Anti Social Behaviour, distraction burglay, street crime

domestic violence, domestic burglary, drug and alcohol abuse

How Secure is your Community

Domestic Burglary Statistical Analysis

Summary
Although levels of domestic burglary have been declining nationally in recent years, this crime is more likely to affect disadvantaged neighbourhoods than other areas. Households with people who are young, unemployed, single parents or with low incomes are more likely to fall victim to burglary, as are those on council estates. Burglary can be profoundly distressing for victims and reducing such crime has been shown to help social and economic renewal. Burglaries are more likely to occur in neighbourhoods where:
• homes lack basic security and are vulnerable to break in
• there are individuals prepared to take advantage of an opportunity to burgle
• there are few measures to deter them from doing so
There are a range of measures to tackle burglary which act at each of the three levels above.

What’s the Problem?
Burglaries are falling yet remain common
The latest crime figures recorded by the police show last year there were over 400,000 domestic burglaries in England and Wales. The numbers of burglaries have decreased in recent years but it is still relatively common and so the Government wants to reduce it by 25% between 1999 and 2005.

Poor neighbourhoods suffer most
The risk of experiencing a burglary is not evenly spread and some households are at greater risk of suffering burglaries than others. For example, the British Crime Survey shows that less than 1% of households in England and Wales accounted for 42% of all burglaries in 1999.
Burglary is a particular problem in the 88 most deprived areas: 67 of these areas have burglary rates above the national average, with some having rates considerably higher than this. Reducing crime, particularly domestic burglary, has been shown to be an enabling factor for neighbourhood renewal.

Certain types of household are most at risk
Burglary is also disproportionately concentrated in certain types of households. The following graph shows that the burglary rates for certain types of households, such as single parent households, are much higher than the national average. Student households have also been shown to have burglary rates which greatly exceed the national average.

Repeat victimisation is a special problem
Studies have shown that those recently burgled are more likely to be burgled again than others. Repeat victimisation may occur because the initial crime ‘flags’ people and places where crime was always likely (eg a house with little security) or because offenders take advantage later of opportunities which the first offence throws up.

The consequences for individuals and neighbourhoods are serious
Burglaries can result in economic, physical and emotional distress for victims and can have wider social and economic impacts for an area. For example, a recent survey of burglary victims showed that a half of burglary victims suffered difficulty in sleeping, 42% experienced acute anxiety or stress, and 21% even considered moving house. Amongst other things, high burglary rates can impact on the health of local residents, deter potential employers and increase costs to local service providers.

What are the causes?
Burglaries, like other criminal events happen when three elements come together:
• a motivated offender
• a suitable target (eg an unprotected property)
• the absence of other people who could prevent the offence from being committed.

Motivated offenders
Other parts of this site deal with the factors that give rise to offending behaviour, including the link between drugs and acquisitive crimes such as burglary.
Vulnerable targets increase the likelihood of crime
A key factor behind burglary is the ease with which offenders can gain access to potential targets. With burglary we should note:
• the groups most likely to fall victim to burglary described above often cannot afford to take basic security measures (such as improved locks on doors and windows). Research shows 15% of households across England and Wales without security measures were burgled, compared with 4% of those with basic measures in place and 3% of those with higher levels of security ;
• sometimes the design of their homes and immediate locality make burglary easier rather than harder. For example, poor lighting, an absence of fences around the property, convenient hiding places nearby, all lower the risks to burglars of being detected;
• there is also an issue of carelessness which explains some burglaries, such as failing to close a door properly or leaving ground floor windows open when the house is empty;
• burglary victims are themselves vulnerable to repeat burglary because a broken window or forced door can be accessed again before it is repaired. Also the first burglary may highlight the presence of items worth stealing at a later date and improve the criminals understanding of how to break in again. Research shows that when re-victimisation occurs it tends to do so quickly and that more experienced burglars are more likely to return to their target.

Lack of a deterring presence is a relevant factor
The presence of a motivated offender and a vulnerable crime do not mean that a burglary will take place. The presence of others may deter. These could be police officers, security guards or neighbourhood wardens but could also include anyone whose presence or proximity discourages a crime from happening (eg a neighbour who is in a position to spot any suspicious activity at nearby houses).
It follows that burglaries can be prevented by altering any of the three elements, eg by improving security at vulnerable properties, targeting offenders and increasing the presence of others in a position to deter crime.

What’s been tried?
The fact that the risk of burglary is uneven suggests that it is cost effective to target those most at risk. This suggests that targeting may be directed towards
• localities where the risk of burglary is high
• types of household at high risk or
• a combination of these approaches (ie identifying high risk households in high burglary areas).
The fact that prior victimisation is the best indicator of victimisation also suggests that efforts should be directed towards preventing re-victimisation of burgled households.
When developing burglary reduction strategies, consideration should be given to addressing the needs of victims and include both taking measures to prevent repeat victimisation but also steps to address any difficulties that victims may be experiencing as a result of being burgled.

Target hardening
Target hardening involves reducing opportunities for criminals through physical barriers such as locks, safes, screens, or reinforced materials. There are three main types of scheme:
Adding basic security measures to locks, bolts and alarms. For example, the HomeSafe target hardening scheme in Merthyr Tydfil reported a 57% reduction in domestic burglary between 1995 and 2001. Such schemes often prioritise repeat victims.

Securing access from outside the property. Evidence suggests that offenders gain access via the rear of properties when committing a large proportion of residential burglaries. . Alley-gating schemes are a form of target hardening aimed at preventing illegitimate access to the rear of properties through the installation of security gates across footpaths and alleyways. There is some evidence to suggest that such schemes can be effective in reducing burglary . Concierge schemes play a similar role in respect of blocks of flats.
Building in Security Features at the outset: The Secured by Design (SBD) scheme, which is sponsored by the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO), encourages the inclusion of adequate physical security measures within newly built property. This has been shown to be effective in reducing both burglary and fear of crime levels.

Property marking
Property marking schemes are designed to reduce burglary by making items of property more difficult to dispose of and therefore reduce their attractiveness to offenders. It can also increase the likelihood of stolen items being returned to their rightful owner. Property marking was also an element of the burglary reduction scheme, which led to reductions in burglary on the Kirkholt Estate, Rochdale. There is evidence that publicity surrounding such an initiative has a positive effect on reducing burglary rates.

Increased presence to deter crime
There are various ways of increasing the surveillance in an area: increasing the number of local patrols (formal surveillance), installing CCTV cameras in a burglary-prone area (technological surveillance) or increasing surveillance by people going about their everyday lives (natural surveillance).
Increasing police patrols in crime hot spots can lead to reductions in crime as can targeting known offenders.
Formal surveillance includes patrols by others, such as Neighbourhood Wardens. For example, neighbourhood wardens at Merthyr Tydfil are asked to cast an eye on houses as they conduct their patrols, looking for security risks. The wardens would then complete a form and put it through the letterbox highlighting the danger to the resident. For example, the warden may alert the resident to the fact that they have left a window open and alert them to the possible risk and ask them for their cooperation in reducing crime.
Evidence about the effectiveness of CCTV is inconclusive. What is, however, clear is that the context in which a CCTV system is set up is very important. An evaluation of the Government’s CCTV Initiative is being carried out but should have been published at the end of 2006.
Surveillance can be promoted through a range of techniques such as removing any obstacles to surveillance (eg cutting back overgrown bushes, improving lighting, etc), designing buildings, etc to all improve visibility of access points, and by encouraging the use of public spaces. Improving lighting has been shown to be effective in reducing crime levels.
Voluntary surveillance schemes such as Neighbourhood Watch are prevalent in some areas. However, evidence on their preventative value is mixed and often those areas with high burglary rates tend to have lower levels of Neighbourhood Watch participation.

Targeting offenders
Most police forces use intelligence to monitor those offenders who they believe most likely to commit crime, rather than simply wait for a crime to be reported before investigating. This can increase the chances of successful detection and help encourage a change in behaviour. Such targeting can involve co-operation and information sharing with other agencies at neighbourhood level.
Suspected burglars are not automatically targets and other priorities include persistent offenders and suspected street robbers . It is important however that the police are fully aware of any serious local burglary problem and consider the scope for targeting where possible.
Informant hotlines, such as Crimestoppers, can assist in both recovering stolen property and securing successful prosecutions. Research by the Vauxhall Centre for the study of Crime at the University of Luton, identified 63% of cases where previously unknown offenders, or those known but not suspected for the case in question, were arrested and charged as a result of Crimestoppers information.

Support for victims
In addition to loss of property, burglary victims may suffer from other physical and emotional problems such as anxiety, difficult in sleeping and increased fear of crime. Providing support for victims should, therefore, form part of any response to local burglary problems. Schemes that involve fitting increased security to burglary victim’s property may go some way to reassuring victims as well as reducing the risk of repeat victimisation. The local Victim Support service can provide help for victims as can other services, such as Neighbourhood or Street Wardens, etc. For example, Neighbourhood Wardens at Merthyr Tydfil have close links with the HomeSafe Scheme (see target hardening section) and can provide support for victims.

Checklist
We set out below a series of issues to be considered in developing anti-burglary strategies:
• Identify groups most at risk of being burgled in your neighbourhood – in particular these include: single parent households; households occupied by young people and households containing the unemployed
• Previous victims are particularly vulnerable because of high rates of ‘repeat victimisation’;
• Strategies need to reflect the circumstances that combine when burglaries happen: a motivated offender; suitable target; absence of people who could deter offenders
• What security measures are in place locally, especially for vulnerable households?
• How rapidly are damages from burglaries repaired – broken windows and locsk make re-victimisation easier – and it tends to happen quickly;
• What ‘deterrent presence’ could be put in place – for example extra beat officers, neighbourhood wardens, even a Neighbourhood Watch scheme?
• Prioritise at risk groups when installing target hardening measures;
• Property marking may make items less attractive to burglars;
• Improved lighting can reduce crime levels but evidence on CCTV is inconclusive.

References

Armitage, R (2000) An Evaluation of Secured by Design Housing within West Yorkshire. Briefing Note 7/00. London: Home Office.
Bennett, T. and Durie, L. (1999) Preventing Residential Burglary in Cambridge: From Crime Audits to Targeted Strategies. Police Research Series Paper 108. London: Home Office.
Bridgeman, C and Hobbs, L (1997) Preventing Repeat Victimisation: the police officer’s guide. London: Home Office.
Clarke, R.V. (1995) Situational Crime Prevention. Building a Safer Society: strategic approaches to crime prevention edited by Tonry, M and Farrington, D.P. London: The University of Chicago Press.
Clarke, R.V. and Harris (1992)
Pease, K (1998) Repeat victimisation: taking stock. Crime Detection and Prevention Series Paper 90. London: Home Office.
Sherman, L., et al (1997) Preventing Crime: What Works, What Doesn’t, What’s Promising. http://www.preventingcrime.org
Sutton, M; Schneider, J. and Hetherington, S. (2001) Tackling theft with the Market Reduction Approach. Crime Reduction Series Paper 8. London: Home Office.
Webb, J. (1997) Direct Line Homesafe: An Evaluation of the First Year . Nottingham: Janice Webb Research.

Further Reading

Other Websites;

Domestic Burglary toolkit

http://www.crimereduction.gov.uk/toolkits/db00.htm

Reducing Burglary Initiative

http://www.crimereduction.gov.uk/bri.htm

Distraction Burglary mini-site

http://www.crimereduction.gov.uk/boguscaller1.htm

Secured by Design introduction

http://www.crimereduction.gov.uk/securedesign8.htm

Secured byDesign

http://www.securedbydesign.com

Select ADVICE from top of this webpage, or Click the ADVICE Button Below, to Return to the Selection of the Most up-to-date Crime Prevention Information.