Abstract

ObjectivesThe crime and place literature lacks a standard methodology for measuring and reporting crime concentration. We suggest that crime concentration be reported with the Lorenz curve and summarized with the Gini coefficient, and we propose generalized versions of the Lorenz curve and the Gini coefficient to correct for bias when crime data are sparse (i.e., fewer crimes than places).MethodsThe proposed generalizations are based on the principle that the observed crime concentration should not be compared with perfect equality, but with maximal equality given the data. The generalizations asymptotically approach the original Lorenz curve and the original Gini coefficient as the number of crimes approaches the number of spatial units.ResultsUsing geocoded crime data on two types of crime in the city of The Hague, we show the differences between the original Lorenz curve and Gini coefficient and the generalized versions. We demonstrate that the generalizations provide a better representation of crime concentration in situations of sparse crime data, and that they improve comparisons of crime concentration if they are sparse.ConclusionsResearchers are advised to use the generalized versions of the Lorenz curve and the Gini coefficient when reporting and summarizing crime concentration at places. When places outnumber crimes, the generalized versions better represent the underlying processes of crime concentration than the original versions. The generalized Lorenz curve, the Gini coefficient and its variance are easy to compute.

Highlights

  • A defining feature of the criminology of place is its focus on the analysis of crime measured at micro-geographic units

  • We suggest that crime concentration be reported with the Lorenz curve and summarized with the Gini coefficient, and we propose generalized versions of the Lorenz curve and the Gini coefficient to correct for bias when crime data are sparse

  • The generalizations asymptotically approach the original Lorenz curve and the original Gini coefficient as the number of crimes approaches the number of spatial units

Read more

Summary

Introduction

A defining feature of the criminology of place is its focus on the analysis of crime measured at micro-geographic units. Weisburd introduced the ‘law of crime concentration at place’. It states that ‘‘for a defined measure of crime at a specific microgeographic unit, the concentration of crime will fall within a narrow bandwidth of percentages for a defined cumulative proportion of crime.’’ (Weisburd 2015: 138). The formulation of the law is an important milestone in the evolution of the crime and place literature. It represents a strong claim regarding the ubiquity of crime concentration at places. To underline this, Weisburd (2015: 151) writes ‘‘The data suggest that the law of crime concentration is a ‘‘general proposition of universal validity’’ (Sutherland 1947: 23), analogous to physical laws observed in the natural sciences’’

Objectives
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (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