*

Crime Reduction Toolkits

Partnership Working

Crime - Let's bring it down
 
* *
*
* *

 
*
*
Toolkits Homepage
*
Toolkits Content
*
*
Overview
*
Partnership Development
*
Auditing
*
Information Sharing
*
Community Consultation
*
Strategy Development
*
Implementation
*
Mainstreaming
*
Monitoring and Evaluation
*
”Information”
*
*

Toolkit Index

Introduction to Micro-spatial Analysis

The physical and spatial environment has an impact upon crime levels (micro-spatial analysis). Simply mapping incidents by clusters or hotspots is not enough. Partnerships need to ask why incidents occur in certain properties or certain situations. Therefore it is important to look at these aspects when analysing and explaining crime figures and patterns.

Recent Home Office research found that the measure that made the most positive difference to (self-assessed) success in a problem-solving initiative was the conduct of analysis of location (Home Office 2000: 6-7). 

This section summarises the type of analysis which can be done to assess whether the physical or spatial environment is creating a crime problem.

Case study: Burglary and spatial layout

A recent research study illustrates what can be achieved through spatial analysis of the location of a crime. In order to understand why residential burglaries were more common in some areas than others, Hillier and Shu described the spatial layouts of properties that have been burgled in order to understand how particular layouts might facilitate or deter crime. They examined:

  • The points of access used by burglars to move from public space to the properties

  • The types and attributes of public space around the burgled properties.

Through detailed spatial analysis Hiller and Shu found that the type of public spaces from which burglary was least likely to occur were ‘through carriageways, with good movement potential and visual links, and with a good number of line neighbours opening on to both sides of the carriageway’. In other words: the common or garden street!

The type of public space from which burglary was most likely to occur were ‘dead-end footpaths with little movement and visibility and few line neighbours’. Hillier and Shu’s conclusions were only possible by detailed spatial analysis. They could not have reached such conclusions by simply mapping burglaries using postal addresses. Such information would not have revealed how burglarised properties were entered.

For more information see Hillier, B. and Shu, S. (2000) ‘Crime and Urban Layout: The Need for Evidence’ in Ballintyne, S., Pease, K. and McLaren, V. Secure Foundations: Key Issues in Crime Prevention, Crime Reduction and Community Safety London: IPPR 

Back to Micro-spatial and temporal analysis

Back to Data Analysis

<<Contents

 > Previous Section

> Next Section

 

*
   
** Back to Top    Site Help    Search    Contact Us    Site Map    Knowledgebase