Crime Hot Spots

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Weisburd ◽  
Sean Wire
Keyword(s):  
Crime Prevention ◽  
Hot Spots ◽  
Routine Activity Theory ◽  
Data Availability ◽  
Routine Activity ◽  
Crime Concentration ◽  
Hot Spots Policing ◽  
Crime Hot Spots ◽  
Criminology Of Place ◽  
Traditional Paradigm

Hot spots of crime, and the criminology of place more generally, deviate from the traditional paradigm of criminology, in which the primary assumption and goal is to explain who is likely to commit crime and their motivations, and to explore interventions aimed at reducing individual criminality. Alternatively, crime hot spots account for the “where” of crime, specifically referring to the concentration of crime in small geographic areas. The criminology of place demands a rethinking in regard to how we understand the crime problem and offers alternate ways to predict, explain, and prevent crime. While place, as large geographic units, has been important since the inception of criminology as a discipline, research examining crime concentrations at a micro-geographic level has only recently begun to be developed. This approach has been facilitated by improvements to data availability, technology, and the understanding of crime as a function of the environment. The new crime and place paradigm is rooted in the past three decades of criminological research centered on routine activity theory, crime concentrations, and hot spots policing. The focus on crime hot spots has led to several core empirical findings. First, crime is meaningfully concentrated, such that a large proportion of crime events occur at relatively few places within larger geographies like cities. This may be termed the law of crime concentration at places (see Weisburd, 2015). Additionally, most hot spots of crime are stable over time, and thus present promising opportunities for crime prevention. Crime hot spots vary within higher geographic units, suggesting both that there is a loss of information at higher levels of aggregation and that there are clear “micro communities” within the larger conceptualization of a neighborhood. Finally, crime at place is predictable, which is important for being able to understand why crime is concentrated in one place and not another, as well as to develop crime prevention strategies. These empirical characteristics of crime hot spots have led to the development of successful police interventions to reduce crime. These interventions are generally termed hot spots policing.

The Theory and Practice of Situational Crime Prevention

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ronald V. Clarke
Keyword(s):  
Crime Prevention ◽  
Situational Crime Prevention ◽  
Routine Activity Theory ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
Routine Activity ◽  
Public And Private ◽  
Transit Systems ◽  
Pattern Theory ◽  
Social Settings ◽  
Sound Foundation

Situational crime prevention is radically different from other forms of crime prevention as it seeks only to reduce opportunities for crime, not bring about lasting change in criminal or delinquent dispositions. Proceeding from an analysis of the circumstances giving rise to very specific kinds of crime and disorder, it introduces discrete managerial and environmental modifications to change the opportunity structure for those crimes to occur—not just the immediate physical and social settings in which the crimes occur, but also the wider societal arrangements that make the crimes possible. It is therefore focused on the settings for crime, not on delinquents or criminals. Rather than punishing them or seeking to eliminate criminal dispositions through improvement of society or its institutions, it tries to make criminal action less attractive. It does this in five main ways: (1) by increasing the difficulties of crime, (2) by increasing the immediate risks of getting caught, (3) by reducing the rewards of offending, (4) by removing excuses for offending, and (5) by reducing temptations and provocations. It accomplishes these ends by employing an action research methodology to identify design and management changes that can be introduced with minimum social and economic costs. Central to this enterprise is not the criminal justice system but a host of public and private organizations and agencies—schools, hospitals, transit systems, shops and malls, manufacturing businesses and phone companies, local parks and entertainment facilities, pubs and parking lots—whose products, services, and operations spawn opportunities for a vast range of different crimes. Some criminologists believe that the efforts that these organizations and agencies have made in the past 20 or 30 years to protect themselves from crime are responsible for the recorded crime drops in many countries. Situational crime prevention rests on a sound foundation of criminological theories—routine activity theory, crime pattern theory, and the rational choice perspective—all of which hold that opportunity plays a part in every form of crime or disorder. There is therefore no form of crime that cannot be addressed by situational crime prevention. To date, more than 250 evaluated successes of situational crime prevention have been reported, covering an increasingly wide array of crimes including terrorism and organized crimes. Many of the studies have found little evidence that situational interventions have resulted in the “displacement” of crime to other places, times, targets, methods, or forms of crime. Indeed, it is commonly found that the benefits of situational crime prevention diffuse beyond the immediately targeted crimes. Despite these successes, situational crime prevention continues to attract much criticism for its supposed social and ethical costs.

scholarly journals Organized crime, situational crime prevention and routine activity theory

2012 ◽  
Vol 15 (2-3) ◽  
pp. 87-92 ◽  
Author(s):  
Edward R. Kleemans ◽  
Melvin R. J. Soudijn ◽  
Anton W. Weenink
Keyword(s):  
Activity Theory ◽  
Crime Prevention ◽  
Organized Crime ◽  
Situational Crime Prevention ◽  
Routine Activity Theory ◽  
Routine Activity

Does the Presence of Casinos Increase Crime? An Examination of Casino and Control Communities

2003 ◽  
Vol 49 (2) ◽  
pp. 253-284 ◽  
Author(s):  
B. Grant Stitt ◽  
Mark Nichols ◽  
David Giacopassi
Keyword(s):  
At Risk ◽  
Activity Theory ◽  
Hot Spots ◽  
Crime Rate ◽  
Crime Rates ◽  
Routine Activity Theory ◽  
Routine Activity ◽  
Resident Population ◽  
Using Data ◽  
And Control

This study is an analysis of crime in six new casino communities and compares the crime rates to those found in six noncasino control communities. The experimental and control communities were matched on 15 socioeconomic variables. The crime rates were calculated using resident population and population at-risk, which includes tourists in the crime rate calculations. Both Part I and Part II crimes were analyzed using data encompassing the pre- and postcasino presence. Crime was expected to rise in the casino communities, consistent with routine activity theory and the belief that casinos serve as hot spots for crime. The analysis yielded few consistent findings across the test and control communities. Crime rates increased significantly in some casino communities, some remained relatively stable, and others decreased. The authors conclude that crime does not inevitably increase with the introduction of a casino into a community, but that the effects of casinos on crime appear to be related to a variety of variables which are only poorly understood.

scholarly journals Examination of Routine Activities Theory by the property crime

2016 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 1188 ◽  
Author(s):  
Uğur Argun ◽  
Murat Dağlar
Keyword(s):  
Activity Theory ◽  
Crime Prevention ◽  
Property Crime ◽  
Routine Activities ◽  
Routine Activity Theory ◽  
Routine Activities Theory ◽  
Routine Activity ◽  
Property Crimes ◽  
The Many ◽  
Causes Of Crime

The studies on crime prevention, causes of crime and the theories associated with it are very essential topics in criminology. Routine Activities Theory (RAT) is also the basis for the many criminological theories. Although it has some shortcomings it is very usual that the theorists and practitioners on crime prevention can benefit from such a strong theory. This study explains the applicability of Routine Activities Theory in prevention and reducing of property crimes in the context of some parameters related to burglary and auto theft incidents in US. The study aims to give some information of the routine activity theory and investigate its relationship with prevention of property crimes. The results of study suggest that Routine Activity Theory may be used as a useful tool by crime reduction or prevention practitioners to evaluate crime problems and also take routine precautions and measures that reduce crime opportunities in people’s daily activities.

Internal Controls, Routine Activity Theory (RAT), and Sustained Online Auction Deception: A Longitudinal Analysis

2014 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 311-337 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexei N. Nikitkov ◽  
Dan N. Stone ◽  
Timothy C. Miller
Keyword(s):  
Activity Theory ◽  
Online Auctions ◽  
Routine Activity Theory ◽  
Data Availability ◽  
Routine Activity ◽  
Primary Data ◽  
Online Auction ◽  
Alternative Theory ◽  
Control Analysis ◽  
Analysis And Design

ABSTRACT This paper adapts and extends routine activity theory (RAT) to investigate the co-evolution of eBay's controls with mundane crime in the rapidly growing auction market of 1997–2005. A suspected deceptive seller's eight-year account history indicates the presence of the three market characteristics that RAT identifies as essential for deception: (1) a motivated offender, (2) suitable targets, and (3) an absence of capable guardians (i.e., regulation and eBay controls). The results document the co-evolution of a deceptive seller's tactics with eBay's controls. The investigation introduces (1) a new market, i.e., the early online auctions, (2) a new theory, i.e., RAT, and (3) new data, i.e., of a long-term deceptive seller, to the accounting controls literature. Contributions include tracing the evolving eBay control system, considering eBay's feedback system as an emergent form of continuous monitoring, and investigating the potential of RAT as an alternative theory for understanding control violations and informing accounting control analysis and design. Data Availability: The archival data are available from public sources. The primary data are available to scholars willing to sign agreements that protect the confidentiality of the sources.

Place Managers and Crime Places

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
John E. Eck
Keyword(s):  
Hot Spots ◽  
Routine Activity Theory ◽  
Health Centers ◽  
Routine Activity ◽  
Regulatory Agencies ◽  
Place Management ◽  
Bus Stop ◽  
The People ◽  
Safety Function ◽  
High Crime

Place management theory—a part of routine activity theory—explains why a relatively few places have a great deal of crime while most places have little or no crime. The explanation is the way place managers carry out their four primary functions: organization of space, regulation of conduct, control of access, and acquisition of resources. Place managers are those people and organizations that own and operate businesses, homes, hotels, drinking establishments, schools, government offices, places of worship, health centers, and other specific locations. They can even operate mobile places such as busses, trains, ships, and aircraft. Some are large—a multi-story office tower for example—while others are tiny—a bus stop, for example. Place managers are important because they can exercise control over the people who use these locations and in doing so contribute to public order and safety. Consequently, it is important to understand place management, how it can fail, and what one can do to prevent failures. Place management has implications beyond high-crime sites. When crime places are connected, they can create crime hot spots in an area. The concentration of high crime places can inflate crime in a neighborhood. Moreover, place management can be applied to virtual locations, such as servers, websites, and other network infrastructures. There is considerable evaluation evidence that place managers can change high crime locations to low crime locations. Research also shows that displacement to other places, though possible, is far from inevitable. Indeed, research shows that improving a high crime place can reduce crime at places nearby places. Although much of this research has studied how police intervene with place managers, non-police regulatory agencies can carry out this public safety function.

Crime prevention in terms of criminal intent criteria in white-collar crime

2018 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
pp. 838-844
Author(s):  
Tage Alalehto
Keyword(s):  
Activity Theory ◽  
Crime Prevention ◽  
White Collar ◽  
Routine Activity Theory ◽  
Routine Activity ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Pattern Theory ◽  
Theory Of Crime ◽  
Actus Reus ◽  
Potential Offender

Purpose In the field of crime prevention there are several theoretical approaches explaining why crime occurs and how to prevent it. Three of them – routine activity theory, crime pattern theory and the theory of crime-as-choice – are logically tested in this work. The point of departure is to test if the theories are logical consistent and logical valid, irrespective of whether the criterion for criminal intent is changed from direct intention to negligence. Design/methodology/approach The issues will be explored in a logical structure by a first-order logic propositional analysis. Findings The analysis shows that all three theories are logical consistent, but only routine activity theory is logical valid. The conclusion is that crime prevention should in general assume that routine activity theory is the legitimate theory and that social prevention as a prevention strategy is logically unnecessary to adopt because it does not matter whether the offender is motivated (direct intention) or not (negligence). Practical implications It does not really matter if the authors theoretically treat white-collar offenders as motivated, because if they have committed an actus reus, they are an offender according to the objective requisites. This means that the best strategies to prevent a potential white-collar criminal are situational prevention, i.e. complicate their access to money, where it becomes irrelevant if the potential offender has a mens rea or not. What counts is the prevention of actus reus by a potential offender. Originality/value As far as I know, no one has previously investigated the logical consistency and/or logical validity of routine activity theory, crime pattern theory and the theory of crime-as-choice as theories of crime prevention.

Hot Spots Policing

Criminology ◽  
2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tammy Kochel ◽  
Seyvan Nouri
Keyword(s):  
Crime Prevention ◽  
Hot Spots ◽  
Hot Spot ◽  
Situational Crime Prevention ◽  
Geographic Area ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Control Cost ◽  
Hot Spots Policing ◽  
Diffusion Of Benefits ◽  
National Institute Of Justice

Since the 1980s, the nature of policing has expanded beyond a person-focused approach to include a location-based approach. Recently developed proactive policing strategies that are concerned with the geographic distribution and explanation of crime include hot spots policing and community policing, and oftentimes problem-oriented policing, broken windows policing, third-party policing, and focused deterrence strategies. Hot spots policing entails focusing police efforts at crime prevention in a very small geographic area where crime concentrates. This strategy is one of only a few policing strategies grounded in both theory and research. Crime concentrates at places even more than it concentrates in people. Research in Minneapolis, Minnesota, in the 1980s demonstrated that 60 percent of the crime occurs at 6 percent of places (see Sherman, et al. 1989, cited under Theory and Basis of Hot Spots Policing). Place-based theories about routine activities and rational choice have led to deterrence-based strategies such as directed patrol, crackdowns, and other traditional approaches to hot spots policing, as well as more community-oriented, problem-solving, and situational crime prevention approaches at crime hot spots. Hot spots policing is one of few areas in criminal justice research that has been tested using randomized controlled trials, a gold standard for research. Several systematic reviews suggest that focusing police efforts in a small geographic area reduces crime. Furthermore, research on displacement and diffusion of benefits suggests that hot spots policing does not merely geographically displace crime. In fact, nearby places may experience a diffusion of crime benefits. Only a few studies have examined the noncrime impacts of hot spots policing, but these suggest that it does not harm public perceptions of police and may even promote informal social control. Cost-effectiveness analyses have been partially used to assess the relative costs and outcomes of hot spot policing interventions. Additionally, existing research has suggested the crime harm index (CHI) for assessing the crime impact of hot spot policing interventions. Several data sources are available from past National Institute of Justice–funded studies on hot spots of crime and hot spots policing.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document