Journal of Quantitative Criminology

, Volume 31, Issue 1, pp 127–147 | Cite as

Crime and Place: A Longitudinal Examination of Street Segment Patterns in Vancouver, BC

  • Andrea S. N. Curman
  • Martin A. Andresen
  • Paul J. Brantingham
Original Paper



To test the generalizability of previous crime and place trajectory analysis research on a different geographic location, Vancouver BC, and using alternative methods.


A longitudinal analysis of a 16-year data set using the street segment as the unit of analysis. We use both the group-based trajectory model and a non-parametric cluster analysis technique termed k-means that does not require the same degree of assumptions as the group-based trajectory model.


The majority of street blocks in Vancouver evidence stable crime trends with a minority that reveal decreasing crime trends. The use of the k-means has a significant impact on the results of the analysis through a reduction in the number of classes, but the qualitative results are similar.


The qualitative results of previous crime and place trajectory analyses are confirmed. Though the different trajectory analysis methods generate similar results, the non-parametric k-means model does significantly change the results. As such, any data set that does not satisfy the assumptions of the group-based trajectory model should use an alternative such as k-means.


Crime and place Trajectory analysis Spatial criminology 


  1. Andresen MA, Linning SJ (2012) The (in)appropriateness of aggregating across crime types. Appl Geogr 35(1–2):275–282CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Andresen MA, Malleson N (2011) Testing the stability of crime patterns: implications for theory and policy. J Res Crime Delinq 48(1):58–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Andruff H, Carraro N, Thompson A, Gaudreau P, Louvet B (2009) Latent class growth modelling: a tutorial. Tutor Quant Methods Psychol 5(1):11–24Google Scholar
  4. Bernasco W, Block R (2011) Robberies in Chicago: a block-level analysis of the influence of crime generators, crime attractors, and offender anchor points. J Res Crime Delinq 48(1):33–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Braga AA, Hureau DM, Papachristos AV (2011) The relevance of micro places to citywide robbery trends: a longitudinal analysis of robbery incidents at street corners and block faces in Boston. J Res Crime Delinq 48(1):7–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brantingham PJ, Brantingham PL (1991) Environmental criminology. Waveland Press, Prospect HeightsGoogle Scholar
  7. Brantingham PJ, Dyreson DA, Brantingham PL (1976) Crime seen through a cone of resolution. Am Behav Sci 20(2):261–273CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Calinski T, Harabasz J (1974) A dendrite method for cluster analysis. Commun Stat 3(1):1–27Google Scholar
  9. Elragal A, El-Gendy N (2012) Trajectory data mining and the need for semantics. European, Mediterranean and Middle Easter Conference on Information Systems, June 7–8, Munich, GermanyGoogle Scholar
  10. Farrell G, Tseloni A, Mailley J, Tilley N (2011) The crime drop and the security hypothesis. J Res Crime Delinq 48(2):147–175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Genolini C, Falissard B (2010) KmL: k-means for longitudinal data. Comput Stat 25(2):317–328CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Groff ER, Weisburd D, Yang S (2010) Is it important to examine crime trends at a local “micro” level? A longitudinal analysis of street to street variability in crime trajectories. J Quant Criminol 26(1):7–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Huizinga D, Esbensen F, Weiher AW (1991) Are there multiple paths to delinquency? J Crim Law Crim 82(1):83–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Levitt SD (2004) Understanding why crime fell in the 1990s: four factors that explain the decline and six that do not. J Econ Perspect 18(1):163–190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Mishra S, Lalumière M (2009) Is the crime drop of the 1990s in Canada and the USA associated with a general decline in risky and health-related behavior? Soc Sci Med 68(1):39–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Mowder MH, Cummings JA, McKinney R (2010) Resiliency scales for children and adolescents: profiles of juvenile offenders. J Psychoeduc Assess 28(4):326–337CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Nagin DS, Land KC (1993) Age, criminal careers and population heterogeneity: specification and estimation of a nonparametric, mixed Poisson model. Criminology 31(3):327–362CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Ouimet M (2002) Explaining the American and Canadian crime “drop” in the 1990s. Can J Criminol 44(1):33–50Google Scholar
  19. Ratcliffe JH (2004) Geocoding crime and a first estimate of a minimum acceptable hit rate. Int J Geogr Inf Sci 18(1):61–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Robinson WS (1950) Ecological correlations and the behavior of individuals. Am Sociol Rev 15(3):351–357CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Sherman LW, Gartin PR, Buerger ME (1989) Hot spots of predatory crime: routine activities and the criminology of place. Criminology 27(1):27–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Weisburd D, Bushway S, Lum C, Yang S (2004) Trajectories of crime at places: a longitudinal study of street segments in the City of Seattle. Criminology 42(2):283–322CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Weisburd D, Bruinsma GJN, Bernasco W (2009a) Units of analysis in geographic criminology: historical development, critical issues, and open questions. In: Weisburd D, Bernasco W, Bruinsma GJN (eds) Putting crime in its place: units of analysis in geographic criminology. Springer, New York, pp 3–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Weisburd D, Morris NA, Groff ER (2009b) Hot spots of juvenile crime: a longitudinal study of street segments in Seattle, Washington. J Quant Criminol 25(4):443–467CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Weisburd D, Groff ER, Yang S (2012) The criminology of place: street segments and our understanding of the crime problem. Oxford University Press, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Andrea S. N. Curman
    • 1
  • Martin A. Andresen
    • 2
  • Paul J. Brantingham
    • 2
  1. 1.Police ServicesMinistry of Justice, Province of British ColumbiaBurnabyCanada
  2. 2.School of Criminology, Institute for Canadian Urban Research StudiesSimon Fraser UniversityBurnabyCanada

Personalised recommendations