Investing in Safety: A Comparative Analysis of Urban Policing Across India and the World

In an era of rapid urbanisation, cities have become dense centres of population, economic activity, and social complexity. As city populations rise and new problems appear, such as cyber-attacks and the need to manage large crowds, governments all over the world are spending billions of dollars to protect their city centres.

Using a detailed side‑by‑side data set on how much money is put into city policing, this piece looks at how major Indian metropolises—Delhi, Mumbai, Bengaluru, Hyderabad and Kolkata—compare with global giants like New York City, London, Tokyo, Paris and Singapore. We not only look at the money each city spends, but also at their main goals, innovative approaches, spending per person, and real results in lowering crime.

All figures have been converted to U.S. dollars using the January 2026 exchange rates so the comparison is fair. The analysis shows clear differences in the amount of resources, areas of focus, and overall effectiveness, and it offers clues about what really makes a city safe.

Overview of Investments

Our analysis starts with a chart showing estimated yearly spending on city police in different urban areas. All amounts are changed into billions of U.S. dollars to make them easier to compare. We’ve also added how much is spent per person, using population data from each city’s official area. The data shows that while Indian cities are spending more on policing, big cities around the world usually spend much more. This difference comes from varying economic resources and government approaches.

Comparative Table: Urban Policing Investment

Takeaways for each city:

Delhi: Rising investment has strengthened surveillance and women-safety infrastructure, but preventive policing remains constrained by scale and population pressure.

Mumbai: Community engagement and disaster-ready policing make Mumbai resilient, though coastal and urban risks demand sustained funding.

Bengaluru: Strong digital integration improves responsiveness, yet manpower shortages limit the full impact of technology-led policing.

Hyderabad: Focused women-centric and predictive strategies show high efficiency despite moderate budgets.

Kolkata: Expertise in crowd and festival management ensures order in dense settings, but modernization needs deeper investment.

New York City: Data-driven, high-spend policing delivers strong enforcement capacity, accompanied by accountability and equity challenges.

London: Neighbourhood-based policing balances community trust with counter-terror preparedness under fiscal constraints.

Tokyo: Community-embedded preventive policing achieves exceptional safety outcomes with efficient resource use.

Paris: Very high per-capita spending reflects a security-centric approach shaped by public-order and terrorism risks.

Singapore: Integrated technology, governance, and training convert moderate spending into consistently low crime and high public confidence.

Comparative Analysis

These contrasts are most clearly reflected in per-capita expenditure, where global cities enjoy substantially higher resource availability per resident, while Indian cities must optimise limited budgets through targeted and often reactive interventions.

Connecting Money Spent on Police Work to Crime Results

A pattern can be seen between how much cities put into policing and the results they get in crime control, but the link isn’t a straight line or just about dollars.

• Cities that spend a lot per person– for example New York, Paris and London – usually have stronger abilities to find crimes, react quickly, and fight terrorism. Because of this they keep violent and organised crime in check, even though small‑scale offences still happen because of the size of the city and social gaps.
• Places that use a preventive, high‑efficiency approach– such as Tokyo and Singapore – combine steady funding with public trust, modern technology and firm management. This mix leads to consistently low crime numbers and a high sense of safety among residents.
• Indian cities show a different picture. Even though the total money spent on policing is going up, the amount spent per resident stays low, there are not enough officers, and policing tends to be reactive rather than proactive. As a result, crime control is uneven and less effective.

The take‑away is that cutting crime does not rely only on pouring more money into police forces. The biggest gains come from using funds wisely: focusing on prevention, building community ties, adopting technology, and keeping police agencies accountable. These strategic investments turn financial resources into real improvements in public safety.

Global Patterns in Urban Policing Expenditure

Let’s look at how much cities around the world spend each year on public safety—measured in billions of U.S. dollars.

Spending Per Person: Why Per-Capita Investment Matters

As discussed earlier, per-capita expenditure remains the clearest indicator of policing capacity per resident. Total policing budgets alone do not capture the real capacity of urban law enforcement. A more meaningful indicator is per-capita spending, which reflects how much protection, manpower, and technological support is available to each resident. Cities in wealthier economies typically spend far more per person, enabling continuous police presence, specialised training, advanced surveillance systems, and faster response times.

For instance, Paris spends over USD 1,500 per resident annually, supporting intensive public-order management and counter-terror preparedness. In contrast, Indian metropolitan cities spend approximately USD 60–85 per resident, requiring police agencies to prioritise essential functions such as women’s safety, crowd control, and selective technology deployment. This gap highlights that while Indian cities are innovating within constraints, expanded per-capita investment would significantly enhance coverage, preventive capacity, and service quality.

How Indian Cities Are Innovating

Despite smaller budgets, Indian cities are working with what they have.

• In Delhi, the Safe City Project (funded by the Nirbhaya Fund) uses AI-powered cameras and sets up help desks for women to fight gender-based violence.
• Mumbai relies on Mohalla Committees—local neighbourhood groups that help during emergencies.
• Bengaluru has the Suraksha app, which lets citizens report issues and connect directly with police.
• Hyderabad’s SHE Teams focus on protecting women and patrolling high-risk areas.
• Kolkata uses trained volunteers to manage crowds during major events, helping keep order.

What Global Cities Are Doing Differently

In other parts of the world, safety strategies rely more on technology and long-term prevention:

• New York City uses CompStat, a system that analyses crime data to send officers where they’re most needed. It supports community policing but still faces challenges—its homicide rate remains relatively high.
• London has Safer Neighbourhood Teams that build trust between police and residents, especially in times of security threats.
• Tokyo’s Koban system places small police posts in neighbourhoods, making officers always visible and accessible.
• Paris uses strong visible patrols to maintain public order.
• Singapore combines surveillance tech and AI to stop crime before it happens, helping keep crime rates extremely low.

Crime Outcomes and Safety Indicators

Crime outcomes further underline that higher per-capita investment strengthens detection, deterrence, and response capabilities, but long-term safety gains depend on how effectively resources are aligned with prevention, governance quality, and public trust.

Key Takeaway

Cities that spend more per person—especially those using smart technology and data—often see better results. Places like Singapore and Tokyo prove that how money is spent matters just as much as how much is spent.

Indian cities are making progress, with some recording drops in crime (like Hyderabad’s 15% decline). But to match global standards, they may need to invest more and adopt stronger data-driven strategies.

Key Observations and Future Directions

Big cities around the world pour money into technology, staff training, and anti‑terrorism efforts. This creates data‑driven, preventative approaches that keep crime rates low. In India, the focus is more on protecting women, managing crowds, and improving infrastructure, but the amount spent per person is still lower, which can limit how far these programs reach.

Cities such as Tokyo and Singapore show how community‑based policing can stop problems before they start, while places like New York and London use data analysis to run large‑scale operations. In the end, how much a city can spend depends on the government’s capacity and how much the public trusts its authorities, but the real driver of success is using innovative tools and involving the community.

As more people move to cities, closing the gap between India’s community‑first style and the high‑tech methods used elsewhere could be the answer. Crime is already falling in many regions, and continued investment can make cities safer everywhere, turning urban challenges into chances for stronger, more prosperous communities.

Conclusion

This study shows that spending money on city policing is really a way to build safer, more confident, and trustworthy communities. But what matters most isn’t how much is spent—it’s how the money is used. Big cities like New York, Paris, and London have strong police forces and good systems for stopping terrorism, but places like Tokyo and Singapore prove that police who work with communities, use smart technology, and focus on preventing crime can achieve even better results and earn more public trust.

In Indian cities, which often have limited budgets, some creative solutions are making a difference. For example, women-led programs, involving local people, and using technology where it helps most have contributed to lower crime rates in major cities. However, these efforts are held back by not enough money, too few officers, and a focus on fixing problems after they happen.

The bigger lesson is clear: lasting safety in cities comes from a mix of proper funding, smart planning, using data to make decisions, strong accountability, and working with citizens. It’s not just about having enough money—it’s about building policing that listens to people’s needs and uses tools like technology and teamwork to stay one step ahead of crime. This “smarter, people-first” approach is what will truly make cities safer, not just in India but worldwide.

Reference

• Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India. (2025). Notes on demands for grants 2025-2026: No. 51/Police. https://www.indiabudget.gov.in/doc/eb/sbe51.pdf
• Delhi Police. (2025). Annual administrative report and budget allocation 2025-26. Government of NCT of Delhi.
• Government of Maharashtra, Home Department. (2025). Police budget and expenditure statements 2025-26. Government of Maharashtra.
• Government of Karnataka, Home Department. (2025). Police budget, Smart City Mission reports, and Bengaluru policing allocations 2025-26. Government of Karnataka.
• Government of Telangana, Hyderabad City Police. (2025). Annual report, SHE Teams documentation, and budget estimates 2025-26. Government of Telangana.
• Government of West Bengal, Home & Hill Affairs Department. (2025). Kolkata Police annual report and budget 2025-26. Government of West Bengal.
• New York City Police Department. (2025). Fiscal 2026 adopted budget and Mayor’s management report. City of New York. https://www.nyc.gov/site/nypd/about/about-nypd/budget.page
• Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime (MOPAC) & Metropolitan Police Service. (2025). Final budget 2025-26 and medium-term financial plan. Greater London Authority. https://www.london.gov.uk/sites/default/files/2025-04/MOPAC%20final%20budget%20report%2025-26.pdf
• Tokyo Metropolitan Government. (2025). Fiscal 2025 budget proposal and public safety allocations (including Tokyo Metropolitan Police estimates). https://www.zaimu.metro.tokyo.lg.jp/documents/d/zaimu/5yosanangaiyou_englishver
• Ministry of the Interior, France. (2025). Projet annuel de performances: Programme 176 Police nationale (including Préfecture de Police de Paris allocations for 2025). https://www.budget.gouv.fr/documentation/file-download/21486
• Singapore Police Force & Ministry of Home Affairs. (2025). Budget estimates and annual report 2025 (Police Programme allocations scaled from MHA totals). Ministry of Home Affairs, Singapore.
• World Bank & United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs. (2025). Urban population statistics, city proper estimates, and governance indicators 2025.
• International Monetary Fund & Reserve Bank of India. (2026). Average monthly exchange rates (January 2026). https://www.imf.org/external/np/fin/data/rms_mth.aspx