The (In)Stability of Residential Burglary Patterns on Street Segments: The Case of Antwerp, Belgium 2005–2016

  • Christophe Vandeviver
  • Wouter Steenbeek
Original Paper



To examine the spatial concentration and spatial stability of residential burglary at micro places in the context of a substantial city-level burglary drop in Antwerp, Belgium.


51,337 police recorded home burglary incidents for the period 2005–2016 are geo-referenced to 26,875 street segments. Longitudinal trends in spatial concentrations of burglary are considered using descriptive statistics, generalized Gini coefficients, and local Getis–Ord statistics. Andresen’s (Appl Geogr 29(3):333–345, 2009) non-parametric spatial point pattern test (SPPT) is used to identify spatial stability in burglary point patterns and evaluate the ubiquity of a city-level burglary drop across street segments. A longitudinal extension of the SPPT is implemented.


Residential burglary is substantially concentrated in street segments. Burglary point patterns exhibit a moderate to high degree of spatial stability over time. Local analyses show that 91% of street segments with burglary experienced a net decrease in crime and under 1% of street segments with burglary experienced a net increase. Absolute spatial stability over time is found for just 1.43% of street segments with burglary and minor increases are consistently observed for as few as 11 street segments with burglary.


The citywide home burglary drop manifested itself uniformly across street segments with burglary and the majority of street segments that experienced burglary contributed relatively equally to the crime drop. In other words, we find no strong evidence that the city-level crime drop can be tied to substantial decreases in a few specific places, nor do we find that the reductions in burglary are spatially concentrated.


Spatial point pattern test Spatial stability Crime trends Street segment 



Christophe Vandeviver and Wouter Steenbeek are both to be regarded as co-first authors of this article. Christophe Vandeviver is a Postdoctoral Fellow of the Research Foundation—Flanders (FWO). Part of this work was carried out while Christophe Vandeviver was International Fellow at the Netherlands Institute for the Study of Crime and Law Enforcement (NSCR).


Vandeviver’s contribution to this work was supported by the Research Foundation—Flanders (FWO) Postdoctoral Fellowship funding scheme and the Research Foundation—Flanders (FWO) Long Stay Abroad funding scheme [FWO15/PDO/242 to C.V., V4.303.16N to C.V.]. Steenbeek’s contribution to this work was supported by the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (NWO) Innovational Research Incentives Scheme [VENI 451-12-011 to W.S.].


  1. Andresen MA (2009) Testing for similarity in area-based spatial patterns: a nonparametric Monte Carlo approach. Appl Geogr 29(3):333–345. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Andresen MA (2016) An area-based nonparametric spatial point pattern test: the test, its applications, and the future. Methodol Innov. Google Scholar
  3. Andresen MA, Malleson N (2011) Testing the stability of crime patterns: implications for theory and policy. J Res Crime Delinq 48(1):58–82. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Andresen MA, Malleson N (2013) Crime seasonality and its variations across space. Appl Geogr 43:25–35. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Andresen MA, Malleson N (2014) Police foot patrol and crime displacement: a local analysis. J Contemp Crim Justice. Google Scholar
  6. Andresen MA, Linning SJ, Malleson N (2017) Crime at places and spatial concentrations: exploring the spatial stability of property crime in Vancouver BC, 2003–2013. J Quant Criminol. Google Scholar
  7. Antwerp Local Police Department (2017) Criminaliteit in Antwerpen daalt voor vierde jaar op rij [Crime in Antwerp Drops for Four Consecutive Years]. Retrieved from Accessed 15 June 2017
  8. Beavon DJK, Brantingham PL, Brantingham PJ (1994) The influence of street networks on the patterning of propery offenses. In: Clarke RV (ed) Crime prevention studies. Willow Tree Press, Monsey, pp 115–148Google Scholar
  9. Belgian Federal Police (2017) Police crime statistics. Retrieved from Accessed 15 June 2017
  10. Bernasco W, Steenbeek W (2016) More places than crimes: implications for evaluating the law of crime concentration at place. J Quant Criminol. Google Scholar
  11. Blumstein A, Rosenfeld R (2008) Factors contributing to U.S. crime trends. In: National Research Council Committee on Understanding Crime Trends Committee on Law and Justice Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education (ed) Understanding crime trends: workshop report. National Academies Press, Washington, DC, pp 13–43Google Scholar
  12. Chainey S, Ratcliffe JH (2005) GIS and crime mapping. Wiley, ChichesterCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Curman ASN, Andresen MA, Brantingham PJ (2015) Crime and place: a longitudinal examination of street segment patterns in Vancouver, BC. J Quant Criminol 31(1):127–147. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Davies T, Bowers K (2014) Quantifying the deterrent effect of police patrol via GPS analysis. In: Paper presented at the GIS research UK (GISRUK) 2015, LeedsGoogle Scholar
  15. Farrell G (2013) Five tests for a theory of the crime drop. Crime Sci 2(1):5. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Farrell G, Tilley N, Tseloni A (2014) Why the crime drop? Crime Justice 43(1):421–490. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Fujita S, Maxfield M (2012) Security and the drop in car theft in the United States. In: van Dijk J, Tseloni A, Farrell G (eds) The international crime drop: new directions in research. Palgrave Macmillan, London, pp 231–249CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Greiling DA, Jacquez GM, Kaufmann AM, Rommel RG (2005) Space–time visualization and analysis in the Cancer Atlas Viewer. J Geogr Syst 7(1):67–84. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Groff ER, Weisburd DL, Yang S-M (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):7–32. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hodgkinson T, Andresen MA, Farrell G (2016) The decline and locational shift of automotive theft: a local level analysis. J Crim Justice 44:49–57. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 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):163–190. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Linning SJ (2015) Crime seasonality and the micro-spatial patterns of property crime in Vancouver, BC and Ottawa, ON. J Crim Justice 43(6):544–555. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Mayhew P (2012) The case of Australia and New Zealand. In: Van Dijk JJM, Tseloni A, Farrell G (eds) The international crime drop: new directions in research. Palgrave Macmillan, BasingstokeGoogle Scholar
  24. Mielke HW, Zahran S (2012) The urban rise and fall of air lead (Pb) and the latent surge and retreat of societal violence. Environ Int 43:48–55. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Ouimet M (2002) Explaining the American and Canadian crime drop in the 1990’s. Can J Criminol Crim Justice 44(1):33–50Google Scholar
  26. Ratcliffe JH (2004) Geocoding crime and a first estimate of a minimum acceptable hit rate. Int J Geogr Inf Sci 18(1):61–72. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Simes RJ (1986) An improved Bonferroni procedure for multiple tests of significance. Biometrika 73(3):751–754CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Steenbeek W, Weisburd DL (2015) Where the action is in crime? An Examination of variability of crime across different spatial units in the Hague, 2001–2009. J Quant Criminol. Google Scholar
  29. Taylor RB (1998) Crime and small-scale places: what we know, what we can prevent, and what else we need to know. In: Taylor RB, Bazemore G, Boland B, Clear TR, Corbett RPJ, Feinblatt J, Berman G, Sviridoff M, Stone C (eds) Crime place: plenary papers of the 1997 conference on criminal Justice research and evaluation. National Institute of Justice, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  30. Truman JL, Langton L (2015) Criminal victimization, 2014 (NCJ 248973). Bureau of Justice Statistics, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  31. Tseloni A, Mailley J, Farrell G, Tilley N (2010) Exploring the international decline in crime rates. Eur J Criminol 7(5):375–394. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Tseloni A, Farrell G, Thompson R, Evans E, Tilley N (2017) Domestic burglary drop and the security hypothesis. Crime Sci 6(1):3. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Van Dijk JJM, Van Kesteren JN, Smit P (2008) Criminal victimisation in international perspective: key findings from the 2004–2005 ICVS and EU ICS. Boom Legal Publishers, The HagueGoogle Scholar
  34. Van Dijk JJM, Tseloni A, Farrell G (eds) (2012) The international crime drop: new directions in research. Palgrave Macmillan, BasingstokeGoogle Scholar
  35. Vollaard B, van Ours JC (2011) Does regulation of built-in security reduce crime? Evidence from a natural experiment*. Econ J 121(552):485–504. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Weisburd DL (2015) The law of crime concentration and the criminology of place. Criminology 53(2):133–157. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Weisburd DL, Bushway S, Lum C, Yang S-M (2004) Trajectories of crime at places: a longitudinal study of street segments in the city of Seattle. Criminology 42(2):283–322. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Weisburd DL, Morris NA, Groff ER (2009) Hot spots of Juvenile crime: a longitudinal study of arrest incidents at street segments in Seattle, Washington. J Quant Criminol 25(4):443. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Wheeler AP, Worden RE, McLean SJ (2016) Replicating group-based trajectory models of crime at micro-places in Albany, NY. J Quant Criminol 32(4):589–612. CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Criminology, Criminal Law and Social LawGhent UniversityGhentBelgium
  2. 2.Research Foundation – Flanders (FWO)BrusselsBelgium
  3. 3.Netherlands Institute for the Study of Crime and Law Enforcement (NSCR)AmsterdamThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations