Territorial functioning and victimisation in council estates in sheffield
Download
1 / 30

TERRITORIAL FUNCTIONING AND VICTIMISATION IN COUNCIL ESTATES IN SHEFFIELD - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 185 Views
  • Uploaded on

TERRITORIAL FUNCTIONING AND VICTIMISATION IN COUNCIL ESTATES IN SHEFFIELD. By: Aldrin Abdullah. Definition & concept. “ Territorial functioning ” refers to how people manage the space they own or occupy Elements of Territorial Functioning :. attitudes. behaviour. markers.

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'TERRITORIAL FUNCTIONING AND VICTIMISATION IN COUNCIL ESTATES IN SHEFFIELD' - Ava


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

Definition concept l.jpg
Definition & concept IN SHEFFIELD

  • “Territorial functioning” refers to how people manage the space they own or occupy

  • Elements of Territorial Functioning:

attitudes

behaviour

markers


Importance of territorial functioning l.jpg
Importance of territorial functioning IN SHEFFIELD

  • Location – spaces that surround the home (streets, front & back yards)

  • Reason – these spaces influence the quality of life in the home


Link between territorial functioning and crime l.jpg
Link between territorial functioning and crime IN SHEFFIELD

  • Notion – offenders perceive maintenance of outdoor residential spaces by the occupants as likely to be defended

  • Support:

    Craik & Appleyard (1980)

    Taylor et al., (1984)


Victimisation perspective l.jpg
Victimisation perspective IN SHEFFIELD

  • The “victimisation perspective” focuses on the characteristics and lifestyle of the victims and to see how that affect their risk of becoming a victim.


Objectives of the study l.jpg
Objectives of the study IN SHEFFIELD

  • 1) Establish the demographic variables that are related to victimisation of household crimes

  • 2) Examine the relationship between territorial functioning and victimisation of household crimes


Methodology l.jpg
Methodology IN SHEFFIELD

  • Main site selection criteria:

  • Council Estates in Sheffield - Similar demographic characteristics (Census SAS)

  • Varying crime rates (Police Offence and Offender Data)


Views of estate high se l.jpg
Views of Estate High (SE) IN SHEFFIELD

  • Graffiti & vandalism are a common sight in the area


Methodology9 l.jpg
Methodology IN SHEFFIELD

  • Procedure:

    Conducted in 2 stages

    Stage 1 (Survey of 217 respondents)

    Stage 2 (Structured interviews – 12 respondents)


Methodology10 l.jpg
Methodology IN SHEFFIELD

Stage 1 (Survey of 217 respondents)

  • Part 1 (demographic information, territorial attitudes, fear and crime problems, victimisation experience)

  • Part 2 (observation of residents’ front garden – evaluate territorial markers)


Methodology11 l.jpg
Methodology IN SHEFFIELD

Measures

  • Victimisation:

    Household & personal crimes (Based on 1996 BCS)

  • Territorial functioning:

    11 Attitude statements

    Observation of marking behaviour


Examples of markers l.jpg
Examples of markers IN SHEFFIELD

Flower pot Number plate


Examples of physical barrier l.jpg
Examples of physical barrier IN SHEFFIELD

Hedge Fence


Examples of gardening effort l.jpg
Examples of gardening effort IN SHEFFIELD

High effort No effort


Methodology15 l.jpg
Methodology IN SHEFFIELD

  • Stage 2 (Structured interviews – 12 respondents)

  • Purpose – Understand issues from the first stage

  • Emphasis on description and discovery and not on generalisation


Results crime in the estates l.jpg
Results – Crime in the estates IN SHEFFIELD

Victimisation Survey Data




Results demographic characteristics by household victimisation l.jpg
Results - Demographic characteristics by household victimisation

Significant relationships (p<.05)

(Spearman’s rho & Mann-Whitney)

Age

Length of residence


Results demographic characteristics by household victimisation20 l.jpg
Results - Demographic characteristics by household victimisation

Non Significant relationships (p>.05) (Spearman’s rho & Mann-Whitney)

Gender Ethnic origin

Marital status Household income Social class Type of residence

Occupation Type of ownership


Results victimisation and territorial functioning l.jpg
Results – Victimisation and territorial functioning victimisation

  • An increase in household victimisation is associated with a decrease in levels of territorial functioning at the individual and neighbourhood level.

  • The analysis cannot infer the causal relationship between the two variables


Two possible explanations l.jpg
Two possible explanations victimisation

First explanation

Increase in level of threat results in the reduction of territorial claims in accordance with the RETREAT approach (Taylor & Brower, 1985).

High victimisationLow territorial functioning


Slide23 l.jpg

Alternative explanation victimisation

Respondents were highly victimised because they expressed low levels of territorial functioning in the first place.

High victimisationLow territorial functioning

Burglars are hypothesised to prefer houses with less markers as targets.


Results interviews l.jpg
Results - Interviews victimisation

  • Purpose – examine which of the two explanations apply.

  • Subjects – 3 highly victimised respondents (7 or more incidents within the 1 year period).

  • Respondents A, B & C


Results interview l.jpg
Results - Interview victimisation

Summary of findings

  • Both respondents A & B displayed more territorial features before the incident.

  • Displays were in the form of more personalised items, barriers, flower pots.

  • Gradual decline in territorial functioning as a result of repeated victimisation.


Slide26 l.jpg

In contrast, victimisation

  • Respondent C had never attempted to display any territorial feature.

  • Why was Respondent C not bothered?

  • Did not believe that territorial display had any function in protecting the property.

  • Felt that these efforts require a lot of time and money – wasteful effort


Discussion l.jpg
Discussion victimisation

  • Age and length of residence are related to household victimisation.

  • This reflects the individual guardianship by older and long term occupier.


Discussion28 l.jpg
Discussion victimisation

  • Low territorial functioning is related to higher victimisation experience.

  • However, the relationship can work in both ways.

    High victimisation Low territorial

    functioning


Conclusion l.jpg
Conclusion victimisation

  • The victimisation perspective is important in studying crime.

  • Crime is not merely an activity of the offender.

  • The characteristics of the victims also influence crime.


Conclusion30 l.jpg
Conclusion victimisation

  • Focus on “multiple victimisation” because a high proportion of crimes are against the same people.

  • Territorial functioning - an environmental approach to crime prevention