Crime Science

The Relationships Between Crime Science and Related Approaches

Crime science is particularly closely associated with four other subjects: forensic science, criminology, police science, and medical science.

Evidence-based crime reduction

Introduction

Local problem-solving as a means of crime and disorder reduction has been emphasised in both the United Kingdom and the United States. In each country, however, reviews have found problem-solving efforts in practice often to be unsystematic and ill-informed.

Many crime reduction tactics have a characteristic lifecycle. To begin with there may be a substantial effect, but this can fade over time. Attention to ways of sustaining effects is therefore needed. Those tactics least liable to diminishing impact, for example target removal, are clearly preferable. Strategies involving a coherent blend of tactics have great promise, for example ‘crackdown and consolidation‘ and ‘weed and seed’. These marry enforcement, to bring about short-term impacts, to measures liable to produce longer-term changes in the wake of the short-term measures.

Development

Modern policing prioritises the reduction of crime and disorder. Problem-solving is widely understood to be the best means of doing so. In some cases this may entail work in partnership with the general community or with other agencies; in others the police may work alone. In all cases the aim is to reduce crime, disorder or calls for service. Whilst there is a consensus that this is sensible, recent reports suggest that what has been done in practice has tended to be weak (Read and Tilley 2000; Scott 2000, Goldstein, personal communication). The SARA process (Scanning, Analysis, Response and Assessment), where it is used by police agencies to address problems, tends to be used in a mechanistic and uncreative way, and does not make use of the existing lessons from research. As a consequence, the process goes on at an almost exclusively low level in the organisation and often results in trivial analyses of poorly articulated problems with responses hardly connected to the analysis, and with an over-reliance on traditional enforcement.

In our field, problems are specified on the basis of an analysis of data in the area in which we are to work. Take domestic violence, as an example. We know from existing research that domestic violence is particularly prone to repeat occurrence. The relevance of this to the local level in which we were proposing to launch an initiative would need to be confirmed. The existing research literature can provide clues as to what to look for in specifying the problem more accurately, and in sufficient detail to enable plausible interventions to be developed. The fact that there are some already established relationships at national level should, therefore, be helpful in guiding the local analyses, but they do not, of course, constitute an exhaustive set. There may be many other nationally or locally relevant relationships which could form the focus of an intervention and which have not yet been identified.

Decades of research have demonstrated that problems of crime and disorder can be broken down into more specific and potentially actionable problems. These are now discussed with a note on what is necessary at a local level in order to verify the existence of the problem there. It is known from research that:

Crime and disorder cluster in ‘hot spots’

There is substantial evidence that crime and disorder tend to cluster in certain places or at certain times. Some housing areas are more likely than others to suffer domestic burglary; and disorder associated with pubs and clubs, perhaps not surprisingly, tends to occur in city centers on Friday and Saturday nights at closing time.

Crime clusters on ‘hot victims’ (repeat victims)

(In relation to the prevention of repeat victimisation and crime clusters), Farrell and Pease (1993) note that repeat victimisation is relevant to domestic and commercial burglary, car crime, racial attacks, school crime, bullying, domestic violence, credit card fraud, retail sector crime, obscene phone calls and neighbour disputes.

Crime is carried out by ‘hot people’ (repeat offenders)

There is now well established research evidence that a small proportion of offenders commit a high proportion of offences. Targeting these people makes sense, particularly since at the local level they can account for their own minicrime wave in their area of operation, although it may be the case that any respite is short-lived.

Ignoring low-level disorder encourages crime

There are reasonable theoretical grounds for thinking that a reduction in disorder may ‘nip crime in the bud’ and deter vulnerable young people from getting involved in more serious offending, or may send ‘signals’ to potential offenders that crime is not tolerated here. Although Sherman (1 997) regards the research evidence as only moderately strong, he does conclude that a police focus on street activity can help reduce serious crime.

‘Crime facilitators’ exist

It is also known from research that certain conditions in the immediate environment facilitate crime and disorder – drugs, alcohol, guns and other weapons are obvious examples. The removal, or control, of these crime facilitators makes sense (on firearms, see for example Wintemute, 2000) and should contribute to the reduction of crime.

An Example: Domestic burglary
There are varying contexts for home or neighbourhood watch, a common tactic to try to reduce domestic burglary. Understanding these suggests that Neighbourhood or home Watch might be implemented differentially in different neighbourhoods to trigger mechanisms to deal with specific burglary-related problems.

Research over the past few years has highlighted the significance of repeat victimisation in domestic burglary. Demonstration projects have shown how tactics have effectively been tailored to trigger mechanisms to reduce risks to those shown to be most vulnerable through prior victimisation. Replications have involved the refinement of the approach in the context of variations in setting. Tactics currently being developed to address repeat victimisation are marrying detection and prevention.

Resources

Notes

1. Based on Tilley, N., & Laycock, G. (2002). Working out what to do: Evidence-based crime reduction. Crime Reduction Research Series paper 11, London: HMSO. ISBN 1-84082-792-0

Further Reading

• Andresen, M. A., & Felson, M. (2009). The impact of co-offending. British Journal of Criminology, 50(1), 66-81.
• Andresen, M., & Felson, M. (2010). Situational crime prevention and co-offending. Crime patterns and analysis. ECCA Journal, 3(1), 3-13.
• Andresen, M. A., & Felson, M. (2012). Co-offending and the diversification of crime types. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 56(5), 811-829.
• Barr, R., & Pease, K. (1990). Crime placement, displacement, and deflection. In M. Tonry & N. Morris (Eds.), Crime and justice: A review of research (pp. 277-318). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
• Batty, M., Desyllas, J., & Duxbury, E. (2003a). Safety in numbers? Modelling crowds and designing control for the Notting Hill Carnival. Urban Studies, 40(8), 1573-1590.
• Batty, M., DeSyllas, J., & Duxbury, E. (2003b). The discrete dynamics of small-scale spatial events: Agent-based models of mobility in carnivals and street parades. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 17(7), 673-697.
• Beckett, H., Firmin, C., Hynes, P., & Pearce, J. (2014). Tackling child sexual exploitation: A study of current practice in London. Luton: University of Bedfordshire.
• Borgatti, S. P., Mehra, A., Brass, D., & Labianca, G.. (2009). Network analysis in the social sciences. Science, 323(5916), 892-895.
• Bouhana, N., & Wikstrom, P.-O. (2011). Al Qai’da-influenced radicalisation: A rapid evidence assessment guided by situational action theory. London: Home Office.
• Bowers, K. J., Johnson, S. D., & Pease, K. (2004). Prospective hot-spotting the future of crime mapping? British Journal of Criminology, 44(5), 641-658.
• Bowers, K. J., Johnson, S, Guerette, R., Summers, L., & Poynton, S. (2011). Spatial displacement and diffusion of benefits among geographically focused policing initiatives: A meta-analytical review. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 7(4), 347-374.
• Braga, A. A., Kennedy, D., Waring, E., & Morrison Piehl, A. (2001). Problem-oriented policing, deterrence, and youth violence: An evaluation of Boston’s Operation Ceasefire. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 38(3), 195-225.
• Brantingham, P., & Brantingham, P. (1984). Patterns in crime. New York: Macmillan.
• Brantingham, P., & Brantingham, P. (1995). Criminality of place. European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research, 3(3), 5-26.
• Brantingham, P., & Brantingham, P. (2008). Crime pattern theory. In R. Wortley & L. Mazerolle (Eds.), Environmental criminology and crime analysis (pp. 78-93). Abingdon: Routledge.
• Brayley, H., Cockbain, E., & Laycock, G. (2011). The value of crime scripting: Deconstructing internal child sex trafficking. Policing, 5(2),132-143.
• Brayley-Morris, H., Sorrell, A., Revoir, A., Meakin, G, Court, D., & Morgan, R. (2015). Persistence of DNA from laundered semen stains: Implications for child sex trafficking cases. Forensic Science International: Genetics, 19, 165-171.
• Bullock, K., Clarke, R. V., & Tilley, N. (2010a). Introduction. In K. Bullock, R. V. Clarke, & N. Tilley (Eds.), Situational prevention of organised crimes (pp. 1-16). Cullompton: Willan.
• Bullock, K., Clarke, R. V., & Tilley, N. (Eds.). (2010b). Situational prevention of organised crimes. Crime Science Series. Cullompton: Willan.
• Campana, P. (2016). The structure of human trafficking: Lifting the bonnet on a Nigerian transnational network. British Journal of Criminology, 56(1), 68-86.
• Chalmers, A. F. (2013). What is this thing called science? Maidenhead: Open University Press.
• Christie, N. (2000). Crime control as industry: Towards gulags, Western style. Abingdon: Routledge.
• Clarke, R. V. (1980). “Situational” crime prevention: Theory and practice. The British Journal of Criminology, 20(2), 136-147.
• Clarke, R. V. (1983). Situational crime prevention: Its theoretical basis and practical scope. Crime and Justice, 4, 225-256.
• Clarke, R. V. (1997a). Introduction. In R. V. Clarke (Ed.), Situational crime prevention: Successful case studies (pp. 1-42). Albany: Harrow and Heston.
• Clarke, R. V. (1997b). Situational crime prevention: Successful case studies (2d ed.). Albany: Harrow and Heston.
• Clarke, R. V. (2004). Technology, criminology and crime science. European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research, 10(1), 55-63.
• Clarke, R. V., & Cornish, D. B. (1985). Modelling offenders’ decisions: A framework for policy and research. In M. Tonry & N. Morris (Eds.), Crime and Justice: An Annual Review of Research. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
• Clarke, R. V., & Eck, J. (2003). Become a problem-solving crime analyst: In 55 small steps. London: Jill Dando Institute of Crime Science.
• Clarke, R. V., & Felson, M. (1993). Routine activity and rational choice (Vol. 5). New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers.
• Clarke, R. V., & Weisburd, D. (1994). Diffusion of crime control benefits: Observations on the reverse of displacement. In R. V. Clarke (Ed.), Crime Prevention Studies (Vol. 2, pp. 165-182). Monsey, NY: Criminal Justice Press.
• Cockbain, E. (2013a). The trafficking of British children within the UK for sexual exploitation: A situational analysis. London: University College London (University of London).
• Cockbain, E. (2013b). Grooming and the “Asian sex gang predator” : The construction of a racial crime threat. Race & Class, 54(4), 22-32.
• Cockbain, E. (forthcoming). Offender and victim networks in human trafficking. Abingdon: Routledge.
• Cockbain, E., Brayley, H., & Laycock, G. (2011). Exploring internal child sex trafficking networks using social network analysis. Policing, 5(2), 144-157.
• Cockbain, E., & Reynald, D. (2016). Introduction to the special edition. Child sexual abuse: Analysis and intervention. Crime Science Journal, 5(4), 1-3.
• Cockbain, E., & Wortley, R. (2015). Everyday atrocities: Does internal (domestic) sex trafficking of British children satisfy the expectations of opportunity theories of crime? Crime Science, 4(1), 1-12.
• Cohen, L. E., & Felson, M. (1979). Social change and crime rate trends: A routine activity approach. American Sociological Review, 44(4), 588-608.
• Coles, N. (2001). It’s not what you know-It’s who you know that counts. Analysing serious crime groups as social networks. British Journal of Criminology, 41(4), 580-594.
• Cope, N. (2003). Crime analysis: Principles and practice. In T. Newburn (Ed.), Handbook of policing (pp. 340-362). Willan: Cullompton.
• Cornish, D. B. (1994). The procedural analysis of offending and its relevance for situational prevention. Crime Prevention Studies, 3, 151-196.
• Cornish, D. B., & Clarke, R. V. (1986). The reasoning criminal: Rational choice perspectives on offending. New York: Springer.
• Cornish, D. B., & Clarke, R. V. (1987). Understanding crime displacement: An application of rational choice theory. Criminology, 25(4), 933-948.
• Cornish, D. B., & Clarke, R. V. (2003). Opportunities, precipitators and criminal decisions: A reply to Wortley’s critique of situational crime prevention. In M. Smith & D. B. Cornish (Eds.), Theory for practice in situational crime prevention (pp. 41-96). Monsey, NY: Criminal Justice Press.
• Crawford, A. (2008). Plural policing in the UK: Policing beyond the police. In T. Newburn (Ed.), Handbook of policing (pp. 147-181). Willan: Cullompton.
• Eck, J. E. (1994). Drug markets and drug places: A case-control study of the spatial structure of illicit drug dealing. PhD thesis, University of Maryland, Faculty of the Graduate School.
• Eck, J. E. (2002). Learning from experience in problem-oriented policing and situational prevention: The positive functions of weak evaluations and the negative functions of strong ones. In N. Tilley (Ed.), Evaluation for crime prevention (pp. 93-118). Monsey, NY: Criminal Justice Press.
• Ekblom, P. (1997). Gearing up against crime: A dynamic framework to help designers keep up with the adaptive criminal in a changing world. International Journal of Risk Security and Crime Prevention, 2, 249-266.
• Ekblom, P., & Tilley, N. (2000). Going equipped. British Journal of Criminology, 40(3), 376-398.
• Farrell, G., Tilley, N., Tseloni, A., & Mailley, J. (2010). Explaining and sustaining the crime drop: Clarifying the role of opportunity-related theories. Crime Prevention & Community Safety, 12(1), 24-41.
• Farrell, G., Tseloni, A., Mailley, J., & Tilley, N. (2011). The crime drop and the security hypothesis. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 48(2), 147-175.
• Farrell, G., & Pease, K. (1993). Once bitten, twice bitten: Repeat victimisation and its implications for crime prevention. In Crime Prevention Unit Papers. London: HMSO.
• Felson, M. (1986). Linking criminal choices, routine activities, informal control, and criminal outcomes. In D. B. Cornish & R. V. Clarke (Eds.), The reasoning criminal: Rational choice perspectives on offending. New York: Springer.
• Felson, M. (2003). The process of co-offending. In M. Smith & D. B. Cornish (Eds.), Theory for practice in situational crime prevention (pp. 149-167). Monsey, NY: Criminal Justice Press.
• Felson, M., & Clarke, R. V. (1998). Opportunity makes the thief. In B. Webb (Ed.), Police Research Series. London: Home Office.
• Felson, M., & Eckert, M. (2015). Crime and everyday life (5th ed.). London: SAGE.
• Forrester, D., Chatterton, M., & Pease, K. (1988). The Kirkholt burglary prevention project, Rochdale. Crime Prevention Unit: Paper 13, London: Home Office.
• Freilich, J. D., & Newman, G. R. (Eds.). (2009). Reducing terrorism through situational crime prevention. Crime Prevention Studies (Vol. 25). Willan: Cullompton.
• French, J., Morgan, R., & Davy, J. (2014). The secondary transfer of gunshot residue: An experimental investigation carried out with SEM-EDX analysis. X-Ray Spectrometry, 43(1), 56-61.
• Garland, D. (1996). The limits of the sovereign state strategies of crime control in contemporary society. British Journal of Criminology, 36(4), 445-471.
• Gilbert, N., & Troitzsch, K. (2005). Simulation for the social scientist (2d ed.). Berkshire: Open University Press.
• Gill, P., Lee, J., Rethemeyer, K., Horgan, J., & Asal, V. (2014). Lethal connections: The determinants of network connections in the Provisional Irish Republican Army, 1970-1998. International Interactions, 40(1), 52-78.
• Goldstein, I., & Goldstein, M. (1984). The experience of science: An interdisciplinary approach. New York: Plenum Press.
• Greene, J. R. (2014). The upside and downside of the ‘police science’epistemic community. Policing, 8(4), 379-392.
• Hancock, G., & Laycock, G. (2010). Organised crime and crime scripts: Prospects for disruption. In K. Bullock & N. Tilley (Eds.), Situational prevention of organised crimes (pp. 172-192). Willan: Cullompton.
• Hesseling, R. (1994). Displacement: A review of the empirical literature. In R. V. Clarke (Ed.), Crime prevention studies (pp. 197-230). Monsey, NY: Criminal Justice Press.
• Hill, J. F., Johnson, S. D., & Borrion, H. (2014). Potential uses of computer agent-based simulation modelling in the evaluation of wildlife poaching. In A. M. Lemieux (Ed.), Situational Prevention of Poaching (pp. 120-153). Abingdon: Routledge.
• Imron, M. A., Herzog, S., & Berger, U. (2011). The influence of agroforestry and other land-use types on the persistence of a Sumatran tiger (Panthera tigris sumatrae) population: An individual-based model approach. Environmental Management, 48(2), 276-288.
• Jackson, A., & Jackson, J. (2011). Forensic science (3d ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
• Jeffery, C. R. (1971). Crime prevention through environmental design. Beverly Hills, CA: SAGE.
• Keane, A., Jones, J. P., & Milner-Gulland, E. (2012). Modelling the effect of individual strategic behaviour on community-level outcomes of conservation interventions. Environmental Conservation, 39(04), 305-315.
• Kennedy, D. M. (2009). Deterrence and crime prevention: Reconsidering the prospect of sanction. Abingdon: Routledge.
• Kennedy, D. (2014). Working in the field: Police research in theory and in practice. In E. Cockbain & J. Knutsson (Eds.), Applied police research: Challenges and opportunities (pp. 9-20). Abingdon: Routledge.
• Laycock, G. (2001a). Scientists or politicians-Who has the answer to crime? Inaugural lecture at the Jill Dando Institute of Crime Science.
• Laycock, G. (2001b). Hypothesis-based research: The repeat victimization story. Criminology and Criminal Justice, 1(1), 59-82.
• Laycock, G. (2003). Launching crime science. London: Jill Dando Institute.
• Laycock, G. (2005). Defining crime science. In M. Smith & N. Tilley (Eds.), Crime science: New approaches to preventing and detecting crime (pp. 3-24). Cullompton: Willan.
• Laycock, G. (2012). Happy birthday? Policing, 6(2), 101-107.
• Lebloch, E. K., & King, S. (2006). Child sexual exploitation: A partnership response and model intervention. Child Abuse Review, 15(5), 362-372.
• Lemieux, A. M. (Ed.). (2014). Situational prevention of poaching. Crime Science Series. Abingdon: Routledge.
• Loader, I., & Sparks, R. (2011). Public criminology? Key Ideas in Criminology. Abingdon: Routledge.
• Mancuso, M. (2014). Not all madams have a central role: Analysis of a Nigerian sex trafficking network. Trends in Organized Crime, 17(1-2), 66-88.
• Marchione, E., Johnson, S. D., & Wilson, A. (2014). Modelling maritime piracy: A spatial approach. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, 17(2), 9.
• McAllister, B. (2004). Al Qaeda and the innovative firm: Demythologizing the network. Studies in Conflict & Terrorism, 27(4), 297-319.
• McAndrew, D. (2000). The structural analysis of criminal networks. In D. Canter & L. Alison (Eds.), The social psychology of crime: Groups, teams and networks. Aldershot: Ashgate.
• Mischel, W. (1968). Personality and assessment. New York: John Wiley.
• Morgan, R. M., & Bull, P. A. (2007). The philosophy, nature and practice of forensic sediment analysis. Progress in Physical Geography, 31(1), 43-58.
• Morgan, R., French, J., & Meakin, G. (forthcoming). Understanding forensic trace evidence. In R. Wortley, A. Sidebottom, G. Laycock, & N. Tilley (Eds.), Handbook of crime science. Abingdon, Routledge.
• Morgan, R., Flynn, J., Sena, V., & Bull, P. (2014). Experimental forensic studies of the preservation of pollen in vehicle fires. Science & Justice, 54(2), 141-145.
• Morselli, C. (2009). Inside criminal networks. New York: Springer.
• Morselli, C., & Petit, K. (2007). Law-enforcement disruption of a drug importation network. Global Crime, 8(2), 109-130.
• Natarajan, M. (2000). Understanding the structure of a drug trafficking organization: A conversational analysis. Crime Prevention Studies, 11, 273-298.
• Natarajan, M. (2006). Understanding the structure of a large heroin distribution network: A quantitative analysis of qualitative data. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 22(2), 171-192.
• Pawson, R., & Tilley, N. (1997). Realistic evaluation. London: SAGE.
• Pease, K. (2005). Science in the service of crime reduction. In N. Tilley (Ed.), Handbook of crime prevention and community safety (pp. 171-197). Cullompton: Willan.
• Pedahzur, A., & Perliger, A. (2006). The changing nature of suicide attacks: A social network perspective. Social Forces, 84(4), 1987-2008.
• Schwartz, D. M., & Rouselle, T. D. (2009). Using social network analysis to target criminal networks. Trends in Organized Crime, 12(2), 188-207.
• Shaw, S. E., Smith, L. L., & Bond, J. W. (2010). Examining the factors that differentiate a car key burglary from a regular domestic burglary. International Journal of Police Science and Management, 12, 450.
• Sherman, L. W. (1998). Evidence-based policing. Washington, DC: Police Foundation.
• Sherman, L. W. (2013). The rise of evidence-based policing: Targeting, testing, and tracking. Crime and Justice, 42(1), 377-451.
• Sparrow, M. (2011). Governing science: New perspectives in policing. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.
• Tilley, N. (2006). Knowing and doing: Guidance and good practice in crime prevention. In J. Knutsson & R. V. Clarke (Eds.), Putting theory to work: Implementing situational prevention and problem-oriented policing (pp. 217-252). Monsey, NY: Criminal Justice Press.
• Tilley, N., & Laycock, G. (2001). Working out what to do: Evidence-based crime reduction. In Crime Reduction Series. London: Home Office.
• Van der Hulst, R. C. (2009). Introduction to Social Network Analysis (SNA) as an investigative tool. Trends in Organized Crime, 12(2), 101-121.
• Van Dijk, J. J. (1994). Understanding crime rates: On the interactions between the rational choices of victims and offenders. British Journal of Criminology, 34(2), 105-121.
• Van?k, O., Jakob, M., Hrstka, O., & P?chou?ek, M. (2013). Agent-based model of maritime traffic in piracy-affected waters. Transportation Research, 36, 157-176.
• von Lampe, K. (2010). Preventing organised crime: The case of contraband cigarettes. In K. Bullock, R. V. Clarke, & N. Tilley (Eds.), Situational Prevention of Organised Crimes (pp. 35-57). Willan: Cullompton.
• Welsh, B. C., & Farrington, D. P. (2002). Crime prevention effects of closed circuit television: A systematic review. Home Office Research Study no. 252. London: Home Office
• Weisburd, D., & Neyroud, P. (2011). Police science: Toward a new paradigm. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.
• Weiss, R. (1987). The community and prevention. In E. Johnson (Ed.), Handbook on crime and delinquency prevention. New York: Greenwood.
• Wortley, R. (2012). Exploring the person-situation interaction in situational crime prevention. In N. Tilley & G. Farrell (Eds.), The reasoning criminologist: Essays in honour of Ronald V. Clarke (pp. 170-179). Abingdon: Routledge.
• Wortley, R., & Mazerolle, L. (Eds.). (2008). Environmental criminology and crime analysis. Abingdon: Routledge.
• Wortley, R., & Smallbone, S. (Eds.). (2006). Situational prevention of child sexual abuse (Vol. 19). Monsey, NY: Criminal Justice Press.
• Wortley, R., & Smallbone, S. (2012). Internet child pornography: Causes, investigation and prevention. Oxford: Praeger.
• Zhang, S. (2008). Chinese human smuggling organizations: Families, social networks, and cultural imperatives. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
• Zhang, S., & Chin, K. L. (2002). Enter the dragon: Inside Chinese human smuggling organizations. Criminology, 40(4), 737-768.