4 Deterring criminals
Situational
crime preventionDesigning-out crime
Approach
122. Situational crime prevention aims to reduce
opportunities for crime. It focuses on specific forms of crime,
changing the way the immediate environment or target of the crime
is managed or designed so that the risk or the effort required
to commit the offence is increased, the rewards are reduced, or
the triggers removed from the environment. The advantages of this
approach are that:
- Interventions can bypass intractable
social problems unresponsive to other approaches;
- Removing temptation may have a 'multiplier' effect
if it prevents crimes which are typically the entry to a criminal
career, such as shop-lifting or vehicle crime; and
- Typically situational crime prevention needs
a short time to implement and have an impact, which amongst other
benefits can prevent a runaway growth in crime.[224]
123. Professor Gloria Laycock, Head of the Jill
Dando Institute of Crime Science, argued that, while tackling
the social problems that can increase the risk of criminality
was clearly an important goal for any government, effective crime
prevention strategies should include a strong focus on crime opportunities:
We [should] regard opportunities as a cause of crimethe
more opportunities the more crimeand that is something
we can do something about because it relates to the immediate
situation
I am assuming that this country is doing the best
it can in helping young people in terms of reducing poverty, in
terms of educating them, in terms of getting jobs. What else
are we going to do? I think the thing we can do which would be
really helpful is to make it much more difficult for them to steal
cars, to do burglaries or shoplift. I pick those three offences
because if you look at the criminal careers of offenders, they
get into it through those easy routes.[225]
Evidence from Deputy Assistant Commissioner Rod Jarman,
that "most crime happens opportunistically
most crime
happens because people have not shut doors; have not locked windows",[226]
supports the usefulness of such an approach.
124. According to the Government, the UK is seen
as the world leader in developing this approach to crime with
the introduction of the Crime and Disorder Act in 1998 particularly
important in encouraging situational crime prevention at the local
level.[227] A good
example is the approach to reducing vehicle crime as outlined
by Professor Laycock:
The Home Office published the Car Theft Index,
which was a massive lever over the car industry to put deadlocks
and immobilisers on vehicles, and that ... resulted in something
like a 65% reduction in theft of vehicles since 1995.[228]
The index allows those planning on buying a car to
check which models are particularly vulnerable to theft, putting
commercial pressure on manufactures. A study by the National Audit
Office concurred that improvements in vehicle security are likely
to be a main reason for the reduction in thefts of vehicles, and
that the Home Office had worked consistently and effectively with
the motor industry to bring about such changes.[229]
125. In the Cutting Crime strategy, the
Government pledged a "new national approach" to designing
out crime which would involve working closely with the corporate
sector to "design crime out of new products and services
at an early stage", focusing on:
- Supporting the provision and
dissemination of good practice guidance on effective problem-solving
techniques to local partnerships, individual organisations and
analysts;
- Creating an early warning system that draws on
local crime analysis and consumer experience to identify problems
quickly that are best tackled at national rather than local level;
- Developing incentives for business design decision
makers to 'think crime' routinely;
- Working closely with consumer groups to increase
the demand for crime-free products and services; and
- Supporting the inclusion of crime prevention
in the professional training of scientists and designers.[230]
The strategy outlined the Government's intention
to focus initially on a number of key business areas: new housing
developments, mobile electronic products, the retail sector, banking
fraud and identity fraud.[231]
GOVERNMENT ACTION
126. To take this work forward, the Home Secretary
set up a Design and Technology Alliance, an expert panel working
to identify emerging crime problems and develop solutions to prevent
them. During our inquiry a number of new developments were unveiled
by the Home Office. The leader of the Alliance, Sebastian Conran,
demonstrated one example to us, a pint glass designed to prevent
glass-related violent incidents, of which there are 87,000 each
year. It contains an encapsulating film, so that if broken the
shards are contained and there is less likelihood of serious injury.
The Alliance has also been working on a glass that works like
a car windscreen, in that it will shatter into very small pieces.[232]
127. Another area of work involves disincentivising
the theft of mobile phones. Jack Wraith, representing the Telecommunications
UK Against Fraud Forum, who are working with the Government on
this issue, explained that early handsets contained security aspects
which could very easily be manipulated; while today, manipulation
is a lot more challenging technically because of changes to the
handset design, based around an International Mobile Equipment
Identity number which gives the unit a unique identity:
Once that IMEI is identified, then the handset
is disabled on the home network and it is that information which
is passed
to the other four networks
They will then
use that information to populate their own networks, so that within
48 hours that handset will not work.[233]
128. We asked Professor Laycock if the Government
had achieved the right balance between measures to prevent criminality
and those to prevent crime opportunities. She responded:
I think not really. I think a lot of progress is
being made. There is still a very persistent bias towards offender-based
interventions, and we should have themI am absolutely clear
about thatbut I am not sure that until really quite recently
enough emphasis has been placed on controlling opportunities.[234]
129. Most crime is opportunistic.
Designing out opportunities for crime can bypass social problems
which are unresponsive to other approaches and often need only
a short time to implement and have an effect. The approach has
been particularly successful in reducing vehicle crime. We welcome
the renewed emphasis given to designing-out crime in the Cutting
Crime strategy and the establishment of the Home Secretary's
Design and Technology Alliance. However, we note concerns that
the Government continues to place insufficient emphasis on this
area of crime prevention.
COMMUNICATION STRATEGIES
130. Our evidence highlighted the need to ensure
that measures are accompanied by effective communications strategies.
For example, SmartWater, a property-marking system aimed at deterring
theft, whose deployment in Nottingham has contributed to a reduction
in repeat victimisation of over 70% in three years,[235]
argues that its success lies in its high visibility:
SmartWater strategy creates a genuine deterrent for
criminals by sending them the message that if they commit a crime,
they, or the stolen goods can be traced and identified
Highlighting the deployment of SmartWater to local criminals ensures
the maximum deterrent effect. For example, we display signs both
on properties and in prominent locations within the neighbourhood
to publicise the presence of SmartWater, and we install scanners
in local police stations [so that] criminals know that the police
are looking for it.[236]
131. This point was re-iterated by Jack Wraith
in respect of the process of disabling mobile phone handsets:
We have found that the mere fact that that is in
operation, the knowledge that that is in operation, has cut down
on a lot of the types of handset sales that used to go on on a
Friday night in the pub or a Thursday night in the pub, because
people know that, yes, the phone might work if it has just been
stolen outside, but come Monday morning it will not work.[237]
Mr Wraith also argued that it was important not to
overlook consumer education, given that consumers have become
far more safety-conscious recently.[238]
The National Audit Office study cited above concluded that a
number of publicity campaigns aimed at motorists were "very
likely" to have contributed to the reduction in thefts of
and from vehicles.[239]
132. Concerns have been raised over the years
that situational crime prevention measures can result in a displacement
of crime to other locations or crime types, including from the
better off to those less able to protect themselves.[240]
However, Professor Laycock denied this is a genuine issue:
Displacement is presumed to occur far more than it
does ... There is always a net gain according to the research.
Indeed, there is some evidence that if temporal and geographic
boundaries are kept fairly fuzzy when you are announcing a crime
prevention measure, you get what academics call a diffusion of
benefits; in other words, the positive effect spreads beyond the
geographical area that you are acting in, and there is also a
temporal spread. It lasts for longer, in other words.[241]
133. In order to be successful,
initiatives to design-out crime should be accompanied by a clear
communications strategy to raise awareness amongst potential criminals
of the increased level of risks and thereby increase the deterrent
effect. Marketing strategies should also capitalise on increased
consumer demand for safe products.
DEVELOPING AN EARLY WARNING SYSTEM
134. Visa Europe described to us how the banking
industry had spent over £1 billion to migrate to chip and
PIN technology, resulting in reductions in losses on transactions
on the UK high street of 55%, from £218.8m in 2004 to £98.5m
in 2008. The European Commission estimates that chip and PIN will
save banks and retailers over £412m annually.[242]
However, on 11 February 2010 Cambridge University researchers
revealed on Newsnight that a flaw in the technology can
and probably already does allow criminals to make bank card payments
without knowing the correct PIN number.
135. This highlighted one of the difficulties
in situational crime prevention, the constant pressure to stay
one step ahead of criminal gangs. Particularly where it involves
technological advance, this requires a high level of investment
on the part of industry and criminal justice agencies. A
Home Office Research Study in 1998 highlighted the need for "continuous"
research and development "to keep ahead of obsolescence",
combined with a "national 'surveillance system' enabling
rapid response to the identification of emergent crime targets,
and new tools and methods of offending".[243]
136. Jack Wraith argued in respect of mobile
phones that "we are keeping up with the game", citing
the "very low" percentage of mobile phone robberies
reported in last year's British Crime Survey, despite a fairly
significant increase in the number of mobile phones in the market-place.[244]
When asked about progress on implementing an early warning system
for identifying new criminal trends, as promised in the Cutting
Crime strategy, the Minister of State responsible for crime
and policing admitted:
It is work in progress. We need to sharpen up on
how we develop that early warning system
Our focus has
been on identifying hot-spots, trying to fund preventative measures
in those hot-spots and that is where the resource has gone to
date."[245]
However, Professor Laycock considered it would be
difficult to make much progress with the data streams available:
I do not think current police systems are designed
to identify emerging trends. They are designed to help the police
respond to crime, quite reasonably, they are designed to provide
statistics for the Home Office, again, quite reasonably, but they
are very poorly designed if they are intending to find emerging
crimes that might suddenly tip and cause a massive great crime
wave.[246]
137. Professor Laycock described the work she
had been doing with Merseyside Police, supported by the Design
and Technology Alliance, attempting to pinpoint the next products
at risk of a crime wave. In Merseyside they have been specifically
looking for evidence to support their prediction that flat-screen
digital televisions will become a target because of increased
demand when the analogue signal is switched off in 2010. Software
has been designed that allows police force analysts to interrogate
large recorded crime datasets over several years: not only the
coded data detailing the offence category, but also the free text
description of offences, which assists in picking out patterns.
She said:
We hope, if we can get continued funding, to develop
that into a tool that all the analysts can use throughout the
UK and then we can sum it across various forces and respond appropriately.[247]
138. On a related point, Professor Laycock spoke
about the difficulty of getting evidence to persuade the Department
of Transport to protect car registration plates. Automatic Number
Plate Recognition technology relies on the integrity of the number
plate, which is currently very insecure. Professor Laycock told
us that the Department for Transport had undertaken to provide
electronic vehicle identification systems by 2007, but this has
not happened. She said that the Department for Transport is demanding
evidence confirming the scale of the problem, but the police find
it very difficult to calculate the extent to which these registration
plates are involved in crime because their use would fall under
different categories of offences (a problem that would be alleviated
if analysts could interrogate the free text function as described
above). Professor Laycock said:
If we had an epidemic of it, they might be persuaded
to do something. It is difficult to prove there is an epidemic
because it is so spread out, but my general point is I do not
think we should be waiting until we are in the middle of a crime
wave before we do something. We know enough about crime and enough
about the opportunities that cause crime to be able to pre-empt
these things, and that is the difficulty.[248]
139. We asked the Department of Transport to
clarify their position. The Secretary of State, Lord Adonis, responded
that, although the Government agreed to consider a recommendation
from the Jill Dando Institute in 2002 that it should plan to introduce
Electronic Vehicle Identification (EVI) by 2007:
Contrary to Professor Laycock's claim, the Government
never undertook to introduce EVI by this or any other date.
The Drivers and Vehicles Licensing Authority did
conduct a trial of electronic number plates in 2006, which "demonstrated
that microchip technology could be deployed successfully to identify
vehicles in traffic"; and a study into the feasibility of
using Electronic Vehicle Identification for motorcycles, which
concluded that EVI was not justified solely for the identification
of motorcycles and would need to be considered in the wider context
of road traffic management. The Department cites Transport for
London congestion charge figures showing that around 3 vehicles
in every 1000 have forged or stolen plates, which they argue suggests
a "fairly low level of non-compliance".[249]
However, given that almost 300,000 motorised vehicles entered
the central London charging zone in 2007,[250]
the number of forged or stolen plates is not insignificant.
140. It is very disappointing
that conclusions about the need for "continuous" research
and development and a "national 'surveillance system' enabling
rapid response to the identification of emergent crime targets,
and new tools and methods of offending" identified in a Home
Office Research Study in 1998 have not yet been translated into
action. The Government has acknowledged that progress in this
area is too slow.
141. The current limitations
on the analysis of crime trends was illustrated during our inquiry
by the issue of car registration plates. The ability to confirm
expert suspicions about the extent of the involvement of forged
or stolen car registration plates in crimes would give greater
impetus to the Department for Transport to implement Electronic
Vehicle Implementation, which would in turn increase the effectiveness
of Automatic Number Plate Recognition technology which relies
on the integrity of the plate. We commend the work being undertaken
with Merseyside Police to identify emerging crime waves through
use of more sophisticated software and hope that this can be implemented
more widely, including to resolve the issue of insecure car number
plates.
Public confidence in the criminal
justice system
142. A Home Office review in 1998 found that
situational crime prevention also relies on a criminal justice
system efficient enough to make the risks credible.[251]
In other words, in many cases the deterrent only works if a potential
offender believes there is a strong chance he will be caught and
punished for the crime. This obviously is dependent mainly on
the criminal justice system itself, but also on effective publicity
about police and sentencing activity. We did not in this inquiry
examine the efforts of those responsible for bringing offenders
to justice but we did note the Shadow Home Secretary's view that:
One pretty important part of crime prevention is
the fact that there are people around who are going to nick you
if you are caught
[this is one of the two main reasons]
why the Government's crime prevention policy has not worked
too many policemen in police stations filling out forms.[252]
143. We did take evidence on the second point.
Louise Casey was commissioned by the Cabinet Office to carry out
a review to explore "how we can work together to reduce crime
further, reduce the fear of crime and give the public a sense
of hope and trust that those working to fight crime are on their
side." Her findings were published in 2008.[253]
She told us that:
The most fundamental thing is that the review found
that the public are almost cut off from the criminal justice system;
they do not hear about the consequences for criminals.[254]
For example, less than a quarter of those surveyed
by Ipsos MORI last year said they felt informed about sentences
locally.[255] 38% of
those interviewed for the 2008/09 British Crime Survey were confident
that the criminal justice system was effective in bringing offenders
to justice, actually a decrease from the figures we cited for
2006/07 in our introduction.[256]
144. The former offenders with whom we spoke
agreed that better awareness about the realities of sentencing
and prison experiences would discourage some individuals from
offending.[257] Louise
Casey told us about the work being carried out following her review,
to raise public awareness:
They want to know there are consequences for criminals.
Since I published the review, that is very much what I have
been trying to drive forward within government. I think that is
the way forward ... Getting a policing pledge agreed and implemented
across the country is happening, but I would not say it is a smooth
process.[258]
145. Situational crime prevention
will only be fully effective if potential offenders are convinced
there is a real risk they will be caught and brought to justice.
Efforts to improve public confidence in the criminal justice system
is a crucial part of this. In our view, this is the area in which
the Government has made least progress. Building on the introduction
of the policing pledge, there must be a consistent push by local
agencies across the country to increase the awareness of policing
and sentencing activity.
224 Paul Ekblom, "Situational crime prevention:
effectiveness of local initiatives", Reducing offending:
an assessment of research evidence on ways of dealing with offending
behaviour, Home Office Research Study 187, 1998, pp 26-7 Back
225
Qq 364, 391 Back
226
Q 241 Back
227
Home Office, Cutting Crime-a new partnership 2008-11, July
2007, p 33 Back
228
Q 371 Back
229
National Audit Office, Reducing vehicle crime, January
2005, p 2 Back
230
Home Office, Cutting Crime-a new partnership 2008-11, July
2007, p 4 Back
231
Ibid., p 35 Back
232
Qq 234, 236 Back
233
Qq 217, 222 Back
234
Q 368 Back
235
Ev 98 Back
236
Ev 99 Back
237
Q 222 Back
238
Q 218 Back
239
National Audit Office, Reducing vehicle crime, January
2005, p 2 Back
240
Paul Ekblom, "Situational crime prevention: effectiveness
of local initiatives", Reducing offending: an assessment
of research evidence on ways of dealing with offending behaviour,
Home Office Research Study 187, 1998, p 29 Back
241
Q 372 Back
242
Ev 89 Back
243
Ken Pease, "Changing the context of crime prevention",
Reducing offending: an assessment of research evidence on ways
of dealing with offending behaviour, Home Office Research
Study 187, 1998, p 41 Back
244
Q 221 Back
245
Q 330 Back
246
Q 377 Back
247
Q 377 Back
248
Qq 384-5 Back
249
Ev 131-2 Back
250
Transport for London, Central London Congestion Charging, Sixth
Annual Impacts Monitoring Report, July 2008, Figure 3.1 Back
251
Paul Ekblom, "Situational crime prevention: effectiveness
of local initiatives", Reducing offending: an assessment
of research evidence on ways of dealing with offending behaviour,
Home Office Research Study 187, 1998, p 35 Back
252
Q 360 Back
253
Cabinet Office, Engaging Communities in Fighting Crime: A review
by Louise Casey, June 2008 Back
254
Q 25 Back
255
Home Office public opinion survey conducted by Ipsos MORI (2009),
cited in Ev 117 [Home Office] Back
256
Alison Walker, John Flatley, Chris Kershaw and Debbie Moon (eds),
Crime in England and Wales 2008/09, Home Office, July 2009,
p 105 Back
257
Annex A Back
258
Qq 21, 27 Back
|