Search

Unanticipated accumulation and dissemination of accurate location information flows is the latest iteration of the privacy debate. This mixed-methods research contributes a grounded understanding of risk perceptions, enablers and barriers to privacy preserving\ud behaviour in a cyber-physical environment.\ud \ud We conducted the first representative survey on internet privacy concerns, cyber and physical risk taking, privacy victimisation, usage of location sharing apps and transport choices in the UK with 466 participants. The responses segregated participants into four distinct, novel clusters (cyber risk takers, physical risk takers, transport innovators, and risk abstainers) with cross-validated prediction accuracy of 92%.\ud \ud In the second part of the study, we qualitatively explored these clusters through 12 homogeneous focus groups with 6 participants each. The predominant themes of the groups matched their clusters with little overlap between the groups. The differences in risk perception and behaviours varied greatly between the clusters. Future transport systems, apps and websites that rely on location data therefore need a more personalised approach to information provision surrounding location sharing. Failing to recognise these differences could lead to reduced data sharing, riskier sharing behaviour or even total avoidance of new forms of technology in transport.

In his 2018 Stockholm prize winner lecture, Goldstein highlighted the need for problem-oriented policing (POP) to be not only effective but also fair. Contributing to the development of POP, this study examines how a wider perspective on problem-solving generally, and scoping in particular, can be adopted to address some of the growing challenges in 21st century policing. We demonstrate that the concept of ‘problem’ was too narrowly defined and that, as a result, many problem-solving models found in criminology are ill-structured to minimize the negative side-effects of interventions and deliver broader benefits. Problem-solving concepts and models are compared across disciplines and recommendations are made to improve POP, drawing on examples in architecture, conservation science, industrial ecology and ethics. QC 20200102The article is published Open Access Creative Commons CC BY.The article was first published as an advance publication article of the journal on May 22, 2019 and included in Vol. 60(1) in January 2020.

Crime and terrorism are not static problems. They change on timescales from days to decades. In part, this flux stems from offenders adapting to exploit opportunities afforded by exogenous social and technological developments in society, and to cope with threats from other offenders. But significantly too it derives from arms races between offenders and those on the security side. On the security side, however, the consensus among change-minded commentators has been that ‘contemporary crime control policies are hopelessly static’ (Cohen et al., 1995:216; see also Dietl, 2008). Ekblom (1997, 2016a) argues that to win campaigns rather than merely individual battles against criminals and terrorists, we must routinely out-innovate adaptive offenders against a background of technological and social change that may first favour one side, and then the other. The classic example is Shover’s (1996) study of safes and safe-breakers, where new, emerging technologies including combination locks, cutting tools, new hardened alloy casings and so forth flipped the advantage back and forth between the opponents.

The use of Cornish’s crime-scripts approach in situational crime prevention grows apace. However, we believe the conceptual foundation of cognitive scripts imported from Abelson and colleagues was rather unclear and is too narrow to support current script research. We therefore review the notion of scripts to both promote clarity and better connect it to mainstream situational prevention and criminology more generally. We also seek to broaden the approach by exploring additional cross-disciplinary links. We believe all this will support the progressively more demanding uses to which the procedural analysis of crime may be put in research and practice and—more broadly—challenge how human behaviour in crime is analysed.

In showing more interest in the crime event than the offender, situational crime prevention has tended to be at the margins of mainstream academic criminology. Yet offenders can only exploit potential crime opportunities if they have the resources to take advantage of them. To understand how crime patterns are generated, situational crime prevention must also consider offender resources and their distribution and social-technical change. Resources have been central to much traditional offendei-centred criminology but mainly for understanding what motivates offending. Consideration of crime-resource needs, availability, development, distribution and change provides a potential bridge between traditional offender-centred criminology and situational crime prevention.

With all due apologies to the aggregate age/crime curve, there is little denying that there is great variability between offenders and within offenders over time with respect to offending over the life course. Many persons offend, but only do so once. Others offend two or three times, and then stop. And a much smaller set of persons offend with high frequency and over longer periods of time. But much like a roller-coaster’s initial large incline to the top, participation and frequency of offending also exhibit declines over the life course until some finite (but difficult to identify without fail) endpoint. This decline in offending, is what is commonly referred to (but not always conceptually agreed upon) as desistance from crime. The topic of desistance is not necessarily a new one as it can be traced back to seminal works in the 19th century by both Quetelet (1831/1984) and Beccaria (1764/1992). However, it did not begin to take hold, at least empirically, until the Philadelphia Birth Cohort Study by Wolfgang et al. (1972/1987), who were the first to study transition probabilities and recidivism in a large sample of boys followed to late adolescence. Research on desistance, however, began to flourish after the U.S. National Research Council’s report on criminal careers (Blumstein et al., 1986), in which the Panel outlined a new paradigm that parceled out an individual’s offending career into distinct dimensions, with desistance emerging as a critical feature. Not surprisingly, much theoretical work was devoted to studying desistance, and policy-relevant discussion ensued in earnest, again not surprisingly because the justice system in general, and the correctional apparatus in particular, has a keen interest in curtailing offenders from persistent offending. Unfortunately, the study of desistance requires longitudinal data spanning at least the first two decades of life, but ideally would follow individuals much longer as antisocial behavior continues (to zig and zag) well into middle to late-middle adulthood. It was only until the last quarter century that such data sets “aged,” much like a fine wine or bourbon, and permitted such analyses both in the US and abroad. In this chapter, we provide an overview of the theoretical and conceptual issues surrounding the topic of desistance, as well as a review of the theoretical and empirical work regarding it. As well, we pay particular attention to the role of desistance in prevention, intervention, rehabilitation, and punishment programs and policies, and we highlight a few directions for empirical research. In doing so, we take a look at whether it is possible to “force the plant,” as the Gluecks (1937/1966, p. 205) wondered nearly 80 years ago, “so that benign maturation [desistance] will occur earlier than it seems to at present.”

Question: What makes connections (often deep ones) between diverse areas, has a network of equally diverse participants, and the potential to significantly impact the life of cities and their inhabitants? Answer: The researchers who combined to produce this special issue, of course. I was privileged to see them, and others, in action at a workshop convened in Stockholm by the Editor of this special issue, and to read the papers published here. I am no specialist in transport crime, but have a broad interest in research and practice in crime prevention and particular concern with the built environment and with design in general. The Editor has already capably summarised the content of the articles in the Introduction, which allows me, in what follows, to reflect on some of the many issues raised, both specific to transport and common to the whole of crime science.

The chapter reviews the methodology developed and deployed within the Bike Off 2 project and notes the significance of this methodology in maximising research outputs and impact. The publication draws on research delivered within the Bike Off project to review best practice in relation to bike theft prevention. The guide was distributed to every US police force.

This chapter seeks to link technology and crime science, including situational crime prevention. It starts by briefly considering the nature of technology. It then looks at the relationship between technology, opportunity, problems and solutions. But opportunity is a more subtle concept than many in the field assume, needing further development for present purposes. It is therefore discussed in relation to both traditional frameworks of crime science and to a more integrated and detailed counterpart, the Conjunction of Criminal Opportunity. But all the opportunity frameworks need supplementing by an account of the dynamics of crime, especially through the concepts of scripts and script clashes. A major section then examines the relationship between crime and technological change, covering adaptations and clashes over longer timescales, in the shape of co-evolutionary arms races between offenders and preventers. This spans both biological and cultural evolution. Then come sections on the practicalities of adopting a deliberately evolutionary approach to prevention—gearing up against crime, innovation and design—and finally some weaknesses of purely technological approaches to crime prevention. The conclusion reviews the significance of understanding technology for crime science. This enhanced understanding of how changing technology can both create and block opportunity for crime, nuisance and terrorism (henceforth, crime) is needed to help us anticipate, detect and respond to the many changes in the crime and security world we can expect to encounter during the rest of the twenty-first century.

Anyone trying to devise counter-terrorist designs for railway carriages faces a range of issues. In particular, designers need a framework for thinking about security. This article explores the specific practical design problem of securing railway carriages against explosive terrorist attacks and assesses the benefits of articulating such exploration through the use of the Security Function Framework (SFF). We present the SFF framework, apply it to the ExRes carriage and evaluate it according to defined criteria. Our evaluation shows that the SFF framework is clearly expressed, aids the designer in communicating design requirements, facilitates systematic creativity without necessarily generating completely new ideas, and appears practically applicable. However, we emphasize that ours have been ‘bench tests’; such tests are really no substitute for trying the SFF out with real life designers.

This paper describes the latest stage of an ongoing attempt to update and upgrade CPTED’s concepts and actions and link them more closely to developments in architecture, design and crime science. The concept of territoriality, for example, is central to the practice domain of CPTED. Yet territoriality is only vaguely defined within that domain, as are the other core concepts such as activity support and target hardening; and all of them confusingly intersect and overlap. The paper attempts a remedy by developing a suite of definitions in depth, relating the core concepts to various frameworks and discourses developed for crime prevention and design against crime, and more generally exploring ways in which CPTED could become richer and more subtle. It will also consider the ‘dark side’ of the environment, covering offenders’ countermoves to prevention and their own counter-exploitation of space, buildings and what they contain. The ultimate intention is to produce a more rigorous, yet deeper and better-integrated conception of CPTED useful for practice, research and theory alike. The paper should be considered as work in progress, indicating what might be possible and stimulating debate rather than offering a definitive resolution of the issue. Further steps are suggested and constructive contributions from readers are invited.

Paul Ekblom edited this thematic issue of the journal, 'European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research' The issue was called, ‘New Thinking on Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design'. In addition Ekblom wrote the introduction chapter. Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) is a familiar field of practice, particularly in English-speaking and Northern European nations, but now emerging too in countries such as Italy and France which have traditionally followed more community‐ and offender-oriented paths in crime prevention; and in Eastern Europe, Turkey and the Middle East. Although worthy of support, CPTED does have some serious limitations, which may limit its theoretical and empirical sharpness, practical relevance and its lasting adoption; and may even introduce harmful side-effects. So ‘old hands’ and ‘new hands’ alike need to proceed with some caution. The idea behind this thematic issue of EJCPR, containing articles from UK and Australia, is to support the concept of CPTED, and to respect the practical experience that has built up over the years, but to subject the language, the methodology, the theory, the detailed evidence and the working practice to constructive criticism. The intention, too, is to indicate directions in which CPTED should update and evolve as a practical but rigorous and evidence-based discipline. (Evidence of impact on crime of CPTED programmes is not covered here although equally important to the future of the approach.) In this introduction I will very briefly define and describe the basic principles of CPTED, as they are now; identify some of the main problems and limitations of CPTED; suggest some strategic ways in which CPTED and its component concepts could evolve and improve; look ahead to the papers in this issue which take things forward in quite diverse ways; and finish with a proposed redefinition of CPTED. Ideally the debate will not stop with this issue but continue elsewhere, contributing to a much-needed reinvigoration of the field.

This paper focuses on descriptions of crime prevention projects identified as ‘good practice’, and how they are captured and shared in knowledge bases, with the purpose of improving performance in the field as a whole. This relates both to evidence-based approaches to practice, and to growing attempts at explicit knowledge management. There are, however, fundamental issues in the transfer of effective practice in the crime prevention field, which few working knowledge bases have properly addressed. Evaluation often remains weak and descriptions of successful projects do not always contain the right information to help practitioners select and replicate projects suitable for transfer to their own contexts. Knowledge remains fragmentary. With these concerns in mind this paper systematically examines the projects contained in the UK Home Office ‘Effective Practice Database’, a repository of project descriptions volunteered and self-completed on a standard online form by practitioners. The Home Office descriptions (and their equivalents elsewhere) reveal significant limitations of richness, retrievability and reliability. Ways of addressing these issues are discussed, ranging from the media and processes of ‘knowledge-harvesting’ to the use of more purpose-designed frameworks such as 5Is. But the fundamental issue remains one of taking knowledge management seriously and investing sustained time, money and leadership effort to make it work.

Planners of crime prevention evaluations often face a dilemma: how to actively manage numerous interacting variables needing prospective consideration as part of a research design. Failure to consider one design component at the expense of another, or lavishing disproportionate attention on some and not others can increase the likelihood of non-convincing and/or non-significant findings. To assist the decision-making processes needed at the initial stage of evaluation design to avoid such outcomes, we describe an evolving systematic prospective planning tool given the acronym CRITIC. CRITIC raises awareness, and discusses the effect, of Crime history (how crime-prone the action and control sites are), Reduction (in terms of proportional reduction in the crime problem anticipated in the action sites when compared to the control), Intensity (in terms of the number and/or strength of interventions necessary per target exposed to crime risk), Time period (that over which the action and control sites are tracked before and after implementation), Immensity (in terms of the number of units of analysis at risk of crime to be tracked) and Cost (in terms of the unit cost per intervention) on the likelihood of statistically significant outcome analyses and cost-effective results. The application of CRITIC is demonstrated on a bag-theft reduction study in a chain of bars in central London. Its wider utility to other crime prevention evaluation contexts is also discussed.

Project MARC aimed to develop a mechanism to assess the risk of theft of consumer electronic products, and their corresponding security; and to devise an operational scheme for EU level to influence manufacturers to make their products less criminogenic. The project encountered serious difficulties in the assessment process due, among other things, to limitations of concepts and terminology. This paper describes and analyses those limitations; discusses an approach to redesigning language that draws on biological and risk management concepts; proposes a ‘basic grammar’ of risk and security covering their dual dimensions of probability and harm (underemphasised in crime prevention); focuses on sources of risk centred on the product, based on ‘crime scripts’ and criminal motivation; and explores wider ecological and evolutionary issues. It makes suggestions for improving any assessment scheme and raises wider issues on how crime science should tighten its terminology and bring together approaches to crime prevention and risk management. The present contribution comprises proposals for discussion and development rather than a perfected schema.

This paper outlines a framework which draws together the currently fragmented understandings of, and actions against, terrorism. The ‘conjunction of terrorist opportunity’ (CTO) stems from a widely known equivalent in crime prevention. Detailed distinctions emerge which clarify the relationship between crime and terrorism. There is special emphasis on historical and higher-level emergent causes, including terrorists' pursuit of strategic objectives and the career of the terrorist organisation itself, as it co-evolves with the society trying to frustrate and destroy it. But the framework seeks to anchor these understandings by reference to terrorist events and their immediate causes. On the basis of this analysis a suite of interventions can then be chosen to match terrorist problem and context and to reflect tactical and strategic priorities. Although the framework is only sketched here, it appears sufficiently promising to test out on a range of case studies by diagnosing causes and describing or suggesting interventions.

Background: The 25 Techniques of Situational Crime Prevention remain one of the bedrocks of research in Crime Science and play a key role in managing knowledge of research and practice. But they are not the only way of organising, transferring and applying this knowledge. Discussion: Taking the 25 Techniques and their theoretical underpinnings as our starting point, this paper presents the (currently) 11 Ds, a set of intervention principles which focus specifically on how the interventions are intended to influence the offender in the proximal crime situation. The context of this work was a project to help security managers detect and control attempts to undertake 'hostile reconnaissance' of public places by those planning to commit crimes or acts of terrorism. We discuss why we judged 25 Techniques as a model for emulation in general terms but unsuitable in detail for the present purpose. We also describe the process of developing the principles, which involved both reflection, and capture of new knowledge from theory and practice, including the security domain. The distinctive contribution of professional design to this process is noted. We then present the Ds themselves and show how, as generic principles, they relate to practical methods of prevention; how they can be further organised to aid their learning and their use; how they relate to other formulations such as the Conjunction of Criminal Opportunity; and how they might apply, with expansion perhaps, to the wider field of SCP. Summary: We discuss the process and the wider benefits of developing alternative – but rigorously linked – perspectives on the same theories and phenomena both for transferring existing research knowledge to practice and for sparking leading-edge theory and research.

In our increasingly knowledge-driven society, we continually encounter guides on ‘how-to’ operate new procedures and technologies at home and work, necessitating rapid familiarization with terms, standards and updates, adaptation to new constraints and exploitation of new enablers. This occurs whenever we change companies, move posts, our current post alters beneath us, or the operating environment out there changes along the axes of science and technology, the economy, the environment or the law. We must also become discerning consumers — learning to distinguish ‘good’ knowledge from the irrelevant, wrong or outdated.

Consider an elementary security problem: theft of customers’ bags in bars. Consider also an equally elementary practical solution: mounting clips beneath bar tables to secure bags by preventing thieves from moving them stealthily along the floor with their foot or lifting them off chairbacks while customers chat with their companions. Faced with high bag theft rates, in London, several years ago, the police developed the ‘Chelsea clip’,1 a plastic fixture screwed under bar tables for anchoring customers’ bags. The police enthusiastically promoted the clip and many were installed. However, an observational survey of a major shopping/entertainment locale in London (Upper Street, Islington) revealed that few were in use. A similar picture emerged more recently from research at a venue at London’s Victoria Station.2 Moreover, during the three-month period of observation by researchers from Central Saint Martins, just one Chelsea clip was found to be in use.

The UK Cox Report on creativity in business (HM Treasury 2005: 2), identifies three key interlinked terms: ‘Creativity’ is the generation of new ideas – either new ways of looking at existing problems, or of seeing new opportunities, perhaps by exploiting emerging technologies or changes in markets. ‘Innovation’ is the successful exploitation of new ideas. It is the process that carries them through to new products, new services, new ways of running the business or even new ways of doing business. ‘Design’ is what links creativity and innovation. It shapes ideas to become practical and attractive propositions for users or customers. Design may be described as creativity deployed to a specific end. Innovation, creativity and design of course occur not just in the scientific and technological domains but in the social, institutional, economic, environmental, commercial and legal. And the business in question could be a criminal enterprise, whether run by a lone, casual thief or the Camorra. This chapter focuses on innovation and creativity; design is covered separately by Ekblom in the 'Designing Products Against Crime' chapter of this encyclopedia. Why should criminologists and crime scientists be interested in these concepts? Simply put, there is a dynamic such that innovation regulates both the quantity and the quality of crime opportunities and crime reduction solutions. Examples are given of obsolescent crimes and the process whereby they become obsolete. The metaphor of co-evolution or arms race between offender and preventer is found helpful in understanding the dynamic. It is noted that the consequence of this insight is the relative unhelpfulness for understanding crime trends of statistics of recorded crime, since the same crime label is attached to crimes whose nature and method has changed with the profile of presenting opportunities. The crime drop experienced throughout the Western world in the last decade of the twentieth century is interpreted in terms of a temporary advantage enjoyed by preventers, notably via enhanced security of motor vehicles. The integration is advocated of this understanding into the crime reduction enterprise, and into the strategy and tactics that follow.

The opening lines of the handbook issued by Sir Robert Peel to all officers of the Metropolitan Police in 1829, were these: ‘It should be understood at the outset that the object to be attained is the prevention of crime. To this great end every effort of the police is to be directed. The security of person and property, the preservation of the public tranquility, and all the other objects of a police establishment will thus be better effected than by the detection and punishment of the offender after he has succeeded in committing the crime.’ Quoted in Reith (1948:62). Mayne, one of the first two Commissioners, added this principle: ‘To prevent crime and disorder, as an alternative to their repression by military force and severity of legal punishment.’ Quoted in Boyd (2012). What exactly they meant by prevention is open to interpretation, and whether this was just a ruse to help convince a suspicious public that in England ‘continental’ methods of repression would not be adopted is not clear. But by the late 19th Century the reactive approach of catching criminals or ‘feeling collars’ had come to predominate; and in the 20th, the politically-significant rhetoric of ‘fighting crime’ achieved consensual hegemony, delivered huge resources to policing over the years and of course powerfully shaped the policing organisation. It was not until the 1960s that the first signs of resurgence of an explicit, practical, preventive role were seen.

Introduction: Ronald V. Clarke - the Quiet Revolutionary, Graham Farrell and Nick Tilley 1. Situational Crime Prevention: The Home Office Origins, Pat Mayhew and Mike Hough 2. On Being Crime Specific: Observations on the Career of R.V.G. Clarke, Derek Cornish and Martha Smith 3. Ferruginous Ducks, Low Hanging Fruit, and Ronald V. Clarke's World of Crime Science, Nick Ross 4. Happy returns: ideas brought back from situational crime prevention's exploration of design against crime, Paul Ekblom 5. Linking Situational Crime Prevention and Focused Deterrence Strategies, Anthony A. Braga and David M. Kennedy 6. How Situational Crime Prevention Saved Problem-oriented Policing, John Eck and Tamara Madensen 7. Ron Clarke's Contribution to Improving Policing: a Diffusion of Benefits, Michael Scott and Herman Goldstein 8. Vulnerability of Evaluators of Problem-oriented Policing Projects, Johannes Knutsson 9. Evaluation for Everyday Life, Mike Maxfield 10. CCTV Evaluation, Nancy La Vigne 11. Spatial Displacement and Diffusion of Crime Control Benefits Revisited: New Evidence on why Crime Doesn't just move around the Corner, David Weisburd and Cody Telep 12. Suicide and Opportunity: Implications for the Rationality of Suicide, David Lester 13. Ron and the Schiphol Fly, Ken Pease and Gloria Laycock 14. Exploring the Person-Situation Interaction in Situational Crime Prevention, Richard Wortley 15. A Rational Choice Analysis of Organized Crime and Trafficked Goods, Mangai Natajaran 16. The Structure of Angry Violence, Marcus Felson 17. Extending the Reach of Situational Crime Prevention, Graeme R. Newman and Joshua D. Freilich 18. Contrasting Hotspots: Did the Opportunist make the Heat, Kate Bowers and Shane Johnson 19. Situating Situational Crime Prevention: Anchoring Politically Palatable Crime Reduction Strategy, Paul Brantingham and Patricia Brantingham

Design against crime has always existed, but a combination of circumstances has led to its recent takeoff. Design seeks fitness for purpose and involves reconciling conflicting requirements, one of which may be crime prevention. The focus in this article is on design changes to the physical world while acknowledging links with social processes. The aim is to illustrate how design and prevention overlap, not to identify what works. After a review of contemporary schools of design, some of which can be criticized for narrowness and an uncertain empirical base, a broader definition of prevention is proposed that allows less restricted exploration of how different types of prevention employ design. The article then considers the process of preventing crime through design, discussing the special difficulties of designing when offenders can fight back. A wider-ranging look, from an ecological perspective, reveals interesting parallels between design against crime and other fields.

Most evaluations of crime prevention are carried out with little regard for methodological probity. Of work that aspires to methodological adequacy, the standard designs are the before-after comparison group and the interrupted time series. The critical questions are whether a program has an effect (and if not, whether because of theory failure, implementation failure, or measurement failure), the extent of any effect achieved, and the means by which it was achieved. The reduction of crime is a measure of outcomes, but others are often used. Clarity is necessary in the use of noncrime measures. Too often, evaluators settle for the "consolation prizes" of reductions in fear and incivilities. Distinct evaluative requirements attach to different types of prevention. Improvements in standard methodology and innovation by nonstandard approaches are needed. The "scientific realist" tradition eschews conventional one-shot quasi experimentation in favor of repeated manipulations leading to the cataloging of possible mechanisms and consistency of outcome pattern with presumed mechanisms. Different actors (practitioners, evaluators, administrators) have different objectives and interests; evaluators must take account of those differences. Language: en

Publisher's description of the book that contains this chapter: How can a society prevent-not deter, not punish-but prevent crime? Criminal justice prevention, commonly called crime control, aims to prevent crime after an initial offence has been commited through anything from an arrest to a death penalty sentence. These traditional means have been frequently examined and their efficacy just as frequently questioned. Promising new forms of crime prevention have emerged and expanded as important components of an overall strategy to reduce crime. Crime prevention today has developed along three lines: interventions to improve the life chances of children and prevent them from embarking on a life of crime; programs and policies designed to ameliorate the social conditions and institutions that influence offending; and the modification or manipulation of the physical environment, products, or systems to reduce everyday opportunities for crime. Each strategy aims at preventing crime or criminal offending in the first instance - before the act has been committed. Each, importantly, takes place outside of the formal criminal justice system, representing an alternative, perhaps even socially progressive way to reduce crime. The Oxford Handbook of Crime Prevention is a comprehensive, up-to-date, and authoritative review of research on crime prevention. Bringing together top scholars in criminology, public policy, psychology, and sociology, this Handbook includes critical reviews of the main theories that form the basis of crime prevention, evidence-based assessments of the effectiveness of the most important interventions, and cross-cutting essays that examine implementation, evaluation methodology, and public policy. Covering the three major crime prevention strategies active today-developmental, community, and situational-this definitive volume addresses seriously and critically the ways in which the United States and the Western world have attempted, and should continue to strive for the prevention of crime.