Burglar Mobility and Crime Prevention Planning

Crime Prevention through Housing Design

“…Surveillance from neighbouring properties appeared to reduce crime risk, yet surveillance from a nearby road or footpath enhanced a property's risk of crime. The latter can be explained by Brantingham and Brantingham (1984) and later Beavon et al's (1994) suggestion that properties within the awareness space of potential offenders are more likely to be selected as targets. Where a property is located within viewing distance of an offender's daily travel path, that property is more likely to be noticed as part of their day-to-day activities.…”

“…As Schneider and Kitchen (2002) highlight, Space Syntax is unable to conduct 'fine-grain analysis' which accounts for 'types of surveillance, street patterns or local context' (Schneider and Kitchen, 2002, p. 40) (Table 6.1). Being located on a development with high levels of permeability/connectivity/through movement increases the risk of crime Bevis and Nutter (1977) Rubenstein et al (1980) Taylor and Gottfredson (1987 Van der Voordt and Van Wegen (1990) White (1990) Poyner and Webb (1991) Beavon et al (1994) Mirlees- Black et al (1998) Rengert and Hakim (1998) Hakim et al (2001 Taylor (2002) Nubani and Wineman (2005) Yang (2006) Armitage (2006a) Armitage et al (2010) Being located on a travel path increases the risk of crime Letkemann (1973) Brantingham and Brantingham (1984) Feeney (1986) Gabor et al (1987) Poyner and Webb (1991) Wiles and Costello (2000) Rengert and Wasilchick (2000) Being located on a cul-de-sac, or a development with low connectivity, reduces the risk of crime Bevis and Nutter (1977) Johnson and Bowers (2010) Armitage et al (2010) Closing off streets reduces crime Matthews (1992) Atlas and LeBlanc (1994) Newman (1995 Donnelly and Kimble (1997) Wagner ( …”

Repeat burglary victimization in Malawi and the influence of housing type and area-level affluence

“…In this vein, Bowers et al (2005) also explore whether the infl uence of housing type on revictimization risk is mediated by the area in which properties are located. Their hypothesis is grounded in claims that offenders follow a two-stage hierarchical procedure when selecting suitable crime targets ( Brantingham and Brantingham, 1984 ;Rengert and Wasilchick, 1985 ). This suggests that offenders initially select a suitable area in which to forage.…”

It Looks Good, but What is it Like to Live There? Exploring the Impact of Innovative Housing Design on Crime

“…The operation of this mechanism has been demonstrated through the crime reductions observed following physical changes to the layout of existing residential areas, such as the closure of streets (Matthews, 1992;Atlas and LeBlanc, 1994;Newman, 1995Newman, , 1996Lasley, 1998;Zavoski et al, 1999, Eck, 2002. Secondly, developments with high levels of throughmovement are more likely to fall within the activity space, and therefore awareness space, of potential offenders (Brantingham and Brantingham, 1984) with offenders selecting targets properties as they take part in day to day activities (Letkemann, 1973;Feeney, 1986;Gabor et al, 1987;Poyner and Webb, 1991;Rengert and Wasilchick, 2000;Wiles and Costello 2000). The third mechanism explains that developments with high levels of through-movement offer increased levels of anonymity for potential offenders (Angel, 1968;Suttles, 1968;Brantingham and Brantingham, 1975;Taylor and Gottfredson, 1987;Poyner and Webb, 1991).…”