LAND USE AND VIOLENT CRIME*

Thomas D. Stucky, John R. Ottensmann

Criminology · 2009 · 278 citations · 53 references

DOIFull text

Open access

Concepts

TL;DR

Prior studies link specific land uses to crime, yet systematic examination of land uses and violent crime remains limited. This study investigates how land uses relate to violent crime and whether socioeconomic disadvantage moderates these relationships. Using geocoded UCR data from Indianapolis and 30 land‑use categories with 2000 Census demographics, the authors predict violent‑crime counts in 1,000‑ft grid cells via negative‑binomial regression. Results show that specific land uses predict variation in violent‑crime counts and rates, with some nonresidential uses associated with higher counts and others with lower counts, and that land uses also moderate the effect of socioeconomic disadvantage. The study discusses implications for routine‑activity, opportunity, and social‑disorganization/collective‑efficacy crime theories.

Abstract

Although research has shown specific land uses to be related to crime, systematic investigation of land uses and violent crime has been less common. This study systematically examines links between land uses and violent crime and assesses whether such links are conditioned by socioeconomic disadvantage. We employ geocoded Uniform Crime Report (UCR) data from the Indianapolis police department and information on 30 categories of land use and demographic information from the 2000 U.S. Census. We use land use variables to predict violent crime counts in 1,000 × 1,000‐feet grid cells using negative binomial regression models. Results indicate that, net of other variables, specific land uses predict variation in counts for individual violent crimes and aggregate rates. Some nonresidential land uses are associated with higher violent crime counts, whereas others are associated with lower counts. Specific land uses also condition the effects of socioeconomic disadvantage on violent crime. The implications for routine activity/opportunity and social disorganization/collective efficacy theories of crime are discussed.

References

53