Introduction

Safety and order are basic needs, and their absence is a major threat to quality of life. The rates, causes and potential solutions to crime in housing estates form a substantial element of all studies of problems in social housing (Chapters 2 and 3).

The chapter also describes non-criminal but threatening or annoying behaviour, including children or dogs out of control, noise, harassment, not disposing of rubbish properly, leaving building doors open, or offending other norms of residence or behaviour in public spaces. It extends beyond the perceptions of staff and residents’ representatives, to draw on evidence from former child residents, some of whom could have been defined as ‘perpetrators’ of annoyance or crime.

‘Broken windows’ theory (Wilson and Kelling 1982) argues that poor maintenance and anti-social behaviour may be causal facts in individual and neighbourhood crime, and it has inspired ‘zero tolerance’ policing (Bratton et al 1998). However, non-criminal threatening or annoying behaviour is included here simply because of its effect on residents’ quality of life, and because, like crime, it has potential knock-on effects on estate population, resident mix, and other dimensions. The chapter draws on the theory of ‘social control’, that assumes that groups, whether nations or communities, set norms to define what is problematic, which may be legal or informal, clear or contested (Hirschi 1969). In order to control problematic behaviour, it must be observed, which may have a deterrent effect, or it must be acted on, whether by police, managers or others with formal responsibility, or by ordinary residents.

The rise and fall of crime

Throughout the period 1982–2018 in which data were collected, recorded crime figures were only available for areas much larger than the estates. Evidence on crime levels in estates is mainly drawn from the impressions of housing managers and residents’ groups. Many interviewees commented that recorded crime did not match up to crime as experienced, as national victimisation surveys also demonstrate (ONS 2018). However, the absence of quantitative data makes detailed comparisons difficult.

Nonetheless, at least from the 1970s to the 1990s, most of the estates appeared to have high rates of crime and disorder relative to other parts of their local authorities and to the national average.