Environmental Criminology and Urban Crime - Essay Example

To what extent can Environmental Criminology account for Patterns of Contemporary Urban Crime? Name: Course: Tutor: Date: Environmental criminology Environmental criminology is defined as the “study of crime, criminality and victimisation as they relate to places, individuals, and organisations” (Boba, 2005, p. 59). In studying environmental criminology, scholars have always relied on spatial factors or place-based influences to determine how crime patterns occur in different geographical locations. The environmental criminology theory suggests that four things must be present for a crime to occur. They include a place or location, a target or victim, an offender and the law (Felson and Clarke, 1998, p. 13). Of special importance to this theory is the “place” factor. This is because environmental criminologists evaluate how the offender related to the victim in that particular place, and also determines how people and organisations conduct their activities in the specific place where a criminal activity occurred. According to the Felson and Clarke (1998, p. 13), environmental criminology does not concentrate on the underlying factors that may have led to a crime. Rather, it analyses the significant role that a specific “place” played in crime occurrence. In order to accomplish such an analysis, mapping becomes a necessary tool. The maps are used to associate crime with traffic patterns, land usage, street or urban design, and the movement or activities of both offenders and their victims. A simple explanation of what environmental criminology does is given by Boba (2005, p. 59), who states that it “focuses on offenders’ patterns on motivation, opportunities that exist for crime, levels of protection for victims within criminal events and the environments in which criminal events occur”. This means that rather than explain what motivated an offender, environmental criminology seeks to understand the different aspects that led to the criminal event. This means that behavioural patterns and other environmental factors that created an opportunity for crime are identified and the necessary preventative measures put in place. Once a crime occurs in a specific place, environmental criminologists do not investigate it as an isolated case. Rather, they establish if similar crimes have happened in the same spot before. They also establish if similar places have had similar crime occurrences, and ascertain the conditions that may have contributed to a crime occurring in that specific place. Based on the resultant data, a crime analyst would then recommend ways to alter environmental factors or victim behaviour in order to reduce chances of a similar occurrence happening at the same place in future (Boba, 2005, p. 60). Routine activity theory According to Boba (2005, p. 60), the theory that a target or victim and an offender must come together in a specific location for a crime to occur is essential in understanding contemporary criminal trends as shown in the crime triangle in figure 1. Figure 1: The crime triangle Source: Boba (2005, p. 60) This theory however recognises that for a crime to occur, the three identified players must interact in isolation. This means that the presence of a fourth factor, which could be a guardian, manager or handler, provides control over the situation, implying that the offender cannot go ahead with his intention to commit crime. For a crime to occur in a specific place therefore, analysts connote that the place lacks sufficient guardianship or oversight. In urban settings, the need to enhance security in specific places is informed by the amount of crime occurring in such areas. In this theory, the term ‘target’ is usually used instead of ‘victim’. This is because offenders not only target people in the crimes explained in this theory. Rather, items such as cars, TVs or laptops could be the offender’s target. According to Felson (1998, p. 5) the possibility of a target’s risk to suffer a criminal attack is influenced by its “value, inertia, visibility and access” Rational choice theory The rational theory suggests that offenders choose where to commit crime based on the opportunities and rewards that they are likely to get from such places (Boba, 2005, p. 61). According to this theory, any person can commit a crime when given the right opportunity. However, the theory posits that if a potential offender deems the reward he or she is likely to get from a crime as too low, and the accompanying risk too high, he or she will decide against committing the crime. Unlike the traditional criminology theory, the rational choice theory implies that one can choose not to engage in criminal behaviour. As such, the theory is used in environmental criminology since it can help analysts figure out why an individual chose to commit a crime under specific circumstances. According to Boba (2005, p. 62), the rational choice theory is especially useful in policing and crime analysis where systematic offenders’ profiles are being developed. If for instance women who park furthest from a shop entrance are attacked often, the security forces can analyse when the attacks occur and who the specific targets are. From such information, they can put the necessary measures to avoid a recurrence of the same kind of attack. Crime pattern theory This theory suggests that crime is likely to occur in places where activities of offenders overlap with activities of potential targets or victims in the same space (Boba, 2005, p. 62). According to Felson and Clarke (1998, p. 6), this theory is a central component in the reasoning behind environmental criminology. Accordingly, the theory defines the activity space of an individual as the place or area where he or she goes shopping, works, lives or passes by. Simply put, this theory posits that “nodes, paths and edges” form a platform on which crime is committed. Nodes are destinations where individuals go to and from. Paths on the other hand are the routes an individual takes when going to and from the nodes. Paths usually form the area where a target risks falling victim to a crime. Edges on the other hand are “the boundaries of area where people live, work, shop or seek entertainment” (Felson and Clarke, 1998, p. 6). The activities that a potential target does create an activity space that a potential offender can use to establish their targets. In relation to nodes, Felson and Clarke (1998, p. 6) observe that offenders are inclined to search for crime target in places such as schools, homes, entertainment places or places where people congregate in large numbers. Studying geographical distribution of criminal activities, the authors further note that the paths that people take while commuting generate more risk for crime during specific hours. Child predators for example may target their victims along the paths they use to and from school. This means that the risk of children-related crimes increase in the morning hours when they are going to school and in the evening hours when they are going back to their homes. Expounding on how environmental criminologists use the edges concept to predict trends in crime, Felson and Clarke (1998, p. 6) observe that the boundaries that exist in places where people seek entertainment, shop , live or work can explain crimes such as shoplifting, racial attacks or robberies. Notably, inside offenders like committing crimes in areas they are well versed with, while external offenders prefer to commit crimes away from their neighbourhoods. As such, they can retreat to the safety of their neighbourhoods after committing a crime. Using environmental criminology to explain contemporary urban crime In most countries, high crime rates are associated with urban areas. However, as noted by Hayward (2004, p.1), the exact nature of the relationship that exists between crime and urban areas remains an enigma to most scholars and social analysts. Notably, the urban interaction of physical, cultural structural and everyday activities in urban areas makes understanding the practicalities therein a tough task even for police departments charged with enhancing law and order. According to Hayward (2004, p.1), the complexity of urban living is worsened by the changeable moods, anxieties, and prosaic routines that punctuate the existence of people in densely populated areas. Seeking to expound on how crime analysts use environmental criminology to account for patterns of contemporary urban crime, Carrabine et al. (2009, p. 137) observe that they (analysts) have to answer questions about how space enlivens criminology. For instance, in order to understand crime trends in a specific urban area, an analyst would need to understand the time that such crimes occur, where the victims live, the spaces, environments and surroundings of the crime scene, and he or she may have to theorize where the offender spends time before committing the crime. Just as space shapes the social life of urban dwellers, Carrabine et al. (2009, p. 137) argue that it has the potential to shape trends in urban crime. In order to put this theory into perspective, the authors argue that crime analysts “think spatially about crime”. This involves seeking an understanding about where a recorded crime took place, who committed the crime, and reasons that may have led them to commit the crime. By understanding these three aspects, the crime analysts are able to build profiles of places and environments where most crimes in urban areas occur. They are also able to build profiles of victims and offenders from crime reports. The second stage in spatial thinking involves considering the environmental interactions in a specific place, which makes it either safe or crime-prone. According to Carrabine et al (2009, p. 138), analysts consider things such as buildings, lighting and traffic during this stage. Depending on the findings, the analysts may involve politicians, developers, planners and other agents who have the capacity to negotiate existing spaces. The third stage as explained by Carrabine et al. (2009, p. 138) involves gaining knowledge regarding the interaction between crime and space. At this stage, mapping is used as the main methodological tool. Two of the identified solutions offered in the prevention and management of crime are ‘crime prevention through environmental design’ and ‘situational crime prevention’ (Carrabine et al., 2009, p. 138). Citing statistics released by the Home Office in England and Wales in 2007, Carrabine et al. (2009, p. 139) note that the uneven geographical distribution of crime makes it hard for crime analysts in these areas to explain the trend in crime or even come up with preventative measures for the same. An example of how crime analysts categorise different spaces and crimes that occur therein is by utilising the Acorn residential area classification. The Acorn classification has grouped residential areas in the UK into five categories namely: 1) wealthy achievers -wealthy executive, flourishing families or affluent mature and old people occupy such neighbourhoods; 2) urban prosperity - occupied by prosperous professional, aspiring singles or educated urbanites; 3) comfortably off - such neighbourhoods are occupied by people who are just starting off, settled suburbia, secure families or prudent pensioners; 4) moderate means - these are neighbourhoods occupied by people with blue collar roots, post-industrial families, or Asian communities; 5) the hard pressed neighbourhoods - these are occupied by struggling families or burdened singles who can put up with high-rise hardships, and inner city adversity brought about by low income, unemployment, multi-purpose built flats and congestion (Acorn, 2009) According to the Home Office (2007, cited by Carrabine et al., 2009, p. 143) burglary, violence and vehicle theft were the most prevalent criimes in the hard-pressed and urban prosperous areas. Anti-social behaviour was however more common in ‘moderate-means’ and ‘hard-pressed areas’. The same report observed that people living in the ‘urban prosperous’ areas were either less concerned or less aware of the crime risks that exist in their neighbourhoods. A different approach in trying to account for urban crime using environmental criminology is adopted by Chatteron and Hollands (2003). The authors argue that towns and cities in Britain have adopted night-time leisure as a method of sustaining their prosperity beyond the conventional day-time hours. Notably however, the nightlife business is opening up new avenues for crime whereby urban centres are becoming “more exclusive, segmented and crime-prone” (Chatterton and Hollands, 2003, p. 174). The push for profits by entrepreneurs who run the night businesses has also been expressed as a major cause of the rise in urban crime in cities like Manchester. According to Chatterton and Hollands (2003, p. 174) most gay bars in Manchester now look similar and have even been opened up to straight consumers. Considering the overindulgence in alcohol, drugs and even sex that take place in such bars, the risk of violence and fights are at a higher level. Winlow and Hall (2006, p. 101) support this observation by stating that the violent disorder in most cities in Britain especially at night can be explained by the drinking, fighting and flirting that is prominent in clubs and bars where young people spend their leisure time. Notably, Winlow and Hall (2006, p. 101) observe that most young people associate violence with hedonism and hence see it as part of ‘having fun’. Notably however, most observe violence from the periphery, and would rather not be directly involved in the same. To most young people who visit night-clubs and bars, violence adds an edge to a night of fun. Though Winlow and Hall (2006, p. 158) state that most such violence go unreported, they observe that there are well known hot spots where such violence occur. Such include parking lots, fast-food outlets, and taxi queues situated near the nightclubs or bars. By analyzing the movement patterns of offenders and victims of urban life crime in British cities, the police can easily know that men are more likely to engage in violence after taking too much alcohol and since both the perpetrators interact in the night clubs or bars, violence is likely to occur inside the same locations. However, since most such establishments are guarded by ‘bouncers’ or guards whose main responsibility is to ensure order, people with a violent intent may wait until their targets have left the nightclubs or bars into the street before they perpetuate the violent acts. As observed by Winlow and Hall (2006, p. 161), such perpetrators and their victims are united by a “Stoical, fatalistic and reactionary attitude to violence, which is deeply entrenched and [regarded] as a reproductive form of survival, which infuses the localised culture of [British] male members” Gauging by how environmental criminology goes about explaining contemporary urban crime occurrences, it is evident that area, space and community dynamics are essential in determining possible solutions in handling present crimes and preventing future crime occurrences. As was explained by Oscar Newman in 1972, instituting changes in the physical environment where crime occur and altering physical objects within the physical environment can lead to a change in crime trends in urban areas (Carrabine et al., 2009, p. 145). Environmental criminology thus explains the environmental factors that spaces and layouts in urban centres have towards crime. However other structural factors like poverty, residential segregation, poverty, unemployment and lack of values are not taken into account. To fully understand crime trends however, a crime analyst would have to use other theories to fully comprehend why, how, where and at what time crime occurs. The justification by environmental criminologists regarding their focus on the interaction between space and crime rather than on the motives of offenders, is indirectly offered by Corrabine et al. (2009, p. 149). The authors argue that crime is inevitable and hence the best that crime analysts can do in their respective communities is devising ways through which law enforcers can reduce opportunities that offenders may utilise to commit crime. This justification does not however go unchallenged. Some critics for example argue that environmental criminology fails to acknowledge that factors such as deprivation, spatial exclusion and poverty are the root causes of crime in the society (Davis, 1999, p. 416). Citing a suggestion proposed in the defensible space theory, Davis argues that finding a solution to crime requires crime analysts to consider how community relations affect trends in crime rates instead of concentrating too much on the effect that urban design has on the same. Simply put, he proposes that people should be made to feel a sense of ownership and shared responsibility over public spaces. The use of environmental criminology according to Davis (1999, p. 418) makes people feel as if they are being monitored all the time. According to Felson and Clarke (1998) other theories present in criminology studies sum the behaviour of individual offenders. However, environmental criminology asserts that “crime rates are an aggregate-level property that reflects the social organisation of the community or society”. This explains why environmental criminology lays a bulk of its attention in understanding the basic frameworks in the society. Such include the structures, networks, positions or institutions in a given space. Conclusion The concentration of specific types of crimes in specific places might have aroused the interest of scholars and those who deal with crime policy of the need to study and analyse geographical distribution of crime. This would have been different if offences were random and unevenly distributed in different geographical areas. With urbanisation becoming an in-thing in the 19th century, it is no wonder that environmental criminology has attracted much attention from crime analysts and scholars. This is mainly because concentration of specific types of crime seemed to be linked with modern development that took place alongside the industrialisation witnessed in the century. During the 20th and 21st centuries, crime trends especially in urban areas are no different. As such, environmental criminology has been trying to explain the distribution of crime, as well as the distribution of offenders in urban spaces. However, the extent to which it accounts for contemporary crime does not include other dimensions in crime, which include the victim or target, the offender and the legal aspect. Rather, environmental criminology makes an exclusive analysis of the context under which the crime occurred, thus concentrating more on the crime itself, its timing and the place it happened. This means that environmental criminologists pay less attention to the motive of the offender or the behaviours of the target or victim. Overall, environmental criminology enables crime analysts to focus on different aspects of criminal activities, which include the offender’s decision-making and development of situational crime prevention strategies. Through geographical profiling, the crime analysts are also able to conduct hotspot crime analysis and are thus able to design crime prevention strategies based on such analysis. References Acorn 2009, Acorn classification, viewed October 26, 2010, Boba, R 2005, Crime analysis and crime mapping, Sage publications, London. Carrabine, E., Cox, P., Lee, M., South, N & Plummer, K 2009, Criminology: A Sociological Introduction, Taylor & Francis, New York. Chatterton, P. & Hollands, R 2003, Urban Nightscapes: Youth Cultures, Pleasure Spaces and Corporate Power, London, Routledge. Davis, M 1999, Ecology of Fear: Los Angeles and the Imagination of Disaster, New York, Vintage Books. Felson, M and Clarke, R.V. 1998,’opportunity makes the thief: practical theory of crime prevention,’ Police Research series, paper 98, pp. 1-31. Hayward, K 2004, City Limits: Crime, Consumer culture and the Urban Experience, Cavendish Publishing Limited, London. Winlow, S. & Hall, S, 2006, Violent Night: Urban Leisure and Contemporary Culture, Berg Publishers, Oxfordshire Read More