It is well established that previous crime events are valuable indicators for the prediction of future crime. Near-repeat burglaries are incidents that occur in close proximity in space and time to an initial burglary. The current study analyses near-repeat victimization patterns in Malmö, Sweden’s third-largest city. The data, provided by the local police, cover a six-year time frame from 2009 to 2014. The complete dataset, as well as each year’s individual dataset, was analysed using Ratcliffe’s Near Repeat Calculator version 1.3. Results reveal significant near-repeat victimization patterns. For the full dataset, an observed/expected ratio of 2.83 was identified for the first week after an initial incident and an area of 100 metres surrounding the original burglary. Separate analyses of each individual year reveal both similarities and differences between years. Some years manifest near-repeat patterns at longer spatial and temporal distances, indicating a need for further studies on the variability of near repeats. Preventive strategies that include both private and public actors need to be intensified and focused on the first two weeks after a burglary.
BernascoW (2008) Them again? Same-offender involvement in repeat and near repeat burglaries. European Journal of Criminology5(4): 411–431.
2.
BernascoWNieuwbeertaP (2005) How do residential burglars select target areas? A new approach to the analysis of criminal location choice. British Journal of Criminology45: 296–315.
3.
BernascoWKoistraT (2010) Effects of residential history on commercial robbers’ crime location choices. European Journal of Criminology7: 251–265.
4.
BlockSFujitaS (2013) Patterns of near repeat temporary and permanent motor vehicle theft. Crime Prevention & Community Safety, pp. 67–151.
5.
BowersKJJohnsonSD (2004) Who commits near repeats? A test of the boost explanation. Western Criminology Review5(3): 12–24.
6.
BowersKJJohnsonSD (2005) Domestic burglary repeats and space–time clusters: The dimensions of risk. European Journal of Criminology2(1): 67–92.
7.
BragaAPapachristosAHureauD (2012) Hot Spots Policing Effects on Crime. Campbell Systematic Reviews2012:8.
8.
BrantinghamPBrantinghamP (1995) Criminality of place – Crime generators and crime attractors. European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research3(3): 5–26.
ChaineySPda SilvaBFA (2016) Examining the extent of repeat and near repeat victimisation of domestic burglaries in Belo Horizonte, Brazil. Crime Science5(1): 1–10.
11.
CohenLEFelsonM (1979) Social change and crime rate trends: A routine activity approach. American Sociological Review44(4): 588–608.
12.
CornishDBClarkeRV (1987) Understanding crime displacement: An application of rational choice theory. Criminology25(4): 933–947.
13.
DaviesTPBishopSR (2013) Modelling patterns of burglary on street networks. Crime Science2(1): 10.
14.
DreißigackerAet al. (2015) Prävention von Wohnungseinbruch. In: Forum Kriminalprävention2/2015: 58–64.
15.
FarrellGPeaseK (1993) Once Bitten, Twice Bitten: Repeat Victimisation and Its Implications for Crime Prevention. Police Research Group, Crime Prevention Unit Paper 46. London: Home Office.
16.
FarrellGPhillipsCPeaseK (1995) Like taking candy: Why does repeat victimization occur?British Journal of Criminology35(3): 384–399.
17.
GerellM (2016) Hot spot policing with actively monitored CCTV cameras: Does it reduce assaults in public places?International Criminal Justice Review26(2): 187–201.
18.
GerellMHallinPO (n.d.) Kroksbäck - Ett bostadsområde med manga ansikten och stora möjligheter. Unpublished manuscript, Department of Urban Studies, Malmö University.
19.
HabermanCPRatcliffeJH (2012) The predictive policing challenges of near repeat armed street robberies. Policing6(2): 151–166.
20.
HernandezP (2013) Is crime contagious? A near-repeat pattern analysis of burglary incidents in Winston-Salem, 2012. Journal of Justice Studies3.
21.
HirschfieldANewtonARogersonM (2010) Linking burglary and target hardening at the property level: New insights into victimization and burglary protection. Criminal Justice Policy Review21(3): 319–337.
22.
JohanssonR (ed.) (2015) Malmö högskola tar form. Malmö: Malmö högskola and Mezzo Media.
23.
JohnsonD (2013) The space/time behaviour of dwelling burglars: Finding near repeat patterns in serial offender data. Applied Geography41: 139–146.
24.
JohnsonSD (2008) Repeat burglary victimization: A tale of two theories. Journal of Experimental Criminology4(3): 215–240.
25.
JohnsonSDBowersKJ (2005) Domestic burglary repeats and space-time clusters: The dimensions of risk. European Journal of Criminology2(1): 67–92.
26.
JohnsonSDSummersLPeaseK (2009) Offender as forager? A direct test of the boost account of victimization. Journal of Quantitative Criminology25(2): 181–200.
27.
JohnsonSDBernascoWBowersKJElfersHRatliffeJRengertGTownsleyM (2007) Space-time patterns of risk: A cross national assessment of residential burglary victimization. Journal of Quantitative Criminology23(3): 201–219.
28.
KnoxEGBartlettMS (1964) The detection of space–time interactions. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series C (Applied Statistics)13(1): 25–30.
29.
LarssonOS (2014) City report: Malmö, Sweden. WILCO Publication, 21: 1–35.
30.
LindströmPMartinez-OlssonE (2016) Färre villainbrott med Märk-DNA. En utvärdering av en försöksverksamhet. Malmö Högskola, Fakulteten för Hälsa och Samhälle. FoU-Rapport2016:3.
31.
LockwoodB (2012) The presence and nature of a near-repeat pattern of motor vehicle theft. Security Journal25(1): 38–56.
32.
MawbyR (2013) Burglary. Uffculme: Taylor & Francis.
33.
MawbyRIet al. (1999) Victims’ needs and the availability of services: A comparison of burglary victims in Poland, Hungary, and England. International Criminal Justice Review9: 18–38.
34.
MohlerGOet al. (2015) Randomized controlled field trials of predictive policing. Journal of the American Statistical Association1459(April): 1399–1411.
35.
MorganF (2001) Repeat burglary in a Perth suburb: Indicator of short-term or long-term risk. In FarellGPeaseK (eds) Repeat Victimization, 1st edn. Crime Prevention Studies, vol. 12. Monsey, NY: Criminal Justice Press, 83–118.
36.
OliverP (2010) The Student’s Guide to Research Ethics. Berkshire/New York: Open University Press, 1–180.
37.
PeaseK (1998) Repeat Victimization: Taking Stock. Home Office Police Research Group, 90 (Crime Detection and Prevention Series).
38.
PolviNet al. (1991) The time course of repeat burglary victimization. British Journal of Criminology31(4): 411–414.
39.
RatcliffeJ (2009) Near Repeat Calculator Program Manual (Version 1.3). Philadelphia, PA: Temple University / Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.
40.
RatcliffeJHRengertGF (2008) Near-repeat patterns in Philadelphia shootings. Security Journal21(1–2): 58–76.
41.
SampsonRJRaudenbushSWEarlsF (1997) Neighborhoods and violent crime: A multilevel study of collective efficacy. Science, 27(5328): 918–924.
42.
ShortMBet al. (2009) Measuring and modeling repeat and near-repeat burglary effects. Journal of Quantitative Criminology25(3): 325–339.
TownsleyMHomelRChaselingJ (2003) Infectious burglaries: A test of the near repeat hypothesis. British Journal of Criminology43(3): 615–633.
45.
TseloniAPeaseK (2003) Repeat personal victimization: ‘Boosts’ or ‘flags’?British Journal of Criminology43(1): 196–212.
46.
WeiselDL (2005) Analyzing Repeat Victimization. Washington DC: US Department of Justice, Office of Community Oriented Policing Services.
47.
WellsWWuL (2011) Proactive policing effects on repeat and near-repeat shootings in Houston. Police Quarterly14(3): 298–319.
48.
WellsWWuLYeX (2012) Patterns of near-repeat gun assaults in Houston. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency49(2): 186–212.
49.
WuLXuXYeXZhuX (2015) Repeat and near-repeat burglaries and offender involvement in a large Chinese city. Cartography and Geographic Information Science42(2): 178–189.
50.
WyantBRTaylorRBRatcliffeJHWoodJ (2012) Deterrence, firearm arrests, and subsequent shootings: A micro-level spatio-temporal analysis. Justice Quarterly29(4): 524–545.
51.
YeXet al. (2015) Space–time interaction of residential burglaries in Wuhan, China. Applied Geography60: 210–216.
52.
YoustinTJet al. (2011) Assessing the generalizability of the near repeat phenomenon. Criminal Justice and Behavior38(10): 1042–1063.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
