Crime Reduction - Helping to Reduce Crime in Your Area

Anti-Social Behaviour

Defining and measuring anti-social behaviour

There is an increasingly high emphasis being placed by the Government on anti-social behaviour (ASB) and methods to tackle it. This is particularly evident through the setting up of the Anti-Social Behaviour Unit (ASBU) within the Home Office, the launch of the Anti-Social Behaviour 'Together' Action Plan and the introduction of the Anti-Social Behaviour Act during 2003. Anti-social behaviour is a key issue of public concern.  

Title: Defining and measuring anti-social behaviour
Author: RDS Anti Social Behaviour Research Team
Series: Home Office Development and Practice Report
Date published: 10 August 2004
Number of pages: 20

A count of reports conducted by ASBU in England and Wales in September 2003 found that over 66,000 reports of anti-social behaviour were made to agencies on one day. The 2003/04 British Crime Survey (BCS) shows that over a quarter of the public perceive particular behaviours such as vandalism, graffiti, litter and teenagers hanging around as a problem in their local area. 

This report draws from a number of sources, in particular: 

  • the ASBU one-day count of reported anti-social behaviour 2003 and lessons learnt from this;

  • a typology of anti-social behaviour developed by the Home Office Research Development and Statistics Directorate (RDS); and

  • a RDS follow-up study to the one-day count based on interviews with a sample of respondents to the one-day count, including Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnerships (CDRPs) and Community Safety Partnerships (CSPs), service providers and businesses that receive reports of anti-social behaviour. This research is referred to as the RDS study throughout this report and details of the research methodology are provided at the end of the report.

Key points for practitioners

Defining anti-social behaviour

The Crime and Disorder Act (1998) definition of anti-social behaviour (ASB) is widely used by Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnerships (CDRPs) and Community Safety Partnerships (CSPs) involved in the RDS study. It defines ASB as follows: 

'Acting in a manner that caused or was likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress to one or more persons not of the same household as (the defendant).' 

In order to develop a focus for work aimed at tackling local anti-social behaviour problems, CDRPs and CSPs need to identify the behaviours that are a particular problem within their locality. It is therefore important to gain an understanding of the nature and extent of local problems, the impact of the behaviours and how the behaviours are perceived by the local community. A typology of anti-social behaviour developed by the Home Office Research Development and Statistics Directorate (RDS) may be a useful starting point. It can be used to help practitioners draw up a working definition of anti-social behaviour.

Collecting data on anti-social behaviour

The collection of data on anti-social behaviour has a series of benefits. It enables practitioners to:

  • identify geographical and temporal hotspots of anti-social behaviour and specific behaviours that are a particular problem in their locality;

  • target resources to tackle anti-social behaviour appropriately; and

  • evaluate the success of initiatives aimed at addressing anti-social behaviour.

The three key types of data that can be collected are:

  • reports of anti-social behaviour from members of the public that are received by local service providers;

  • incidents of anti-social behaviour witnessed by service providers or through audits of anti-social activity; and

  • public perceptions of anti-social behaviour collected via surveys.

Methods of data collection

There are a range of sources and approaches to collecting anti-social behaviour data. The main methods are:

  • a count of reports of anti-social behaviour;

  • analysis of local service providers' records of ASB incidents;

  • analysis of police recorded crime figures as a proxy measure of ASB;

  • analysis of ASB incidents recorded by CCTV cameras;

  • street activity audits;

  • visual audits;

  • community consultation; and

  • surveys of public perceptions of ASB.

Each of these methods has both advantages and limitations depending on the purpose of the data collection exercise. Practitioners need to consider these before deciding which method(s) to employ and before using and interpreting the data collected.

Deciding on the method

In order to identify the most appropriate method of data collection the following questions should be considered.

  • What is the purpose of the data collection exercise? The purpose of the exercise should be considered when selecting the data collection method, that is whether it is to gain a quick overview or scan of the key ASB problems across the locality, an in-depth understanding of specific local problem behaviours and geographical hotspots, or to evaluate ASB reduction initiatives.

  • Incident or report data? Some methods of data collection will provide information on reports of anti-social behaviour made by the public and others information on incidents of anti-social behaviour. Practitioners will need to decide whether they want to collect information on incidents or reports of anti-social behaviour or both. Data on ASB reported by the public to local services may be more easily accessible but under-reporting is a significant issue. A large proportion of ASB incidents is likely to be unreported due to apathy, tolerance of the behaviour, fear of repercussions of reporting or lack of knowledge of where to report.

  • What resources are available? Certain methods of data collection are resource intensive, for example collection of primary data through large-scale visual audits, street activity audits and public perception surveys. Practitioners should consider what methods can be successfully implemented with the resources available and determine whether the benefit derived from the exercise justifies the cost involved.

  • What types of behaviour are being measured? Certain methods of data collection are suited to specific behaviours, for example visual audits are useful for measuring environmental damage and street activity audits can be used to measure the extent of behaviours such as street drinking and begging.

  • Are data available and accessible? While practitioners may want to collect specific data, the data may not be available or accessible. Practitioners will need to consider whether they can instigate the collection of the data they require and overcome any barriers that prevent access. Data sharing between local services is a key issue. Local partnerships may need to establish agreements and commitments between partner agencies in order to facilitate effective data sharing.

This report identifies the benefits of collecting data on anti-social behaviour that is a problem within a CDRP or CSP area. The report has attempted to set out the types of data that might be readily available locally and methods of collecting further information on anti-social behaviour. Each of the approaches has advantages and disadvantages, which practitioners need to consider before deciding which method(s) to employ and before using and interpreting the data collected. Data collection should enable partnerships to better plan their programme of anti-social behaviour work and target their resources appropriately. It should also allow partnerships to determine whether initiatives implemented to tackle anti-social behaviour are effective.

Download "Defining and measuring anti-social behaviour" PDF 126Kb

 

 

Last update:  

Last update: 10 August 2004