Community Safety: Findings from the New Zealand Crime

1
Community Safety Findings from the New Zealand
Crime Safety Survey (NZCASS) 2006

• Authors Pat Mayhew
• James Reilly

2
Safer Communities A key Justice Outcome

• Being communities in which there is reduced
  crime and in which safety and wellbeing is
  enhanced through partnerships
• Crime in public places
• Community safety influences the way people engage
  in social, productive or creative enterprises or
  activities.
• Concern about crime
• People feel more assured when there are core
  safety functions, less crime and a visible police
  service.
• Neighbourhood Support
• Safety is also enhanced when communities are
  supported through locally based government
  agencies and organisations.
• Ministry of Justice Strategic Plan 2005 - 2010

3
Community Safety - definition

• A term used to describe a broad approach to the
  achievement of safety and security, generally in
  local authority areas. It involves focusing on a
  broad range of crimes and incivilities, both to
  reduce actual levels of crime and anti-social
  behaviour, and anxieties about crime impairing
  citizens quality of life
• Nick Tilley (2005) Handbook of Crime Prevention
  and Community Safety, p758.

4
Crime in Public Places

• Crimes discussed here only involved offenders who
  were not well known to the victim. For NZCASS,
  this involved questions asked in the Victim Form.
• Private Places
• In and around the home, the workplace, other
  peoples homes
• Public Places
• Streets, car parks, places of entertainment,
  public buildings / facilities
• A quarter of all crimes occurred in public places
  i.e., 0.6m crimes of the 2.753m total recorded
  by NZCASS

5
The proportion of different offence types in
public and private places
1 Three percent of offences are excluded. They
took place in other locations where it was not
known whether they were public or private.
6
Proportion of specific locations by crimes
committed
Column percentages do not add to 100 as more
than one location could be specified.
7
Groups most at risk of crime in public places

8
The involvement of alcohol in assaults
threats, by location
Totals may not add to 100 because of rounding
9
Victims assessment of whether the offender was
affected by alcohol, or under the influence of
drugs
10
Victims Offenders

• The victimological literature would suggest not
  just victim proneness on the part of men in
  public places, but rather a transaction in which
  both victims and offenders play a part.
• Research on the relationship between
  victimisation and offending has consistently
  found that one of the strongest correlates of
  victimisation is involvement in deviant or
  criminal behaviour and alternatively, that
  victimisation is one of the strongest correlates
  of offending. Such research has included numerous
  data sources and methodologies.
• (Lauritsen Laub, 2007).
• Also see Smart et al., 2005 Budd et al., 2005
  Hayward Sharp, 2005 Zedner, 2002 Zhang et
  al., 2001 Smith , 2004 Wittebrood
  Nieuwbeerta, 2000 Sampson Lauritsen, 1994).

11
Concern about crime

• Is there a crime problem in your neighbourhood?
• Has crime increased or decreased?
• Are you concerned about social disorder?
• Do you worry about becoming a victim of some
  crimes?
• Worry on account of race, ethnicity or cultural
  group
• Feelings of safety after dark in the
  neighbourhood
• Fear of going downtown for entertainment at night
• Impact of fear of crime on quality of life

12
Some findings

• 1. Is there a local crime problem in your
  neighbourhood?
• - 35 said yes the same proportion as
  previous surveys
• 1a. What kinds of crimes?
• - Burglary (65), Vandalism/graffiti (40),
  Dangerous driving (30)
• 2. Has crime increased or decreased in your
  neighbourhood?
• - Two-thirds thought crime levels were the
  same as in the last year
• - One in five thought more crime (an increase
  overall from 2001)
• 3. Are you concerned about social disorder? (Very
  or fairly big problem)
• Speeding cars (57), vandalism/ graffiti (28),
  teenagers hanging around (27), rubbish / litter
  (24), Drunks / drug users (16)
• (An increase on all items from 2001)

13
Types of crime problems perceived in the
neighbourhood
Multiple responses possible. Dont knows are
included in the base.
14
Social disorder problems
Percentages do not necessarily add because of
rounding. Dont knows are included in the base.
15
Social disorder problems 2001 and 2006
16
Personal worries of victimisation
17
Worry on account of enduring characteristics
18
Percent of ethnic groups very or fairly worried
about being victims of specific crimes
19
Worry on account of race, ethnicity or cultural
group
20
Feeling unsafe walking alone in the neighbourhood
after dark
21
Impact of fear of crime on quality of life
Total sample
7
5
European
10
Mäori
11
Most deprived areas
12
Victims of confrontational crime
12
Mäori women
13
Pacific peoples
18
Asians
greatly affected by crime (scores of 8-10)
22
Differences between groups on downtown measures
23
Downtown fear
24
Views on the effectiveness of NS
25
Concern about crime NS members and others
26
Comparisons with England Wales
27
Who is afraid downtown

• Little differences between men and women
• though women had a bit more intense fear
• Young people more afraid downtown
• though older people a bit more often fearful
• No differences for Maori
• More in deprived areas felt fearful downtown
• More in Auckland
• And more victims

28
Neighbourhood Support activities among members
29
Key results on Neighbourhood Support
30
Those most willing least willing to join NS
Percentage point differences from the average
willingness to join NS (81.8)
31
Neighbourhood Support Is it successful?

• NZCASS 2006 CANNOT TELL US IF NS IS SUCCESSFUL
• International literature shows
• No evidence that NS reduces crime
• No evidence that NS reduces concern about crime
• No evidence that NS improves social cohesion
• But NZCASS does show
• 82 not covered by schemes said they would join
• 77 of members felt NS was effective in helping
  to reduce crime
• 78 of members felt NS was effective in
  increasing community support
• And Collective efficacy is increasingly
  recognised as a factor in crime control (e.g.
  Sampson et al., 1997)

32
Questions?