Make a Submission
No. XLII/2 (2020)
Articles

Crime and environment. Analysis of facilities as crime risk factors in Niš, Serbia

Przestępczość i środowisko. Analiza obiektów jako czynników ryzyka przestępczości w Niszu w Serbii

PDF
  • Dušan Stanković
Dušan Stanković
Police Officer
DOI: https://doi.org/10.7420/AK2020W

Published 2023-02-15

Keywords

  • crime,
  • environmental facilities,
  • property and violent crime,
  • spatial analysis,
  • risk factors

How to Cite

Stanković, D. (2023). Crime and environment. Analysis of facilities as crime risk factors in Niš, Serbia: Przestępczość i środowisko. Analiza obiektów jako czynników ryzyka przestępczości w Niszu w Serbii. Archives of Criminology, (XLII/2), 49–65. https://doi.org/10.7420/AK2020W
Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

Abstract

This study aimed to examine the relationship between environmental facilities as risk factors and crime. Police data of property and violent criminal offences registered during 2018 in the city of Niš, Republic of Serbia, has been geocoded. Grid cells of 100 by 100 meters were designed as spatial units for the analysis, and geoinformation data of 12 different facilities were extracted from GIS. The negative binomial regression model was constructed to investigate crime risky facilities. The crime is mostly related to facilities as banks and exchange offices, bus stops, gyms and recreational centers. On the other hand, cafes, nightclubs, and big shopping centers were not significantly associated with crime. Finally, limitations, practical and theoretical usage of the research are discussed.

PDF

References

  1. Andresen М. (2009). ‘Testing for similarity in area-based spatial patterns: A nonparametric Monte Carlo approach’. Applied Geography 29(3), pp. 333–345.
  2. Andresen M.A. and Malleson N. (2011). ‘Testing the stability of crime patterns: Implications for theory and policy’. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 48(1), pp. 58–82. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1177/0022427810384136.
  3. Andresen M.A. and Malleson N. (2013). ‘Spatial Heterogeneity in Crime Analysis. In M. Leitner (ed.) Crime Modeling and Mapping Using Geospatial Technologies. Dordrecht: Springer, pp. 3–23. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4997-9.
  4. Barnum J.D., Caplan M.J. and Kennedy W.L. (2017). ‘The crime kaleidoscope: A cross-jurisdictional analysis of place features and crime in three urban environments’. Applied Geography 79, pp. 203–211. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2016.12.011.
  5. Bernasco W. and Block R. (2011). ‘Robberies in Chicago: A block-level analysis of the influence of crime generators, crime attractors, and offender anchor points’. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 48(1), pp. 33–57. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1177/0022427810384135.
  6. Brantingham P.L. and Brantingham P.J. (1993). ‘Nodes, paths and edges: Considerations on the complexity of crime and the physical environment’. Journal of Environmental Management 13. pp. 3–28.
  7. Breetzke G.D. and Andresen M.A. (2018). ‘The spatial stability of alcohol outlets and crime in post-disaster Christchurch, New Zealand’. New Zeland Geographer 74(1), pp. 36–47. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1111/nzg.12182.
  8. Bromley R.D.F. and Nelson A.L. (2002). ‘Alcohol-related crime and disorder across urban space and time: Evidence from a British city’. Geoforum 33(2), pp. 239–254. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0016-7185(01)00038-0.
  9. Cohen L.E. and Felson М. (1979). ‘Social change and crime rate trends: A routine activity approach’. American Sociological Review 44, pp 588–605.
  10. Cornish D. and Clarke R. (1986). The Reasoning Criminal: Rational Choice Perspectives on Offending. New Jersey: Transaction Publishers.
  11. Van Dijk J. (2009). ‘Approximating the truth about crime. Comparing crime data based on general population surveys with police figures of recorded crimes’. In R. Philippe (ed.) Comparing crime data in Europe: official crime statistics and survey based data. Brussels: VUB Press, pp. 13–51.
  12. Irvin-Erickson Y. (2014). Identifying risky places for crime: An analysis of the criminogenic spatiotemporal influences of landscape features on street robberies. New Jersey: University of Newark.
  13. Gerell M. (2018). ‘Bus stops and violence, are risky places really risky ?’. European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research 24(4), pp. 351–371.
  14. Groff E. and McCord E.S. (2012). ‘The role of neighborhood parks as crime generators’. Security Journal 25(1), pp. 1–24. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1057/sj.2011.1.
  15. Hardyns W., Snaphaan T. and Pauwels L.J.R. (2019). ‘Crime concentrations and micro places: An empirical test of the “law of crime concentration at places” in Belgium’. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Criminology 52(3), pp. 390–410. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1177/0004865818807243.
  16. Ignjatović D. (2006a). Kriminolosko naslede [Criminological heritage]. Beograd: Službeni glasnik.
  17. Ignjatović D. (2006b). Kriminologija [Criminology]. Beograd: Službeni glasnik.
  18. Kennedy L.W., Caplan J.M. and Piza E. (2011). ‘Risk clusters, hotspots, and spatial intelligence: Risk terrain modeling as an algorithm for police resource allocation strategies’. Journal of Quantitative Criminology 27(3), pp. 339–362. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10940-010-9126-2.
  19. Konstantinović-Vilić S., Nikolić-Ristanović V. and Kostić M. (2012). Kriminologija [Criminology]. Niš: Pravni fakultet, Univerzitet u Nišu.
  20. Loukaitou-Sideris A. (1999). ‘Hot spots of bus stop crime’. Journal of the American Planning Association 65(4), pp. 395–411. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1080/01944369908976070.
  21. MacDonald J.M., Nicosia N. and Ukert B.D. (2018). ‘Do schools cause crime in neighborhoods? Evidence from the opening of schools in Philadelphia’. Journal of Quantitative Criminology 34, pp. 717–740. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10940-017-9352-y.
  22. Ratcliffe J.H. (2004). ‘Geocoding crime and a first estimate of a minimum acceptable hit rate’. International Journal of Geographical Information Science 18(1), pp. 61–72. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1080/13658810310001596076.
  23. Roncek D.W. and Maier P.A. (1991). ‘Bars, blocks, and crimes revisited: Linking the theory of routine activities to the empiricism of “hot spots”’. Criminology 29(4), pp. 725–753. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9125.1991.tb01086.x.
  24. Sherman L.W., Gartin P.R. and Buerger M.E. (1989). ‘Hot spots of predatory crime: Routine activities and the criminology of place’. Criminology 27(1), pp. 27–56. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9125.1989.tb00862.x
  25. SooHyun O. and Lee Y.J. (2016). ‘Crime and land use in Pittsburgh: A micro-size grid-cell analysis of the influence of land-uses on area crime’. Crime Prevention and Community Safety 18(3), pp. 204–227. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1057/cpcs.2016.9.
  26. Stanković D. (2020). ‘Ecology of crime in urban and suburban area: Spatial patterns of crime in the city of Niš (Serbia)’. Facta Universitatis, Series: Law and Politics 18(1), pp. 37–52.
  27. Stucky T.D. and Ottensmann J.R. (2009). ‘Land use and violent crime’. Criminology 47(4). Available online: https://scholarworks.iupui.edu/bitstream/handle/1805/6030/Stucky_2009_land.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y [31.10.2019].
  28. Vandeviver C. and Bernasco W. (2020). ‘“Location, location, location”: Effects of neighborhood and house attributes on burglars’ target selection’. Journal of Quantitative Criminology 36, pp. 779–821. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10940-019-09431-y.
  29. Vandeviver C. and Steenbeek W. (2019). ‘The (in)stability of residential burglary patterns on street segments: The case of Antwerp, Belgium 2005–2016’. Journal of Quantitative Criminology 35(1), pp. 111–133. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10940-017-9371-8.
  30. Vandeviver C., Bernasco W. and Van Daele S. (2019). ‘Do sports stadiums generate crime on days without matches? A natural experiment on the delayed exploitation of criminal opportunities’. Security Journal 32, pp. 1–19. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41284-018-0142-5.
  31. Vandeviver C., Van Daele S. and Van Der Beken T. (2015). ‘What makes long crime trips worth undertaking balancing costs and benefits in burglars journey to crime’. British Journal of Criminology 55(2), pp. 399–420. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1093/bjc/azu078.
  32. White G.F., Gainey R.R. and Triplett R.A. (2015). ‘Alcohol outlets and neighborhood crime: A longitudinal analysis’. Crime and Delinquency 61(6), pp. 851–872. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1177/0011128712466386.
  33. Weisburd D. and Mazerolle L.G. (2000). ‘Crime and disorder in drug hot spots: Implications for theory and practice in policing’. Police Quarterly 3(3), pp. 331–349.
  34. Weisburd D., Morris N. and Groff R. (2009). ‘Hot spots of juvenile crime: A longitudinal study of arrest incidents at street segments in Seattle, Washington’. Journal of Quantitative Criminology 25(4), pp. 443–467. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/225355513_Hot_Spots_of_Juvenile_Crime_A_Longitudinal_Study_of_Arrest_Incidents_at_Street_Segments_in_Seattle_Washington [31.10.2019].
  35. Weisburd D. (2015). ‘The law of crime concentration and the criminology of place’. Criminology 53(2), pp. 133–157.