It is widely recognized that crimes are clustered in space. Features of the built environment are among various factors associated with crime clustering patterns. There are two competing perspectives on this association: the “encounter” and “enclosure” hypotheses. This study examines the effect of the built environment on the spatial distribution of residential burglary in Wuhan, China, aiming to test these two competing perspectives. First, we review existing studies analyzing the influence of the built environment on residential burglary, especially those based on the two hypotheses. We then conduct an exploratory data analysis to observe the spatial and temporal distribution patterns of residential burglaries. Next, we use a multivariate spatial regression model to evaluate the influence of various built environment characteristics on residential burglaries, after controlling for socio-demographic variables, guardianship, and the time-of-day effect. The results suggest a double peak in the hourly distribution of burglaries: 6:00 a.m.–8:59 a.m. and 5:00 p.m.–7:59 p.m. Burglaries are positively and significantly autocorrelated in space and mainly concentrated in the north-west and central areas of Wuhan. Two transport facilities features (intersection density and the presence of subway stations), three building features (multiple stories, high housing prices, and older houses), and land-use mix are each positively correlated with burglary. However, the burglary count is negatively correlated with the ratio of the residential land. Overall, neighborhoods with high permeability are vulnerable to residential burglaries. Thus, the principle of access control promoted by the enclosure hypothesis appears effective in preventing residential crime. The results’ implications for crime prevention and urban design practice are also discussed.
AnselinLBeraAK (1998) Spatial dependence in linear regression models with an introduction to spatial econometrics. In: UllahAGilesDE (eds) Handbook of Applied Economic Statistics. New York: Marcel Dekker, pp. 237–289.
2.
ArmitageR (2007) Sustainability versus safety: Confusion, conflict and contradiction in designing out crime. In:FarrellGBowersKJJohnsonSD, et al. (eds) Imagination for Crime Prevention: Essays in Honour of Ken Pease. Crime Prevention Studies, vol. 21. Monsey, NY: Criminal Justice Press.
3.
ArmitageR (2013) Crime Prevention through Housing Design. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
4.
AshtonJBrownISeniorB, et al. (1998) Repeat victimisation: Offenders accounts. International Journal of Risk, Security and Crime Prevention3: 269–279.
5.
Australian Government (1995) AMCORD 95: A National Resource Document for Residential Development. Canberra, ACT, Australia: Australian Government Publishing Service.
6.
BeatonAE (1975) The influence of education and ability on salary and attitudes. In:JusterF (ed.) Education, Income, and Human Behavior. New York: McGraw-Hill, pp. 365–396.
7.
BennettTWrightR (1984) Burglars on Burglary: Prevention and the Offender. Aldershot: Gower.
8.
BernascoW (2008) Them again? Same-offender involvement in repeat and near repeat burglaries. European Journal of Criminology5: 411–431.
9.
BernascoWNieuwbeertaP (2005) How do residential burglars select target areas? A new approach to the analysis of criminal location choiceThe British Journal of Criminology45: 296–315.
10.
BevisCNutterJB (1977) Changing street layouts to reduce residential burglary. Paper presented to the American society of criminology annual meeting, Atlanta, GA, 16–20 November.
11.
BirksDDaviesT (2017) Street network structure and crime risk: An agent-based investigation of the encounter and enclosure hypotheses. Criminology55: 900–937.
12.
BrantinghamPJBrantinghamPL (1975) The spatial patterning of burglary. The Howard Journal of Criminal Justice14: 11–23.
13.
BrantinghamPJBrantinghamPL (1981) Environmental Criminology. Beverly Hills, CA: SAGE.
14.
BrantinghamPLBrantinghamPJ (1999) A theoretical model of crime hot spot generation. Studies on Crime & Crime Prevention8: 7–26.
15.
BreetzkeGDCohnEG (2013) Burglary in gated communities: An empirical analysis using routine activities theory. International Criminal Justice Review23(1): 56–74.
16.
BrowningCRByronRACalderCA, et al. (2010) Commercial density, residential concentration, and crime: Land use patterns and violence in neighborhood context. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency47: 329–357.
17.
CantorDLandKC (1985) Unemployment and crime rates in the post-world War II United States: A theoretical and empirical analysis. American Sociological Review50: 317–332.
18.
ClareJFernandezJMorganF (2009) Formal evaluation of the impact of barriers and connectors on residential burglars’ macro-level offending location choices. Australian & New Zealand Journal of Criminology42(2): 139–158.
19.
CliffordPRichardsonS (1985) Testing the association between two spatial processes. Statistics and Decisions2: 155–160.
20.
CohenLEFelsonM (1979) Social change and crime rate trends: A routine activity approach. American Sociological Review44: 588–608.
21.
CozensPM (2011) Urban planning and environmental criminology: Towards a new perspective for safer cities. Planning Practice & Research26: 481–508.
22.
CozensPMSavilleGHillierD (2005) Crime prevention through environmental design (CPTED): A review and modern bibliography. Property Management23: 328–356.
23.
CroweT (2000) Crime Prevention through Environmental Design: Applications of Architectural Design and Space Management Concepts. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.
24.
DaviesTJohnsonSD (2015) Examining the relationship between road structure and burglary risk via quantitative network analysis. Journal of Quantitative Criminology31: 481–507.
25.
Department of Environment, Transport and the Regions (DETR) (1998) Places, Streets and Movement: A Companion Guide to Design Bulletin 32, Residential Roads and Footpaths. London: DETR.
26.
DoveyK (1998) Safety and danger in urban design. Paper presented at the conference safer communities: Strategic directions in urban planning, Melbourne, VIC, Australia, 10–11 September.
27.
DuanyAPlater-ZyberkE (1992) The second coming of the American small town. The Wilson Quarterly16: 19–48.
28.
FosterSGiles-CortiB (2008) The built environment, neighborhood crime and constrained physical activity: An exploration of inconsistent findings. Preventive Medicine47: 241–251.
29.
FosterSGiles-CortiBKnuimanM (2010) Neighbourhood design and fear of crime: A social-ecological examination of the correlates of residents’ fear in new suburban housing developments. Health & Place16: 1156–1165.
30.
FrankLDSallisJFConwayTL, et al. (2006) Many pathways from land use to health: Associations between neighborhood walkability and active transportation, body mass index, and air quality. Journal of the American Planning Association72: 75–87.
31.
FrankLDSallisJFSaelensBE, et al. (2010) The development of a walkability index: Application to the neighborhood quality of life study. British Journal of Sports Medicine44: 924–933.
32.
GilderbloomJIRiggsWWMearesWL (2015) Does walkability matter? An examination of walkability’s impact on housing values, foreclosures and crime. Cities42: 13–24.
33.
HeidensohnF (1989) Gender and crime. In:HeidensohnF (ed.) Crime and Society. Basingstoke: Macmillan, pp. 85–111.
34.
HerbertDTHydeSW (1985) Environmental criminology: Testing some area hypotheses. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers10: 259–274.
35.
HillierB (2004) Can streets be made safe?Urban Design International9: 31–45.
36.
HillierBSahbazO (2008) An evidence based approach to crime and urban design or, can we have vitality, sustainability and security all at once? In: CooperRBoykoCEvansG, et al. (eds) Urban Sustainability for the 24 Hour City. London: Routledge.
37.
HippJRKimY-AKaneK (2018) The effect of the physical environment on crime rates: Capturing housing age and housing type at varying spatial scales. Crime & Delinquency. Epub ahead of print 25 June. DOI: 10.1177/0011128718779569.
38.
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.
39.
JacobsJ (1961) The Death and Life of Great American Cities. New York: Random House.
40.
JefferyCR (1971) Crime Prevention through Environmental Design. London: SAGE.
41.
JohnsonSDBowersKJ (2010) Permeability and burglary risk: Are cul-de-sacs safer?Journal of Quantitative Criminology26: 89–111.
42.
JonesHR (1993) Crime and the Urban Environment. Brookfield, VT: Avebury.
43.
KitchenTSchneiderRH (2007) Crime Prevention and the Built Environment. Abingdon: Routledge.
44.
LiuLLiJCM (2017) Progress and future directions of crime research in China with selected case studies. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency54: 447–453.
45.
MayhewP (1979) Defensible space: The current status of a crime prevention theory. The Howard Journal of Criminal Justice18: 150–159.
46.
MerryS (1981) Defensible space undefended: Social factors in crime prevention through environmental design. Urban Affairs Quarterly16(3): 397–422.
47.
MoranPAP (1948) The interpretation of statistical maps. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series B10: 243–251.
NewmanO (1972) Defensible Space. New York: Macmillan.
50.
NormanGJNutterSKRyanS, et al. (2006) Community design and access to recreational facilities as correlates of adolescent physical activity and body-mass index. Journal of Physical Activity and Health3: S118–S128.
51.
Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (2004) Safer Places: The Planning System and Crime Prevention. London: Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, Home Office.
52.
PanterJRJonesAPVan SluijsEMF, et al. (2010) Neighborhood, route, and school environments and children’s active commuting. American Journal of Preventive Medicine38: 268–278.
53.
PaternosterRBushwaySD (2001) Theoretical and empirical work on the relationship between unemployment and crime. Journal of Quantitative Criminology17: 391–407.
54.
PeetersMPVan DaeleSVander BekenT (2018) Adding to the mix: A multilevel analysis of residential burglary. Security Journal31: 389–409.
55.
ReynaldDM (2010) Guardians on guardianship: Factors affecting the willingness to supervise, the ability to detect potential offenders, and the willingness to intervene. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency47: 358–390.
SohnD-W (2016) Residential crimes and neighbourhood built environment: Assessing the effectiveness of crime prevention through environmental design (CPTED). Cities52: 86–93.
58.
SongGLiuLBernascoW, et al. (2018) Theft from the person in urban China: Assessing the diurnal effects of opportunity and social ecology. Habitat International78: 13–20.
59.
SummersLJohnsonSD (2017) Does the configuration of the street network influence where outdoor serious violence takes place? Using space syntax to test crime pattern theory. Journal of Quantitative Criminology33: 397–420.
60.
TalenE (2013) Charter of the New Urbanism, 2nd edn.New York: McGraw-Hill.
61.
TseloniA (2006) Multilevel modelling of the number of property crimes: Household and area effects. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series A (Statistics in Society)169(2): 205–233.
62.
TseloniAThompsonRTilleyN (2018) Reducing Burglary. New York: Springer.
63.
VandeviverCNeutensTVan DaeleS, et al. (2015) A discrete spatial choice model of burglary target selection at the house-level. Applied Geography64: 24–34.
64.
WallerIOkihiroNR (1978) Burglary: The Victim and the Public. Toronto, ON, Canada: University of Toronto Press.
65.
WelshBCFarringtonDPTaheriSA (2015) Effectiveness and social costs of public area surveillance for crime prevention. Annual Review of Law and Social Science11: 111–130.
66.
WhiteGF (1990) Neighborhood permeability and burglary rates. Justice Quarterly7: 57–67.
67.
WinchesterSJacksonH (1982) Residential Burglary: The Limits of Prevention. London: Her Majesty’s Stationery Office.
68.
WortleyRLorraineM (2008) Environmental Criminology and Crime Analysis. Cullompton: Willan Publishing.
69.
WrightRTDeckerSH (1994) Burglars on the Job: Streetlife and Residential Break-ins. Boston, MA: Northeastern University Press.
70.
WuLLiuXYeX, et al. (2015a) Permeability, space syntax, and the patterning of residential burglaries in urban China. Applied Geography60: 261–265.
71.
WuLXuXYeX, et al. (2015b) Repeat and near-repeat burglaries and offender involvement in a large Chinese city. Cartography and Geographic Information Science42(2): 178–189.
72.
Wuhan Statistics Bureau (2015) Wuhan Statistical Yearbook–2015. Beijing, China: China Statistical Press.
73.
YueHZhuXYeX, et al. (2018) Modelling the effects of street permeability on burglary in Wuhan, China. Applied Geography98: 177–183.
74.
Zuniga-TeranAAOrrBJGimblettRH, et al. (2017) Neighborhood design, physical activity, and wellbeing: Applying the walkability model. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health14: 76.
