crime mapping research papers

• Skip to main content
• Skip to primary sidebar

Criminal Justice

IResearchNet

Academic Writing Services

Crime mapping.

Crime mapping is the process through which crime analysts and researchers use location information about crime events to detect spatial patterns in criminal activity. Early crime mapping efforts typically involved placing physical markers, such as pins, on maps to designate the locations where crimes occurred. Patterns of criminal activity were determined primarily through visual inspection of these maps. (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

I. Introduction

Ii. a brief history of crime mapping, iii. theoretical perspectives in crime mapping research, iv. spatial crime research and planning interventions, v. future directions and challenges in crime mapping, vi. conclusion.

Crime is not a random event. Criminological research suggests that certain psychological, social, or economic characteristics are associated with higher levels of criminal involvement. Furthermore, particular lifestyles and patterns of activity place individuals at a heightened risk for victimization. Crime fluctuates temporally as well: More crimes occur in the evening as opposed to the morning, on weekends as opposed to weekdays, and in summer months as opposed to winter months. It comes as no surprise that spatial patterns of crime exist as well. For example, Sherman and colleagues (Sherman, Gartin, & Buerger, 1989) found that approximately 50% of calls for service came from approximately 3% of addresses in Minneapolis, Minnesota.

Crime mapping is the process through which crime analysts and researchers use location information about crime events to detect spatial patterns in criminal activity. Early crime mapping efforts typically involved placing physical markers, such as pins, on maps to designate the locations where crimes occurred. Patterns of criminal activity were determined primarily through visual inspection of these maps. With the advances in computing, geographic information system (GIS) software, such as MapInfo and ArcGIS, enables researchers to convert geographic information (addresses or global positioning system [GPS] coordinates) into coordinates used with virtual maps. Researchers and crime analysts can then use a number of analytic software packages to examine and detect patterns of criminal activity from these virtual maps.

This research paper is designed to offer an overview of the field of crime mapping. First, the history of crime mapping is briefly discussed. After this, a brief overview of several theoretical perspectives that have been used to understand the spatial patterns of crime is provided. Following this, some of the major findings in spatial crime analyses are discussed, particularly in regard to the relevance of implementation strategies designed to combat crime. The research paper concludes with recommendations for future directions in crime mapping research.

Interestingly, the earliest efforts at crime mapping can be traced to the roots of the discipline of criminology itself. In the early 19th century, a number of studies examined the distribution of crime in France and England. Brantingham and Brantingham (1991a) provided an overview of some of the findings of the main studies from this era. Guerry and Quetelet mapped crimes in France at the department level and found that crimes were not distributed evenly across departments. They also found that there was stability over time in both areas with high crime and areas with low crime over time. These findings were echoed in England with studies by Plint, Glyde, and Mayhew.

In the United States, Shaw and McKay’s (1942) seminal study of juvenile delinquency in Chicago made extensive use of crime maps. Shaw and McKay borrowed Park and Burgess’s (1924) ecological model and divided the city into five different zones. They found that the zone adjacent to the central business district, the zone of transition, perpetually suffered from the highest rates of juvenile delinquency and other social problems regardless of the specific ethnic group occupying the zone at the time. This research was instrumental in popularizing social disorganization theory and inspired a number of similar mapping projects in Chicago; Philadelphia; Richmond, Virginia; Cleveland, Ohio; Birmingham, Alabama; Denver, Colorado; Seattle, Washington; and other cities.

Accompanying these early efforts in crime mapping were developments in the profession of policing that provided additional opportunities for crime mapping. In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, the professionalization movement in policing encouraged police organizations to compile statistics documenting the extent of crime in their jurisdictions. In fact, one of the main justifications for the creation of Federal Bureau of Investigation was for the explicit purpose of documenting the extent of crime in the United States through the Uniform Crime Reporting program (Mosher, Miethe, & Phillips, 2002). During this time, many agencies began compiling crime statistics and conducting analyses of crime data. Crime mapping was primarily done using pin maps, which were very time-consuming and provided only a basic visualization of crime patterns.

The late 1960s and early 1970s were critical for the development of crime mapping. In 1966, the Harvard Lab for Computer Graphics and Spatial Analysis developed SYMAP (Synagraphic Mapping System), one of the first widely distributed computerized mapping software programs. The Environmental Science and Research Institute was founded in 1969 and in the subsequent decades emerged as one of the top distributors of GIS software, including the current ArcView and ArcGIS software packages. Also around this time, the U.S. Census Bureau began the ambitious GBF-DIME (Geographic Base Files and Dual Independent Map Encoding) project, which was used to create digitized street maps for all cities in the United States during the 1970 census (Mark, Chrisman, Frank, McHaffie, & Pickles, 1997). These advances were necessary for the development of GIS programs used in crime mapping.

The use of GIS programs for mapping has been the most important advance in the field of crime mapping. There are several important advantages in using virtual maps instead of physical maps. First, computers have dramatically reduced the time and effort required to produce crime maps. Given the relatively low cost and user-friendliness of many of these software programs, it no longer requires a substantial investment for agencies that wish to engage in crime mapping. Second, these GIS programs reduce the amount of error associated with assigning geographic coordinates to crime events. Third, virtual maps are much more flexible than physical maps, allowing researchers and crime analysts to compare the geographic distribution of crimes against other characteristics of the area under investigation (e.g., census bureau information, city planning and zoning maps, and maps produced by other agencies). Finally, GIS and other spatial analysis software provide powerful statistical tools for analyzing and detecting patterns of criminal activity that cannot be detected through simple visual inspection.

In the mid-1970s and early 1980s, a crisis of confidence in traditional police practices emerged following the results of studies, such as the Kansas City Preventative Patrol experiment, that suggested that the police were not effective in combating crime (Weisburd & Lum, 2005). Goldstein’s (1979) problem-oriented policing emerged as a response to this crisis and emphasized that policing should involve identifying emerging crime and disorder problems and working to address the underlying causes of these problems. Academic interests in the field of criminology also began to shift during this time. While many criminologists were concerned with causes of crime that were outside the sphere of influence of police agencies (e.g., economic depravation, differential association, and social bonds), a number of researchers, such as Jeffery (1971), Newman (1972), and Cohen and Felson (1979), began discussing factors that contribute to the occurrence of crime that were more amenable to intervention. The combination of the shift in theoretical focus in criminology and the shift in the philosophy of policing yielded new opportunities for crime mapping and initiated a resurgence of research on both the geography of crime as well as crime prevention strategies involving crime mapping.

Although the first instances of computerized crime mapping occurred in the mid-1960s in St. Louis, Missouri, the adoption of computerized crime mapping across the United States remained relatively slow. Although a number of agencies, in particular in larger jurisdictions, became early adopters of computerized crime mapping technology, the large period of growth in computerized crime mapping did not begin until the late 1980s and early 1990s (Weisburd & Lum, 2005). The rate of adoption of crime mapping among departments greatly increased as desktop computers became cheaper and more powerful and GIS software became easier to use and more powerful. The Compstat program, which started in 1994 in New York City, emphasized crime mapping as a central component to strategic police planning and helped popularize crime mapping among police agencies. With assistance from the Office of Community Oriented Police Services and the National Institute of Justice, a large number of departments adopted computerized crime mapping practices. By 1997, approximately 35% of departments with more than 100 officers reported using crime mapping (Weisburd & Lum, 2005).

As previously noted, the development of tools and techniques of crime mapping have been accompanied by an expanding body of criminological theory oriented toward explaining the geographic patterns of crime. It is important, when discussing theories about the spatial distribution of crime, to distinguish between theories that explain criminality and theories that explain criminal events. Traditional criminological approaches tend to emphasize individual-level social and psychological characteristics as the main factors that lead to criminality, that is, the propensity toward committing criminal acts. These theories focus predominately on explaining why offenders engage and persist in criminal lifestyles. Alternatively, theories that discuss the spatial distribution of crime focus on explaining the patterns seen in criminal events, that is, the occurrences of crime. These theories focus less attention on the motivations of offenders and more attention on factors of the environment that promote crime.

A. Social Disorganization Theory

Although a number of theories have been proposed to explain why particular neighborhoods experience high crime rates, social disorganization theory has been the most influential. Social disorganization theory, as first proposed by Shaw and McKay (1942), can be seen as the first attempt to construct a criminological theory of place. The concept of social disorganization refers to “the inability of local communities to realize the common values of their residents or solve commonly experienced problems” (Bursik, 1988, p. 521). As such, disorganized communities suffer from diminished capacities to exercise social control and are unable to regulate the behavior of community members (see Bursik & Grasmick, 1993). As the capacity of a community to regulate the behavior of its members decreases, the potential for illegal activity increases.

A central tenet of social disorganization theory is that structural conditions within a neighborhood attenuate the social ties that promote social cohesion and enable community members to exercise social control. Economic depravation creates undesirable living conditions that promote residential instability and population heterogeneity. Because social ties require time to form, high residential instability in neighborhoods prevents the development of social ties as residents frequently relocate (Bursik & Grasmick, 1993). In neighborhoods with high levels of population heterogeneity the extensiveness of friendship and acquaintance networks through which social control is exercised is limited because of social and cultural barriers between residents (Bursik & Grasmick, 1993). Structural factors such as these compromise the social integration of neighborhood residents and undermine perceptions of collective efficacy, that is, the collective sense of trust, social cohesion, and willingness to intervene on behalf of the public good (Sampson, Raudenbush, & Earls, 1997). Neighborhoods that have low collective efficacy are likely to experience high levels of crime.

B. Routine Activities Theory

Cohen and Felson’s (1979) routine activities theory has been applied extensively to research on spatial patterns of crime. To Cohen and Felson, crime is a predatory activity and, as such, can subsist only near patterns of legitimate activity. Therefore, to understand crime patterns it is necessary to understand the patterns of conventional routine activities around which crime is organized. Criminal victimization occurs where routine activities produce a convergence in space and time of the three necessary conditions for crime to occur: (1) a suitable target, (2) a motivated offender, and (3) the absence of capable guardians (Cohen & Felson, 1979). Felson (1998) explained that suitable targets have value to the offender, are visible to the offender, are easily moved or removed, and are accessible by the offender. The concept of guardianship has also been extended and includes intimate handlers, who are responsible for monitoring the behavior of offenders; guardians, who are responsible for protecting targets; and place managers, who are responsible for monitoring and controlling access to particular spaces (see Eck, 2001). In applications of this theory to spatial crime analysis, structural features of the city, patterns of land use, and the routine activities associated with particular locations can concentrate motivated offenders and suitable targets into areas with limited guardianship. This, in turn, fosters opportunities for criminal victimization.

C. Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design and Defensible Space Theories

A couple of important theories have been proposed to explain why criminal events occur more frequently at particular sites. Jeffery (1971) was one of the first criminologists to suggest that immediate features of the environment affected crime, with his Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) approach. This approach emphasizes target hardening and surveillance. Contemporaneously, Newman (1972) also emphasized the role of the environment in creating crime with his defensible space theory. Newman argued, in regard to public housing, that it is possible to design the use of space to enhance territorial functioning and to improve the natural surveillance in these environments. Crowe (2000) expanded on both Jefferey’s and Newman’s initial theories. In the current formulation of CPTED, Crowe discussed three strategies that are used to prevent crime: (1) access control to prevent contact between the offender and the target, (2) surveillance to monitor areas and discourage offenders, and (3) territorial reinforcement to promote feelings of ownership among users of the space. CPTED is usually employed along with situational crime prevention (discussed in the next section) to formulate practical strategies for reducing crime.

D. Rational Choice Perspective and Situational Crime Prevention

The rational choice perspective (Cornish & Clarke, 1986) is primarily concerned with understanding offender decision making. This approach assumes that offenders possess limited rationality, meaning that they make rational calculations of the costs and benefits associated with crime but are constrained in their decision making by time, information, context, ability, and prior experiences. This perspective seeks to understand the series of decisions made by the offender that result in a criminal event. Interestingly, unlike many other theories of offending, the rational choice perspective emphasizes that different decisions are involved in the production of different types of crime. Rational choice explanations of criminal offending differ by crime type, instead of ignoring these differences in favor of a general motivation toward engaging in crime, as is common in many other criminological theories. Spatial applications of the rational choice perspective emphasize offender movement, search patterns, and target selection processes that determine the spatial patterns observed in crime.

Situational crime prevention (Clarke, 1997) refers to the application of the rational choice perspective toward developing policy recommendations to reduce crime. Situational crime prevention emphasizes situational-level interventions toward increasing the efforts associated with committing a crime, increasing the perceived risks for engaging in crime, reducing the anticipated rewards from crime, and removing the excuses associated with crime (Clarke, 1997). As with the CPTED and defensible space theories, the policy applications of situational crime prevention focus on practical strategies that are customized to specific settings. Although the successes of this approach are well documented, rarely do the methods used in these studies permit broad conclusions regarding the effectiveness of this approach at reducing crime (see Clarke, 1997, for a discussion).

E. Crime Pattern Theory

Brantingham and Brantingham (1991b, 1993) developed a perspective referred to as crime pattern theory that incorporates elements of the rational choice, routine activities, and other spatial perspectives on crime. According to this perspective, individuals create a cognitive map of their spatial environment with which they are familiar through their routine activities. The action space of an individual consists of (a) nodes, the destinations of travel, such as work, home, and entertainment locations, and (b) paths, the travel routes that individuals take to move from one node to another. Through repeated movement along paths to various nodes, individuals develop an awareness space consisting of the areas in a city with which they are familiar. According to this theory, offenders search for suitable targets primarily within this awareness space by comparing potential targets against templates, or mental conceptualizations of the characteristics of appropriate targets. The likelihood of a particular target being selected by an offender dramatically decreases as an offender moves away from his or her awareness space, a process often referred to as distance decay (see Rengert, Piquero, & Jones, 1999). One interesting application of this theory is geographic profiling, which attempts to narrow the scope of police investigations by using information on repeated crimes to identify the awareness space of a repeat criminal (Rossmo, 2000).

A. Hot Spots

As previously indicated, a large number of studies have demonstrated that criminal events are spatially concentrated. Although the extent of concentration differs between studies, all empirical evidence suggests that a small number of places account for the majority of crime within any given city. Sherman and colleagues (1989) popularized the term hot spot to describe these areas where crime is concentrated. The detection and explanation of these hot spots is a major concern of research in crime mapping. Hot-spot analysis is currently very popular among police agencies because it provides a method to coordinate interventions in emerging problem areas.

A number of studies have demonstrated the benefits of hot-spot analysis to help coordinate police responses to crime. For example, in a randomized experiment in Minneapolis, Sherman and Weisburd (1995) found that concentrated patrol efforts in hot-spot areas produced a significant decline in calls for service. Police responses to crime are not limited to enhanced patrol. In another randomized experiment in Jersey City, New Jersey, Weisburd and Green (1995) found that after identifying drug market hot spots using crime mapping, a coordinated policy of engaging business owners and community members coupled with police crackdowns yielded substantial decreases in disorder calls for service. In fact, a recently conducted meta-analysis on street-level drug enforcement indicated that approaches that focus on community–police partnerships in drug market hot spots were more effective than enforcement-only approaches (Mazerolle, Soole, & Rombouts, 2006). This suggests that the best approach is a coordinated strategy between police officers and community members toward reducing crime in identified hot spots.

B. Community-Level Factors Affecting Crime

When designing strategies to address crime in hot-spot areas, it is important to consider the community context that contributes to emergence and maintenance of hot spots. Neighborhood-level research on spatial crime patterns helps illuminate the factors associated with heightened levels of crime. As previously mentioned, economic depravation, residential mobility, and population heterogeneity all contribute to higher levels of crime in a neighborhood by impeding the development of social ties between residents (Bursik & Grasmick, 1993). Family dissolution and inadequate supervision of adolescents also contribute to increased levels of crime. In fact, the presence of unsupervised adolescents in a community is an important predictor of violent crime in a neighborhood (Veysey & Messner, 1999). Rose and Clear (1998) suggested that prior crime policies that result in mass incarceration may also impair community functioning, because in some communities this represents a substantial loss in the social and human capital on which informal social control depends.

Although many of the structural factors contributing to social disorganization remain outside the control of police agencies, such as concentrated disadvantage and high residential mobility, it remains possible to design interventions to increase social integration and improve collective efficacy. Community policing emphasizes community involvement in responding to crime problems through the creation of police–community partnerships, which should both increase community access to public social control and foster improved trust between community members and police officers. Furthermore, programs designed to increase community integration through increasing resident involvement in local agencies should be helpful in fostering the development of social ties and increasing perceptions of collective efficacy. Finally, if Rose and Clear (1998) are correct, community corrections and offender reintegration efforts should alleviate some of the impact of the mass incarceration policies that have removed offenders from the community. Bursik and Grasmick (1993) provided an extensive discussion on various community-based interventions and provided suggestions for how to improve these programs.

In addition to the previously discussed factors, a fair amount of research has examined the effects of incivilities on crime and the fear of crime within a community. Incivilities, such as poorly tended residences, the accumulation of refuse, graffiti, and public loitering and drunkenness, are signs of disorder. A number of studies have demonstrated that the presence of incivilities in a neighborhood is associated with increased levels of serious crime and with heightened fear of crime among community residents (see Skogan, 1990). Sampson and colleagues (1997), however, suggested that this relationship is spurious and that crime and incivilities result from the same underlying causal process, namely, a lack of collective efficacy. Although the causal role of incivilities in producing crime is in doubt, they may still function as leading indicators of potential crime problems, meaning that mapping incivilities may provide information on communities where hot spots may be emerging.

C. City Features and Crime Locations

In truly comprehensive strategies for addressing crime in hot-spot areas, it is important not only to examine neighborhood-level factors that contribute to the emergence of a crime hot spot but also to consider microlevel place characteristics that promote crime. As Sherman and colleagues (1989) noted, even within high-crime neighborhoods there is substantial variability in the levels of crime. Some places within these neighborhoods experience very low levels of crime, whereas other places are responsible for a substantial amount of the crime.

A number of studies have demonstrated that hot spots of crime tend to emerge around particular features of the urban environment, such as bars and taverns (Roncek & Maier, 1993), fast food restaurants (Brantingham & Brantingham, 1982), schools (Roncek & Faggiani, 1985), public housing (Roncek, Bell, & Francik, 1981), vacant buildings (Spelman, 1993), and public transportation (Block & Davis, 1996). These locations may promote crime by juxtaposing motivated offenders and suitable targets in the absence of capable guardians. Furthermore, the pattern and timing of criminal events in these areas follow the rhythm of legitimate social activity in these areas. For example, crime around bars is more common during evenings and weekends, because more legitimate patrons visit bars during this time. Crime is more common around schools during the school year and after school, because many students interact at this time near school grounds without teacher or parental supervision. Understanding the relationship between the pattern of legitimate social activity and criminal activity around these areas allows researchers and policymakers to design suitable crime prevention strategies.

In addition to identifying the location and timing of criminal events at particular sites, it is important to discern the mechanism through which these areas produce criminal opportunities. Brantingham and Brantingham (1993) discussed the differences between crime generators and crime attractors. Crime generators, such as transit stations, foster criminal activity by bringing both victims and offenders into a location. On the other hand, crime attractors, such as bars and taverns, tend to bring higher proportions of offenders into an area because these locations are tied to patterns of illicit activity. It is important to discern whether a given location functions as a crime generator or a crime attractor, because the appropriateness and effectiveness of intervention strategies may differ by type of location.

There is no shortage of practical policy recommendations for reducing or eliminating criminal opportunities around hot-spot areas. Clarke’s (1997) situational crime prevention model offers a set of 16 different opportunity-reducing strategies. Among those most applicable to location-based interventions are controlling access and entry/exit screening; improving surveillance by officers, civilians, and citizens; deflecting offenders by disrupting routines that promote crime; and facilitating compliance with rules. Use of these strategies to control opportunities for crime may help reduce the risks of victimization in hot-spot areas.

D. Crime Displacement

Unanticipated consequences are always a concern when designing an intervention. For interventions in crime hot spots, crime displacement is of particular importance. After the intervention is implemented and crime opportunities are reduced, it is possible that offenders simply relocate their activities to areas outside the intervention site. For example, if a police crackdown on drug trafficking is initiated at a particular intersection that is a hot spot for drug dealing, it is possible that offenders will simply move to a nearby intersection, and drug sales will continue. Other types of crime displacement, such as offenders committing crime during different times, offenders selecting different targets, or even offenders committing different types of crimes, also are possible. Given the wide ranges of different responses that might constitute crime displacement, it is difficult to conclusively demonstrate that crime displacement did not occur during a particular study. For this reason, any researchers or policymakers implementing place-based intervention strategies should be keen to the possibility of crime displacement. Fortunately, the empirical literature on crime displacement is decidedly mixed, and it appears that many interventions do not lead to appreciable crime displacement effects (Clarke, 1997).

On the basis of the current research on the spatial patterns of crime, a number of avenues of research in crime mapping are worth exploring. Obviously, a major focus for future research in this area will be further development and refinement of the tools needed in crime mapping studies. Although not discussed in this research paper, there are substantial methodological and analytic difficulties that remain in crime mapping research. Beyond this, however, there are a number of substantive research avenues in crime mapping that are worth pursuing.

A first avenue of research is the further development and integration of theories of the spatial distribution of crime. Although there have been some efforts at integrating social disorganization and routine activities theories (see Miethe & Meier, 1994), additional work remains. These theories share considerable conceptual overlap, and linking the two should provide a more comprehensive framework for understanding the relationship between crime at the macroand microlevels. Furthermore, the criminal events perspective (Meier, Kennedy, & Sacco, 2001; Sacco & Kennedy, 2002) provides a mechanism to link other theories of criminality with theories of criminal events. To date, the implications of other theories of criminality for understanding the spatial distribution of crime remains unexplored and may provide useful insights into offender search patterns and the selection of targets and locations.

A second area of research that would be very helpful in regard to policymakers is expanding crime mapping to include additional justice agencies. The vast majority of research in crime mapping has used calls for service and crime report data, and most applications of crime mapping have been applied to police decision making. Researchers should consider broadening the scope of crime mapping efforts to incorporate data from other justice agencies. In a practical sense, mapping efforts involving other agencies can provide assistance with managing caseloads and coordinating the distribution of services. For example, mapping the residences of parolees and probationers can help agencies optimize caseloads and improve the process of referring ex-offenders to nearby treatment facilities. In addition, novel data can provide new measures of concepts that are commonly used in geographic research, raise interesting research questions, and possibly introduce new avenues of research.

A third potentially fruitful area of research would involve increased attention to the differences between types of city features and the production of criminal events. As previously discussed, it is well established that certain city features tend to concentrate criminal events in adjacent areas. What remains to be seen, however, is how other spatial and community features contribute to differential spatial patterns of crime. For example, it is not entirely clear why some bars suffer from high levels of crime problems and others do not. Obviously, design features of the location itself should account for some of the differences, but other features, such as the level of community organization, adjacent land usage, and the level of concentration of other crime generators or attractors, may also be important for differentiating between problematic and nonproblematic bars.

A final recommendation for future research on spatial patterns in crime is to further examine the stability of crime in small areas. Specifically, as Weisburd, Bushway, Lum, and Yang (2004) recognized, few studies have examined the degree to which crime in microlevel areas is stable over time. In their study, conducted in Seattle over a 14-year period, Weisburd et al. found that there was a substantial amount of stability in the level of crime on street segments. Despite the high degree of stability in many places, some street segments exhibited either downward or upward crime trajectories. Obviously, additional research is needed to determine whether this pattern holds generally or is specific to the city of Seattle. This type of research will be very helpful in describing the factors that lead to the development, maintenance, and decline of crime in problematic areas.

The purpose of this research paper was to review some of the current research on crime mapping, the process through which crime analysts and researchers use location information about crime to detect spatial patterns in criminal activity. Although the history of crime mapping can be traced to the beginnings of the field of criminology, it is only recently that researchers and crime analysts have been able to engage in extensive mapping efforts, primarily due to the development of the desktop computer and GIS software. The emergence of the problem-oriented policing model, along with advances in the theory of criminal events, created a niche for crime mapping in police agencies. The popularization of computerized crime mapping through the Compstat program in New York led to a period of rapid adoption of crime mapping that continues today.

Several theories that are widely used in crime mapping research were also discussed in this research paper. Social disorganization theory argues that structural factors can compromise the social networks needed for social integration, which in turn reduces the capacity of communities to regulate the behavior of its members. Routine activities theory states that crime can be understood through the convergence in time and space of suitable targets, motivated offenders, and the absence of capable guardians. Defensible space and CPTED focuses on how the design of a physical space can prevent crime through increasing territorial functioning and enhancing surveillance capabilities. The rational choice and crime pattern theories of crime focus primarily on explaining how patterns of offender routine activities and target-searching strategies can increase the level of crime in particular areas. Taken together, these theories provide the conceptual backdrop for understanding the spatial distribution of crime and designing strategies to combat crime in high-crime areas.

Finally, this research paper aimed to elaborate on some of the major findings in crime mapping and spatial crime research, with particular attention to designing strategies to combat crime problems. It was argued that the best strategy for eliminating crime hot spots requires consideration of causal factors operating at both the neighborhood and site levels. This research paper concluded with a number of suggestions for future researchers examining spatial crime patterns through crime mapping. In particular, crime mapping research may benefit from efforts at theoretical integration, using crime mapping with additional agencies, further examining the source of differences in the production of criminal opportunities between city features, and examining the stability of crime areas over time.

References:

• Block, R., & Davis, S. (1996). The environs of rapid transit stations: A focus for street crime or just another risky place? In R. Clarke (Ed.), Crime prevention studies: Vol. 6. Preventing mass transit crime. (pp. 237–257). Monsey, NY: Criminal Justice Press.
• Brantingham, P. J., & Brantingham, P. L. (1982). Mobility, notoriety, and crime: A study in crime patterns of urban nodal points. Journal of Environmental Systems, 11, 89–99.
• Brantingham, P. J., & Brantingham, P. L. (1991a). Introduction: The dimensions of crime. In P. J Brantingham & P. L. Brantingham (Eds.), Environmental criminology (pp. 7–26). Prospect Heights, IL:Waveland Press.
• Brantingham, P. J., & Brantingham, P. L. (1991b). Notes on the geometry of crime. In P. J. Brantingham & P. L. Brantingham (Eds.), Environmental criminology (pp. 27–54). Prospect Heights, IL:Waveland Press.
• Brantingham, P. J., & Brantingham, P. L. (1993). Nodes, paths, and edges: Considerations on the complexity of crime and the physical environment. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 13, 3–28.
• Bursik, R. J. (1988). Social disorganization and theories of crime and delinquency: Problems and prospects. Criminology, 26, 519–551.
• Bursik, R. J., & Grasmick, H. G. (1993). Neighborhoods and crime: The dimensions of effective community control. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.
• Clarke, R. V. (1997). Part 1: Introduction. In R. Clarke (Ed.). Situational crime prevention: Successful case studies (2nd ed., pp. 1–44). Albany, NY: Harrow & Heston.
• Cohen, L. E., & Felson, M. (1979). Social change and crime trends:A routine activities approach. American Sociological Review, 44, 588–608.
• Cornish, D., & Clarke, R. (1986). Introduction. In D. Cornish & R. Clarke (Eds.), The reasoning criminal: Rational choice perspectives on offending (pp. 1–13). New York: Springer- Verlag.
• Crowe, T. (2000). Crime prevention through environmental design: Applications of architectural design and space management concepts (2nd ed.). Boston: Butterworth- Heinemann.
• Eck, J. E. (2001). Policing and crime event concentration. In R. F. Meier, L. W. Kennedy, & V. F. Sacco (Eds.), The process and structure of crime: Criminal events and crime analysis (pp. 249–276). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
• Felson, M. (1998). Crime and everyday life (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge Press.
• Goldstein, H. (1979). Improving policing: A problem-oriented approach. Crime & Delinquency, 25, 236–258.
• Jeffery, C. (1971). Crime prevention through environmental design. Beverley Hills, CA: Sage.
• Mark, D. M., Chrisman, N., Frank, A. U., McHaffie, P. H., & Pickles, J. (1997). The GIS History Project. Retrieved from http://www.ncgia.buffalo.edu/gishist/bar_harbor.html
• Mazerolle, L., Soole, D. L., & Rombouts, S. (2006). Street-level drug law enforcement: A meta analytic review. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 2, 409–435.
• Meier, R. F., Kennedy, L.W., & Sacco,V. F. (2001). Crime and the criminal events perspective. In R. F.Meier, L.W. Kennedy, & V. F. Sacco (Eds.), The process and structure of crime: Criminal events and crime analysis (pp. 1–28). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
• Miethe, T. D., & Meier, R. M. (1994). Crime and its social context. Albany: State University of New York Press.
• Mosher, C. J., Miethe, T. D., & Phillips, D. M. (2002). The mismeasure of crime. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
• Newman, O. (1972). Defensible space: Crime prevention through urban design. New York: Collier Books.
• Park, R. E., & Burgess E. W. (1924). Introduction to the science of sociology (2nd ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
• Rengert, G. F., Piquero, A. R., & Jones, P. R. (1999). Distance decay re-examined. Criminology, 37, 427–445.
• Roncek, D. W., Bell, R., & Francik, J. M. A. (1981). Housing projects and crime. Social Problems, 29, 151–166.
• Roncek, D. W., & Faggiani, D. (1985). High schools and crime: A replication. Sociological Quarterly, 26, 491–505.
• Roncek, D. W., & Maier, P. A. (1993). Bars, blocks, and crime revisited: Linking the theory of routine activities to the empiricism of “hot spots.” Criminology, 29, 725–753.
• Rose, D. R., & Clear, T. R. (1998). Incarceration, social capital, and crime: Implications for social disorganization theory. Criminology, 36, 441–478.
• Rossmo, K. (2000). Geographic profiling. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
• Sacco, V. F., & Kennedy, L. W. (2002). The criminal event: Perspectives in space and time. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
• Sampson, R. J., Raudenbush, S. W., & Earls, F. (1997, August 15). Neighborhoods and violent crime: A multi-level study of collective efficacy. Science, 277, 918–924.
• Shaw, C. R., & McKay, H. D. (1942). Juvenile delinquency in urban areas. Chicago: University. of Chicago Press.
• Sherman, L.W., Gartin, P. R., & Buerger, M. E. (1989). Hot spots of predatory crime: Routine activities and the criminology of place. Criminology, 27, 27–55.
• Sherman, L.W., &Weisburd, D. (1995). General deterrent effects of police patrol in crime “hot spots”: A randomized, controlled trial. Justice Quarterly, 16, 633–654.
• Skogan,W. G. (1990). Disorder and decline: Crime and the spiral of decay in American neighborhoods. Berkeley: University of California Press.
• Spelman, W. (1993). Abandoned buildings: Magnets for crime. Journal of Criminal Justice, 21, 481–495.
• Veysey, B. M., & Messner, S. F. (1999). Further testing of social disorganization theory: An elaboration of Sampson and Grove’s “community structure and crime.” Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 36, 156–174.
• Weisburd, D., Bushway, S., Lum, C., & Yang, S. (2004). Trajectories of crime at places:A longitudinal study of street segments in the city of Seattle. Criminology, 42, 283–321.
• Weisburd, D., & Green, L. (1995). Policing drug hot spots: The Jersey City Drug Market Experiment. Justice Quarterly, 12, 711–736.
• Weisburd, D., & Lum, C. (2005). The diffusion of computerized crime mapping in policing: Linking research and practice. Police Practice and Research, 6, 419–434.

Introduction: Crime Mapping and Crime Prevention

23 Pages Posted: 13 Jul 2015

David L. Weisburd

Hebrew University of Jerusalem; George Mason University - The Department of Criminology, Law & Society; Hebrew University of Jerusalem - Faculty of Law

Institute for Law and Justice

Date Written: July 12, 2015

Crime maps have only recently begun to emerge as a significant tool in crime and justice. Until a decade ago, few criminal justice agencies had any capability for creating crime maps, and few investigators had the resources or patience to examine the spatial distribution of crime. Today, however, crime mapping is experiencing what might be termed an explosion of interest among both scholars and practitioners. This introduction begins by examining some early examples of mapping of crime, focusing in particular on factors that inhibited the widespread integration of mapping into crime prevention research and practice in the past. It then turns to innovations in mapping technologies and crime prevention theory that have recently brought crime mapping to the center of trends in crime prevention. The final section introduces the contributions that follow and discusses how they illustrate the many uses of mapping in crime prevention. It examines the pitfalls and problems that researchers and practitioners are likely to encounter in developing and analyzing maps, and the potential advances in crime mapping we might expect in coming decades.

Keywords: crime maps, criminal justice, mapping, analyzing, crime

Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation

David L. Weisburd (Contact Author)

Hebrew university of jerusalem ( email ).

Mount Scopus Jerusalem, Jerusalem 91905 Israel

George Mason University - The Department of Criminology, Law & Society ( email )

4400 University Drive MS 4F4 Fairfax, VA 22030 United States

Hebrew University of Jerusalem - Faculty of Law ( email )

Mount Scopus Mount Scopus, IL 91905 Israel

Institute for Law and Justice ( email )

Alexandria, VA 22314 United States

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?

Paper statistics, related ejournals, criminology ejournal.

Subscribe to this fee journal for more curated articles on this topic

Law & Society: Public Law - Crime, Criminal Law, & Punishment eJournal

Innovation law & policy ejournal, sociology of innovation ejournal, law enforcement ejournal.

Crime Mapping as a Tool for Security and Crime Prevention

Cite this chapter.

• Kate Bowers &
• Shane D. Johnson  

1708 Accesses

7 Citations

There is no doubt that crime mapping is now a mainstream practice in police organizations and the security industry more generally (Wartell and McEwen, 2001). For example, a Home Office survey (Weir and Bangs, 2007) conducted in 2005, with responses from 35 of the 43 UK police forces and many of the UK Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnerships (CDRPs), revealed that 90% of the 171 respondents used Geographic Information Systems (GIS), with three-quarters using them at least weekly. In terms of training, most respondents assessed themselves as competent or proficient users. Commonly used methods included point mapping of individual incidents of crime (86%) and the thematic mapping of data to boundaries such as local authority wards or police beats (80%). Only 50% of respondents used hotspot mapping and where used kernel density estimation (a smoothed risk surface over which crime risk is interpolated from a point pattern) and grid thematic mapping were employed. Of practical concern, when asked how the mapping they undertook informed operational decisions, only 29% felt that it was always or frequently used, with 25% stating that their analyses were very infrequently or never used.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save.

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or eBook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime
• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Unable to display preview.  Download preview PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Mapping Crime Prevention: What We Do and Where We Need to Go

Crime mapping and spatial analysis.

An Introduction to GIS

Boba, R. (2005). Crime Analysis and Crime Mapping . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Google Scholar  

Bowers, K.J. and Johnson, S.D. (2005). Domestic Burglary Repeats and Space-Time Clusters: The Dimensions of Risk.. European Journal of Criminology , 2(1), 67–92.

Article   Google Scholar  

Bowers, K. J., Johnson, S. D., Guerette, R., Summers, L., and Poynton, S. (2011). Do Geographically Focussed Police Initiatives Displace Crime or Diffuse Benefits? A Systematic Review.. Journal of Experimental Criminology , 7(4), 347–374.

Bowers, K.J., Johnson, S.D. and Pease, K. (2004). Prospective Hot-Spotting: The Future of Crime Mapping? The. British Journal of Criminology , 44(5), 641–658.

Braga, A.A. (2005). Hot Spots Policing and Crime Prevention: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials.. Journal of Experimental Criminology , 1(3), 317–342.

Brown, D.E., Liu, H. and Xue, Y. (2000). Mining Preferences from Spatial-Temporal Data . Paper presented at First SIAM International Conference on Data Mining, Chicago, IL, April.

Chainey, S. and Ratcliffe, J. (2005). GIS and Crime Mapping . Chichester: Wiley.

Book   Google Scholar  

Chainey, S. and Tompson, L. (2012). Engagement, Empowerment and Transparency: Publishing Crime Statistics Using Online Crime Mapping.. Policing: A Journal of Policy and Practice 6(3), 228–239.

Chamard, S. (2003). The Adoption and Discontinuance of Computerized Crime Mapping by Municipal Police Departments in New Jersey . Dissertation, School of Criminal Justice, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, Newark. Ann Arbor, MI: UMI Company.

Chamard, S. (2006) The History of Crime Mapping and Its Use by American Police Departments. Alaska Justice Forum , 23(3), 1, 4–8.

Clarke, R.V. and Eck, J. (2003). Become a Problem Solving Crime Analyst in 55 Small Steps . London: Jill Dando Institute of Crime Science.

Eck, J.E. and Spelman, W. (1987). Newport News Tests Problem-Oriented Policing. U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, Washington DC.

Fielding, M. and Jones, V. (2012). ‘Disrupting the Optimal Forager’: Predictive Risk Mapping and Domestic Burglary Reduction in Trafford, Greater Manchester.. International Journal of Police Science & Management , 14(1), 30–41.

(Goldstein, H. (1979) Improving Policing: A Problem-Oriented Approach. Crime and Delinquency , April 1979 25(2), 236–225.

Gorr, W.L and Olligschlaeger, A. (2001). Crime Hotspot Forecasting: Modeling and Comparative Evaluation . (Draft Final Report.) Washington, DC: Office of Justice Programs, National Institute of Justice.

Gorr, W.L., A. Olligschlaeger, and Y. Thompson (2003). Short-Term Forecasting of Crime. International Journal of Forecasting , 19(4), 579–594.

Groff, E.R. and LaVigne, N.G. (2002). Forecasting the Future of Predictive Crime Mapping, in Tilley, N. (ed.). Analysis for Crime Prevention . Volume. 13. Monsey, NY: Criminal Justice Press. pp. 29–58.

Groff, E., Kearley, B., Fogg, H., Beatty, P., Couture, H. and Wartell, J. (2005) A Randomised Experimental Study of Sharing Crime Data with Citizens: Do Maps Produce More Fear? Journal of Experimental Criminology 1, 87–115.

Grubesic, T.H. and Mack, E.A. (2008). Spatio-Temporal Interaction of Urban Crime.. Journal of Quantitative Criminology , 24, 285–306.

Hawkes, A.G. (1971). Spectra of Some Self-Exciting and Mutually Exciting Point Processes.. Biometrika , 58(1), 83–90.

Home Office (2012.) Police.uk Website Analysis . London: Home Office.

Johnson, S.D. (2008). Repeat Burglary Victimization: A Tale of Two Theories.. Journal of Experimental Criminology , 4, 215–240.

Johnson, S.D., Birks, D, McLaughlin, L., Bowers, K.J. and Pease, K. (2007) . Prospective Mapping in Operational Context . Home Office Online Report 19/07. London: Home Office.

Johnson, S.D. and Bowers, K.J. (2004a). The Burglary as Clue to the Future: The Beginnings of Prospective Hot-Spotting.. European Journal of Criminology , 1(2), 237–255.

Johnson, S.D. and Bowers, K.J. (2004b). The Stability of Space-Time Clusters of Burglary. The. British Journal of Criminology , 44(1), 55–65.

Johnson, S.D. and Bowers, K.J. (2007). Burglary Prediction: Theory, Flow and Friction, in Farrell, G., Bowers, K., Shane, J.D. and Townsley, M. (eds.). Crime Prevention Studies . Volume. 21, 203–224. New York: CRC Press.

Johnson, S.D. and Bowers, K.J. (2010). Permeability and Crime Risk: Are Cul-de-sacs Safer?. Journal of Quantitative Criminology , 26, 113–138.

Johnson, S.D., Bowers, K. and Pease, K. (2005). Predicting the Future or Summarising the Past? Crime Mapping as Anticipation, in Smith, M. and Tilley, N. (eds.) Crime Science: New Approaches to Preventing and Detecting Crime . London: Willan. pp. 145–163.

Johnson, S.D. and Braithwaite, A. (2009). Spatio-Temporal Modelling of Insurgency in Iraq . Crime Prevention Studies. Volume. 25. Cullompton: Willan.

Johnson, S.D., Summers, L. and Pease, K. (2009). Offender as Forager? A Direct Test of the Boost Account of Victimization.. Journal of Quantitative Criminology , 25, 181–200.

Kennedy, L., Caplan, J. 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), 339–362.

Mohler, G.O., Short, M.B., Brantingham, P.J., Schoenberg, F.P. and Tita, G.E. (2011). Self-Exciting Point Process Modeling of Crime . Journal of the American Statistical Association , 106 (493), 100–108.

Muller, J. (2011). https://www.google.co.uk/ ?gws_rd=cr&ei=Smx7UojMPOPT0QW6q4GQCw#q=john+muller+(2011)+prediction&safe=active.

National Criminal Intelligence Service (2000). The National Intelligence Model . NCIS Corporate Communications .

Olligschlaeger, A.M. (1997). Artificial Neural Networks and Crime Mapping, in Weisburd, D. and McEwen, T. (eds.) Crime Mapping and Crime Prevention . Monsey, NY: Criminal Justice Press.

Ozdemir, H (2010). Compstat: Strategic Police Management for Effective Crime Deterrence in New York City. IPES/DCAF Working Paper No 30, March 2011 .

Pease, K. (1998). Repeat Victimisation: Taking Stock (Home Office Crime Prevention and Detection Series, Paper No. 90). London, UK: Home Office.

Perry, W.L., McInnis, B., Price, C.C., Smith, S. and Hollywood, J.S. (2013). Predictive Policing: The Role of Crime Forecasting in Law Enforcement Operations . Washington, DC: Rand Corporation, xiii.

Pitcher, A. and Johnson, S.D. (2011). Testing Theories of Victimization Using a Mathematical Model of Burglary.. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency , 48(1), 83–109.

Quinton, P. (2011) The Impact of Information about Crime and Policing on Public Perceptions: The Results of a Randomised Controlled Trial . London: NPIA.

Ratcliffe, J.H. and Rengert, G.F. (2008). Near-Repeat Patterns in Philadelphia Shootings.. Security Journal , 21(1), 58–76.

Ray, K., Davidson, R., Husain F., Vegeris, S., Vowden K. and Karn, J. (2012). Perceptions of the Policing and Crime Mapping ‘Trailblazers’. Home Office, Policing Research and Analysis , Research Report 67.

Roth, R., Ross, K., Finch, B., Luo, W. and MacEachren, A. (2013). Spatio-Temporal Crime Analysis in U.S. Law Enforcement Agencies: Current Practices and Unmet Needs.. Government Information Quarterly , 30(2013), 226–240.

Rowley, C. and Mueller-Johnson, K. (In preparation). ‘Super-Cocooning’ and the Prevention of Near Repeats in Domestic Burglary.

Summers, L., Johnson, S.D. and Rengert, G. (2010). The Use of Maps in Offender Interviews, in Bernasco, W. (ed.) Offender on Offending: Learning About Crime from Criminals . Cullompton: Willan.

Townsley, M., Homel, R. and Chaseling, J. (2003) Infectious Burglaries: A Test of the Near Repeat Hypothesis. British Journal of Criminology , 43, 615–633.

Townsley, M.T., Johnson, S.D. and Ratcliffe, J.R. (2008). Space–Time Dynamics of Insurgent Activity in Iraq.. Security Journal , 21(3), 139–146.

Travis, L.F. and Hughes, K.D. (2002). Overcoming the Barriers: Crime Mapping in the 21st Century Number 2, August 2002. Police Foundation.

Walsh, W.F. (2001). Compstat: An Analysis of an Emerging Police Managerial Paradigm.. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies and Management , 24(3), 347–362.

Wartell, J. and McEwen, J.T. (2001). Privacy in the Information Age: A Guide for Sharing Crime Maps and Spatial Data Series: Research Report. Institute for Law and Justice .

Weir, R. and Bangs, M. (2007). The Use of Geographic Information Systems by crime Analysts in England and Wales. Home Office Online Report 03/07.

Download references

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

Martin Gill ( Professor of Criminology and Director of Perpetuity Research ) ( Professor of Criminology and Director of Perpetuity Research )

Copyright information

© 2014 Kate Bowers and Shane D. Johnson

About this chapter

Bowers, K., Johnson, S.D. (2014). Crime Mapping as a Tool for Security and Crime Prevention. In: Gill, M. (eds) The Handbook of Security. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-67284-4_25

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-67284-4_25

Publisher Name : Palgrave Macmillan, London

Print ISBN : 978-1-349-67286-8

Online ISBN : 978-1-349-67284-4

eBook Packages : Palgrave Social Sciences Collection Social Sciences (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

• Analyzing Crime Data
• Criminology
• Research Methods
• Serial Killers
• Fact Busting
• Call for Papers
• Submissions
• Paid Access
• Redemption Code

Crime Mapping: A Journal of Research and Practice

Co-Editors Timothy C. Hart, Ph.D. & Paul Zandbergen, Ph.D

• ISSN: 1942-0927 (Print) • ISSN: 2152-9876 (Online)

Keywords: Environmental Criminology, Crime Analysis, Space, Time, and Crime

Issue Price: $36.99 | Article Price: $18.99

Crime Mapping: A Journal of Research and Practice is an international, peer-reviewed journal dedicated to publishing high quality manuscripts on the spatial, temporal, and geographical aspects of crime and crime analysis from both a theoretical and an applied perspective. Crime Mapping is published twice a year, in the Spring and Fall, by CJ Research.

Crime Mapping: A Journal of Research and Practice aims to cover a wide range of interdisciplinary topics related to crime mapping, crime analysis and the use of geospatial methods and techniques in criminal justice. Topics include, but are not limited to: spatial theories of crime, spatial statistics for crime analysis, crime hotspot detection, operational crime mapping, spatio-temporal analysis of crime, tracking technologies, investigative crime mapping, tactical crime mapping, geographic profiling, web-based crime mapping, crime cartography, as well as general topics related to the use of geospatial technologies in criminal justice, such as Geographic Information Systems (GIS), Global Positioning Systems (GPS) and Remote Sensing (RS).

Crime mapping plays an important role in almost any form of crime analysis and can improve our understanding of the important relationships between people, location, time, and crime. It therefore assists us in discovering crime patterns, implementing corrective strategies, optimizing resource allocation and developing crime prevention measures. While existing journals in criminal justice, geography and other fields publish crime mapping and analysis related articles, they are offered limited priority and recognition, and no journal is currently focused on the broader spectrum of Geographic Information Science and criminal justice. Crime Mapping: A Journal of Research and Practice is filling this gap in existing journals by providing a credible venue for researchers and practitioners to publish their crime mapping research.

PO Box 72742 • Las Vegas • NV • 89170 © CJ Research 2011-19

An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.

Here's how you know

Official websites use .gov A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS A lock ( Lock A locked padlock ) or https:// means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

From Crime Mapping to Crime Forecasting: The Evolution of Place-Based Policing

Mapping law enforcement report data can be an effective way to analyze where crime occurs. The resulting visual display can be combined with other geographic data (such as the locations of schools, parks, and industrial complexes) and used to analyze and investigate patterns of crime and help inform responses.

The past decade, in particular, has seen advances in analytical capabilities within the criminal justice community, making it possible to add more geographic and social dimensions to statistical analyses to forecast where crimes are likely to occur.

NIJ has been a long-time investor in research on mapping and analysis. Over the years, the Institute has funded projects that explore, evaluate, and seed analytical techniques and technology to support law enforcement agencies that use place-based policing practices and strategies to help answer the question, “How do we best reduce crime and improve public safety?”

This article follows the field’s evolution — from crime mapping to crime forecasting (and, in some cases, crime prediction) — and discusses NIJ’s investments in research and future directions.

A Brief History

In 1829, Adriano Balbi and André Michel Guerry produced maps showing the relationships between educational level and violent and property crime in France. This is often cited as the first instance of crime mapping. [1] Following this work, Joseph Fletcher, in 1849, and Henry Mayhew, in 1861, produced maps that showed rates of male incarceration and county crime, respectively. [2]

In the early 20th century, Clifford Shaw and Henry McKay mapped thousands of incidents of juvenile delinquency and analyzed the relationships between delinquency and various social conditions. [3]

In the 1950s, Jane Jacobs examined the built (urban) environment and the needs of city dwellers. [4] In her work, she introduced constructs that are still used in today’s place-based research, such as “eyes on the street” and “social capital.” Although Jacobs did not attempt to forecast crime, her work led to later research positing that crime has spatial patterns and thus should be able to be forecast. [5]

In the 1970s, criminologists began to emphasize the importance of place. Lawrence Cohen and Marcus Felson’s routine activities theory (RAT) described how routine activities affect crime. [6] According to RAT, for a crime to occur, three things must coincide at the same place and time: a person motivated to commit a crime, a suitable target, and a lack of capable guardianship. Due to the consistency in our routines, Cohen and Felson argued, we should be able to forecast crime: “The spatial and temporal structure of routine legal activities [7] should play an important role in determining the location, type and quantity of illegal acts occurring in a given community or society.” [8]

Similarly, Paul and Patricia Brantingham put forward the environmental criminology theory, positing that crime is a complex event in which four things intersect at one time: a law, a person motivated to commit a crime, a target, and a place. [9] They defined this fourth dimension — place — as a discrete location where the other three dimensions intersect and provided seven propositions describing how, where, and why people decide to commit crimes. [10] These propositions provide a framework to argue that crimes may spatially cluster because either a criminal has already spent time and energy staking out a neighborhood (a form of “capital”) or the learned behavior may result in a peripatetic cycle. The propositions lead to the idea that place — not people — is the key element in crime. As such, the Brantinghams believe that “it should be possible to predict the spatial distribution of crime and explain some of the variation in volume of crime between urban areas and between cities.” [11]

In 1979, Herman Goldstein proposed a problem-oriented policing approach. [12] This approach advocated for law enforcement officers to follow a scanning, analysis, response, and assessment process (now known as the SARA approach) to identify, analyze, and solve problems. [13] In the 1990s, [14] Compstat emerged as an alternative policing practice to reduce crime. [15] Made famous by then-Chief Bill Bratton while at the New York City Police Department, Compstat is a truly data-driven approach to creating accountability for the police department. Although these practices and strategies did not necessarily rely on criminological theory, they used statistical analysis to solve problems associated with crime, indicating that they relied on either spatial or temporal patterns.

As these place-based theories and policing approaches continued to take shape, researchers began to test them. For example, Lawrence Sherman, Patrick Gartin, and Michael Buerger — with support from NIJ — examined 323,979 calls to the Minneapolis Police Department between December 15, 1985, and December 15, 1986, to test the spatial premise behind RAT. [16] Using actual addresses and intersections, the research team found that 50% of all calls originated from only 3% of all possible locations. Sherman also found a greater concentration of crime around microplaces than around individuals, [17] which led to the question, “Why aren’t we thinking more about wheredunit, rather than just whodunit?” [18] These results marked the beginning of hot spots policing. [19]

From 1989 to 2007, researchers examined crime-specific responses, the effects of foot patrols, and trajectories of crime. Researchers also tested problem-oriented policing in Madison, Wisconsin; Baltimore, Maryland; and Newport News, Virginia, in the 1980s [20] and began testing Compstat and community-oriented policing in the 1990s and early 2000s. Today, we still have problem-oriented policing, Compstat, community-oriented policing, and hot spots policing, along with intelligence-led policing, community problem-oriented policing, and many other variations and combinations.

NIJ’s Critical Role

During the 1980s, NIJ funded evaluations of place-based policing strategies, including the research by Sherman and colleagues as well as similar research in Chicago. NIJ also began funding the development of technologies that were later incorporated into crime-mapping software. [21]

In 1997, NIJ established the Crime Mapping Research Center, which surveyed law enforcement departments to determine how they used analytic mapping. The center began developing training programs to enhance departments’ capability to use spatial maps and data sets. From 1997 to 2014, NIJ funded the development of CrimeStat software to help practitioners and academics conduct spatial analyses. [22]

In the early 2000s, NIJ started to expand from evaluating place-based policing practices and strategies (e.g., hot spots policing) to exploring the statistical techniques used to forecast and predict crime and how that affects the effectiveness and efficiency of place-based policing practices and strategies. In 2008, Bratton — who by then was chief of the Los Angeles Police Department — began working with the acting directors of NIJ and the Bureau of Justice Assistance on a new approach called “predictive policing.” [23] As a result, in 2009 NIJ funded seven agencies to create predictive policing models in their jurisdictions. In 2011, NIJ invited these agencies to propose implementation plans for the models, which would then be evaluated. NIJ funded models developed by the Chicago Police Department and the Shreveport (Louisiana) Police Department and also funded the RAND Corporation to provide technical assistance and evaluate the two models.

RAND’s evaluation of the Shreveport predictive policing model showed three key successes. [24] First, the model improved community relations, which increased the community’s willingness to interact with the police and led to better tips. Second, the Shreveport Police Department found that the predictions were actionable, even though they were not truly predictive. Finally, the model improved actionable intelligence — it led to better skills among analysts, which led to better pattern recognition and more relevant and timely data. [25]

As these awards were coming to a close, NIJ began releasing solicitations for research to test geospatial policing strategies and explore their relationship to criminological theories. For instance, NIJ funded an evaluation of risk terrain modeling in six cities. [26] The evaluation found that conjunctive analysis (an enhanced version of risk terrain modeling) could forecast areas that were at greater risk of a range of future crimes across five cities. The models also identified environmental factors that played a role in these areas, thus allowing law enforcement to develop strategies to address them.

NIJ-funded evaluations of near-repeat (NR) residential burglaries found that departments are likely to overestimate the number of NR burglaries and thus need to temper their expectations. The evaluations also found that providing notifications to people within likely NR regions leads to little or no reduction in NR burglaries; however, communities within the jurisdictions still favored being notified. [27]

NIJ also funded an operationally realistic evaluation of the predictive policing model. This evaluation was NIJ’s first place-based, randomized controlled trial to explore the effect of varying police patrol strategies on the rates of violent crime and property crime. Examining the strategies of marked patrols, unmarked patrols, and an awareness patrol (having knowledge of high-crime areas but no dedicated patrol there), the researchers found that a marked unit may have a modest effect on property crime, but they found no other effects for property crime or violent crime. [28]

See “Predictive Policing: The Role of Crime Forecasting in Law Enforcement Operations”

In 2013, NIJ supported research that compared the effectiveness of different crime forecasting software. The most effective software was then used to conduct a randomized controlled trial in Denver, Colorado, that tested the effects of a hot spots policing approach in forecast areas. [29] The research is ongoing.

In 2015, NIJ directed its attention to exploring the value of data to law enforcement. That year, NIJ funded research to create a flexible tool for departments to better understand the value of the data they collect. A major preliminary finding in this ongoing research is that the perceived value of data can vary widely within an office, even more than variations within and between entire police departments.

In 2016, NIJ released the Real-Time Crime Forecasting Challenge, which asked competitors to forecast where crime was likely to cluster in the future within the jurisdiction of the Portland (Oregon) Police Bureau. Competitors submitted forecasts for all calls for service, burglaries, street crimes, and motor vehicle thefts for the next week, two weeks, one month, two months, and three months. Initial analysis of the results seems to indicate that even the naïve model can compete when there is enough crime to forecast. When crime is rare, however, even the more sophisticated models were unable to effectively or efficiently forecast crime. Additional analysis of the results is forthcoming. [30]

Future Directions

So, what has changed in place-based policing over the years? The short answer is everything — and nothing.

Technology has played a critical role in advancing the field and has become so affordable that most, if not all, law enforcement departments can now afford electronic records and some version of mapping software. Technology has also provided the computational power needed to run data analyses and has enhanced the education of analysts. All of this has allowed departments and outside researchers to conduct more research.

But we are still trying to answer the original question: How do we best reduce crime? We have learned that crime does cluster in hot spots. We have learned that there is stability in these hot spots over longer periods of time, but far less stability when looking at short periods. We also know that the public is leery and that we know very little about how these strategies affect individuals, their neighborhoods, and the larger community.

To help address the research gaps, NIJ recently changed direction in its funding of place-based — and to an extent, person-based — policing research. In 2017, NIJ asked research applicants to look beyond administrative data (e.g., crime rates, calls for service, and arrests) and instead develop and use metrics that consider the potential impacts of police practices and strategies on individuals, neighborhoods, communities writ large, and policing organizations (including individual officers) to determine their success or failure.

In 2018, grant applicants were asked to propose research exploring and evaluating the effects of police practices and strategies on officer safety, investigation outputs, and prosecution outcomes while still measuring the effects on crime rates. Additionally, NIJ wanted applicants to consider the effects of focused deterrence, persistence of hot spots, and intervening variables (e.g., neighborhood and police department characteristics). The goal is to provide a more holistic understanding of the impacts of place-based policing practices and strategies.

Sidebar: Predictive Policing — The Role of Crime Forecasting in Law Enforcement Operations

Smart, effective, and proactive policing is clearly preferable to simply reacting to criminal acts. Although there are many methods to help law enforcement respond to crime and conduct investigations more effectively, predicting where and when a crime is likely to occur — and who is likely responsible for previous crimes — has gained considerable currency. Law enforcement agencies across the United States are employing a range of predictive policing approaches.

With support from NIJ, the RAND Corporation developed a reference guide for law enforcement agencies interested in predictive policing. Predictive Policing: The Role of Crime Forecasting in Law Enforcement Operations offers a focused examination of the predictive techniques currently in use, identifies the techniques that show promise if adopted in conjunction with other policing methods, and shares findings and recommendations to inform future research and clarify the policy implications of predictive policing.

Back to text .

About This Article

This article was published in NIJ Journal issue no. 281 , July 2019.

[note 1] Borden D. Dent, “Brief History of Crime Mapping,” in Atlas of Crime: Mapping the Criminal Landscape, ed. Linda S. Turnbull, Elaine Hallisey Hendrix, and Borden D. Dent (Phoenix, AZ: Oryz Press, 2000), 4-21.

[note 2] Sharon Chamard, “The History of Crime Mapping and its Use by American Police Departments,” Alaska Justice Forum 23 no. 3 (Fall 2006): 1, 4-8.

[note 3] Clifford Shaw and Henry D. McKay, Juvenile Delinquency and Urban Areas: A Study of Rates of Delinquents in Relation to Differential Characteristics of Local Communities in American Cities (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1942); and Clifford R. Shaw, Frederick M. Zorbaugh, Henry D. McKay, and Leonard S. Cottrell, Delinquency Areas: A Study of the Geographical Distribution of School Truants, Juvenile Delinquents, and Adult Offenders in Chicago (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1929).

[note 4] Jane Jacobs, The Death and Life of Great American Cities (New York: Random House, 1961).

[note 5] See Chamard’s (2006) abridged history of Dent’s (2000) chapter, “Brief History of Crime Mapping,” for a more thorough pre-1970 history.

[note 6] Lawrence E. Cohen and Marcus Felson, “Social Change and Crime Rate Trends: A Routine Activities Approach,” American Sociological Review 44 no. 4 (1979): 588-608.

[note 7] In macro-time, when and how we go to work, when and where we eat, and when and where we go for entertainment tend to be routines.

[note 8] Cohen and Felson, “Social Change and Crime Rate Trends,” 590.

[note 9] Paul J. Brantingham and Patricia L. Brantingham, Environmental Criminology (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 1981).

[note 10] Paul J. Brantingham and Patricia L. Brantingham, “Environmental Criminology,” in Classics of Criminology, ed. Joseph E. Jacoby, Theresa A. Severance, and Alan S. Bruce (Long Grove, IL: Waveland Press, Inc., 2004), 61-70.

[note 11] Brantingham and Brantingham, “Environmental Criminology,” 69.

[note 12] Although Goldstein originally proposed this in 1979, his 1990 book provides a stronger fundamental framework for problem-oriented policing (POP). Herman Goldstein, “Improving Policing: A Problem-Oriented Approach,” Crime and Delinquency 25 no. 2 (April 1, 1979): 236-258.

[note 13] Herman Goldstein, Problem-Oriented Policing (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1990).

[note 14] Other practices and strategies began to emerge as well, such as community-oriented policing (COP). However, COP is predicated on community involvement in, at minimum, identifying the problem. Unlike POP and Compstat, identification of the problem may be driven more by community perceptions than by actual crime patterns. Community-Oriented Policing Services, “ About the COPS Office .”

[note 15] Jerry Ratcliffe, Intelligence-Led Policing (Portland, OR: Willan Publishing, 2008).

[note 16] Lawrence W. Sherman, Patrick R. Gartin, and Michael E. Buerger, “Hot Spots of Predatory Crime: Routine Activities and the Criminology of Place,” Criminology 27 no. 1 (1989): 27-56.

[note 17] Lawrence W. Sherman, “Hot Spots of Crime and Criminal Careers of Places,” in Crime and Place, ed. John E. Eck and David Weisburd (Monsey, NY: Criminal Justice Press, 1995), 35-52. Weisburd similarly found that police in Seattle would have to target four times as many people as places to account for half of the crime incidents between 1989 and 2002. David Weisburd, “Place-Based Policing,” Ideas in American Policing 9 (January 2008), Police Foundation Lecture Series.

[note 18] Sherman, “Hot Spots of Crime,” 36-37.

[note 19] Spring and Block first used the term “hot spots” while identifying high-crime areas. James V. Spring and Carolyn R. Block, “Finding Crime Hot Spots: Experiments in the Identification of High Crime Areas,” paper presented at the annual meeting of the Midwest Sociological Society, Minneapolis, MN, October 1988.

[note 20] Center for Problem-Oriented Policing, “Mission and History of the Center for Problem-Oriented Policing,” 2017.

[note 21] More recent NIJ-funded geospatial tools — resulting from NIJ grant number 2009-SQ-B9-K101 — have been incorporated into ArcGIS software, perhaps the crime mapping software most widely used by law enforcement agencies.

[note 22] CrimeStat IV (version 4.02) is the most recent version of CrimeStat, a spatial statistics program for the analysis of crime incident locations. CrimeStat was developed by Ned Levine & Associates of Houston, Texas, under the direction of Ned Levine, Ph.D., and funded by grants from NIJ (grants 1997-IJ-CX-0040, 1999-IJ-CX-0044, 2002-IJ-CX-0007, and 2005-IJ-CX-K037).

[note 23] Walter L. Perry, Brian McInnis, Carter C. Price, Susan C. Smith, and John S. Hollywood, Predictive Policing: The Role of Crime Forecasting in Law Enforcement Operations (Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation, 2013).

[note 24] Priscillia Hunt, Jessica M. Saunders, and John S. Hollywood, Evaluation of the Shreveport Predictive Policing Experiment (Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation, 2014).

[note 25] During this award, only an evaluation of the Shreveport experiment was produced.

[note 26] However, it was fully evaluated in only five cities.

[note 27] Elizabeth R. Groff and Travis A. Taniguchi, Micro-Level Policing for Preventing Near Repeat Residential Burglary (Washington, DC: Police Foundation, 2018); and Police Foundation, “Translating ‘Near Repeat’ Theory into a Geospatial Policing Strategy.”

[note 28] Jerry Ratcliffe, “ Philadelphia Predictive Policing Experiment .”

[note 29] This research was originally going to be conducted in Columbia, South Carolina.

[note 30] See the results of the Challenge .

About the author

Joel Hunt is a computer scientist in NIJ’s Office of Science and Technology.

Cite this Article

Read more about:, related publications.

• NIJ Journal Issue No. 281

IEEE Account

• Change Username/Password
• Update Address

Purchase Details

• Payment Options
• Order History
• View Purchased Documents

Profile Information

• Communications Preferences
• Profession and Education
• Technical Interests
• US & Canada: +1 800 678 4333
• Worldwide: +1 732 981 0060
• Contact & Support
• About IEEE Xplore
• Accessibility
• Terms of Use
• Nondiscrimination Policy
• Privacy & Opting Out of Cookies

A not-for-profit organization, IEEE is the world's largest technical professional organization dedicated to advancing technology for the benefit of humanity. © Copyright 2024 IEEE - All rights reserved. Use of this web site signifies your agreement to the terms and conditions.

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

GIS and Crime Mapping

GIS and Crime Mapping is the definitive text to support readers with the fundamental theory, scientific methodologies, analysis techniques, application design, and management processes for implementing and developing crime mapping. The book includes a comprehensive presentation of GIS, crime mapping and geographic crime analysis solutions for operational, tactical, investigative, and strategic policing and crime reduction purposes. Topics in this book include, • The basics of GIS for mapping crime • Definitions and geographical structures within criminal justice • The principle spatial theories of crime • Spatial statistics for crime analysis • Crime hotspots • Mapping and analysing change over time • Mapping crime with local community data • Information sharing • GIS and crime mapping for operational, tactical, investigative, and strategic policing and crime reduction • Crime map cartography • Implementing GIS and crime mapping • Managing and organising crime mapping and analysis. ...

Related Papers

Crime Mapping and Geographical Information Systems in Crime Analysis

As essential apparatus in crime analysis, crime mapping and Geographical Information Systems (GIS) are being progressively more accepted by police agencies. Development in technology and the accessibility of geographic data sources make it feasible for police departments to use GIS and crime mapping. GIS and crime mapping can be utilized as devices to discover reasons contributing to crime, and hence let law enforcement agencies proactively take action against the crime problems before they become challenging. The purpose of this study is to conduct a literature review of Geographical Information System and Crime Mapping in Crime Analysis and to propose policy recommendations regarding to implementation of crime mapping and GIS. To achieve this purpose, first a historical evaluation of GIS and crime mapping will be rendered and then the importance of place will be explained in terms of assessing crime problems accurately.

Oxford Bibliographies Online: Criminology

Matthew Valasik

The mapping and spatial analysis of crime covers a broad range of techniques and has been used to explore a variety of topics. In its most basic form, crime mapping is the use of Geographic Information System (GIS) to visualize and organize spatial data for more formal statistical analysis. Spatial analysis can be employed in both an exploratory and well as a more confirmatory manner with the primary purpose of identifying how certain community or ecological factors (such as population characteristics or the built environment) influence the spatial patterns of crime. Two topics of particular interest include examining for evidence of the diffusion of crime and in evaluating the effectiveness of geographically targeted crime reduction strategies. Crime mapping can also be used to visualize and analyze the movement or target selection patterns of criminals. Mapping software allows for the creation of electronic pin-maps and by spatially organizing the data, GIS increases the analytical value of these maps. Crime mapping allows researchers and practitioners to explore crime patterns, offender mobility, and serial offenses over time and space. Within the context of local policing, crime mapping provides the visualization of crime clusters by types of crimes, thereby validating the street knowledge of patrol officers. Crime mapping can be used for allocating resources (patrol, specialized enforcement) and also to inform how the concerns of local citizens are being addressed. The citations listed below highlight the interdisciplinary nature of both the study of crime and the development of the methods used in spatial analysis. They exemplify the growing prominence that spatial analysis has in understanding where crime occurs.

mostafa ahmadi

Journal of Forensic Sciences & Criminal Investigation

Ksenija Butorac

SSRN Electronic Journal

eepublishers.co.za

Chris Overall

Peter Rogerson

This paper reviews modern crime analysis with regard to the research and educational challenges outlined by the University Consortium for Geographic Information Science. In the context of Geographical Information Systems (GIS), attention is devoted to the role that crime analysis currently and potentially plays in reducing crime and improving the efficiency of police activity. It is our aim to stimulate interest in advancing crime analysis in the areas of crime mapping and visualization. It is hoped that an outcome of this effort will be the attention that granting agencies may give to this rich and productive mixture of state-of-the-art technology and social responsibility.

This work used Geographic Information Systems to create crime maps and analyze crime distribution within the Dansoman Police Subdivision in Accra, Ghana. It was done on a pilot basis and is intended to enable senior officers have a visual framework for prescribing action. Spatial data of 142 crime incidents namely Assault, Causing Damage, Defilement, Fraud, Rape, Robbery, Stealing and Unlawful Entry was analyzed using ArcGis®v10 software. A summary of the attribute table showed that Assault, Causing Damage and Unlawful Entry had the highest counts of 22 each while Rape and Stealing had the least counts of 12 each. Pin maps produced gave a graphical representation of crime locations against a backdrop of roads, existing police stations and district boundaries. Kernel density estimation maps showed the Mamprobi district had a high density of crime even though it was the smallest district. An average nearest neighbor spatial statistics analysis revealed that all incidents exhibited a random nature apart from Rape and Stealing which were statistically dispersed. None of the 8 crime types was found to be statistically clustered. The mean centers of the crimes were plotted and found to be within a 1 km radius.It is recommended that crime spatial data is collected over longer periods instead of a few months and should also include attribute data such as time, date and personal information of the perpetrators. The results of this analysis could be used as a predictive and tactical tool by the Ghana Police Service. 1. Introduction In general a Geographic Information System (GIS) can be described as a system of hardware, software, data and organizational structure for collecting, storing, manipulating and spatially analyzing geo-referenced data and displaying information resulting from these processes. A more detailed definition describes a GIS as any information management system that can: • Collect, store and retrieve information based on spatial location • Identify locations within a targeted environment that meet specific criteria • Explore relationships among data sets within that environment • Analyze the related data spatially as an aid to making decisions about that environment • Facilitate selecting and passing data to application-specific analytical models capable of assessing the impact of alternatives on the chosen environment; and • Display the selected environment both graphically and numerically either before or after analysis. The thread that is common to both definitions is that in a GIS, decisions are made based on spatial analyses performed on data sets that are referenced in a common geographical system. GIS has been applied in virtually every imaginable field of activity from engineering to agriculture and from medical science of epidemiology to wildlife management. (Ghilani and Wolf, 2012) The use of GIS in law enforcement, crime prevention and general policing is therefore not an entirely new phenomenon with much of the innovation in crime mapping being driven in the United States by the National Institute of Justice's Crime Mapping and Research Center (CRMC) later renamed as the Mapping and Analysis for Public Safety (MAPS). This has served as a foundation for the development of crime mapping in many countries worldwide. (Chainey and Ratcliff, 2005) Crime mapping is the direct application that comes from considering the inherent geography in crime. It combines the skills of people, the practical use of data and information, and the application of technology to capture, analyse, identify and respond to crime problems and improve policing performance. Crime mapping techniques can also be applied to other police data such as incidents, offenders, victims, stops and searches. (https://www.ucl.ac.uk/scs/people/academic-research-staff/spencer-chainey/Slides/Home_Office_CrimeMapping) Using GIS, crime analysts can overlay other datasets such as census demographics, locations of pawn shops, liquor shops and bars, schools, etc., to better understand the underlying causes of crime and help law enforcement administrators to devise strategies to deal with the problem. GIS is also useful for law enforcement operations, such as allocating police officers and dispatching to emergencies.

Dan Jerome Barrera

Innovations in policing, like problem-oriented policing and hot spots policing, demand quantitative techniques to identify crime patterns across space. However, current crime mapping practice is monopolized by the use of proprietary GIS. This situation is unfortunate for police departments, especially in developing countries, that are ill-funded. This paper introduces free alternatives to proprietary computerized crime mapping GIS tools and information. By reviewing extant literature, mature free and open source desktop GIS tools and volunteered geographic information, which could be used in performing crime mapping routines, are identified. The viability of these programs for crime mapping purposes was then demonstrated through the analysis of property crimes (i.e. carnapping, robbery, and theft incidents) in Dumaguete City, Negros Oriental, Philippines (2010-2012). Considering the limited resources for crime prevention, the availability of free-of-cost resources for crime mapping provides police departments the opportunity to do more with less.

Elizabeth Groff

Loading Preview

Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.

RELATED PAPERS

Daukere E . Bitrus , Ekpo Effiong

International Journal of Computer Applications Technology and Research

Prof. Eke Bartholomew

Vania Ceccato

ahmad nazri muhamad ludin

Urban Studies and Public Administration

Dukiya Jaiye

Carlos Carcach

… FIG Congress Munich

timothy IDOWU

Jonalyn Nalzaro

IOSR Journals

Research Methods for Rural Criminologists

Crime mapping and crime …

Patricia Brantingham

Ingrid D McGuffog , Ingrid McGuffog

British Journal of Criminology

Ingrid D McGuffog

Molood Seifi

Frank Gajewski

International Journal IJRITCC

Turkish Journal of Geosciences

Prof. Dr. Musa ATAR

Rachel M. Laisne

International Journal of Computer Aided Design and Application

Fatima Isiaka

RELATED TOPICS

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

Information

• Author Services

Initiatives

You are accessing a machine-readable page. In order to be human-readable, please install an RSS reader.

All articles published by MDPI are made immediately available worldwide under an open access license. No special permission is required to reuse all or part of the article published by MDPI, including figures and tables. For articles published under an open access Creative Common CC BY license, any part of the article may be reused without permission provided that the original article is clearly cited. For more information, please refer to https://www.mdpi.com/openaccess .

Feature papers represent the most advanced research with significant potential for high impact in the field. A Feature Paper should be a substantial original Article that involves several techniques or approaches, provides an outlook for future research directions and describes possible research applications.

Feature papers are submitted upon individual invitation or recommendation by the scientific editors and must receive positive feedback from the reviewers.

Editor’s Choice articles are based on recommendations by the scientific editors of MDPI journals from around the world. Editors select a small number of articles recently published in the journal that they believe will be particularly interesting to readers, or important in the respective research area. The aim is to provide a snapshot of some of the most exciting work published in the various research areas of the journal.

Original Submission Date Received: .

• Active Journals
• Find a Journal
• Proceedings Series
• For Authors
• For Reviewers
• For Editors
• For Librarians
• For Publishers
• For Societies
• For Conference Organizers
• Open Access Policy
• Institutional Open Access Program
• Special Issues Guidelines
• Editorial Process
• Research and Publication Ethics
• Article Processing Charges
• Testimonials
• Preprints.org
• SciProfiles
• Encyclopedia

Journal Menu

• Aims & Scope
• Editorial Board
• Reviewer Board
• Topical Advisory Panel
• Instructions for Authors
• Special Issues
• Topical Collections
• Article Processing Charge
• Indexing & Archiving
• Editor’s Choice Articles
• Most Cited & Viewed
• Journal Statistics
• Journal History
• Journal Awards
• Society Collaborations
• Conferences
• Editorial Office

Journal Browser

• arrow_forward_ios Forthcoming issue arrow_forward_ios Current issue
• Vol. 13 (2024)
• Vol. 12 (2023)
• Vol. 11 (2022)
• Vol. 10 (2021)
• Vol. 9 (2020)
• Vol. 8 (2019)
• Vol. 7 (2018)
• Vol. 6 (2017)
• Vol. 5 (2016)
• Vol. 4 (2015)
• Vol. 3 (2014)
• Vol. 2 (2013)
• Vol. 1 (2012)

Find support for a specific problem in the support section of our website.

Please let us know what you think of our products and services.

Visit our dedicated information section to learn more about MDPI.

Urban Crime Mapping and Analysis Using GIS

• Print Special Issue Flyer

Special Issue Editors

Special issue information.

• Published Papers

A special issue of ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information (ISSN 2220-9964).

Deadline for manuscript submissions: closed (15 February 2020) | Viewed by 102474

Share This Special Issue

Dear Colleagues,

Spatial crime analysis and mapping started mostly by geographers in the early 1970s. The concurrent rise of Geographic Information Systems (GIS) coupled with the development of spatial crime analysis software programs led to a powerful suite of spatial analysis and visualization tools that allowed the rapid analysis of large amounts of crime incident data. As a result, spatial crime analysis became increasingly popular as a practical tool for law enforcement and as a research and teaching tool in geography, criminal justice, and other related programs.

This Special Issue is a follow-up publication of an edited book (Leitner 2013) and two previously published Special Issues (Leitner and Helbich 2015, Helbich and Leitner 2017) on crime analysis, modeling, and mapping. We believe that this new collection of papers will contribute to the contemporary research agenda on spatial and temporal crime-related issues. We encourage both theoretical as well as application-oriented papers dealing with these emerging issues. Our interest is in papers that cover a wide spectrum of methodological and domain-specific topics, including, but not limited to, the following:

• Crime and Place
• Crime Forecasting
• Crime Perception
• Criminogenic Factors
• Exceptional Events and Crime
• Geographic Profiling
• Hot Spot Analysis
• Human Trafficking
• Micro-Spatial Crime Analysis
• Modeling and Mapping Large Volume Crime
• Near Repeat Pattern Analysis
• Predictive Policing
• Relationship between Alcohol-Serving Establishments and Disorder
• Relationship between Foreclosure and Crime
• Risk Terrain Modeling
• Sex Offender Residency Restriction Laws
• Simulation Modeling
• Social Media
• Social Network Analysis
• Spatial Analysis of Gang Activities
• Spatial and Temporal Crime Analysis
• Temporal Approximation
• Traffic Accidents Analysis
• University Campus Crime
• 3-D Crime Modeling

Prof. Michael Leitner Ms. Alina Ristea Guest Editors

Manuscripts should be submitted to the ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging into this website. Once you are registered, go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline (30 September 2019). Papers will be published continuously (as soon as final acceptance) and will be listed together on the Special Issue website. Research articles, review articles, as well as communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 250 words, including the authors’ names and affiliations) must be sent to the editors ( [email protected] and [email protected] ) until 30 April 2019 . Authors will be notified by 12 May 2019 as to whether the research described in the abstract fits the topic of the Special Issue. In that case, authors will be invited to submit a full manuscript and the Editorial Office will post all accepted abstracts to the ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except shorter versions in the form of conference proceedings papers, which must be indicated explicitly on the submitted manuscript). All manuscripts are refereed through a peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for the submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information is an international peer-reviewed Open Access monthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 1000 CHF (Swiss Francs).

Helbich, M. and M. Leitner (eds.) (2017) Frontiers in Spatial and Spatiotemporal Crime Analytics. Special Issue of ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information , 6 (3), 73 ( https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi6030073 ).

Leitner, M. & M. Helbich (eds.) (2015) Innovative Crime Modeling and Mapping. Special Issue of Cartography and Geographic Information Science, 42 (2), 95-209 ( https://doi.org/10.1080/15230406.2015.1010308 ).

Leitner, M. (ed.) (2013) Crime Modeling and Mapping Using Geospatial Technologies . Springer: Heidelberg, 446 pages.

Published Papers (18 papers)

Jump to: Research , Review

Jump to: Editorial , Review

Graphical abstract

Jump to: Editorial , Research

Further Information

Mdpi initiatives, follow mdpi.

Subscribe to receive issue release notifications and newsletters from MDPI journals

crime mapping as a tool in crime analysis for crime management

• January 2018
• International Journal of Phytoremediation

Discover the world's research

• 25+ million members
• 160+ million publication pages
• 2.3+ billion citations

• Mubashra Mansoor

• Aadithya Seshadri

• Stefano Z. Stamato

• Ira Kawthalkar
• Siddhesh Jadhav

• D. Kim Rossmo
• Ben Russelhome
• Tompson Chainey
• Velarda Rossmo
• Travis Lawrence
• Hughes Kenneth
• Recruit researchers
• Join for free
• Login Email Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google Welcome back! Please log in. Email · Hint Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google No account? Sign up