Document Library

Key Text Investing Wisely in Crime Prevention: International Experiences

Author: US Department of Justice
Date: 2000
Size: 26 pages (945 KB)

Access full text: available online

Summary

Crime is expensive for ordinary citizens. Prevention projects in the United States have reduced crime rates, however they are still at an unacceptable level and more needs to be done.This Bureau of Justice Assistance publication looks at ways to reduce crime in the United States and examines trends in the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, France and New Zealand.

Studies have shown that there are a number of factors that increase the likelihood of youths committing crime: poverty and inadequate housing; insufficient parental guidance; limited social and cognitive abilities; exclusion from school; family violence; few employment opportunities; economic exclusion and a culture of violence. These studies also show that victimisation is not random and happens more frequently when: residences and goods are inadequately protected; goods are easy to transport and sell; the victim lives with the offender; alcohol and substance abuse is involved and firearms are available.

Crime reduction has been a result of demographic trends, focused policing and mobilisation of a broad sector of agencies. In many cases, community demonstration projects are more cost-effective than the existing law enforcement and incarceration measures. Specific findings are that:

Delinquency in young children can be reduced through pre-school and after-school programmes, visiting at-risk families at home to improve parenting skills and increasing support and assistance for parents.
Delinquency in school-aged children can be reduced by home visits, educational and financial assistance, neighbourhood and after-school programmes, on-the-job training and working directly with families.
Successful approaches for reducing common crime include: 'cocoon' neighbourhood watch, home security improvements, treatment of substance-abusing offenders and intervention for repeat victims.
In Britain, a new community safety crime reduction programme was implemented. It focused on youth offending prevention programmes, high-volume crime, effective sentencing and redesigning consumer products.
In France, local crime prevention contracts have been signed between different agencies. These contracts foster crime prevention through social integration, employment and support for parents.
The Netherlands uses learning-based strategies: successful projects are publicised and communities are encouraged to try them. In New Zealand, a crime prevention unit was created in the Prime Minister’s Office.

Reducing crime requires a range of agencies and sectors to focus on multiple causes. Sectors include schools, social services, entertainment, health services and business. A national crime prevention organisation is required to be responsible for inter-sectoral work. Recommendations are that:

Specific strategies should elaborate a plan of action with defined priorities and targets, influence the policies and decisions of relevant organisations and stimulate and sustain community partnerships.
The central crime prevention organisation should have the capacity to analyse trends in crime; identify risk factors and ways to address them and have resources for pilot projects, disseminating information and training.
Sectors should agree on how to respond to risk factors and actions that reduce them and should use a battery of interventions.
Sectors should initiate action in their own areas, but in collaboration with other sectors.
Fads and popular notions should not be used to guide action.
The US should look to the experience of practitioners in other countries.

Access full text: available online

Source: US Department of Justice, 2000, Investing Wisely in Crime Prevention: International Experiences, Bureau of Justice Assistance Monograph, US Department of Justice, Washington DC
Author: US Department of Justice, http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov