The foraging perspective in criminology: A review of research literature

Christophe Vandeviver,Wim Bernasco,Elias Neirynck

doi:10.1177/14773708211025864

Christophe Vandeviver, Wim Bernasco + Show 1 more

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.1177/14773708211025864

Copy DOI

Abstract

In order to explain how crimes are carried out, and why at a particular place and time and against a specific target, crime studies increasingly harness theory from behavioural ecology, in particular Optimal Foraging Theory (OFT). However, an overview of their main findings does not exist. Given the growing focus on OFT as a behavioural framework for structuring crime research, in this article we review the extant OFT-inspired empirical crime research. Systematic search in Google Scholar and Web of Science yielded 32 crime studies, which were grouped into four categories according to their research topic. Empirical results largely support predictions made by OFT. However, there remains much potential for future OFT applications to crime research, in particular regarding the theoretical foundation of OFT in criminology, and through the application of contemporary extensions to OFT using specific tools developed for the study of animal foraging decisions.

Highlights

Environmental criminology concerns itself with explaining where and when crimes occur
Brownian motion is characterized by small variations in step length and appears optimal in environments where food is abundant, whereas Lévy flight is characterized with occasional large jumps and appears optimal in sparse environments
Both types of random walk generate movement patterns distinct from central place foraging, which is typical of the movement of animals that repeatedly return to an anchor point and characterizes human mobility (Song et al, 2010)

Summary

Introduction

Environmental criminology concerns itself with explaining where and when crimes occur. In an effort to address why crime is unevenly and non-randomly distributed in time and space (Brantingham & Brantingham, 1993), researchers make use of the Rational Choice Perspective (RCP; Cornish & Clarke, 1986). Within RCP, criminal behaviour is framed as purposive behaviour, in the sense that people act in order to attain valued goals. Actions are selected from a range of (legal and non-legal) alternatives, based on an evaluation of the costs and benefits associated with a particular behavioural alternative. RCP is abstract, and “requires supplementary empirical content through specification of the relevant aims and choice situations” Crime researchers increasingly supplement RCP with theoretical insights from Optimal Foraging Theory (OFT, see Brantingham, 2013; Johnson, 2014; Johnson, Summers, et al, 2009)

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusion