Encyclopedia of Criminology and Criminal Justice

2014 Edition
| Editors: Gerben Bruinsma, David Weisburd

Measuring Crime Specializations and Concentrations

Reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-5690-2_298


Research on crime at places is a rapidly growing literature. Though Eck and Weisburd (1995) coined the term “crime at places,” the starting point of this literature was Sherman et al. (1989) in a microspatial analysis of predatory crime in Minneapolis. This research area finds that calls for police service are highly concentrated in very few places: 50 % of calls for police service are generated from 5 % of street segments (or less), particularly when one considers detailed crime classifications (Sherman et al. 1989; Andresen and Malleson 2011). Moreover, research has shown that spatial crime patterns at microspatial units of analysis vary significantly across crime classifications (Andresen and Malleson 2011). Because of this consistency, Weisburd et al. (2012) put forth the Law of Crime Concentrations.

One implication from this research is that opportunity surfaces for different crimes, though they may overlap, are different – the opportunity surface for a crime is the...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Recommended Reading and References

  1. Andresen MA (2006) Crime measures and the spatial analysis of criminal activity. Br J Criminol 46:258–285Google Scholar
  2. Andresen MA (2007) Location quotients, ambient populations, and the spatial analysis of crime in Vancouver, Canada. Environ Plann A 39:2423–2444Google Scholar
  3. Andresen MA (2009) Crime specialization across the Canadian provinces. Can J Criminol Crim Justice 51:31–53Google Scholar
  4. Andresen MA, Malleson N (2011) Testing the stability of crime patterns: implications for theory and policy. J Res Crime Delinq 48:58–82Google Scholar
  5. Balassa B (1965) Trade liberalisation and “revealed” comparative advantage. Manchester Sch Econ Soc Stud 33:99–123Google Scholar
  6. Block S, Clarke RV, Maxfield MG, Petrossian G (2012) Estimating the number of U.S. vehicles stolen for export using crime location quotients. In: Andresen MA, Kinney JB (eds) Patterns, prevention, and geometry of crime. Routledge, New York, pp 54–68Google Scholar
  7. Brantingham PL, Brantingham PJ (1981) Notes of the geometry of crime. In: Brantingham PJ, Brantingham PL (eds) Environmental criminology. Waveland Press, Prospect Heights, pp 27–54Google Scholar
  8. Brantingham PL, Brantingham PJ (1993) Location quotients and crime hot spots in the city. In: Block CR, Dabdoub M (eds) Workshop on crime analysis through computer mapping, proceedings. Criminal Justice Information Authority, Chicago. pp 175–197Google Scholar
  9. Brantingham PL, Brantingham PJ (1995) Location quotients and crime hot spots in the city. In: Block CR, Dabdoub M, Fregly S (eds) Crime analysis through computer mapping. Police Executive Research Forum, Washington, DC, pp 129–149Google Scholar
  10. Brantingham PL, Brantingham PJ (1998) Mapping crime for analytic purposes: location quotients, counts and rates. In: Weisburd D, McEwen T (eds) Crime mapping and crime prevention. Criminal Justice Press, Monsey, pp 263–288Google Scholar
  11. Bulwer HL (1836) France, social, literary, political, volume I, book I: crime. Richard Bentley, LondonGoogle Scholar
  12. Clarke RVG, Cornish DB (1985) Modeling offenders’ decisions: a framework for research and policy. Crime Justice Annu Rev Res 6:147–185Google Scholar
  13. Cohen LE, Felson M (1979) Social change and crime rate trends: a routine activity approach. Am Sociol Rev 44:588–608Google Scholar
  14. De Benedictis L, Gallegati M, Tamberi M (2009) Overall trade specialization and economic development: countries diversify. Rev World Econ 145:37–55Google Scholar
  15. Eck JE, Weisburd D (eds) (1995) Crime prevention studies, volume 4, crime and place. Criminal Justice Press, MonseyGoogle Scholar
  16. Frank LD, Andresen MA, Schmid TL (2004) Obesity relationships with community design, physical activity, and time spent in cars. Am J Prev Med 27:87–96Google Scholar
  17. Herfindahl OC (1950) Concentration in the U.S. steel industry. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Columbia UniversityGoogle Scholar
  18. Hirschman AO (1945) National power and the structure of foreign trade. University of California Press, BerkeleyGoogle Scholar
  19. Johnson SD, Summers L, Pease K (2009) Offender as forager? A direct test of the boost account of victimisation. J Quant Criminol 25:181–200Google Scholar
  20. Kinney JB, Brantingham PL, Wuschke K, Kirk MG, Brantingham PJ (2008) Crime attractors, generators and detractors: land use and urban crime opportunities. Built Environ 34:62–74Google Scholar
  21. McCord ES, Ratcliffe JH (2007) A micro-spatial analysis of the demographic and criminogenic environment of drug markets in Philadelphia. Aust N Z J Criminol 40:43–63Google Scholar
  22. Miller MM, Gibson LJ, Wright NG (1991) Location quotient: a basic tool for economic development studies. Econ Dev Rev 9:65–68Google Scholar
  23. Quetelet LAJ (1842) A treatise on man and the development of his faculties. W and R. Chambers, EdinburghGoogle Scholar
  24. Ratcliffe JH (2001) On the accuracy of TIGER type geocoded address data in relation to cadastral and census areal units. Int J Geogr Inf Sci 15:473–485Google Scholar
  25. Ratcliffe JH (2004) Geocoding crime and a first estimate of a minimum acceptable hit rate. Int J Geogr Inf Sci 18:61–72Google Scholar
  26. Ratcliffe JH, Rengert GF (2008) Near repeat patterns in Philadelphia shootings. Secur J 21:58–76Google Scholar
  27. Rengert GF (1996) The geography of illegal drugs. Westview Press, BoulderGoogle Scholar
  28. Sherman LW, Gartin PR, Buerger ME (1989) Hot spots of predatory crime: routine activities and the criminology of place. Criminology 27:27–56Google Scholar
  29. Theil H (1967) Economics and information theory. Rand McNally, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  30. Weisburd D, Groff ER, Yang S (2012) The criminology of place: street segments and our understanding of the crime problem. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of CriminologyInstitute for Canadian Urban Research Studies, Simon Fraser UniversityBurnabyCanada