A Growing Threat to Community Safety

A new position paper from Europol, the European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Cooperation, has highlighted the severe and growing threat of caller ID spoofing, calling it a primary driver of financial fraud and social engineering scams across Europe.

The report warns that this technique, which involves manipulating caller information to appear trustworthy, accounts for approximately 64% of reported fraud cases and results in an estimated annual global loss of €850 million.

For community safety advocates and neighbourhood watch groups, this report serves as a critical alert on a crime that directly targets citizens in their homes.

What is Caller ID Spoofing?

Caller ID spoofing is a technique where criminals deliberately manipulate the information displayed on a recipient's phone. By using Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) services or specialised apps, they can make a call or text appear to come from a trusted source, such as a bank, a government agency (like the tax office or police), a utility company, or even a family member.

The goal is to exploit trust. Criminals use this guise to:

• Trick recipients into revealing sensitive personal information.
• Persuade victims to make fraudulent payments or initiate money transfers.
• Conduct tech support scams, convincing victims of non-existent computer problems to gain remote access or demand payment.
• Execute dangerous harassment tactics like "swatting," where they falsely report a major emergency at a victim's address.

A Cross-Border Challenge

According to Europol, the current situation is "untenable". The technology makes spoofing easy and cheap to perpetrate, but exceptionally difficult for Law Enforcement Agencies (LEAs) to investigate.

Organised criminal networks intentionally operate from different countries to launch their attacks, creating "safe havens" that hinder investigations. These groups have even industrialised their methods, offering "spoofing-as-a-service" platforms that lower the barrier for other criminals to commit these crimes.

A Europol survey across 23 countries revealed significant challenges, including a lack of suitable regulatory frameworks and insufficient collaboration between LEAs and telecommunication operators.

Europol's Call to Action

To combat this, Europol is urging a unified, multi-faceted approach to make spoofing more complex and costly for criminals. The agency’s strategic objectives include:

1. Harmonisation of Technical Standards: Creating unified EU-wide technical standards to trace fraudulent calls (traceback) and better distinguish legitimate international calls from spoofed ones.
2. Enhanced Cross-Border Collaboration: Fostering a coordinated ecosystem between LEAs, industry, and regulators to enable rapid information sharing and enforcement.
3. Regulatory Convergence: Aligning national laws to provide regulatory clarity and mandate service providers to implement robust validation mechanisms to block illegitimate traffic.

What This Means for Community Safety

Whilst high-level policy and technical standards are essential, public awareness remains the first and most powerful line of defence.

As criminals increasingly use technology to bypass traditional security, an informed and vigilant community is vital. The core mission of neighbourhood watch schemes—fostering social cohesion and promoting proactive crime prevention—is central to mitigating these modern threats.

Citizens must be educated to adopt a "zero-trust" approach to unsolicited calls, regardless of who the caller ID claims to be. The key advice remains:

• Be sceptical: If a call from a "trusted" source asks for sensitive information or money, hang up.
• Verify independently: Call the organisation back using a phone number you have sourced yourself from their official website or your own documents.
• Report: Report suspicious calls to the police and your telecommunications provider to help authorities and operators identify fraudulent patterns.

Europol's report is a clear signal that modern crime prevention must combinate high-tech solutions with foundational community awareness.

Download Europol report

The Gallup "Global Safety Report 2025" reveals a striking paradox: in an era experiencing more armed conflicts than at any time since the Second World War, the global population's personal perception of safety has never been higher.

This report measures public confidence using the benchmark question for the UN's Sustainable Development Goal 16: "Do you feel safe walking alone at night in the city or area where you live?". The findings offer a complex and nuanced picture, especially for Europe.

A world that feels safer

Globally, 2024 marked a historic milestone. 73 per cent of adults worldwide said they feel safe walking alone at night. This is the highest figure recorded since Gallup began tracking the metric in 2006.

This positive trend is visible across several regions. The Asia-Pacific (79 per cent) and Western Europe (77 per cent) lead the rankings for perceived safety. Even Latin America and the Caribbean, while remaining among the least safe regions, reached the 50 per cent threshold for the first time.

At a national level, Singapore leads the world, with 98 per cent of residents feeling safe. At the other end of the spectrum is South Africa, where just 33 per cent of adults feel safe.

However, the report shows a clear fracture in this perception: the gender gap. Globally, there is an 11-percentage-point gap between men who feel safe (78 per cent) and women (67 per cent). This disparity, the report demonstrates, is particularly stark in the world's wealthiest regions.

Focus on Europe – a dark mirror for women's safety

Western Europe shines in the general rankings. With a 77 per cent regional score for perceived safety, it has matched or set new records. Countries like Norway (91 per cent), Denmark (89 per cent), Finland (88 per cent), and Switzerland (88 per cent) are among the safest in the world.

And yet, the Gallup report provides a critical insight: Europe has a systemic problem with women's perceived safety.

The report highlights that the largest gender gaps are found almost exclusively in "high-income economies". It explicitly states that the European Union is "overrepresented" in the list of the 10 countries with the largest gaps.

Five of the ten countries with the widest gender gap globally are EU members:

• Italy: Presents a 32-point gap. While 76 per cent of men feel safe, only 44 per cent of women do.
• Malta: A 29-point gap (85 per cent of men vs 56 per cent of women).
• Greece: A 26-point gap (77 per cent of men vs 51 per cent of women).
• Cyprus: A 26-point gap (85 per cent of men vs 59 per cent of women).
• The Netherlands: A 26-point gap (95 per cent of men vs 69 per cent of women).

The case of Italy is particularly striking. The 44 per cent of women who feel safe is not only the lowest figure in the European Union, but it is also the lowest figure for Italian women in more than a decade.

To put this figure into perspective, the Gallup report makes a stark comparison: the level of safety perceived by women in Italy (44 per cent) is on par with that of women in Uganda (44 per cent). In the same country, the safety perception of Italian men (76 per cent) is similar to that of men in Germany (78 per cent).

The 2025 Gallup report, while celebrating global progress, serves as a strong warning for Europe. It demonstrates that economic progress and strong institutions, by themselves, do not "eliminate inequality in how safe people—particularly women—feel in their daily lives". In a continent that perceives itself as a beacon of safety, the data shows this safety remains a profoundly unequal experience—a privilege not yet extended to all its citizens.

Download Gallup report

In an era marked by growing distrust of institutions and a widespread sense of insecurity, Neighbourhood Watch schemes have become an increasingly common feature in many European cities. Born with the goal of increasing safety through active citizen participation, these groups often find themselves at a crucial crossroads. They can evolve into powerful tools of social cohesion or, conversely, unintentionally become catalysts for populist drifts, fuelling division and fear.

Understanding this dynamic is essential for anyone who cares about both security and the health of the democratic fabric.

A Fertile Ground for Populism

The correlation between populism and Neighbourhood Watch is no coincidence; the former can create the ideal conditions for the latter to emerge. Populism, especially in its right-wing form, thrives on a precise narrative: that of honest, hardworking "people" betrayed by corrupt, distant "elites" who are incapable of protecting them from threats like crime and decay. In this view, the state is portrayed as inefficient, weak, or even complicit.

This rhetoric undermines trust in traditional institutions, such as the police and the judiciary, which are often depicted as being too "soft" or lacking resources. It is in this void of trust that the populist call for direct action takes hold. Feeling abandoned, citizens are urged to "take back control" of their own security. A Neighbourhood Watch scheme can thus become the most concrete manifestation of this impulse: an act of self-organisation that bypasses institutions and asserts the sovereignty of the local community.

Furthermore, the populist tendency to identify a scapegoat—the immigrant, the minority, the "other"—provides these groups with a tangible enemy. The fear of an external threat acts as a unifying force, pushing residents to unite not just for something (security) but also against someone.

The Boomerang Effect

While populism fosters the birth of these groups, it is equally true that the groups themselves can become a powerful vehicle for populist ideas to take root. This "boomerang effect" manifests in several ways:

• The very existence of the group and its actions (a report, a presumed thwarted burglary) become living proof of the state's failure. The neighbourhood chat group turns into a sounding board where anxiety is amplified and the narrative of institutional inefficiency finds continuous confirmation.
• Within the group, a strong sense of belonging based on exclusion is strengthened. The "us" are the respectable residents defending the territory; the "them" is anyone perceived as an external threat. This shifts the focus from crime vigilance to social surveillance, where even non-illegal but simply "different" behaviours can become an object of suspicion. This mechanism generates an exclusive "bonding social capital" that strengthens internal ties but builds walls against outsiders.
• Neighbourhood Watch groups can easily become a political incubator, a training ground for local leaders who, gaining visibility and consensus on security issues, find an ideal platform for a future political career, often aligned with populist parties.
• The issue of security ceases to be a complex social problem and becomes a simple moral battle between "good" and "evil." This fuels the demand for simplistic and punitive solutions, a cornerstone of populist rhetoric.

Towards an Inclusive and Democratic Model

Is it inevitable then that a Neighbourhood Watch scheme will slide towards populism? Absolutely not. It is possible to design and manage these groups in a way that makes them a bulwark against polarisation and a driver of genuine cohesion. The key is a paradigm shift: moving from a fortress mentality to a town square mentality, from defence to inclusion. This requires the adoption of some fundamental principles.

• Partner with institutions. The group should not be born as an antagonist to institutions but as their partner. Formal agreements with local, regional, or national authorities are crucial for defining roles and boundaries. The regular presence of a police liaison officer at meetings and adequate training on the legal limits of citizens' actions can transform distrust into collaboration and prevent vigilante behaviour.
• Embrace inclusion. A healthy group must reflect the neighbourhood's actual composition. A proactive effort is needed to include residents of every nationality, culture, and social background. Multilingual communication, the involvement of migrant associations, and horizontal, rotating leadership are effective antidotes against the creation of an exclusive "us."
• Focus on community. The group's energy should be channelled not just towards surveillance but especially towards improving the quality of life. "Situational" prevention—like advocating for better lighting or the redevelopment of a park—increases real and perceived safety without fuelling a climate of suspicion. Initiatives such as neighbourhood parties, collective clean-ups of green spaces, or the creation of urban gardens build the kind of "bridging social capital" that unites people rather than dividing them.
• Communicate responsibly. Populism feeds on moral panic. To counter this, internal communication within the group must be rigorous. It is crucial to rely on official crime data provided by authorities rather than anecdotes and hearsay. A strict rule should be established against the spread of unverified news, and language should be adopted that talks about problematic "behaviours," not categories of "people."

A Choice to Make

Neighbourhood Watch is not inherently "good" or "bad." It is a tool, and like any tool, its impact depends on how it is used. If left at the mercy of fear and distrust, it can easily become a weapon in the hands of populist propaganda, eroding social cohesion and undermining the principles of the rule of law.

If, however, it is built on solid foundations of collaboration, inclusivity, and active community care, it can transform into an extraordinary exercise in active citizenship. A healthy Neighbourhood Watch doesn't build higher walls; it builds longer tables. It is not measured by the number of "enemies" it identifies, but by the number of neighbours it brings together. Ultimately, the choice between being a fortress and an open town square rests with the community itself.

As the European Neighbourhood Watch Association (EUNWA), we are pleased to present our new report: "Searching for Missing Persons in Europe: A Guide to National Systems and Cooperation Models." We have designed this document as a practical guide for policymakers, law enforcement agencies, and third-sector organisations, offering a clear and detailed comparison of the different alert and search systems currently active across the continent.

In the report, we map the considerable diversity of national approaches, from strongly state-led systems to models that rely heavily on the professionalism of volunteers. This guide provides professionals with a valuable tool to understand this complex landscape and identify effective practices.

The Crucial Role of Citizen Participation

A central finding of our research is the confirmation of the crucial role that citizens already play in supporting search operations. In the guide, we analyse several successful models of collaboration already active in Europe, demonstrating that public engagement is a key factor for success. These models range from community apps for vulnerable groups to highly professionalised volunteer search teams and digital mobilisation platforms that use social media to spread alerts.

Our Hypothesis for the Future: Extending the Search Network with Neighbourhood Watch

Building on this analysis of successful citizen participation, in our report we explore a working hypothesis for the future. We suggest that the formal involvement of established Neighbourhood Watch networks as official channels for disseminating alerts could significantly extend the reach and effectiveness of the search network.

The model we propose would leverage these trusted, geographically-focused community structures to act as trained "eyes and ears," complementing the work of law enforcement and specialised teams. We therefore conclude the report by inviting stakeholders to consider this framework as a basis for pilot projects, aimed at testing and adapting this promising approach to different national contexts.

This report is a tool we have designed for professionals working in the field of public safety and community engagement. It provides a comprehensive overview and a forward-looking perspective on how to build more resilient and collaborative communities.

The full report is available for free download.

Click here to download the guide: "Searching for Missing Persons in Europe"