This section draws together findings from research on the effectiveness of different
approaches that have been effective in reducing crime generally, rather than arson
specifically. You will find reference to approaches such CCTV and Secure by design
that are recommended in this toolkit as potential tactics for reducing arson. However,
favourable findings do not mean that an approach will ‘work’ in every situation.
Using the option appraisal tool will help partners to assess whether the approach
meets their needs.
|
Approach
|
Reasoning / mechanism
|
Summary of research findings
|
|
Increase CCTV coverage
|
Cameras can:
|
Can be effective where it is clear what impact the scheme is meant to have, and
where the right conditions are in place for the cameras to have the intended effect.
Works best as part of an integrated and evolving package of measures.
(Tilley, 1993)
|
|
Secure by design
|
Making it harder and more risky to commit can reduce crime.
|
Target premises are less vulnerable in well lit open areas.
|
|
Improved lighting
|
Better lighting will deter anti-social behaviour and make detection more likely.
|
Small scale studies suggest that better lighting may reduce crime and incivilities
in localised areas, at least in the short term.
An evaluation of area-wide lighting improvements found these were popular and reassuring
for the public but did not reduce crime to any great extent.
(Atkins et al, 1991)
A recent study ‘A review of Street Lighting Evaluations: Crime Reduction Effects’
(Pease, 1999) argues that ‘precisely targeted increases in street lighting generally
have crime reduction effects’.
|
|
Targeted policing of hotspots
|
The more precisely patrol presence is concentrated at the ‘hotspots’ the less crime/disorder/anti-social
behaviour there will be at those places and times.
|
US evidence is that this is an effective strategy for dealing with local problems.
(Goldblatt & Lewis, 1998)
|
|
Targeting known offenders
|
Disrupting offenders’ methods/routines can reduce crimes.
The higher the police arrest rate for high risk offenders the lower the rates of
crime/disorder/anti-social behaviour
|
Targeting repeat offenders appears to be worthwhile.
(Goldblatt & Lewis, 1998)
|
| |
