45 results
Helminth communities in eels Anguilla anguilla from Adriatic coastal lagoons in Italy
- D. Di Cave, F. Berrilli, C. De Liberato, P. Orecchia, C.R. Kennedy
-
- Journal:
- Journal of Helminthology / Volume 75 / Issue 1 / January 2001
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 12 April 2024, pp. 7-13
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
The composition and diversity of the total and intestinal component and infra-communities were determined in eels Anguilla anguilla from three shallow lagoons on the Adriatic coast of Italy to determine whether the helminth communities would differ in composition and structure from those in eels from lagoons on the Tyrrhenian coast. The lagoons differed in respect of their management regimes and the extent of freshwater influx. Both freshwater and marine species of helminths were found in the eels in all three lagoons, but the freshwater component was richer in Valle Figheri. A suite of three digenean eel specialist species occurred in all three lagoons, of which any two members dominated each community. This conferred a high degree of similarity between the communities of the three lagoons. The same three species also dominated helminth communities in eels in lagoons along the Tyrrhenian coast of Italy, and compositional similarity levels were similar within and between western and eastern groups. Species richness was higher in the component communities of the eels of the Adriatic lagoons when compared to the Tyrrhenian ones, but diversity and dominance indices were of a similar order of magnitude and range. Intestinal helminth communities were richer and more diverse in two of the Adriatic lagoons because the proportion of eels with zero or one helminth species was, unusually, in the minority. It was nevertheless concluded that infracommunity structure was similar in eels from both western and eastern lagoons and that the hypothesis that it would differ in Adriatic lagoons could not be supported. The findings provide further evidence of the similarity in composition and structure of helminth communities in eels from coastal lagoons throughout Europe.
Interactions between seed functional traits and environmental factors and their influence on germination performance of Australian native species
- Fernanda C. Beveridge, Alwyn Williams, Robyn Cave, Sundaravelpandian Kalaipandian, Buddhi Dayananda, Steve W. Adkins
-
- Journal:
- Seed Science Research , First View
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 25 March 2024, pp. 1-16
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Open access
- HTML
- Export citation
-
Climate variability is expected to increase due to climate change, with projected increases in temperature and erratic rainfall patterns. These changes will alter the environmental cues sensed by seeds, and therefore will impact plant recruitment. This study investigated the effects of seed functional traits (germinability, germination time, synchrony and seed mass) on germination responses of several sub-tropical native Australian plant species under different environmental factors (water stress, salinity and pH). The effect of a hot water pre-treatment was also tested on Fabaceae seeds with known physical dormancy. Seed traits, environmental factors and seed pre-treatments had significant effects on final germination percentage and germination time. Seed mass and time to 50% germination (t50) were also positively correlated. In contrast, pH did not affect germination and there was no interaction between pH and any of the measured seed functional traits. Some species showed a high thermal tolerance to germination and germination was indifferent to light conditions for all species. Results showed that certain seed functional traits interact with environmental factors to influence germination percentage and time. These findings highlight the importance of considering seed functional traits when determining a species germination response under a changing climate. In addition, the findings provide important knowledge to better guide seed-based land restoration programmes.
S17.02 - Kinematic analysis of facial expression behaviour in psychiatric patients
- G. Juckel, C. Cave
-
- Journal:
- European Psychiatry / Volume 23 / Issue S2 / April 2008
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 16 April 2020, p. S30
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Export citation
-
Background:
There is a long tradition to develop valid instruments for the exact assessment of psychomotor dysfunctions in psychiatry. However, progress is hampered by the complexity of emotionally driven movements in psychiatric patients.
Methods:Methods used up to now either remains unspecific due to only qualitative measurements or focus on the neurophysiological aspects too much.
Results:Thus, the results accomplished so far are only very general unspecific concerning different groups of psychiatric patients. In this lecture, an own method are presented which are aimed to avoid the two poles above mentioned. Kinematic analyses of facial expressions provide quantitative and quite specific informations about psychomotor dysfunctions of psychiatric patients and the effects of psychotropic substances.
Conclusions:Thus, this methods are well suitable for relating them to other neurobiological parameters in order to contribute to the pathophysiological understandig of psychomotor symptoms and nonverbal behaviour in psychiatric patients.
Verification of simulated snow cover in an Arctic basin using satellite-derived snow-cover maps
- O. C. Turpin, R. G. Caves, R. I. Ferguson, B. Johansson
-
- Journal:
- Annals of Glaciology / Volume 31 / 2000
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 14 September 2017, pp. 391-396
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- HTML
- Export citation
-
Time series of Earth observation (EO) data (Landsat Thematic Mapper (TM), U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Advanced Very High Resolution Radiometer (NOAA AVHRR) and European Remote-sensing Satellite synthetic-aperture radar (ERS SAR)) were obtained for a 2250 km2 mountainous basin in northern Sweden to validate snow-cover area (SCA) estimates produced by a conceptual model (HBV) during three melt seasons. SCA depletion curves derived for each image type, arid coincident images, reveal that the SCA estimate varies with the sensor. Discrepancies betweenTM and AVHRR appear to be an effect of spatial resolution. However, differences betweenTM and SAR are not simply related. Since more AVHRR thanTM data were available, a TM-equivalent SCA was derived from AVHRR by relating TM SCA to AVHRR channel 1 reflectance. The TM-equivalent SCA was used to test SCA simulated by HBV for the 1992 melt season. Although the modelled and TM-equivalent SCA were in reasonable agreement, the modelled SCA declined faster than the TM-equivalent SCA. Partial recalibration of model parameters controlling snowpack accumulation improved the match between the modelled and EO-derived SCA decline. The recalibrated parameters were verified using SCA maps generated for the 1996 and 1998 melt seasons. The adjusted parameter sets had little effect on the Nash-Sutcliffe R2 runoff fit but improved the volume fit in all three years.
Some Meteorological Conditions Which Increase the Danger of Flying
- C. J. P. Cave
-
- Journal:
- The Aeronautical Journal / Volume 21 / Issue 83 / September 1917
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 24 August 2017, pp. 301-312
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
It may seem rather presumptuous for one who does not himself fly to discuss, the dangers that may be met with in the air as though a landsman who had crossed the Channel a few times were to write on the navigation of a ship across the ocean. At the same time, it may be of some use to point out certain conditions of the atmosphere which seem to me to constitute dangers, although I may be mistaken in my estimate of some of these, and would welcome any information from pilots bearing on the subject. In fact, my paper is meant to elicit information rather than to give it.
Linkage between solid-phase apportionment and bioaccessible arsenic, chromium and lead in soil from Glasgow, Scotland, UK
- Joanna Wragg, Andrew Broadway, Mark R. Cave, Fiona M. Fordyce, Barbara Palumbo-Roe, Darren J. Beriro, John G. Farmer, Margaret C. Graham, Bryne T. Ngwenya, Richard J. F. Bewley
-
- Journal:
- Earth and Environmental Science Transactions of The Royal Society of Edinburgh / Volume 108 / Issue 2-3 / June 2017
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 13 November 2018, pp. 217-230
- Print publication:
- June 2017
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
The chemical composition of soil from the Glasgow (UK) urban area was used to identify the controls on the availability of potentially harmful elements (PHEs) in soil to humans. Total and bioaccessible concentrations of arsenic (As), chromium (Cr) and lead (Pb) in 27 soil samples, collected from different land uses, were coupled to information on their solid-phase partitioning derived from sequential extraction data. The total element concentrations in the soils were in the range <0.1–135mgkg–1 for As; 65–3680mgkg–1 for Cr and 126–2160mgkg–1 for Pb, with bioaccessible concentrations averaging 27, 5 and 27% of the total values, respectively. Land use does not appear to be a predictor of contamination; however, the history of the contamination is critically important. The Chemometric Identification of Substrates and Element Distribution (CISED) sequential chemical extraction and associated self-modelling mixture resolution analysis identified three sample groupings and 16 geochemically distinct phases (substrates). These were related to iron (n=3), aluminium–silicon (Al–Si; n=2), calcium (n=3), phosphorus (n=1), magnesium (Mg; n=3), manganese (n=1) and easily extractable (n=3), which was predominantly made up of sodium and sulphur. As, Cr and Pb were respectively found in 9, 10 and 12 of the identified phases, with bioaccessible As predominantly associated with easily extractable phases, bioaccessible Cr with the Mg-dominated phases and bioaccessible Pb with both the Mg-dominated and Al–Si phases. Using a combination of the Unified Barge Method to measure the bioaccessibility of PHEs and CISED to identify the geochemical sources has allowed a much better understanding of the complexity of PHE mobility in the Glasgow urban environment. This approach can be applied to other urban environments and cases of soil contamination, and made part of land-use planning.
Wireless Apparatus for Aircraft
- C. B. Cave
-
- Journal:
- The Aeronautical Journal / Volume 34 / Issue 237 / September 1930
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 28 July 2016, pp. 794-802
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
During the early stages of the development of aircraft in the pre-war days it was realised that wireless communication would provide the only satisfactory means of maintaining contact between an aeroplane and the ground. Although the technique of wireless was in its infancy at the time, it must be remembered that the needs of aviation in this respect were correspondingly limited; pilots of early types of aircraft had their time fully occupied in keeping their machines in the air at all, and had no energy to spare for communicating with persons on the ground.
Notes
- David Weisburd, George Mason University, Virginia, John E. Eck, University of Cincinnati, Anthony A. Braga, John F. Kennedy School of Government, Massachusetts, Cody W. Telep, Arizona State University, Breanne Cave, George Mason University, Virginia, Kate Bowers, University College London, Gerben Bruinsma, VU University Amsterdam, Charlotte Gill, George Mason University, Virginia, Elizabeth R. Groff, Temple University, Philadelphia, Julie Hibdon, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, Joshua C. Hinkle, Georgia State University, Shane D. Johnson, University College London, Brian Lawton, John Jay College of Criminal Justice, City University of New York, Cynthia Lum, George Mason University, Virginia, Jerry H. Ratcliffe, Temple University, Philadelphia, George Rengert, Temple University, Philadelphia, Travis Taniguchi, Sue-Ming Yang, George Mason University, Virginia
-
- Book:
- Place Matters
- Published online:
- 05 April 2016
- Print publication:
- 04 April 2016, pp 159-162
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
Contents
- David Weisburd, George Mason University, Virginia, John E. Eck, University of Cincinnati, Anthony A. Braga, John F. Kennedy School of Government, Massachusetts, Cody W. Telep, Arizona State University, Breanne Cave, George Mason University, Virginia, Kate Bowers, University College London, Gerben Bruinsma, VU University Amsterdam, Charlotte Gill, George Mason University, Virginia, Elizabeth R. Groff, Temple University, Philadelphia, Julie Hibdon, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, Joshua C. Hinkle, Georgia State University, Shane D. Johnson, University College London, Brian Lawton, John Jay College of Criminal Justice, City University of New York, Cynthia Lum, George Mason University, Virginia, Jerry H. Ratcliffe, Temple University, Philadelphia, George Rengert, Temple University, Philadelphia, Travis Taniguchi, Sue-Ming Yang, George Mason University, Virginia
-
- Book:
- Place Matters
- Published online:
- 05 April 2016
- Print publication:
- 04 April 2016, pp v-vi
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
Index
- David Weisburd, George Mason University, Virginia, John E. Eck, University of Cincinnati, Anthony A. Braga, John F. Kennedy School of Government, Massachusetts, Cody W. Telep, Arizona State University, Breanne Cave, George Mason University, Virginia, Kate Bowers, University College London, Gerben Bruinsma, VU University Amsterdam, Charlotte Gill, George Mason University, Virginia, Elizabeth R. Groff, Temple University, Philadelphia, Julie Hibdon, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, Joshua C. Hinkle, Georgia State University, Shane D. Johnson, University College London, Brian Lawton, John Jay College of Criminal Justice, City University of New York, Cynthia Lum, George Mason University, Virginia, Jerry H. Ratcliffe, Temple University, Philadelphia, George Rengert, Temple University, Philadelphia, Travis Taniguchi, Sue-Ming Yang, George Mason University, Virginia
-
- Book:
- Place Matters
- Published online:
- 05 April 2016
- Print publication:
- 04 April 2016, pp 197-200
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
6 - Reducing Crime at High-Crime Places: Practice and Evidence
- David Weisburd, George Mason University, Virginia, John E. Eck, University of Cincinnati, Anthony A. Braga, John F. Kennedy School of Government, Massachusetts, Cody W. Telep, Arizona State University, Breanne Cave, George Mason University, Virginia, Kate Bowers, University College London, Gerben Bruinsma, VU University Amsterdam, Charlotte Gill, George Mason University, Virginia, Elizabeth R. Groff, Temple University, Philadelphia, Julie Hibdon, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, Joshua C. Hinkle, Georgia State University, Shane D. Johnson, University College London, Brian Lawton, John Jay College of Criminal Justice, City University of New York, Cynthia Lum, George Mason University, Virginia, Jerry H. Ratcliffe, Temple University, Philadelphia, George Rengert, Temple University, Philadelphia, Travis Taniguchi, Sue-Ming Yang, George Mason University, Virginia
-
- Book:
- Place Matters
- Published online:
- 05 April 2016
- Print publication:
- 04 April 2016, pp 113-139
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
The fact that crime and disorder are concentrated at a few places is interesting and deserves an explanation. It is also interesting that places show up in other criminological theories and in other disciplines. And it is useful to understand the methods for studying places. However, a primary reason we are interested in high-crime places is that it might be possible to do something about crime by addressing these places. We are convinced that focusing on places can substantially reduce crime and disorder. Our conviction is not a matter of faith, but is based on over twenty-five years of accumulating evidence.
This chapter summarizes the research evidence examining whether focusing on crime places reduces crime. We first discuss a broad range of place-based prevention strategies examined by Eck and Guerrette (2012). This review provides strong evidence for a place-based approach to crime prevention. We then turn to a specific form of place-based crime prevention – hot spots policing (Sherman and Weisburd 1995). Again, we have a strong body of evidence supporting a place-based approach. Having reviewed hot spots policing, we turn to the importance of place managers and third parties in controlling problem places. We then examine an extension of the third-party approach to argue that a place-based approach to crime may free crime control policy from the police monopoly. Then we describe how a place-based approach to crime could be incorporated in community corrections to improve probation and parole outcomes. Finally, we review the larger body of research on the potential threat of crime displacement, and its opposite, the diffusion of crime control benefits. Consistently, the evidence described in this chapter clearly shows the substantial utility of a place-based approach for reducing crime.
SITUATIONAL CRIME PREVENTION AT PLACES
In Chapter 3 we argued for the importance of social disorganization theories for understanding crime places. This is an area where basic research suggests promise (e.g., see Weisburd et al. 2012; Weisburd et al. 2014), but where there is little evidence of effectiveness of specific practices. Such evidence is beginning to be developed, but we can say little at this juncture. In contrast, the evidence regarding opportunity reduction and crime has grown systematically over the last few decades.
2 - The Concentration of Crime at Place
- David Weisburd, George Mason University, Virginia, John E. Eck, University of Cincinnati, Anthony A. Braga, John F. Kennedy School of Government, Massachusetts, Cody W. Telep, Arizona State University, Breanne Cave, George Mason University, Virginia, Kate Bowers, University College London, Gerben Bruinsma, VU University Amsterdam, Charlotte Gill, George Mason University, Virginia, Elizabeth R. Groff, Temple University, Philadelphia, Julie Hibdon, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, Joshua C. Hinkle, Georgia State University, Shane D. Johnson, University College London, Brian Lawton, John Jay College of Criminal Justice, City University of New York, Cynthia Lum, George Mason University, Virginia, Jerry H. Ratcliffe, Temple University, Philadelphia, George Rengert, Temple University, Philadelphia, Travis Taniguchi, Sue-Ming Yang, George Mason University, Virginia
-
- Book:
- Place Matters
- Published online:
- 05 April 2016
- Print publication:
- 04 April 2016, pp 16-41
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
Take a moment to imagine a crime occurring – perhaps a street robbery or a bag snatch. When you do this, it is difficult not to visualize the crime occurring in a particular setting or place. So, you might imagine a dark street corner with dim street lighting or seating in the outside area of a public bar. It seems intuitively sensible to analyze and understand crime at this unit of analysis – in other words, to investigate how criminals behave and crime concentrates at small microplaces. However, engaging in such microlevel analysis has tended to be a more recent criminological undertaking, and there are still many fruitful avenues to explore in terms of advancing both our knowledge and the sophistication of the methods that we use in this research area.
In this chapter, we raise and endeavor to answer a number of questions concerning the appropriate scale of analysis of criminological enquiry. To do this, we will start by defining what we mean by place and how this differs from other geographic concepts. Next, we highlight what has become the key catalyst for the criminology of place – the tremendous concentration of crime at microgeographic units of analysis. The strong and consistent concentration of crime at addresses, street segments, and other microgeographic units across cities is key to understanding why it is important to study the criminology of place and why it has such strong policy implications. We then turn to some additional statistical benefits of studying crime at microgeographic units that have to do with what is often termed “spatial interaction effects.” Finally, we examine problems that crime and place researchers will need to consider, and recommend some future directions for research exploring crime concentration at places.
PLACE AND SPACE
Geographic concepts are sometimes used in criminological research without a clear understanding of their meaning. Place and space are two such concepts. The subtle difference between them is important to keep in mind, as they can be a guide to establishing a carefully constructed study and influence the interpretation of findings. Furthermore, as will become apparent later in this chapter, a confusion of these concepts can mislead the reader in the interpretation of an argument. For example, it is important to keep in mind that place does not necessarily mean small units of analysis, nor does space necessarily refer to large areas.
Place Matters
- Criminology for the Twenty-First Century
- David Weisburd, John E. Eck, Anthony A. Braga, Cody W. Telep, Breanne Cave, Kate Bowers, Gerben Bruinsma, Charlotte Gill, Elizabeth R. Groff, Julie Hibdon, Joshua C. Hinkle, Shane D. Johnson, Brian Lawton, Cynthia Lum, Jerry H. Ratcliffe, George Rengert, Travis Taniguchi, Sue-Ming Yang
-
- Published online:
- 05 April 2016
- Print publication:
- 04 April 2016
-
Over the last two decades, there has been increased interest in the distribution of crime and other antisocial behavior at lower levels of geography. The focus on micro geography and its contribution to the understanding and prevention of crime has been called the 'criminology of place'. It pushes scholars to examine small geographic areas within cities, often as small as addresses or street segments, for their contribution to crime. Here, the authors describe what is known about crime and place, providing the most up-to-date and comprehensive review available. Place Matters shows that the study of criminology of place should be a central focus of criminology in the twenty-first century. It creates a tremendous opportunity for advancing our understanding of crime, and for addressing it. The book brings together eighteen top scholars in criminology and place to provide comprehensive research expanding across different themes.
4 - The Importance of Place in Mainstream Criminology and Related Fields: Influences and Lessons to be Learned
- David Weisburd, George Mason University, Virginia, John E. Eck, University of Cincinnati, Anthony A. Braga, John F. Kennedy School of Government, Massachusetts, Cody W. Telep, Arizona State University, Breanne Cave, George Mason University, Virginia, Kate Bowers, University College London, Gerben Bruinsma, VU University Amsterdam, Charlotte Gill, George Mason University, Virginia, Elizabeth R. Groff, Temple University, Philadelphia, Julie Hibdon, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, Joshua C. Hinkle, Georgia State University, Shane D. Johnson, University College London, Brian Lawton, John Jay College of Criminal Justice, City University of New York, Cynthia Lum, George Mason University, Virginia, Jerry H. Ratcliffe, Temple University, Philadelphia, George Rengert, Temple University, Philadelphia, Travis Taniguchi, Sue-Ming Yang, George Mason University, Virginia
-
- Book:
- Place Matters
- Published online:
- 05 April 2016
- Print publication:
- 04 April 2016, pp 68-85
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
This chapter explores the importance of place in theory and research in both mainstream criminology and other disciplines. As we noted in earlier chapters, traditional criminology has focused primarily on understanding why people commit crime. This focus on criminality has generally inhibited study of microgeographies and their role in producing crime. However, more recently there has been a trend toward integrating microgeographic places into traditional theorizing about criminality. In the first part of the chapter we discuss this trend, focusing on some recent innovations in understanding criminality that have incorporated place-based perspectives. In the second part of the chapter we focus on how other disciplines have influenced thinking in this area, focusing in particular on contributions in psychology, economics, and public health. Finally, we explore how trends in other disciplines might influence future directions of study in the criminology of place.
THE GROWING ROLE OF MICROGEOGRAPHIC PLACES IN TRADITIONAL THEORIZING OF CRIMINALITY
As we noted in Chapter 1, places, at least at a macro level, played a key part in the development of criminology in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. But despite the role of place in crime in empirical study in Europe and theoretical development in the Chicago School through social disorganization theory, microgeographic places were mostly ignored. This was not because early criminologists failed to recognize the role of place in crime. Crime occurs in specific environments, and this was apparent to observers of the crime problem. Nonetheless, as we noted in Chapter 1, early criminologists did not see “crime places” – small discrete areas within communities – as a relevant focus of criminological study. This was the case, in part, because crime opportunities provided by places were assumed to be so numerous as to make concentration on specific places of little utility for theory or policy. What is the point of focusing theory or research on the opportunities offered by specific places if such opportunities can be found throughout the urban context?
Moreover, criminologists did not see the utility in focusing in on situational opportunities when criminal motivation was the key to understanding crime rates. Criminologists traditionally assumed that situational factors played a relatively minor role in explaining crime as compared with the “driving force of criminal dispositions” (Clarke and Felson 1993, 4; Trasler 1993).
3 - Theories of Crime and Place
- David Weisburd, George Mason University, Virginia, John E. Eck, University of Cincinnati, Anthony A. Braga, John F. Kennedy School of Government, Massachusetts, Cody W. Telep, Arizona State University, Breanne Cave, George Mason University, Virginia, Kate Bowers, University College London, Gerben Bruinsma, VU University Amsterdam, Charlotte Gill, George Mason University, Virginia, Elizabeth R. Groff, Temple University, Philadelphia, Julie Hibdon, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, Joshua C. Hinkle, Georgia State University, Shane D. Johnson, University College London, Brian Lawton, John Jay College of Criminal Justice, City University of New York, Cynthia Lum, George Mason University, Virginia, Jerry H. Ratcliffe, Temple University, Philadelphia, George Rengert, Temple University, Philadelphia, Travis Taniguchi, Sue-Ming Yang, George Mason University, Virginia
-
- Book:
- Place Matters
- Published online:
- 05 April 2016
- Print publication:
- 04 April 2016, pp 42-67
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
In the previous chapter, we showed that crime is concentrated at very small geographic units, substantially smaller than neighborhoods, and that these concentrations, on average, are relatively stable. This is true whether examining high- or low-crime neighborhoods. Although high-crime places do cluster, they seldom form a homogeneous block of high-crime places. Rather, interspersed within concentrations of high-crime places are many low- and modest-crime places.
Why is crime concentrated in a relatively small number of places? Standard criminology has not asked this question, largely because standard criminology focuses on criminality and implicitly assumes that the density of offenders explains crime density. Recognition that place characteristics matter is the starting point for this chapter. We look at two perspectives on crime place characteristics. We use the term “perspective” because each type of explanation is comprised of multiple theories linked by a common orientation. The first perspective arises from opportunity theories of crime. The second perspective arises from social disorganization theories of crime.
We begin by contrasting two ways of thinking about how a place becomes a crime hot spot and suggest that the process by which high-crime places evolve must involve place characteristics. In the next sections, we examine opportunity and social disorganization explanations. In the final section of the chapter, we examine possible ways researchers might link these two perspectives.
PROCESSES THAT CREATE CRIME PLACES
Before we look for explanations of why places become hot spots of crime it is important to consider two processes that might lead to such an outcome. Criminologists have generally proposed two generic models to account for the processes that lead to variation in place susceptibility to crime. One model suggests that places may start with reasonably similar risks of an initial criminal attack, but once attacked the risk of a subsequent attack on the place rises. Over time, places diverge in their crime risk, and consequently in their crime counts. This temporal contagion model is also known as a boost model (see Chapter 2) or a state-dependence model. It puts the emphasis on offenders’ willingness to return to a previously successful crime site (Johnson et al. 2007; Townsley et al. 2000). It suggests that irrespective of initial crime risk the occurrence of a crime will lead to changes in risk of crime at a place.
List of figures
- David Weisburd, George Mason University, Virginia, John E. Eck, University of Cincinnati, Anthony A. Braga, John F. Kennedy School of Government, Massachusetts, Cody W. Telep, Arizona State University, Breanne Cave, George Mason University, Virginia, Kate Bowers, University College London, Gerben Bruinsma, VU University Amsterdam, Charlotte Gill, George Mason University, Virginia, Elizabeth R. Groff, Temple University, Philadelphia, Julie Hibdon, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, Joshua C. Hinkle, Georgia State University, Shane D. Johnson, University College London, Brian Lawton, John Jay College of Criminal Justice, City University of New York, Cynthia Lum, George Mason University, Virginia, Jerry H. Ratcliffe, Temple University, Philadelphia, George Rengert, Temple University, Philadelphia, Travis Taniguchi, Sue-Ming Yang, George Mason University, Virginia
-
- Book:
- Place Matters
- Published online:
- 05 April 2016
- Print publication:
- 04 April 2016, pp vii-x
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
7 - Crime Places in the Criminological Imagination
- David Weisburd, George Mason University, Virginia, John E. Eck, University of Cincinnati, Anthony A. Braga, John F. Kennedy School of Government, Massachusetts, Cody W. Telep, Arizona State University, Breanne Cave, George Mason University, Virginia, Kate Bowers, University College London, Gerben Bruinsma, VU University Amsterdam, Charlotte Gill, George Mason University, Virginia, Elizabeth R. Groff, Temple University, Philadelphia, Julie Hibdon, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, Joshua C. Hinkle, Georgia State University, Shane D. Johnson, University College London, Brian Lawton, John Jay College of Criminal Justice, City University of New York, Cynthia Lum, George Mason University, Virginia, Jerry H. Ratcliffe, Temple University, Philadelphia, George Rengert, Temple University, Philadelphia, Travis Taniguchi, Sue-Ming Yang, George Mason University, Virginia
-
- Book:
- Place Matters
- Published online:
- 05 April 2016
- Print publication:
- 04 April 2016, pp 140-158
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
We began this book by noting that criminologists have largely ignored the involvement of microgeographic places in crime. Mainstream criminologists have focused on “who done it?” and not “where done it?” (Sherman 1995). At least for the last century the key inquiries of crime and the key prevention approaches have looked to doing something about criminal motivation (Sutherland 1947; Reiss 1981). Why people commit crime has been the main focus of criminology (Brantingham and Brantingham 1990; Weisburd 2002), and catching and processing offenders has been the main focus of crime prevention (Weisburd 2008). In contrast, the criminology of place (Sherman et al. 1989; Weisburd et al. 2012), which began to develop in the 1980s and 1990s (Brantingham and Brantingham 1981; 1984; Eck 1994; Eck and Weisburd 1995; Roncek and Bell 1981; Weisburd and Green 1995a), provides an alternative vision of how we can understand crime and the crime problem. Like the emergence of community criminology during the same period (Bursik 1988; Morenoff et al. 2001; Sampson 2008; Sampson et al. 1997) the criminology of place has offered a new set of mechanisms for crime study and a new set of methods for doing something about the crime problem.
Theory has been a driving force in criminological study, and as we note below, we think that more not less attention to theory is important for advancing the criminology of place. However, theories are about something and try to explain something. When we change the unit of analysis, we are changing the target for theory. The criminology of place proposes a new target. It focuses on places, rather than people. Its goal is to explain the criminal involvement of microgeographic units rather than trying to explain the criminal involvement of people. This does not mean we ignore the role of individuals in the crime problem. But it does mean that we begin our inquiries with the place and see the individuals as only one part of the crime equation at places.
We have illustrated in the preceding chapters the extent to which theory, method, and empirical evidence about crime places have been developing over the last three decades. In this concluding chapter, we want to draw from our review of what is known some key themes that we think our work has identified, and key questions that still need to be answered.
Frontmatter
- David Weisburd, George Mason University, Virginia, John E. Eck, University of Cincinnati, Anthony A. Braga, John F. Kennedy School of Government, Massachusetts, Cody W. Telep, Arizona State University, Breanne Cave, George Mason University, Virginia, Kate Bowers, University College London, Gerben Bruinsma, VU University Amsterdam, Charlotte Gill, George Mason University, Virginia, Elizabeth R. Groff, Temple University, Philadelphia, Julie Hibdon, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, Joshua C. Hinkle, Georgia State University, Shane D. Johnson, University College London, Brian Lawton, John Jay College of Criminal Justice, City University of New York, Cynthia Lum, George Mason University, Virginia, Jerry H. Ratcliffe, Temple University, Philadelphia, George Rengert, Temple University, Philadelphia, Travis Taniguchi, Sue-Ming Yang, George Mason University, Virginia
-
- Book:
- Place Matters
- Published online:
- 05 April 2016
- Print publication:
- 04 April 2016, pp i-iv
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
References
- David Weisburd, George Mason University, Virginia, John E. Eck, University of Cincinnati, Anthony A. Braga, John F. Kennedy School of Government, Massachusetts, Cody W. Telep, Arizona State University, Breanne Cave, George Mason University, Virginia, Kate Bowers, University College London, Gerben Bruinsma, VU University Amsterdam, Charlotte Gill, George Mason University, Virginia, Elizabeth R. Groff, Temple University, Philadelphia, Julie Hibdon, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, Joshua C. Hinkle, Georgia State University, Shane D. Johnson, University College London, Brian Lawton, John Jay College of Criminal Justice, City University of New York, Cynthia Lum, George Mason University, Virginia, Jerry H. Ratcliffe, Temple University, Philadelphia, George Rengert, Temple University, Philadelphia, Travis Taniguchi, Sue-Ming Yang, George Mason University, Virginia
-
- Book:
- Place Matters
- Published online:
- 05 April 2016
- Print publication:
- 04 April 2016, pp 163-196
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
List of contributors
- David Weisburd, George Mason University, Virginia, John E. Eck, University of Cincinnati, Anthony A. Braga, John F. Kennedy School of Government, Massachusetts, Cody W. Telep, Arizona State University, Breanne Cave, George Mason University, Virginia, Kate Bowers, University College London, Gerben Bruinsma, VU University Amsterdam, Charlotte Gill, George Mason University, Virginia, Elizabeth R. Groff, Temple University, Philadelphia, Julie Hibdon, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, Joshua C. Hinkle, Georgia State University, Shane D. Johnson, University College London, Brian Lawton, John Jay College of Criminal Justice, City University of New York, Cynthia Lum, George Mason University, Virginia, Jerry H. Ratcliffe, Temple University, Philadelphia, George Rengert, Temple University, Philadelphia, Travis Taniguchi, Sue-Ming Yang, George Mason University, Virginia
-
- Book:
- Place Matters
- Published online:
- 05 April 2016
- Print publication:
- 04 April 2016, pp xiii-xvi
-
- Chapter
- Export citation