, women, people with disabilities and older people, as well as trafficked migrant workers. This book adopts a broad perspective on humanitarian action, acknowledging how its boundaries are challenged and expanded in forced migration contexts. Its operational and theoretical insights will be useful for a range of readers, from humanitarian and migration researchers and students to practitioners and policymakers.

London: Routledge, 2026.