International Journal of Business and Economics Research

2014; 3(6-1): 22-30

Published online December 09, 2014 (http://www.sciencepublishinggroup.com/j/ijber)
doi: 10.11648/j.ijber.s.2014030601.14
ISSN: 2328-7543 (Print); ISSN: 2328-756X (Online)

A review of research on crime displacement theory

Ching Eng Leong
Faculty of Social Sciences, University Sains Malaysia, Penang, Malaysia

Email address:
ELChing.EngLeong@honeywell.com

To cite this article:

Ching Eng Leong. A Review of Research on Crime Displacement Theory. International Journal of Business and Economics Research.
Special Issue: Supply Chain Management: Its Theory and Applications. Vol. 3, No. 6-1, 2014, pp. 22-30.
doi: 10.11648/j.ijber.s.2014030601.14

Abstract: Reppetto (1976) published crime displacement theory in Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency and put
forward his theoretical underpinnings for the future analysis of crime displacement phenomenon and outlined five types of
crime displacement such as: 1. Temporal - Committing the intended crime at a different time; 2. Tactical - Committing the
intended crime in a different way; 3. Target - Committing the intended crime type on a different target; 4. Spatial - Committing
the intended crime type to the same target in a different place; 5. Functional - Committing a different type of crime. Research
on crime displacement began to be carried out in a more systematic manner during the 1990s. There was a significant step
forward when research in 1990 and 1993 specifically studied displacement and found it to be much less of problem than had
generally been supposed. Crime displacement occurred where it was most likely to be similar targets or to similar and adjacent
areas. Although the findings were greatly positive, there was and not surprisingly, variation between different crimes. Research
has consistently found that crime displacement is the exception rather than the rule and that diffusion of benefits is just as
likely and sometimes more likely to occur. Research also shows that crime displacement is unlikely in the aftermath of broader
community development programs. In cases where some displacement occurs it tends to be less than the gains achieved by the
response and found that crime displacement and diffusion are equally likely to occur. The theory of crime displacement is
related to rational choice theory and there are three assumptions regarding the potential perpetrator and the target. The theory
of crime displacement does not explain the reason of perpetrators committing a certain crime or why some crimes are more
attractive to them than others. Crime displacement can occur in different ways or methods. An often-stated opinion about crime
displacement is the theory, its practical usages, that it can induce a sense of disbelief towards crime prevention initiatives.
Keywords: Crime Displacement, Types of Crime Displacement, Rational Choice Theory, Perpetrators, Criminal Patterns

interaction of the 3 variables that was typical crime element

1. Introduction found in America as illustrated in Figure1. The availability of
suitable target for the predator; the absence of guardian and
Crime can be distinguished into 3 elements namely the presence of motivated offenders most likely causing the
motivated perpetrator, transported goods and lack of guardian crime to take place (Teresa, 1999).
(Sherman, Gartin & Buerger, 1989). These elements are The decision to commit crime is structured by analysis of
known to be present in all types of crime. The relationship the type of crime, the time and place of crime, and the target
among the 3 elements is very complex and changes in one of of crime. Criminal tends to move away from committing the
the element may prevent the crime from happening. There crime if they perceived it as difficult or potentially dangerous
are a few different views or explanation related to the driving for them to commit (Garry & Don, 2001). Evidence showed
force and the motivation that causes the crime to occur. that jurisdiction with relatively low incarceration rates also
Crime can be linked to social process, human behavior and experienced the highest crime rate (Rengert, 1989). Crime
other traits or factors where the pattern of crime can be of can be avoided if potential targets are guarded securely,
temporary and ecological factors (Parker, 1995). The pattern means or opportunities to commit are controlled and potential
of crime was expressed in a series of papers published by targets are monitored closely. This will convince potential
Felson and Clark (1998). The volume and distribution of criminals to abstain from committing the crime, delay their
predatory crime against a person or crime which an offender action or even avoid committing the crime.
attempted to steal an object are closely related to the
 International Journal of Business and Economics Research 2014; 2014; 3(6-1): 22-30 23

specific crimes;
b Design the place which makes crime difficult to occur
or;
c Make the crime itself more difficult and risky for the
offenders.

3. Understanding and Discussion on

Crime Displacement Theory
Figure 1. Routine Activities Theory: The Interaction of Three Factors The theory of crime displacement is related to rational
choice theory and there are three assumptions regarding the
Source: Teresa, LaGrange (1999). The Impact of Neighborhoods, Schools, potential perpetrator and the target (Lab, 2000). Lab argued
and Malls on the Spatial Distribution of Property Damage, Journal of
that crime displacement assumes that crime is inelastic; the
Research in Crime and Delinquency, 36, 393 – 422.
perpetrator has the flexibility relative to time, place, method
and type of crime; and the existence of unlimited alternatives
2. The Background of Crime targets available. Professional criminal are more inelastic
Displacement Theory while opportunist criminal are more elastic (Hesseling, 1994).
In reality, perpetrators are normally limited in their mobility,
Reppetto (1976) published crime displacement theory in adaptability and flexibility, relative to a particular crime,
Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency and put place, time, method and the number of targets is limited in
forward his theoretical underpinnings for the future analysis one way or another (Hesseling, 1994). The theory of crime
of crime displacement phenomenon and outlined five types displacement does not explain the reason of perpetrators
of crime displacement such as: committing a certain crime or why some crimes are more
i Temporal - Committing the intended crime at a different attractive to them than others. Furthermore, it does not
time explain the perpetrators’ perceptions and reactions to changes
ii Tactical - Committing the intended crime in a different in opportunities (Hesseling, 1994). The key element in all
way crime is the role that opportunity plays, for example, if there
iii Target - Committing the intended crime type on a is no opportunity there is no crime (Felson & Clarke, 1998).
different target Crime displacement can occur in different ways or methods.
iv Spatial - Committing the intended crime type to the An often-stated opinion about crime displacement is the
same target in a different place theory, its practical usages, that it can induce a sense of
v Functional - Committing a different type of crime disbelief towards crime prevention initiatives (Town, 2001).
Ronald V. Clarke is one of the earliest criminology One problem with the crime displacement theory is that it is
professor analyzing crime theory by defining crime is being accepted because it instinctively appeals to people’s common
displaced known as crime displacement theory. He is the sense. Town (2001) illuminates this problem as:
Dean as well as a Professor at the School of Criminal Justice Criminals prevented or stopped them in one location
at Rutgers University in New Jersey since 1987. Clarke then they just find another.
(1998) argued that crimes are displaced by removing Common sense is a valuable commodity, but it has its
opportunity for crime or by changing the situation of the limitations and changes with time.
crime and when this occurs it does not actually prevent crime Total displacement and partial displacement are different
but merely moves or shift the crime to another location. and the usage of common sense is attracted to the idea of
There are five main ways in which Clarke (1998) suggested total displacement. The theory of crime displacement states
that crime is being moved around: that rational thinking perpetrators with crime mobility will
i Geographical displacement - crime can be moved from alter their criminal behavior in response to crime prevention
one location to another which is identified efforts (Lab, 2000). The objective is to reduce crime
ii Temporal displacement - crime can be moved from one opportunities, which will lead to a change in all potential
time to another theft situations; therefore, crime displacement is a valid
iii Target displacement - crime can be directed away from theory.
one target to another Crime displacement is one probable explanation the
iv Tactical displacement - one method of committing criminal pattern changes in a certain system. A practical and
crime can be substituted for another common belief about crime displacement is that if
v Crime type displacement - one kind of crime can be perpetrators have the ability, mobility and flexibility to
substituted for another exploit the weakest link in the chain, they will do so to
Clark (1998) suggested that crime can be reduced by the commit the crime (Ekwall & Lumsden, 2007). It is the
following: perpetrators’ ability to organize a successful theft, and their
a Opportunity - reducing measures by analyzing at the relationship relative to the actors, within the network that are
24 Ching Eng Leong: A Review of Research on Crime Displacement Theory

the fundamental variables to categorize perpetrators. The displaced burglaries from the homes of participants to those
crime preventive measures are of great importance to force a of non-participants (Gabor, 1990). Evidence has begun to
change in the perpetrators’ decision process. A simplification accumulate of the successful application of situational
of the benefit with a crime can be illustrated with the target measures with few displacement costs in accordance with the
that the perpetrators want. development of crime displacement analyses. Crime
Crime displacement theory is related to situational crime displacement has been studied in specific geographical areas
prevention based on the theoretical premise of rational choice (example, shopping centers, parking lots, housing estates and
(Cornish & Clarke, 1986). An individual or criminal makes a neighborhoods). Crime prevention efforts do not aim to alter
decision as to whether or not to commit an offence based on the root causes of crime and the offenders who are deflected
a range of inputs. These include the effort involved, the simply shift to other targets or places, severely limiting the
potential payoff, the degrees’ of peer support for the action, net reduction in crime rate. Many authors viewed crime
the risk of apprehension and punishment, and individual displacement as the result of the implementation of effective
needs. The theory does not state that a perpetrator will measures against crime (Gabor, 1990; Ekwall, 2009; Cook &
commit a crime for every opportunity they encounter. Rather, Mac Donald, 2010; Klaus, 2011). Thus, Gabor (1990)
the potential perpetrator makes a calculated decision about defined crime displacement as a change in offender behavior,
the opportunity to commit a crime (Lab, 2000). In short, a along with illegitimate means, which is designed to get away
perpetrator acts according to the rational choice theory, with either specific preventive measures or more general
seeking to maximize its utility with regards to time and conditions unfavorable to the offender's usual mode of
resources available (Bodman & Maultby, 1997). Situational operating. For example, a burglar may move to a different
crime prevention addresses the symptoms but not the cause neighborhood, employ new tactics, and offend at a different
of the crime. This can lead to an excessive trust in technology time of day. Only a few authors acknowledged and suggested
(Crawford, 1998). Both of these criticisms are valid for the that given the extent to which different forms of displacement
usage of situational crime prevention to hinder theft. operate at the same time, it may be impossible to confirm
Basically, this is achieved by applying the following four empirically the existence or magnitude of displacement (Barr
prevention principles of; i) increased perceived efforts; ii) & Pease, 1992; Ekblom, 1989). Studies of crime
increased perceived risks; iii) reducing anticipated rewards displacement tend to assume rational decision making from
and; iv) inducing guilt or shame (Clarke, 1992; Clarke & the offenders. Offenders are most likely to displace when
Homel, 1997). other crime targets are familiar to them (Cornish & Clarke,
Deeper understanding is required on the motives and 1986; Eck, 1993).
modus operandi of target groups of offenders which provides Crime displacement has been studied empirically in two
a way of dealing with the limitations of the statistical search different ways that is by conducting ethnographic studies of
for crime displacement (Barr & Pease, 1990). It may not offenders' motives and offenders’ decision-making processes
always be possible to interview offenders, but in some cases whether to commit the crime or likewise; and by evaluating
insights on motivation and methods can be provided by the impact of programs to reduce crime. Most studies of
closer analysis of patterns of offenders. In this case, Clarke crime displacement take the latter approach, evaluating the
(1992) has shown significant variances among automobiles amount of displacement resulting from a crime prevention
in their risks for different forms of theft, which reflect the measure by examining crime rates in adjacent areas or for
motives of offenders. Cornish and Clarke (1987) found that other offenses. If researchers observed an increase in crime
new cars are most at risk of being striped in the United States rates, they typically assume that displacement has occurred
during the mid-1980s where mostly European models with as the result of the crime prevention measures effectively
good audio equipment; joyriding cars were American made implemented. There are possibilities that other factors
muscle car and those higher-prices luxury vehicles are for re- independent to the prevention measures such as changes in
sale and the target of vehicles are not difficult to understand the offender population, the opportunity structure, or the
in terms of the motives of offenders. Under the dispositional overall trend of crime rates at the area. Only a few authors
assumptions of traditional criminological theory, situational have stressed these other factors in their explanations of the
variables merely determine the time and place of offending. displacement effects of crime prevention projects (Hakim &
As such, offender may target for smaller criminal rewards of Rengert 1981; Barron, 1991). If these other factors are
crime if the alternatives are not feasible. Some offenders are disregard by the researchers, the amount of crime being
so driven by needs or desires that they have to maintain a displaced may be overestimated. Crime displacement is
certain level of offending regardless of the cost. For many, highly complex and the amount of displacement may depend
the elimination of easy opportunities for crime may actually both upon whether offenders resort to any combination of
encourage them to explore other criminal alternatives. On the alternative targets, times, places, methods, and offenses, and
other hand, since crime is the product of purposive and whether these alternatives are familiar to the offender. In
sometimes inventive minds, displacement to other categories addition, researchers may mistakenly assume that a crime
of offense or other areas are expected. prevention effort may cause an increase in crime rates, when
There are many examples of displacement reported. A this causal relationship may in fact be spurious. Thus, crime
property marking program in Ottawa, Canada may have displacement is difficult to predict and often impossible to
 International Journal of Business and Economics Research 2014; 2014; 3(6-1): 22-30 25

measure but it is safe to assume that most preventive have commented upon this ‘NIMBY’ (not in my backyard)
measures may potentially result in crime displacement. approach to crime prevention, which is primarily concerned
It is very difficult to change peoples’ habit or routine in with preventing crime against a specific target; regardless of
crime prevention. Cornish and Clarke (2003) developed its effects elsewhere. A change in the patterns of crime will
situational crime prevention techniques which can be always be considered beneficial for most cases, provided that
grouped into five categories such as: the nature of change places the threat of victimization further
i Increasing the efforts, from their own lives. The avoidance of crime can also be
ii Increasing the risk, much more widespread, benefiting almost everyone, for at
iii Reducing the rewards, least a short time after the introduction of a crime control
iv Reducing the provocations, and measure.
v Removing the excuses
Increasing the efforts techniques can be carried out by
hardening the targets such as implementation of access 5. The Weakness of Crime Displacement
control points, screening of exits, and other tools and weapon Theory
used to decrease the crime. Reduction of risk by extending
the guardianship such as neighborhood watch, assisting There may be some weaknesses in crime displacement
natural surveillance, and strengthening formal surveillance theory. The first holds that displacement is essentially
can make crime more difficult to happen. When the unfavorable, since the prevention strategies that cause it
opportunity for burglary is blocked, burglar moves to another gives no overall decrease in crime (Hakim & Rengert, 1981).
neighborhood, but either the frequency of burglary is less The second element concerns the belief that displacement is
than before or the new neighborhood is less vulnerable than inevitable. The negative aspects of displacement, combined
before (Clarke & Weisburd, 1994). Crime prevention efforts with its inevitability, are used to show that social or
are supported by the argument that even the displacement is corrective prevention would be more effective (albeit more
mild; it spreads the burden of crime more equitable across the costly and difficult) alternatives to the use of situational
community or replaces more serious with less (Barr & Pease, methods (Reppetto, 1976). An intensive effort has been made
1990). Eck (1993) summarized thirty three crime prevention to show that displacement is not the inescapable result of any
interventions and displacement in those studies. In three of crime control program (Cornish & Clarke, 1986; Miethe,
these studies evidence of much displacement was found; in 1991). A primary reason for weakness in the available
twelve of them there were some displacement; and in research is that displacement, like crime itself, is very
eighteen of them there was no displacement (Eck, 1993). difficult to measure. Even if no displacement is found in a
Crime displacement was not found in 22 studies after given study or research, it could have occurred in a direction
reviewing 55 studies and it was never 100 percent in the that was not examined (Cornish & Clarke, 1986), or the
remaining studies (Gabor, 1990; Eck, 1993; Hesseling, 1994). displaced crime could easily be concealed within the overall
Dingle (2005) summarizes the crime displacement that if crime rate (Mayhew, 1988).
given a choice, criminals will choose the easiest route, and
will choose to commit crimes that provide the least 6. Research Conducted on Crime
probability of getting caught.
Displacement
4. Strength of Crime Displacement Research on crime displacement began to be carried out in
a more systematic manner during the 1990s. There was a
Theory significant step forward when research in Canada (Gabor,
The key to such an argument is that crime prevention can 1990) and the United States (Eck, 1993) specifically studied
be quite successful, even when displacement is both displacement and found it to be much less of problem than
inevitable and complete. While such a statement seems had generally been supposed. As suggest by Eck (1993),
contrary to reason (given that no overall reduction in crime is displacement occurred where it was most likely to be to
produced), there are still beneficial; if sometimes temporary similar targets or to similar and adjacent areas. Although the
and effects to be gained from the prevention of crime. In fact, findings were greatly positive, there was, not surprisingly,
it is important to recognize that only effective means of crime variation between different crimes. Drug dealing, for
prevention can be capable of producing displacement in the example, had been found to be susceptible to displacement
first place (Gabor, 1981, 1990; Barr & Pease, 1990). But the (Rengert, 1990; Sherman, 1990; Caulkins, 1992; Eck 1993),
advantages of displacement go well beyond this simple, which echoed the views of Barr and Pease (1990) on
almost tautological, analogy. They range from the selfish to perpetrator displacement.
the selfless and extend benefits to the individual, the In 1994, the Ministry of Justice in Holland has tasked
community and society as a whole. At its most basic level, Professor Rene B.P. Hesseling to conduct research
displacement is of extreme value to those who have avoided systematically by analyzing all the available literatures on
victimization. Both Sherman (1990), Barr and Pease (1990) crime prevention measures specifically looked for evidence
26 Ching Eng Leong: A Review of Research on Crime Displacement Theory

of crime displacement. This huge task took fourteen months diffusion effects, found that when spatial displacement did
and involved reviewing fifty-five published articles related to occur, it tended to be less than the response effect. In short,
crime displacement. The summary stated that crime the responses were still beneficial on average (Guerette, Rob
displacement is a possible, but not inevitable consequence of & Kate, 2009).
crime prevention (Hesseling, 1994). Further, if crime An evaluation of the New Deal for Communities (NDC)
displacement does occur, then it will be limited in size and program in the United Kingdom discovered that, among 383
scope. This conclusion is supported by other review studies buffer zones, spatial diffusion of benefits was observed in 23
on this topic (Clarke, 1999). It is believed that criminologists percent of the zones, while spatial crime displacement was
have generally shown little interest in crime displacement observed in only 2 percent of the zones. The remaining 75
prevention. This neglect stems from what the regards as two percent showed no signs of displacement or diffusion. Also,
mistakes of modern criminology. The first problem of across the buffer zones offense diffusion was more common
explaining crime has been confused with the problem of than offense displacement (McLennan & Whitworth, 2008).
explaining the criminal and the second related mistake is to A review of crime hot spots policing of the five studies that
confuse the problem of controlling crime with that of dealing examined displacement and diffusion effects found that none
with the criminal (Moss &Pease, 1999). of the review reported any substantial immediate spatial
In 1999, evaluations were carried out by the Building displacement of crime into areas surrounding the targeted
Research Establishment (BRE) United Kingdom (Pascoe, locations while four studies found possible diffusion effects
1999), Gwent Police in South Wales (Brown, 1999) and by (Braga, 2007). Research conducted to identify the presence
the Applied Criminology Group, University of Huddersfield of displacement in a problem-oriented policing project was
(Armitage, 1999). The results of all three studies were very conducted in Lowell, Massachusetts and found no significant
positive and the issue of displacement was discussed to crime displacement to the areas immediately surrounding the
varying degrees. Although not specifically focused on targeted places (Braga & Bond, 2008). It should be noted,
displacement, the BRE report, commenting on a large however, that there may be times when crime displacement is
burglary reduction in one scheme, stated that it has not simply undetectable. Offenders may move to other
displaced the crime to the neighbors and the report found no jurisdictions or switch to other crimes from which no data
evidence of displacement from prevented burglary into other can be obtained. Due of this, the research findings reported
crime (Brown, 1999). As regards to displacement, the above may undercount the true extent of crime displacement
evidence from the broad based analysis suggested that there effects. Offender’s familiarity with locations also provides
is a diffusion of benefits, as opposed to displacement of lower risks to them because they can identify entry and exit
crime. This is particularly evident on some estates (Armitage, points more readily which allow them to approach and leave
1999). crime scenes in shorter time. Offenders’ spatial familiarity is
Crime displacement inevitably occurs with the primarily determined by the known places and the
implementation of policing efforts are largely based on surrounding area that they frequent as part of their normal
unfounded suppositions rather than empirical facts as living routines. This provides minimal effort for offenders in
discussed by (Eck, 1993; Hesseling, 1994; Hill & Pease, the meantime allowing them to commit crimes easily in their
2001). Research also shows that crime displacement is zone. For target and tactical crime displacement, familiarity
unlikely in the aftermath of broader community development means offenders are more likely to select similar target and
programs (Roman, Cahill, Coggeshall, Lagerson, & Courtney, use the same tactics they have used in former crimes. The
2005; McLennan & Whitworth, 2008) and more focused offender will not engage on targets they are not familiar.
policing initiatives that centered on hot spots crime area Most offenders acquired skill sets from peer groups or other
(Braga, 1999; Weisburd, 2006; Braga, 2007). An evaluation delinquent associations as well as through their direct and
of the Weed and Seed program in Miami, Florida, found that indirect experiences of committing crime (Cornish, 1994).
spatial diffusion of benefits occurred more commonly than The use of existing skill sets is much less likely in the
spatial displacement (Roman, 2005). absence of other available crime targets. Highly motivated
Crime displacement inevitably occurs in the aftermath of offenders may expend the effort to acquire new skill sets, but
problem-led policing efforts is largely based on unsupported the more common opportunistic offender is less likely to do
suppositions rather than empirical facts. Research has so. The presence of crime opportunities also determines when
consistently found that crime displacement is the exception and where crime displacement may occur as stipulated in
rather than the rule and that diffusion of benefits is just as Figure 2. Crime displacement is more likely to happen where
likely and sometimes more likely to occur (Eck, 1993; there are suitable crime targets. This is contingent upon the
Hesseling, 1994; Hill & Pease, 2001). In cases where some offenders’ motivation and familiarity with the crime targets
displacement occurs it tends to be less than the gains and tactics needed to carry out the crime. Responses that
achieved by the response and found that crime displacement occur adjacent to areas that have unprotected crime targets
and diffusion are equally likely to occur (Guerette & Bowers, are more likely to experience some level of crime
2008). An analysis of a subsample of 13 studies, which displacement compared to those that do not.
allowed for the assessment of the prevention project’s overall
outcomes while accounting for spatial displacement and
 International Journal of Business and Economics Research 2014; 2014; 3(6-1): 22-30 27

Crime displacement occurs mainly determined by three

aspects such as offender motivation, offender familiarity, and
crime opportunity. Offender motivation determines which
offenders and types of crimes are likely to be displaced.
Offenders driven by drug addiction are more likely to
displace their crime behavior to crime types and targets that
facilitate their addiction. Opportunistic offenders will
continue to be involved in crime after a response because
their motivation is greater. Likewise, instrumental offenders
(e.g., those motivated by monetary gain) are more likely to
seek out other crime targets and types that provide similar
monetary gain (Guerette et al., 2005).
Different crimes present different costs, efforts, and
Figure 2. Predictors and factors of crime displacement
rewards as there are many instances when displacing crime
behavior is not worthwhile for the offender. Offenders
Source: Cornish, Derek B. (1994). The procedural analysis of offending and displace their criminal behavior only when the risks and
its relevance for situational prevention in Crime Prevention Studies, 3, effort of committing new crimes are worth the reward
Clarke, R.V. & Monsey, (Eds.), New York, Criminal Justice Press. (Cornish & Clarke, 1986). In other words, opportunities to
commit crime are not evenly distributed across time and
7. Factors of Crime Displacement place. Another aspect to consider is that when crime
opportunities are closed down, committing other crimes is
not the only way offenders can meet their needs. Blocking
crime opportunities can make satisfying individual needs
through legitimate activities more appealing. An offender’s
decision as to whether to displace his crime behavior in the
aftermath of a response is shaped by the variety of
circumstances found among other crime types, targets, times,
tactics, and places (Cornish & Clarke, 1987). Crime
displacements often will not occur if offender knowledge is
bounded of knowing the way to commit the crime. This
means the offender may not be well versed with the skill or
tactic to commit that crime.

Figure 3. Familiarity Decay and Crime Displacement

8. Other Theories Related to Crime
Source: Eck, John E. (1993). The Threat of Crime Displacement, Criminal
Justice Abstracts, 25, 527 - 546.
Displacement Theory
Three recent theoretical perspectives: 1) rational choice, 2)
Occurrence of displacement is largely determined by three routine activity theory, 3) crime pattern theory; have
factors; i) offenders motivation, ii) offenders familiarity and; influenced the understanding of the importance of place in
iii) crime opportunity. Likewise, instrumental offenders are crime prevention efforts. A rational choice perspective
more likely to search for other crime targets and types that provides the basic rationale for defining place as essential,
provide similar monetary gain (Guerette, Stenius & McGloin, since it suggests that offenders will select targets and define
2005). Offenders are more likely to relocate their behavior to means to achieve their goals in a manner that can be
crime targets, places, times, and tactics with which they are explained (Cornish & Clarke, 1986). Some claim that this
most familiar. This means if displacement occurs it is most perspective is to some degree un-testable, while others have
likely to be close to the original crime location and involve demonstrated that it is possible to test various forms of
similar targets and tactics. The probability of displacement is rational choice (Hogarth & Reder, 1981). Routine activity
greatest close to the original crime location and decreases as theory seeks to explain the occurrence of crime events as the
the distance from the response area increases as in Figure 3 confluence of several circumstances (Cohen & Felson, 1979;
(Eck, 1993). Offenders are more likely to relocate their Felson, 1994). First, there must be a motivated offender. The
behavior to crime targets, places, times, and tactics with the explanation of the development of motivated offenders is the
one which they are most familiar (Eck, 1993). Offenders are goal of offender theories. Second, there must be a desirable
less likely to offend in unfamiliar locations because it poses target. Third, the target and the offender must be at the same
greater risk and greater effort to familiarize themselves with place at the same time. Finally, three other types of
new locations. Distance from the original crime location controllers: 1) intimate handlers, 2) guardians and; 3) place
increases the probability of unfamiliarity among offenders. managers; must be absent or ineffective. For a crime to occur,
28 Ching Eng Leong: A Review of Research on Crime Displacement Theory

guardian must be absent, ineffective or negligent (Eck, 1994). places are problematic because of their location and
Crime pattern theory is particularly important in relationship to the environment for the crime pattern theorist.
developing an understanding of crime and place because it As for the routine activity theorist, places are problematic
combines rational choice and routine activity theory in aid of due to the absence and presence of the types of people at the
explaining the distribution of crime across places. The location. On the other hand, for a crime displacement theorist,
distribution of offenders, targets, handlers, guardians, and crime will be displaced. Clearly all the explanations can be
managers over time and place will describe crime patterns. valid in different contexts and situations. It is possible that
Changes in society have increased the number of potential crime-specific explanations may show that for some events
targets while separating them from the people who can crime pattern theory is a particularly useful explanation, for
protect them (handlers, guardians, and managers). other events routine activity theory offers greater insights,
Reasonably rational offenders, while engaging in their and for still a third group of events some combination of the
routine activities, will note places without guardians and two theories is needed.
managers and where their handlers are unlikely to show up.
Pattern theory explores the interactions of offenders with
their physical and social environments that influence References
offenders' choices of targets. According to crime pattern
theory, how targets come to the attention of offenders [1] Armitage, Rachel (1999). An evaluation of Secured by Design
Housing Schemes throughout the West Yorkshire Area, The
influences the distribution of crime events over time, space, University of Huddersfield: The applied criminology group
and among targets (Brantingham & Brantingham, 1993). This
occurs because offenders engage in routine activities. Just [2] Barr, R. & Pease, K. (1990). Crime Placement, Displacement
and Deflection in Tonry, M. & Morris, N. (Eds.) Crime and
like other, non-offending individuals, offenders move among
Justice: A Review of Research, 12, Chicago: University of
the spheres of home, school, work, shopping, and recreation. Chicago Press
As they conduct their normal legitimate activities, they
become aware of criminal opportunities. Thus, criminal [3] Barr, R. & Pease, K. (1992). A place for every crime in its
place: An alternative perspective on crime displacement in
opportunities that are not near the areas offenders routinely Evans, D.J., Fyfe, N.R. & Herbert, D.T. (Eds.). Crime,
move through are unlikely to come to their attention. A given Policing and Place. Essays in Environmental Criminology,
offender will be aware of only a subset of the possible targets London, UK: Routledge
available. Criminal opportunities found at places that come to
[4] Bodman, P. & Maultby, C. (1997). Crime, punishment and
the attention of offenders have an increased risk of becoming deterrence in Australia, International Journal of Social
targets (Brantingham & Brantingham, 1993). While a few Economics, 24, 884-901
offenders may aggressively seek out uncharted areas, most
[5] Braga, Anthony (2007). Effects of Hot Spots Policing on
will conduct their searches within the areas they become Crime, A Campbell Collaboration Systematic Review
familiar with through noncriminal activities.
The concept of place is essential to crime pattern theory. [6] Braga, Anthony & Brenda, J. Bond (2008). Policing crime and
disorder hot Spots: A Randomized controlled trial,
Not only are places logically required (an offender must be in
Criminology, 46, 577-607
a place when an offense is committed), their characteristics
influence the likelihood of a crime. Place characteristics [7] Barron, J.M. (1991). Repulsive and attractive displacement paper
highlighted by routine activity theory include the presence presented to the American Society of Criminology, San Francisco
and effectiveness of managers and the presence of capable [8] Brantingham, Patricia L., & Paul J. Brantingham (1993).
guardians. Crime pattern theory links places with desirable Nodes, paths and edges: Considerations on the complexity of
targets and the context within which they are found by crime and the physical environment. Environmental
Psychology, 13, 3-28
focusing on how places come to the attention of potential
offenders. It is worth noting that although crime [9] Brown, Jon (1999). An Evaluation of the Secured by Design
displacement theory, crime pattern theory and routine activity Initiative in Gwent, South Wales, Unpublished Dissertation,
theory are mutually supportive in many aspects, yet giving University of Leicester
different explanations of crime at specific locations. A crime [10] Caulkins, J.P. (1992). Thinking about displacement in drug
pattern theorist would focus on how offenders discover and markets: Why observing change of Venue isn’t enough? in
gain access to the place as for a given set of high-crime Journal of Drug Issues
locations. A routine activity theorist would focus instead on [11] Clarke, Ronald V. (1992). Situational Crime Prevention:
the behaviors of the targets and the possible absence of Successful Case Studies. Albany, NY: Harrow and Heston
controllers whose presence could have prevented the offenses
[12] Clarke, Ronald V. (1998). Situational Crime Prevention:
from taking place—guardians, handlers, and place managers. Successful Case Studies (2nd ed.). Albany, NY: Harrow &
Heston
9. Conclusion [13] Clarke, Ronald V. (1999). Hot products: Understanding,
anticipating and reducing demand for stolen goods, Police
Crime displacement theory looks at the possibility of crime Research Series Paper 112, London: Home Office Research,
being shifted or displaced to other location. In other words, Development and Statistics Directorate
 International Journal of Business and Economics Research 2014; 2014; 3(6-1): 22-30 29

[14] Clarke, Ronald.V. & Homel, R. (1997). A Revised [31] Gabor, Thomas (1981). The crime displacement hypothesis:
Classification of Situational Crime Prevention Techniques in An empirical examination. Crime and delinquency, 26, 390-
Lab, S.P. (Ed.), Crime Prevention at a Crossroads, Cincinnati, 404
OH: Anderson Publishing Co
[32] Gabor, Thomas (1990). Crime displacement and situational
[15] Clarke, Ronald V. & Weisburd, D. (1994). Diffusion of crime prevention: Towards the development of some principles,
control benefits in Crime Prevention Studies, ed. R.V. Clarke, Canadian Journal of Criminology, 32, 41-74
165-183. Monsey, NY: Criminal Justice Press
[33] Gary Kleck & Don Kates (2001). Armed: New Perspectives
[16] Cohen, Lawrence E. & Felson, Marcus (1979). Social change on Guns, Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books
and crime rate trends: A Routine Activity Approach, American
Sociological Review, 44, 588-608 [34] Guerette, Rob, T. & Bowers, K.J. (2009). Assessing the extent
of crime displacement and diffusion of benefits: A review of
[17] Cook, Philip J. & MacDonald, John (2010). Mobilizing situational crime prevention evaluations, Criminology, 47(4),
Private Inputs for Crime Prevention. This paper was prepared 1331-1368
for the NBER Economical Crime Control Conference, held at
UC Berkeley on January 15th and 16th, 2010 [35] Guerette, Rob T., Vanja Stenius & Jean, McGloin (2005).
Understanding offending specialization and versatility: A re-
[18] Cornish, Derek B. (1994). The procedural analysis of application of the rational choice perspective, Journal of
offending and its relevance for situational prevention in Crime Criminal Justice, 33(1), 77-87
Prevention Studies, 3, Clarke, R.V. & Monsey, (Eds.), New
York, Criminal Justice Press [36] Hesseling, B.P. (1994). Displacement: A review of the empirical
literature, Clarke, R. (Ed.), Crime Prevention Studies, 3, 197-
[19] Cornish, Derek B. & Ronald V. Clarke (1986). In: D.B. 230, Monsey, New York: Criminal Justice Press
Cornish and R.V. Clarke (Eds.). The Reasoning Criminal:
Rational Choice Perspectives on Offending. New York: [37] Hill, I. & Pease, K. (2001). The wicked issues: Displacement
Springer-Verlag and sustainability in secure foundations: Key issues in crime
prevention, Crime reduction and community safety, S.
[20] Cornish, Derek B. & Ronald V. Clarke (1987). Understanding Ballantyne, Pease, K. & McLaren, V. (Eds.), London: IPPR
Crime Displacement: An Application of Rational Choice
Theory, Criminology, 25(4), 933-947 [38] Klaus van Lampe (2011). Re-Conceptualizing transnational
organized crime: Offenders as problem solvers, International
[21] Cornish, Derek, B. & Ronald V. Clarke (1990). Crime Journal of Security and Terrorism, 2, 1- 23
specialization in crime displacement and rational choice in
Wegener, H. (Eds.). Criminal Behavior and the Justice System, [39] Lab, S.P. (2000). Crime prevention: Approaches, practices
New York: Springer-Verlag and evaluations (4th ed.). Cincinnati, OH: Anderson,
Publishing, Co
[22] Cornish, Derek, B. & Ronald V. Clarke (2003). Opportunities,
precipitators and criminal decision in M. J. Smith & D. B. [40] Mayhew, P (1988). The British Gas Suicide Story and Its
Cornish (Eds.), Crime Prevention Studies, 16, 41-96, Monsey, Criminological Implications. In: M. Tonry and N. Morris
NY: Criminal Justice Press (Eds.), Crime and Justice: A Review of Research, 10, Chicago,
IL: University of Chicago Press
[23] Crawford, Adam (1998). Crime Prevention and Community
Safety: Politics, policies and practice, London: Longman [41] McLennan, David & Adam, Whitworth (2008). Displacement
of Crime or Diffusion of Benefit: Evidence from the New Deal
[24] Dingle, J. (2005). Displacement Theory, Cargo Security for Communities Programme. Social Disadvantage Research
International, 3(5) Centre, University of Oxford, Communities and Local
Government
[25] Eck, John E. (1993). The threat of crime displacement,
Criminal Justice Abstracts, 25, 527-546 [42] Miethe, T. (1991). Citizen-Based Crime Control Activity and
Victimization Risks: An Examination of Displacement and the
[26] Ekblom, P. (1989). Evaluation: The Management of Free-Rider Effect, Criminology, 29, 419-441
Uncertainty, Paper presented at the British Criminology
Conference [43] Moss, K. & Pease, K. (1999). Crime and Disorder Act 1998:
Section 17, A Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing, Crime Prevention and
[27] Ekwall, Daniel (2009). The displacement effect in cargo theft, Community Safety: An International Journal, 1-19, Leicester:
International Journal of Physical, Distribution & Logistics Perpetuity Press
Management, 39(1), 47-62
[44] Parker, R. & Nash (1995). Bringing Booze’ back in the
[28] Ekwall, Daniel & Lumsden, K. (2007). Differences in relationship between alcohol and homicide, Journal of
stakeholder opinion regarding antagonistic gateways within Research in Crime and Delinquency, 32, 3-38
the transport network, Proceedings of Nofoma, Reykjavik,
Iceland [45] Pascoe, Tim (1999). Evaluation of Secured by Design in
Public Sector Housing, Building Research Establishment
[29] Felson, Marcus (1994). A Crime Prevention Extension Service,
Crime Prevention Studies, 3 [46] Rengert, George F. (1989). Spatial justice and criminal
victimization, Justice Quarterly, 6, 543-564
[30] Felson, Marcus & Clarke, Ronald V. (1998). Opportunity
makes the thief: Practical theory for crime prevention, Police [47] Rengert, George F. (1990). Drug purchasing as a routine
Research Series Paper 98; London: Home Office Research, activity of drug dependent property Criminal and the spatial
Development and Statistics Directorate concentration of crime, Paper presented at the American
Society of Criminology Annual Conference, USA
30 Ching Eng Leong: A Review of Research on Crime Displacement Theory

[48] Reppetto, Thomas A. (1974). Residential Crime, Cambridge, Buerger (1989). Hot Spots of Predatory Crime: Routine
MA: Ballinger Activities and the Criminology of Place, Criminology 27(1),
27-56. DOI: 10.1111/j.1745-9125.1989.tb00862.x
[49] Roman, C.G., Meagon C., Mark C., Erica L. & Shannon C.
(2005). The weed and seed initiative and crime displacement [52] Teresa, L. (1999). The impact of neighborhoods, schools, and
in South Florida: An examination of spatial displacement malls on the spatial distribution of property damage, Journal
associated with crime control initiatives and the of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 36, 393-422
redevelopment of public housing. Final Report, the Urban
Institute [53] Town, Stephen (2001). Crime Displacement, the Perception,
Problems, Evidence and Supporting Theory, Bradford District
[50] Sherman, Lawrence W. (1990). Police crackdowns: Initial and Architectural Liaison Officer, Bradford
residual deterrence in Tonry, M. & Norval, M. (Eds.) Crime
and Justice: A Review of Research, 12, Chicago: University of [54] Weisburd, D., Laura W., Justin R., Eck, J. Joshua C. Hinkle &
Chicago Press Frank G. (2006). Does crime just move around the corner? A
controlled study of spatial displacement and diffusion of crime
[51] Sherman, Lawrence W., Patrick R. Gartin & Michael E. control benefits, Criminology, 44(3), 549-591