The Socio-Economics of Crime and Justice by Brian Forst

Author:Brian Forst [Forst, Brian]
Language: eng
Format: epub
Tags: Political Science, General
ISBN: 9781315486284
Google: IOlmDAAAQBAJ
Goodreads: 30660499
Publisher: Routledge
Published: 1993-09-01T00:00:00+00:00

Individual-Focused, Private-Minded Responses

Research has shown that a large proportion of individuals adopt protective behaviors that reduce the risk of victimization by avoiding threatening situations (risk avoidance) and by making victimization more difficult or by minimizing the loss when victimization occurs (risk management). Risk-avoidance behaviors include staying home at night and avoiding certain parts of a city or a neighborhood. Risk-management behaviors include carrying a weapon such as a knife or gun, carrying little or no money when out, and equipping oneself with defense skills. Many people also adopt household "target-hardening" measures, such as installing strong locks on doors and windows, or a security system, engraving property with an identity number, and locking doors and windows when away. Such measures are used to eliminate the possibility of physical intrusion or make it more difficult, or to reduce the amount of loss that occurs when a victimization is not prevented.

Each of these three responses, risk avoidance, risk management, and target-hardening measures, represents self-protective behaviors intended to reduce the individual's fear of crime or the probability of crime; they are not necessarily intended to provide collective safety.19 Protecting one's self-interest appears to be a strong incentive for responding to crime and fear of crime. Research has shown that more people participate in individually focused, "private-minded" responses to crime than in collective, "public-minded" responses to crime, such as block- or neighborhood-watch schemes.20 Research has consistently found that over 80 percent of individuals have adopted some form of private crime prevention measures, whereas less than 10 percent participate in public-minded programs.21 The private security industry has grown substantially over the last decade; private protection expenditures now exceed public.22

Research has indicated that private-minded responses are effective in reducing the probability of individual victimization,23 and that people who engage in high levels of risk-avoidance activity, especially women and the elderly, are less likely to be victimized than people who report fewer such behaviors.24 There is also some evidence to suggest that people who engage in household protection measures are less likely to be property crime victims than those who do not take such measures.25 Bennett and Wright's work suggests that offenders look for household crime prevention measures when choosing a burglary target,26 and Reppetto has empirically supported the notion that target-hardening devices serve as a strong deterrent to residential burglary.27 For example, Bennett and Wright found that the presence or absence of alarms was a prime consideration in the choice of targets. Findings suggest that the impact on fear of crime is positive as well. People who engage in target-hardening responses generally report lower fear of crime, higher feelings of safety, and increased perceptions of security.28

Private-minded responses to crime pose a complex irony for community safety. On the one hand, although this relationship has not been fully developed in the literature,29 individuals who protect themselves and their property by adopting private-minded responses may produce a collective benefit.30 The community may be safer because a majority of the residents are staying off the streets at night or because

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.