Preventing Crime at Places: The Importance of Recognizing That Places Exist Within a Broader Social Context

This Campbell systematic review examines the effects of focusing police crime prevention efforts on crime ‘hot spots’, and whether focused police actions at specific locations result in crime displacement (i.e. crime moving around the corner) or diffusion (i.e. crime reduction in surrounding areas) of crime control benefits. The review includes 19 studies covering 25 cases. Seventeen of the studies were conducted in the USA.Investing police agencies' limited resources on hot spot policing in a small number of high‐activity crime places will prevent crime in these and surrounding areas, reducing total crime. Problem oriented policing approach allows for developing tailored responses to specific recurring problems in high activity crime spots. Implementing situational prevention strategies that reduce police reliance on aggressive enforcement strategies may also have positive benefits for police‐community relations. The reactions of local communities to hot spot policing must be considered. Residents may welcome efforts to reduce crime. But if policing programmes are seen as heavy‐handed, or focus too much on particular population groups, they may end up driving a wedge between the police and those they are trying to help.AbstractBACKGROUNDIn recent years, crime scholars and practitioners have pointed to the potential benefits of focusing crime prevention efforts on crime places. A number of studies suggest that there is significant clustering of crime in small places, or “hot spots,” that generate half of all criminal events. A number of researchers have argued that many crime problems can be reduced more efficiently if police officers focused their attention to these deviant places. The appeal of focusing limited resources on a small number of high‐activity crime places is straightforward. If we can prevent crime at these hot spots, then we might be able to reduce total crime.OBJECTIVESTo assess the effects of focused police crime prevention interventions at crime hot spots. The review also examined whether focused police actions at specific locations result in crime displacement (i.e., crime moving around the corner) or diffusion (i.e., crime reduction in surrounding areas) of crime control benefits.SEARCH STRATEGYA keyword search was performed on 15 online abstract databases. Bibliographies of past narrative and empirical reviews of literature that examined the effectiveness of police crime control programs were reviewed and forward searches for works that cited seminal hot spots policing studies were performed. Bibliographies of past completed Campbell systematic reviews of police crime prevention efforts and hand searches of leading journals in the field were performed. Experts in the field were consulted and relevant citations were obtained.SELECTION CRITERIATo be eligible for this review, interventions used to control crime hot spots were limited to police enforcement efforts. Suitable police enforcement efforts included traditional tactics such as directed patrol and heightened levels of traffic enforcement as well as alternative strategies such as aggressive disorder enforcement and problem‐oriented policing. Studies that used randomized controlled experimental or quasi‐experimental designs were selected. The units of analysis were limited to crime hot spots or high‐activity crime “places” rather than larger areas such as neighborhoods. The control group in each study received routine levels of traditional police enforcement tactics.DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS19 studies containing 25 tests of hot spots policing interventions were identified and full narratives of these studies were reported. Ten of the selected studies used randomized experimental designs and nine used quasi‐experimental designs. A formal meta‐analysis was conducted to determine the crime prevention effects in the eligible studies. Random effects models were used to calculate mean effect sizes.RESULTS20 of 25 tests of hot spots policing interventions reported noteworthy crime and disorder reductions. The meta‐analysis of key reported outcome measures revealed a small statistically significant mean effect size favoring the effects of hot spots policing in reducing citizen calls for service in treatment places relative to control places. The effect was smaller for randomized designs but still statistically significant and positive. When displacement and diffusion effects were measured, unintended crime prevention benefits were associated with the hot spotsAUTHORS' CONCLUSIONSThe extant evaluation research provides fairly robust evidence that hot spots policing is an effective crime prevention strategy. The research also suggests that focusing police efforts on high‐activity crime places does not inevitably lead to crime displacement and crime control benefits may diffuse into the areas immediately surrounding the targeted locations.

Schools as places of crime? Evidence from closing chronically underperforming schools

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to investigate the impact of Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED), a crime prevention tool, on reducing rates of sexual assault. In addition, the study attempts to understand if CPTED results in crime displacement in non-target areas.Design/methodology/approachThis research utilizes a Weighted Displacement Quotient (WDQ) model to analyze the effects of CPTED, which is an appropriate tool in fields of regional-scale crime prevention and on sexual assault prevention. WDQ is capable of analyzing policy effectiveness while controlling for geographical crime displacement, a known side effect of CPTED in the literature.FindingsThe analysis results show that CPTED is an effective tool to prevent sexual assaults in South Korea. The sexual assault occurrence rate decreased in the CPTED implementation zone of Yeomri-dong Mapo-gu. WDQ showed that crime displacement occurred in adjacent areas in Daeheung-dong and Ahyun-dong. But, crime displacement was lower than the policy effectiveness in the target zone.Originality/valueThe policy implications of this research are immense. First, CPTED for the prevention of sexual assaults should be considered as a pre-control tool. Second, a strategic method for more effectively implementing CPTED is required. Third, because CPTED is a policy done on a regional scale, provisions need to be in place to manage crime displacement.

Disappointment in crime prevention based on the etiological approach led to a closer analysis of the circumstances of the offence, its physical conditions, and the resulting motivations of the offender. Whatever his inborn or socially acquired criminal predispositions, object and opportunity are necessary for an offence to take place. Advocates of the situational approach in criminology argue that a potential offender generally does not act on an impulse: instead, he more or less consciously analyses the situation and decides to commit the offence at a given time and place and against a given target. This is the basic assumption of situational crime prevention. Situational crime prevention resolves itself into reduction or liquidation of the physical opportunity to commit an offence, and extension of the probability of apprehension of the offender. This can be done in three different ways. First, the guard over the target can be extended or intensified, or the potential offender can be made to believe that, while dwelling in a given place, he is under incessant surveillance by the police or other competent persons, or by the inhabitants or users of a given object or area. Second, the target can be made less open to crime: special circumstances make it less easily accessible (or completely inaccessible), and theft can no longer yield the expected profit to the offender. This procedure is called target hardening. Third, various organizational steps can be taken that change the environment of crime: new ciercumstances arise and situation in which an offence might take place is changed. The above three methods of situational crime prevention have different efficiency. Their actual efficiency depends on a variety of factors related to the methodology of the crime prevention program and to cultural conditions. As regards programs basied on increased surveillance, the most efficient are those which involve the local population who are allowed both passively to watch over their area of residence, and actively to participate in its protection. What is considered a particulary effective method of situational crime prevention is target hardening where access to the target is made difficult through a variety of physical obstacles. Not as obvious is the efficiency of another target hardening measure where valuable objects are marked so as to make it difficult for the offender to gain by his theft and to increase the probability of his apprehension. Such measures, called operation identification, prove highly efficient in some countries but are next to ineffective in others. Thee ffects here depend largely on the efficiency of the police. Whith a low detection rate of thefts, the marking of objects cannot possibly yield the expected results. It has been found in studies of offenders’ processes of deciding that their decision to commit an offencis based on the factors that condition, first, the physical opportunity (access to the object) nad second, the offender’s safety. The idea of situational crime prevention has many followers who stress the relative easiness of the application of the suggested methods and their efficiency. The opponents argue that,while it many perhaps contribute to preventing definite offences at a definite time and place, situational crime prevention does not actually prevent crime. What it leads to is displacement of crime. The offence is committed anyway but perhaps in another time or place, by other means, or against another target. Despite all the reservations concerning displacement of crime, it msot be stated that situational crime prevention often proves effective; what is more, it requires neither prolonged programs nor entangled methods of manipulating society. Admittedly the offender is not reformed; yet a definite offence is not committed in a definite place, and the target remains safe. This makes situational prevention as important an element of crime prevention programs as the generally recognized social methods.

Displacement of crime is the specter that haunts crime prevention studies, in that, the crime problem does not go away but shifts from one location to another. The fact that crime is not reduced in an area but rather moves around means that trying to change the situation and circumstances surrounding the targeted area may not fully reduce crime. Research that has been previously carried out into the study of geographic displacement of crime in the Kings Cross area did not have any spatial element within the methodology. Most analyses have used more statistical methods than spatial analysis. This research aimed at investigating how the patterns of prostitution, “arrests for soliciting”, have changed between June 2000 and May 2005, more specifically to find out whether there had been a “displacement of crime” or a “diffusion of benefits.” This research used a geographical information system and a general statistical method to investigate how much, and in which direction(s) crime had been displaced. It also explored the temporal nature of offences within the study area. Data provided on offenders also included, apart from the locational information, the date and time of the offences. Analysis was also carried out to establish how “arrests for soliciting” changed overtime in Camden Basic Command Unit (BCU) . The hotspot analysis using kernel density estimation (KDE) revealed that there had been a significant displacement of crime events to the north of the target area. The hotspots revealed a “displacement of crime” in a north-easterly direction; it is interesting to know that the resultant index of displacement for a buffer zone of 500 m around the target area varied over the years. It can be shown from the research that between the periods of June 2000 and May 2005 there were varied relationships between diffusion and direct effects. The most recent weighted displacement quotient (WDQ) indicates a positive net effect of the program in May 2005. As part of the temporal analysis on average between June 2000 and May 2005, most of the “arrests for soliciting were made during a week day, specifically during the midweek. The least number of “arrests for soliciting” occurred during the weekends and Mondays. Keywords: GIS, crime displacement, hotspot analysis, index of displacement, temporal analysis

If offending were simply displaced following (often spatially) focused crime reduction initiatives, the continued expenditure of resources on this approach to crime reduction would be pointless. The aims of this article were to: critically appraise the current body of displacement research; identify gaps in understanding; articulate an agenda for future research; and to consider the implications of the accumulated findings for practitioners, evaluators, and policy makers. First, we review existing criminological theory regarding crime displacement and the alternative perspective—that crime prevention activity might generate a diffusion of crime control benefits. Second, we review the empirical research, focusing in particular on the findings of existing systematic reviews. Third, we consider the types of displacement that might occur and the methodological approaches employed to study them. Theoretical and empirical research suggests that displacement is far from inevitable and that a diffusion of crime control benefit is at least as likely. However, some forms of displacement have not been adequately studied. Existing research suggests that successful crime reduction interventions often have a positive impact on crime that extends beyond the direct recipients of a particular project. However, current understanding of crime displacement and how benefits might diffuse remains incomplete. Consequently, to inform an agenda for future research, we derive a typology of methodological issues associated with studying displacement, along with suggestions as to how they might be addressed.

BackgroundIn recent years, crime scholars and practitioners have pointed to the potential benefits of focusing crime prevention efforts on crime places. A number of studies suggest that there is significant clustering of crime in small places, or “hot spots,” that generate half of all criminal events. Researchers have argued that many crime problems can be reduced more efficiently if police officers focused their attention to these deviant places. The appeal of focusing limited resources on a small number of high‐activity crime places is straightforward. If crime can be prevented at these hot spots, then citywide crime totals could be reduced.ObjectivesTo assess the effects of focused police crime prevention interventions at crime hot spots. The review also examined whether focused police actions at specific locations result in crime displacement (i.e., crime moving around the corner) or diffusion (i.e., crime reduction in surrounding areas) of crime control benefits.Search MethodsA keyword search was performed on 15 abstract databases. Bibliographies of past narrative and empirical reviews of literature that examined the effectiveness of police crime control programs were reviewed and forward searches for works that cited seminal hot spots policing studies were performed. Bibliographies of past completed Campbell systematic reviews of police crime prevention efforts were reviewed and hand searches of leading journals in the field were completed. Experts in the field were consulted and relevant citations were obtained.Selection CriteriaTo be eligible for this review, interventions used to control crime hot spots were limited to police‐led prevention efforts. Suitable police‐led crime prevention efforts included traditional tactics such as directed patrol and heightened levels of traffic enforcement as well as alternative strategies such as aggressive disorder enforcement and problem‐oriented policing. Studies that used randomized controlled experimental or quasiexperimental designs were selected. The units of analysis were limited to crime hot spots or high‐activity crime “places” rather than larger areas such as neighborhoods. The control group in each study received routine levels of traditional police crime prevention tactics.Data Collection and AnalysisSixty‐five studies containing 78 tests of hot spots policing interventions were identified and full narratives of these studies were reported. Twenty‐seven of the selected studies used randomized experimental designs and 38 used quasiexperimental designs. A formal meta‐analysis was conducted to determine the crime prevention effects in the eligible studies. Random effects models were used to calculate mean effect sizes.ResultsSixty‐two of 78 tests of hot spots policing interventions reported noteworthy crime and disorder reductions. The meta‐analysis of key reported outcome measures revealed a small statistically significant mean effect size favoring the effects of hot spots policing in reducing crime outcomes at treatment places relative to control places. The effect was smaller for randomized designs but still statistically significant and positive. When displacement and diffusion effects were measured, a diffusion of crime prevention benefits was associated with hot spots policing.Authors' ConclusionsThe extant evaluation research suggests that hot spots policing is an effective crime prevention strategy. The research also suggests that focusing police efforts on high‐activity crime places does not inevitably lead to crime displacement; rather, crime control benefits may diffuse into the areas immediately surrounding the targeted locations.

Measuring the crime displacement and diffusion of benefit effects of open-street CCTV in South Korea

Contents: Introduction Part I Theorizing Situational Determinants of Crime: Delinquency, environment and intervention, R.V.G. Clark The situational analysis of crime and deviance, Christopher Birkbeck and Gary LaFree Routine activities and individual deviant behavior, Wayne D. Osgood, Janet. K. Wilson, Patrick M. Oa (TM)Malley, Jerald G. Bachman and Lloyd D. Johnston. Part II The Production of Criminal Opportunities: Routine Activity Theory: Human ecology and crime: a routine activity approach, Marcus Felson and Lawrence E. Cohen Routine activities and crime prevention in the developing metropolis, Marcus Felson Routine activities and involvement in violence as actor, witness, or target, Richard B. Felson The demand and supply of criminal opportunities, Philip J. Cook. Part III Deciding to Commit Crime: the Rational Choice Perspective: Modeling offenders' decisions: a framework for research and policy, Ronald V. Clarke and Derek B. Cornish Understanding crime displacement: an application of rational choice theory, Derek B. Cornish and Ronald V. Clarke A descriptive model of the hunting process of serial sex offenders: a rational choice perspective, Eric Beauregard, D. Kim Rossmo and Jean Proulx Serendipity in robbery target selection, Bruce A. Jacobs Organized fraud and organizing frauds: unpacking research on networks and organization, Michael Levi Parameters for software piracy research, Clyde W. Holsapple, Deepak Iyengar, Haihao Jin and Shashank Rao. Part IV 'Bounded' Rational Choice: Good Enough or Not Enough: Rational choice, deterrence, and social learning theory in criminology: the path not taken, Ronald L. Akers Situational crime prevention and its discontents: rational choice theory versus the 'culture of now', Keith Hayward Situational crime prevention and its discontents: rational choice and harm reduction versus 'cultural criminology', Graham Farrell Karl Popper: a philosopher for Ronald Clarke's situational crime prevention, Nick Tilley. Part V Variants Beyond Rational Choice and Routine Activity: Activity fields and the dynamics of crime: advancing knowledge about the role of the environment in crime causation, Per-Olof H. WikstrA m, Vania Ceccato, Beth Hardie and Kyle Treiber A classification of techniques for controlling situational precipitators of crime, Richard Wortley Going equipped: criminology, situational crime prevention and the resourceful offender, Paul Ekblom and Nick Tilley. Part VI Implications for Crime Prevention: Situational crime prevention: theory and practice, R.V.G. Clarke Routine activities and crime prevention: armchair concepts and practical action, Marcus Felson Minimising corruption: applying lessons from the crime prevention literature, Angela Gorta Subway slugs: tracking displacement on the London Underground, Ronald V. Clarke, Ronald P. Cody and Mangai Natarajan Assessing the extent of crime displacement and diffusion of benefits: a review of situational crime prevention evaluations, Rob T. Guerette and Kate J. Bowers Name index.

What is crime prevention in 2020?

Police patrol, motorized and foot, has a long history of being used as a crime prevention method. Scientific evaluations of this crime prevention technique have been undertaken for at least 40 years, with mixed results. One of the important questions to be answered regarding the implementation of a police patrol is the presence of crime displacement: criminal activity simply moving around the corner, away from the primary patrol area. Previous investigations of this phenomenon have found that, most often, crime displacement is nonexistent or less than crime reductions in the primary area of interest. In this article, we investigate local crime displacement. We use a spatial point pattern test that can identify changes in the spatial patterns/distribution of crime even if crime in all areas has decreased. We find moderate evidence for the presence of this spatial shift and discuss the implications.

It may be argued that any discussion on crime prevention and community safety necessarily involves engagement with wider criminological, and indeed, social and political debates about the nature of the state, the relationship between the state and civil society and the manner through which security as a ‘public good’ is produced and distributed. At least within the criminological field, crime prevention and community safety have emerged as part of what may be imagined as the ‘preventative turn’ (Hughes, 1998; 2007) – as a means of capturing the governmental tendency towards the decentralisation of crime control from central institutions and towards the outer edges of the criminal justice system. Critics of such localising agendas argue that it is not only an extension of governing rationalities - ‘government at a distance’ (Garland, 2000) - but also a part of broader neo-liberal agendas to dismantle welfare apparatuses in favour of ‘governing through crime’ (Simon, 2007). In this regard, the re-socialisation of the subject as ‘self-governing’ is, in effect, a path towards creating the conditions for private security proliferation (Rose, 1999). Furthermore, critical realist authors on community safety have argued that this neo-liberal model of crime control is subject to regional and national variations, shaped by professional habitus as a function of practice cultures and local political traditions (Edwards and Hughes, 2005; Hughes 2007). Hence social research in this field needs to identify the ‘deep grammar’ of ‘practice-in-context’ in order to capture the nuanced and eclectic nature of crime prevention and community safety in different settings (Stenson, 2008).Bearing in mind these wider debates, the present chapter attempts to discuss the history and development of crime prevention and community safety in Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland – as two distinct, yet closely related jurisdictions –aiming to identify convergences and divergences, continuities and discontinuities. In relation to Northern Ireland, where police reform has been a central component underlying the transition from conflict, the chapter identifies the recent history of crime prevention and community safety together with a critical appraisal of key developments. Critical here is the existence of an active, grass-roots civil society as a key factor underpinning community safety at the level of government policy. In the Republic where police reform has been a more muted affair, crime prevention and community safety is an emerging area of practice, related to funding, government and governance arrangements including drug prevention, youth justice and urban regeneration. While taking note of recent analyses of crime prevention and community safety in the UK and Ireland, the chapter plots the nature and scope of crime prevention and community safety through case studies of Ireland, North and South. These show that in practical terms, crime prevention and community safety are uniquely shaped by the circumstances in which they are conceived (Edwards et al., 2013; Hughes and Edwards, 2013; Gilling et al., 2013).A central contention of the chapter from the outset, underpinned by its layout, is the fact that the two jurisdictions have developed (in a community safety sense) in an entirely distinct fashion. It is therefore contended that a simple thematic or comparative approach defies the complex evolution of the preventative turn within the two jurisdictions. In this regard, the evidence presented highlights that community safety is in fact a function of governmental agendas and policy, rather than rational or criminological approaches to dealing with late modern society (Garland, 2001).

Crime Prevention: Principles, Perspectives and Practices introduces readers to the theory and practice of crime prevention. Now in its third edition, this book argues for a combination of social and situational/environmental crime prevention strategies as more effective alternatives to policing, criminal justice and 'law and order' approaches. Contending that the principles of prevention can be applied to persistent crime problems such as alcohol-related violence and family and domestic violence, the book explores the prevention of other broad societal harms including terrorism, cybercrime and threats to the environment. The book features useful pedagogy such as case studies, discussion questions and extension topics, as well as new chapters on environmental crime and counter-terrorism. Written by a team of experts in the field of criminology, Crime Prevention remains an authoritative introduction to crime prevention in Australia, and is an invaluable resource for criminology students.

Crime Prevention: Principles, Perspectives and Practices introduces readers to the theory and practice of crime prevention. Now in its third edition, this book argues for a combination of social and situational/environmental crime prevention strategies as more effective alternatives to policing, criminal justice and 'law and order' approaches. Contending that the principles of prevention can be applied to persistent crime problems such as alcohol-related violence and family and domestic violence, the book explores the prevention of other broad societal harms including terrorism, cybercrime and threats to the environment. The book features useful pedagogy such as case studies, discussion questions and extension topics, as well as new chapters on environmental crime and counter-terrorism. Written by a team of experts in the field of criminology, Crime Prevention remains an authoritative introduction to crime prevention in Australia, and is an invaluable resource for criminology students.

이 연구는 범죄집중 현상에 대한 체계적인 정리 및 논의를 위해 진행되었다. 이를 위해 먼저 이 연구는 범죄학 분야에서 지금까지 발견된 범죄집중의유형을 체계적으로 정리하였다. 더불어, 범죄예방에서 범죄집중이 왜 중요한지, 그리고 각각의 범죄집중 유형과 범죄예방이 어떻게 연결될 수 있는지 살펴보았다. 이후 국내외 실증연구 및 관련 데이터 검토를 통해 범죄집중이 실재한다는 것을 확인하였다. 마지막으로, 각각의 범죄집중 유형에 따른 적절한범죄예방대책을 제시하였다. 이 연구의 결과는 몇 가지 정책적 제언을 시사한다. 첫째, 경찰 또는 자치단체에서 범죄예방대책을 수립할 때 범죄자가 집중된다는 점에 기초한 범죄예방대책이 필요하다. 즉, 범죄예방정책 수립 시 이 연구에서 제시한 범죄자집중에 대처하기 위한 다양한 범죄예방대책을 검토할 필요가 있다. 둘째, 경찰 또는 자치단체에서 범죄예방대책을 수립할 때 범죄장소가 집중된다는 점에 기초한 범죄예방대책이 필요하다. 즉, 범죄예방정책 수립 시 이 연구에서제시한 범죄장소 집중에 대처하기 위한 다양한 범죄예방대책을 검토할 필요가 있다. 마지막으로, 경찰 또는 자치단체에서 범죄예방대책을 수립할 때 범죄피해가 집중된다는 점에 기초한 범죄예방대책이 필요하다. 즉, 범죄예방정책 수립 시 이 연구에서 제시한 범죄피해 집중에 대처하기 위한 다양한 범죄예방대책을 검토할 필요가 있다.This study was conducted to systematically organize and discuss the crime concentration phenomenon. To this end, this study systematically organized the types of concentration of crimes discovered so far in the field of criminology. In addition, we looked into why crime concentration is important in crime prevention and how each type of crime concentration can be connected with crime prevention. Afterwards, it was confirmed that crime concentration is real through domestic and foreign empirical studies and review of related data. Finally, appropriate crime prevention measures are presented according to each type of crime concentration. The results of this study suggest several policy suggestions. First, when establishing crime prevention measures in the police or local governments, crime prevention measures are needed based on the fact that criminals are concentrated. In other words, when establishing a crime prevention policy, it is necessary to review various crime prevention measures to cope with the concentration of criminals presented in this study. Second, when the police or local governments establish crime prevention measures, crime prevention measures are needed based on the fact that crime locations are concentrated. In other words, when establishing a crime prevention policy, it is necessary to review various crime prevention measures to cope with the concentration of crime places suggested in this study. Finally, when the police or local governments establish crime prevention measures, crime prevention measures are needed based on the fact that crime damage is concentrated. In other words, when establishing a crime prevention policy, it is necessary to review various crime prevention measures to cope with the concentration of crime victims presented in this study.