What can social science contribute to crime reduction Evidencebased policies and indicator systems 2 - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 13
About This Presentation
Title:

What can social science contribute to crime reduction Evidencebased policies and indicator systems 2

Description:

Imprisonment incapacitates, but is highly expensive and can be criminogenic. ... always examining the criminogenic possibility of other social change (housing, ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:30
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 14
Provided by: joannas7
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: What can social science contribute to crime reduction Evidencebased policies and indicator systems 2


1
What can social science contribute to crime
reduction?Evidence-based policies and indicator
systems 200613 July 2006
  • Joanna Shapland

1
2
A Dynamic Theoretical Model of CriminalityOver
the Life-Course
STRUCTURAL BACKGROUND FACTORS
SOCIAL CONTROL PROCESSES
JUVENILE OUTCOMES
ADULT DEVELOPMENT
  • Low Family SES
  • Family Size
  • Family Disruption
  • Residential Mobility
  • Parents Deviance
  • Household Crowding
  • Foreign-Born
  • Mothers Employment

Crime and Deviance
  • FAMILY
  • Lack of Supervision
  • Threatening/Erratic/
  • Harsh Discipline
  • Parental Rejection

Crime and Deviance
Crime and Deviance
Delinquency
  • SCHOOL
  • Weak Attachment
  • Poor Performance
  • SOCIAL BONDS
  • Weak Labour Force
  • Attachment
  • Weak Marital
  • Attachment
  • SOCIAL BONDS
  • Weak Labour Force
  • Attachment
  • Weak Marital
  • Attachment

Length of Incarceration
INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCE CONSTRUCTS
DELINQUENT INFLUENCE
  • Peer Delinquent
  • Attachment
  • Sibling Delinquent
  • Attachment
  • Difficult Temperament
  • Persistent Tantrums
  • Early Conduct Disorder

TRANSITION TO YOUNG ADULTHOOD (17-25)
YOUNG ADULTHOOD (25-32)
TRANSITION TO MIDDLE ADULTHOOD (32-45)
CHILDHOOD
ADOLESCENCE
(0-10)

(10-17)
Source Sampson and Lamb (1993), pp. 244-5.
2
3
To reduce crime ...
  • The problem is not finding something to do, or an
    intervention to mount.
  • It is
  • choosing the most effective initiative in terms
    of reducing the particular crime problem
  • which is likely to be implemented
  • which will continue to be implemented over the
    time scale necessary
  • setting up the conditions for its implementation
  • setting up the evaluation before the initiative
  • ensuring the initiative is not criminogenic

3
4
  • Social science can ...
  • provide evidence as to which theories are most
    likely to lead to successful initiatives for
    particular problems - and which arent
  • measure the extent of the particular crime
    problem
  • provide valid evaluation measures
  • point to the strategies likely to be effective
  • ask difficult questions, like are you actually
    doing this to reduce crime? What crime? Where
    is your evaluation? Why has noone in the UK
    funded how-to-do-it databases of crime reduction
    projects?
  • It cant
  • take political decisions about spending money on
    particular initiatives
  • sell the initiative or the evaluation to
    agencies, politicians or local people
  • provide the money for the initiative or evaluation

4
5
  • A large number of evaluations of crime reduction
    initiatives reveal implementation failure, not
    theory failure.
  • Why? And what can we do about it?
  • environmental scanning needs to show the problem
    is there, then (crime car, initial rj)
  • the actual purpose of the initiative may be to be
    announced, not implemented
  • crime reduction often requires multi-agency
    planning and action, which needs to take account
    of agencies (different) priorities and
    performance measures, and peoples resistance to
    change
  • the UK has not tended to put emphasis
  • (and money) into proper evaluation

5
6
Proper evaluation?
  • A massive (and possibly very successful)
    programme leaves nothing unless it lets others -
    elsewhere or in the future - know what happened
    and what to do next.
  • Process evaluation - what happened, what
    decisions had to be taken, who needed to be
    involved, what measures needed to be taken, what
    went wrong and how it was resolved - to produce a
    how-to-do-it manual (like From Soup to Nuts -
    Thames Valley JRC restorative justice)
  • Outcome measures - exactly what are they and how
    do we expect these outcomes to occur (our theory
    of crime reduction)
  • Control groups - not everyone can be doing the
    initiative matching (particularly of areas) is
    difficult the role of random assignment (RCTs) -
    suitable and possible at the individual level, if
    there is a clear, relatively simple question and
    consideration of ethical issues (informed
    consent
  • practitioner views what happens to control
    group
  • members)

6
7
Van Dijks typology of crime reduction
  • Target groups Developmental stage
  • Primary Secondary Tertiary
  • Offenders/ Schools Early intervention Post-priso
    n
  • potential programmes programmes rehabilitation
  • offenders
  • Drugs media Detached Detection
  • programmes youth work investigation
  • Situations Overall town Multi-agency Licensing
    policy
  • planning targeted re pubs, discos
  • building standards programmes
  • Prostitution
  • CCTV Concierge crack-downs
  • schemes
  • Victims/ Media campaigns Train bank Support of
    victims
  • potential employees
  • victims Prevention Crime prevention

7
8
So, what is the evidence? Where do we want to
concentrate? 1
  • Primary prevention (we have some evidence, mostly
    from other countries)
  • is expensive, because it is to the whole group -
    but we have no way of predicting which children,
    or situations, will actually develop criminality.
    Evaluation is necessarily long-term.
  • is suited to developmental, social targets - like
    nursery provision (very long-term evaluation) or
    educational programmes (Netherlands - they work,
    but only for a short time and need to be changed
    regularly)
  • will encourage social inequality and possibly
    ghettoisation and displacement to the poor if it
    is left solely to private means (house security
    provisions, situational measures on shopping
    developments)

8
9
So, what is the evidence? Where do we want to
concentrate? 2
  • Secondary prevention (we have quite a lot of
    evidence)
  • means we need an accurate picture of the crime
    problem (crime audits), because it has to be
    targeted on hotspots
  • UK has tended to concentrate on situational
    prevention against burglary and car crime
    (surveillance and locks/bolts), which can be very
    successful in a particular, defined area, but can
    have serious social effects
  • can embody criminality prevention with potential
    offenders (for example, street social work with
    young girls at risk of prostitution or groups
    hanging around shopping centres - Netherlands)
  • encompasses remedial work in relation to design
    and management of housing estates and facilities
    - can work
  • well if done with residents/shops and taking
    into
  • account their priorities

9
10
So, what is the evidence? Where do we want to
concentrate? 3
  • Tertiary prevention (few cross-initiative
    comparisons)
  • this includes the whole criminal justice system.
    Is it working primarily to reduce crime?
    Imprisonment incapacitates, but is highly
    expensive and can be criminogenic. Should we be
    putting as much work/money into mitigating the
    criminogenic effects (supporting desistance) as
    into the incapacitive?
  • How effective are programmes, compared to
    supportive casework, in community sentences?
    RCT/evaluation of single programmes needs to be
    followed by cross-programme and support
    comparison.
  • Should reducing crime be the only outcome
    measure? e.g. evaluation of reassurance policing
    against public engagement and security - what
    should we use for correctional measures?
  • Positive evidence for the value of victim
    support,
  • restorative justice and vulnerable witness
    measures to victims

10
11
Some possible key areas for the future
  • Primary prevention
  • developing a range of school based educational
    programmes which suit local crime profiles
  • Secondary prevention
  • always examining the criminogenic possibility of
    other social change (housing, planning of
    licensed premises, crowd management of leisure
    facilities)
  • where can young people go? Banning or working
    with them? (Netherlands shopping centre)

11
12
  • Tertiary prevention
  • continuing to invest in drug rehabilitation
    programmes which fit the local drug of choice
    profile, with criminal justice partnership
  • working to support desistance, not to continue
    the path into crime (keeping family ties through
    imprisonment, resettlement support in the key
    first few weeks after release)
  • providing measures to support victims, help lead
    to closure (for victims and offenders), and
    reintegrate offenders

12
13
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com