Routine activities and lifestyle theories focus on the opportunities that lead to victimization experience. Routine activities theory considers a micro- and macro-level approach to understanding victimization, which suggests the utility of this theory in cross-national research. However, few cross-national studies applying a routine activities framework address both the individual and structural levels of analysis. Additionally, much research adhering to this theoretical perspective does not distinguish between instrumental and expressive crimes. Because of these limitations, the full explanatory value of the theory has not been adequately explored. In this study, the author focuses on a cross-national multilevel analysis of violent and property victimization across 47 developed and developing nations. The author uses the International Crime Victimization Survey (ICVS) and the European Survey on Crime and Safety (EU ICS) for individual-level measures and incorporates information on country structure from sources including the United Nations, World Bank, and the International Labor Organization. The results indicate individual-level measures of routines and lifestyles are differentially related to expressive and instrumental victimization, and these relationships maintain significance when structural opportunity measures are considered. Moreover, the measures of structural opportunity as captured by the level of development, sex ratio, and female employment are differentially associated with violent and property victimization.
Anderson, T.L., & Bennett, R.R. ( 1996). Development, gender, and crime: The scope of the routine activities approach. Justice Quarterly, 13, 31-56.
2.
Arnold, R., Keane, C., & Baron, S. ( 2005). Assessing risk of victimization through epidemiological concepts: An alternative analytic strategy applied to routine activities theory . Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology, 42, 345-364.
3.
Bennett, R.R. ( 1991). Routine activities: A cross-national assessment of a criminological perspective. Social Forces, 70, 147-163.
4.
Birkbeck, C., & LaFree, G. (1993). The situational analysis of crime and deviance. Annual Review of Sociology, 19, 113-137.
5.
Bjerregaard, B., & Cochran, J.K. ( 2008). Want amid plenty: Developing and testing a cross-national measure of anomie. International Journal of Conflict and Violence , 2, 182-193.
6.
Block, R. ( 1993). A cross-national comparison of victims of crime: Victim surveys of twelve countries. International Review of Victimology , 2, 183-207.
7.
Bouten, E., Goudriaan, H., & Nieuwbeerta, P. (2002). Criminal victimization in seventeen industrialized countries. In P. Nieuwbeerta (Ed.), Crime victimization in comparative perspective (pp. 13-28). Dan Haag: Boom Juridische uitgevers.
8.
Cantor, D., & Land, K.C. ( 1985). Unemployment and crime rates in the post-World War II United States: A theoretical and empirical analysis. American Sociological Review, 50, 317-332.
9.
Cao, L., & Maume, D.J. Jr. (1993). Urbanization, inequality, lifestyles and robbery: A comprehensive model. Sociological Focus, 36, 11-26.
10.
Cohen, L.E., Cantor, D., & Klugel, J.R. ( 1981a). Robbery victimization in the U.S.: An analysis of a nonrandom event. Social Science Quarterly, 62, 644-657.
11.
Cohen, L.E., & Felson, M. ( 1979). Social change and crime rate trends: A routine activity approach. American Sociological Review, 44, 588-608.
12.
Cohen, L.E., Klugel, J.R., & Land, K.C. ( 1981b). Social inequality and predatory criminal victimization: An exposition and test of a formal theory. American Sociological Review, 46, 505-524.
13.
Cruszczynska, B. ( 2002). Cross-national perspective of violent victimization risk . In P. Nieuwbeerta (Ed.), Crime victimization in comparative perspective (pp. 213-226). Dan Haag: Boom Juridische uitgevers.
14.
Felson, M. ( 1998). Crime and everyday life (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge Press.
15.
Felson, M., & Cohen, L. ( 1980). Human ecology and crime: A routine activities approach . Human Ecology, 8, 389-406.
16.
Felson, R.B. ( 1996). Big people hit little people: Sex differences in physical power and interpersonal violence. Criminology, 34, 433-452.
17.
Gottfredson, M.R., & Hirschi, T. ( 1990). A general theory of crime. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
18.
Hawley, A. ( 1950). Human ecology. A theory of community structure. New York: Ronald Press.
19.
Hindelang, M.J., Gottfredson, M.R., & Garofalo, J. ( 1978). Victims of personal crime: An empirical foundation for a theory of personal victimization. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.
20.
Hsieh, C., & Pugh, M.D. ( 1993). Poverty, income inequality, and violent crime: A meta-analysis . Criminal Justice Review, 18, 182-202.
21.
Kennedy, L.W., & Forde, D.R. ( 1990). Routine activities and crime: An analysis of victimization in Canada. Criminology, 28, 137-152.
22.
Kick, E.L., & LaFree, G.D. (1985). Development and the social context of murder and theft. Comparative Social Research, 8, 37-58.
23.
Kim, S., & Pridemore, W.A. (2005). Poverty, socioeconomic change, institutional anomie, and homicide. Social Science Quarterly, 86, 1377-1398.
24.
LaFree, G.D., & Kick, E.L. ( 1986). Cross-national effects of developmental, distributional, and demographic variables on crime: A review and analysis. International Annals of Criminology, 24, 213-235.
25.
Lee, M.R. ( 2000). Community cohesion and violent predatory victimization: A theoretical extension and cross-national test of opportunity theory. Social Forces, 79, 683-688.
26.
Lynch, J.P. ( 1987). Routine activity and victimization at work. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 3, 283-300.
27.
Messner, S.F., & Blau, J.R. ( 1987). Routine leisure activities and rates of crime: A macro-level analysis. Social Forces, 65, 1035-1052.
28.
Messner, S.F., & Rosenfeld, R. ( 1997). Political restraint of the market of levels of criminal homicide: A cross-national application of institutional-anomie theory. Social Forces, 75, 1393-1416.
29.
Messner, S.F., & Sampson, R.J. ( 1991). The sex ratio, family disruption, and rates of violent crime: The paradox of demographic structure. Social Forces , 69, 693-713.
30.
Miethe, T.D., & Drass, K.A. ( 1999). Exploring the social contest of instrumental and expressive homicides: An application of qualitative comparative analysis. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 15, 1-21.
31.
Miethe, T.D., & Meier, R.F. ( 1990). Opportunity, choice, and criminal victimization: A test of a theoretical model. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency , 27, 243-266.
32.
Miethe, T.D., Stafford, M.C., & Long, J.S. ( 1987). Social differentiation in criminal victimization: A test of routine activities/lifestyle theories. American Sociological Review, 52, 184-194.
33.
Mustaine, E.E., & Tewksbury, R. ( 1999). A routine activity theory explanation for women’s stalking victimizations. Violence Against Women, 5, 43-62.
34.
Outlaw, M.C. ( 2001). A routine activity approach to the study of intimate partner violence. Retrieved on April, 2007, from http://www.etda.libraries.psu.edu/theses/approved/WorldWideFiles/ETD78/outlawd.pdf
35.
Pratt, T.C., & Godsey, T.W. ( 2002). Social support and homicide: A cross-national test of an emerging criminological theory. Journal of Criminal Justice , 30, 589-601.
36.
Pratt, T.C., & Godsey, T.W. ( 2003). Social support, inequality, and homicide: A cross-national test of an integrated theoretical model. Criminology, 41, 611-644.
37.
Pridemore, W.A. ( 2008). A methodological addition to the cross-national empirical literature on social structure and homicide: A first test of the poverty-homicide thesis. Criminology, 46, 133-154.
38.
Pridemore, W.A., & Kim, S. ( 2007). Democratization and political change as threats to collective sentiments: Testing Durkheim in Russia. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 605, 82-103.
39.
Raudenbush, S.W., & Bryk, A.S. ( 1992). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE .
40.
Sacco, V.F., Johnson, H., & Arnold, R. ( 1993). Urban-rural residence and criminal victimization. Canadian Journal of Sociology, 18, 431-451.
41.
Sampson, R.J. ( 1987). Personal violence by strangers: An extension and test of the opportunity model of predatory victimization. The Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, 78, 327-356.
42.
Sampson, R.J., & Wooldredge, J.D. (1987). Linking the micro- and macro-level dimensions of lifestyle-routine activity and opportunity models of predatory victimization. Journal of Quantitative Criminology , 3, 371-393.
43.
Savolainen, J. ( 2000). Inequality, welfare state, and homicide: Further support for the institutional anomie theory. Criminology, 38, 1021-1042.
44.
Schreck, C.J., & Fisher, B.S. ( 2004). Specifying the influence of family and peers on violent victimization: Extending routine activities and lifestyles theories. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 19, 1021-1041.
45.
Tseloni, A., & Farrell, G. ( 2002). Burglary victimization across Europe: The roles of prior victimization, micro-and macro-level routine activities. In P. Nieuwbeerta (Ed.), Crime victimization in comparative perspective (pp. 141-162). Dan Haag: Boom Juridische uitgevers.
46.
Tseloni, A., Wittebrood, K., Farrell, G., & Pease, K. ( 2004). Burglary victimization in England and Wales, the United States and the Netherlands. British Journal of Criminology , 44, 66-91.
47.
van Kesteren, J., Mayhew, P. & Nieuwbeerta, P. ( 2000). Criminal Victimisation in Seventeen Industrialized Countries . Justitie: Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek- en Documentatiecentrum.
48.
van Kesteren, J.N. ( 2007). Integrated database from the international crime victims survey (ICVS) 1989-2005, codebook and data. Tilburg: INTERVICT.
49.
van Wilsem, J. ( 2004). Criminal victimization in cross-national perspective . European Journal of Criminology, 1, 89-109.
50.
van Wilsem, J., de Graaf, N.D., & Wittebrood, K. (2002). Variations in cross-national victimization: The impact of composition and context. In P. Nieuwbeerta (Ed.), Crime victimization in comparative perspective (pp. 119-140). Dan Haag: Boom Juridische uitgevers.
51.
van Wilsem, J., de Graff, N.D., & Wittebrood, K. (2003). Cross-national differences in victimization: Disentangling the impact of composition and context. European Sociological Review, 19, 125-142.
52.
Vieraitis, L.M. ( 2000). Income inequality, poverty, and violent crime: A review of the empirical evidence. Social Pathology: A Journal of Reviews, 6, 24-45.
53.
Vold, G.B., Bernard, T.J., & Snipes, J.B. ( 1998). Theoretical criminology (4th ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.
