Advertisement

Crime Prevention and Community Safety

, Volume 10, Issue 2, pp 85–96 | Cite as

Modelling Crime Flow between Neighbourhoods in Terms of Distance and of Intervening Opportunities

  • Henk Elffers
  • Danielle Reynald
  • Margit Averdijk
  • Wim Bernasco
  • Richard Block
Article

Abstract

Using data on solved crimes in The Hague, the Netherlands, we study crime trips between areas where offenders live and where they offend, in order to test the hypothesis that the number of criminal opportunities between two areas (“intervening opportunities”) influences the number of crime trips that take place between those areas. The findings are that, contrary to the hypothesis, simple geographical distance between two areas explains the number of crime trips between them better than various measures of intervening opportunities do.

Keywords

intervening opportunities crime trips gravitational models 

Notes

References

  1. Bamberg, S. and Schmidt, P. (1998). Changing Travel-Mode Choice as Rational Choice. Rationality & Society. Vol. 10, No. 2, pp 223–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Clarke, R.V. and Eck, J. (2005). Become A Problem-Solving Crime Analyst: In 55 Small Steps. London: Jill Dando Institute of Crime Science, University College London.Google Scholar
  3. Elffers, H. (2004). Decision Models Underlying The Journey to Crime. In Bruinsma, G., Elffers, H. and de Keijser, J.W. (eds) Punishment, Places and Perpetrators: Developments in Criminology and Criminal Justice Research. Cullompton: Willan Publishing, pp 180–195.Google Scholar
  4. Ewing, G.O. (1974). Gravity and Linear Regression Models of Spatial Interaction: A Cautionary Note. Economic Geography. Vol. 50, No. 1, pp 83–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Galle, O.R. and Taeuber, K.E. (1966). Metropolitan Migration and Intervening Opportunities. American Sociological Review. Vol. 31, No. 1, pp 5–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Ghosh, B. (1951). Random Distances within a Rectangle and Between Two Rectangles. Bulletin of the Calcutta Mathematical Society. Vol. 43, pp 17–24.Google Scholar
  7. Hechter, M. and Kanazawa, S. (1997). Sociological Rational Choice Theory. Annual Review of Sociology. Vol. 23, No. 1, pp 191–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Kleemans, E.R. (1996). Strategische misdaadanalyse en stedelijke criminaliteit. Een toepassing van de rationele keuzebenadering op stedelijke criminaliteitspatronen en het gedrag van daders, toegespitst op het delict woninginbraak. Enschede, The Netherlands: Universiteit Twente.Google Scholar
  9. Lück, D., Limmer, R. and Bonß, W. (2006). Theoretical Approaches to Job Mobility: State-of-the-Art of Mobility Research. Job Mobilities Working Paper No. 2006-01, Chapter 2, The European Commission.Google Scholar
  10. Persky, J. (1995). Retrospectives: The Ethology of Homo Economicus. Journal of Economic Perspectives. Vol. 9, No. 2, pp 221–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Rengert, G.F. (1981). Burglary in Philadelphia: A Critique of an Opportunity Structure Model. In Brantingham, P.J. and Brantingham, P.L. (eds) Environmental Criminology. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, pp. 189–202.Google Scholar
  12. Rodrigue, J.-P., Comtois, C. and Slack, B. (2006). The Geography of Transport Systems. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  13. Smith, T.S. (1976). Inverse Distance Variations for the Flow of Crime in Urban Areas. Social Forces. Vol. 54, No. 4, pp 802–815.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Stouffer, S.A. (1940). Intervening Opportunities: A Theory Relating Mobility and Distance. American Sociological Review. Vol. 5, No. 6, pp 845–867.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Stouffer, S.A. (1960). Intervening Opportunities and Competing Migrants. Journal of Regional Science. Vol. 2, No. 1, pp 1–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Tellier, L.-N. and Sankoff, D. (1975). Gravity Models and Interaction Probabilities. Journal of Regional Science. Vol. 15, No. 3, pp 317–322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Ullman, E.L. (1973). The Role of Transportation and the Bases of Interaction. In Blunden, J., Brook, C., Edge, G. and Hay, A. (eds) Regional Analysis and Development. London: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
  18. Wadycki, W. (1975). Stouffer's Model of Migration: A Comparison of Interstate and Metropolitan Flows. Demography. Vol. 12, No. 1, pp 121–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Zipf, G.K . (1949). Human Behavior and the Principle of Least Effort. Reading, MA: Addison–Wesley.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Palgrave Macmillan Ltd 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Henk Elffers
    • 1
  • Danielle Reynald
    • 1
  • Margit Averdijk
    • 1
  • Wim Bernasco
    • 1
  • Richard Block
    • 2
  1. 1.The Netherlands Institute for the Study of Crime and Law Enforcement NSCRLeidenthe Netherlands
  2. 2.Loyola University ChicagoChicagoUSA

Personalised recommendations