Effect of emergency winter homeless shelters on property crime

Article

Abstract

Objective

To evaluate the effect of emergency winter homeless shelters on property crimes in the nearby communities.

Methods

Every winter between 2009 and 2016, the City of Vancouver, Canada opened shelters to protect the homeless from harsh winter conditions. The city opened 19 shelters, but only five to nine of them were open in any one winter. Using the variation in timing and placement of the shelters, we contrast crime rates in the surrounding areas when the shelters are open and closed.

Results

The presence of a shelter appears to cause property crime to increase by 56% within 100 m of that shelter, with thefts from vehicles, other thefts, and vandalism driving the increase. However, when a homeless shelter opened, rates of breaking and entering commercial establishments were 34% lower within 100 m of that shelter. The observed effects are concentrated close to shelters, within 400 m, and dissipate beyond 400 m. Consistent with a causal effect, we find a decreasing effect of shelters with increasing distance from the shelter.

Conclusions

While homeless shelters are a critical social service, in Vancouver, they appear to impact property crime in the surrounding community. Shelters may warrant greater security to control property crime, but the data suggest that any increase in security need not extend beyond 400 m, about two to three blocks, from the shelters.

Keywords

Community design Homeless shelters Property crime Vancouver 

References

  1. Anderson, J. F. (2014). Criminological theories: Understanding crime in America. Burlington, MA: Jones & Bartlett.Google Scholar
  2. Barrow, S. M., Herman, D. B., Cordova, P., & Struening, E. L. (1999). Mortality among homeless shelter residents in New York City. American Journal of Public Health, 89(4), 529–534.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Berk, R., & MacDonald, J. (2010). Policing the homeless: An evaluation of efforts to reduce homeless-related crime. Criminology & Public Policy, 9(4), 813–840.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9133.2010.00673.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. City of Vancouver, Canada. (2017). Open Data Catalogue: Crime. Retrieved February 17, 2017, from Open Data Catalogue: City of Vancouver. http://data.vancouver.ca/datacatalogue/crime-data.htm.
  5. Cohen, L. E., & Felson, M. (1979). Social change and crime rate trends: A routine activity approach. American Sociological Review, 44(4), 588–608.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Fisher, R. A. (1935). The logic of inductive inference. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series A Statistics in Society, 98, 39–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Fitzpatrick, K. M., La Gory, M. E., & Ritchey, F. J. (1993). Criminal victimization among the homeless. Justice Quarterly, 10(3), 353–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Gauthier, C. (2017). Opinion: Homeless shelter residents are ‘neighbours, not strangers’. Vancouver Sun. Retrieved November 15, 2017. http://vancouversun.com/opinion/op-ed/opinion-homeless-shelter-residents-are-neighbours-not-strangers.
  9. Hill, A. B. (1965). The environment and disease: Association or causation? Proceedings of the Royal Society of Medicine, 58(5), 295–300.Google Scholar
  10. Hwang, S. W. (2000). Mortality among men using homeless shelters in Toronto, Ontario. Journal of the American Medical Association, 283(16), 2152–2157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Imbens, G. W., & Rubin, D. B. (2015). Causal inference for statistics, social, and biomedical sciences. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kelling, G. L., & Wilson, J. Q. (1982). Broken windows: The police and neighborhood safety. Atlantic Monthly, 29(3), 29–38.Google Scholar
  13. Klein, J. D., Hall Woods, A., Wilson, K. M., Prospero, M., Greene, J., & Ringwalt, C. (2000). Homeless and runaway youths’ access to health care. Journal of Adolescent Health, 27(5), 331–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kushel, M. B., Evans, J. L., Perry, S., Robertson, M. J., & Moss, A. R. (2003). No door to lock: Victimization among homeless and marginally housed persons. Archives of Internal Medicine, 163(20), 2492–2499.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. MacDonald, J. (2015). Community design and crime: The impact of housing and the built environment. Crime and Justice, 44, 333–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Montgomery, A. E., Szymkowiak, D., Marcus, J., Howard, P., & Culhane, D. P. (2016). Homelessness, unsheltered status, and risk factors for mortality: Findings from the 100,000 homes campaign. Public Health Reports, 131(6), 765–772.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Nyamathi, A. M., Leake, B., & Gelberg, L. (2000). Sheltered versus nonsheltered homeless women: Differences in health, behavior, victimization, and utilization of care. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 15(8), 565–572.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Patefield, W. M. (1981). Algorithm AS 159: An efficient method of generating random r × c tables with given row and column totals. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series C Applied Statistics, 30, 91–97.Google Scholar
  19. Redburn, F. S., & Buss, T. F. (1986). Responding to America’s homeless: Public policy alternatives. New York, NY: Praeger.Google Scholar
  20. Regional Steering Committee on Homelessness. (2012). One step forward... Results of the 2011 Metro Vancouver Homeless Count. Retrieved October 20, 2017. http://stophomelessness.ca/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/2011HomelessCountFinalReport28Feb2012-FinalVersion-Tuesday.pdf.
  21. Snow, D. A., Baker, S. G., & Anderson, L. (1989). Criminality and homeless men: An empirical assessment. Social Problems, 36(5), 532–549.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Thomson, M. (2016). Vancouver Homeless Count 2016. Vancouver: M. Thomson Consulting. Retrieved April 11, 2017. http://vancouver.ca/files/cov/homeless-count-2016-report.pdf
  23. Wang, R., & DeGruttola, V. (2016). The use of permutation tests for the analysis of parallel and stepped-wedge cluster randomized trials. Harvard University Biostatistics Working Paper Series. Working Paper 205. Retrieved March 15, 2017. http://biostats.bepress.com/harvardbiostat/paper205.
  24. Wooldridge, J. M. (2010). Econometric analysis of cross section and panel data. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V., part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.RAND CorporationArlingtonUSA
  2. 2.Department of CriminologyUniversity of PennsylvaniaPhiladelphiaUSA
  3. 3.Department of StatisticsUniversity of PennsylvaniaPhiladelphiaUSA

Personalised recommendations