The Law of Crime Concentration: An Application and Recommendations for Future Research
- 766 Downloads
We address four outstanding empirical questions related to the “law of crime concentration” (Weisburd in Criminology 53:133–157, 2015): (1) Is the spatial concentration of crime stable over time? (2) Do the same places consistently rank among those with the highest crime counts? (3) How much crime concentration would be observed if crimes were distributed randomly over place? (4) To what degree does the spatial concentration of crime depend on places that are crime free?
The data are annual counts of violent and property crimes in St. Louis between 2000 and 2014. Temporal stability in the spatial inequality of crime is measured by computing the fraction of crimes that occur in the 5% of street segments with the highest crime frequencies each year. The spatial mobility of crime is measured by computing the number of years each street segment appears in the top 5% of street segments. Poisson simulations are used to estimate the fraction of crimes that could appear in the top 5% of street segments on the basis of chance alone. The impact of crime-free locales on the spatial concentration of crime is evaluated by comparing results from analyses that include and exclude crime-free street segments from the crime distributions.
The concentration of crime is highly unequal and stable over time. The specific street segments with the highest crime frequencies, however, change over time. Nontrivial fractions of street segments may appear among the 5% with the highest crime frequencies on the basis of chance. Spatial concentration of crime is reduced when crime-free street segments are excluded from the crime distributions.
The law of crime concentration is not a measurement artifact. Its substantive significance, however, should be assessed in future longitudinal research that replicates the current study across diverse social settings.
KeywordsCrime concentration Hot spots policing Criminology of place
Funding was provided by National Institute of Justice (US) (2012-IJ-CX-0042).
- Clarke RV, Eck JE (2007) Understanding risky facilities. US Department of Justice, Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
- Eck JE, Clarke RV, Guerette RT (2007) Risky facilities: crime concentration in homogeneous sets of establishments and facilities. Crime Prev Stud 21:225–264Google Scholar
- Fields GS, Ok EA (1999) The measurement of income mobility: an introduction to the literature. In: Silber J (ed) Handbook of income inequality measurement. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- Hope T (2015) Generating processes of the crime victimization frequency distribution, working paper. University of Salford, SalfordGoogle Scholar
- Pierce GL, Spaar S, Briggs LR (1988) The Character of police work: strategic and tactical implications. Center for Applied Social Research, Northeastern University, BostonGoogle Scholar
- Piketty T (2000) Theories of persistent inequality and intergenerational mobility. In: Atkinson AB, Bourguignon F (eds) Handbook of income distribution, vol 1. Elsevier, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
- Spelman W (1995) Criminal careers of public places. In: Eck JE, Weisburd D (eds) Crime and place: crime prevention studies 4. Willow Tree Press, MonseyGoogle Scholar
- Weisburd D, Groff E, Yang SM (2012) The criminology of place: street segments and our understanding of the crime problem. Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
- Wolfgang ME, Figlio RM, Sellin T (1972) Delinquency in a birth cohort. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar