By David Weisburd George Mason University, Hebrew University Taryn Zastrow

Recent data in New York City suggest that violent crime is on the rise. However, over the last three decades, there has been a more than 70% decline in index crimes as reported by the FBI. This led to a growing perception, especially among critics of policing, that crime in NYC had become a marginal problem, or at least that it had declined to levels such that there was no need to place too much emphasis on crime control. Combined with concerns about police abuses and claims of disparities in policing in minority and disadvantaged communities, this fueled calls for defunding the police. In this report, we focus on the high-crime hot spots where 25% and 50% of NYC crimes were committed. The crime numbers on those streets suggest that, despite the encouraging overall crime decline over the past few decades, many city streets continue to have very high crime levels that need to be addressed by police and other agents of the city government. Our report looks beyond general crime statistics to the hot spots of crime where much crime in a city is concentrated. Looking at NYPD crime reports for 2010, 2015, and 2020, we find that about 1% of streets in NYC produce about 25% of crime, and about 5% of streets produce about 50% of crime. This is consistent across the three years, showing that a very small proportion of streets in the city are responsible for a significant proportion of the crime problem. Mapping crime in NYC, we found that high-crime streets are spread throughout the city, though concentrated in Manhattan, the Bronx, and Brooklyn. In turn, we observed a good deal of street-by-street variability, with the highest-crime streets often adjacent to streets with little or no crime. This means that it is misleading to classify whole neighborhoods as crime hot spots, since the majority of streets—even in higher-crime areas—are not. This is an important lesson for police and ordinary citizens who mistakenly see very large areas as crime-ridden. We also found a good deal of stability in the locations of crime hot spots. Nearly all the streets that were hot spots as we have defined them in 2010 were also hot spots in 2020.

New York: Manhattan Institute, 202. 30p.

By Daniela Collazos, Eduardo García, Daniel Mejía, Daniel Ortega, and Santiago Tobón

Objectives: Test direct, spillover and aggregate effects of hot spots policing on crime in a high crime environment. Methods: We identified 967 hot spot street segments and randomly assigned 384 to a six-months increase in police patrols. To account for the complications resulting from a large experimental sample in a dense network of streets, we use randomization inference for hypothesis testing. We also use non-experimental streets to test for spillovers onto non-hot spots, and examine aggregate effects citywide. Results: Our results show an improvement in short term security perceptions and a reduction in car thefts, but no direct effects on other crimes or satisfaction with policing services. We see larger effects in the least secure places, especially for short term security perceptions, car thefts and assaults. We find no evidence of crime displacement but rather a decrease in car thefts in nearby hot spots and a decrease in assaults in nearby non-hot spots. We estimate that car thefts decreased citywide by about 11 percent. Conclusions: Our study highlights the importance of context when implementing hot spots policing. What seems to work in the U.S. or even in Bogotá is not as responsive in Medellín (and vice versa). Further research¿especially outside the U.S.¿is needed to understand the role of local crime patterns and police capacity on the effectiveness of hot spots policing.

Bogotá, Colombia: Universidad de los Andes–Facultad de Economía–CEDE, 2019. 44p.

By World Bank Group

Over the next 13 years, Feira de Santana, in the state of Bahia (BA), and Aracaju, in the state of Sergipe (SE) will both benefit from significant investments in street lighting. Several studies have discussed the many benefits of this type of investment, including the effects of street lighting on people’s perceptions of safety and security. This study aims to provide a baseline to support those lighting interventions and contribute to an evaluation exercise at the end of the investment cycle. The analysis contained herein tries to explore the potential impacts on people’s behavior and perceptions of safety and security, especially among women. It also addresses education and job opportunities. The study adopted a mixed-methods approach, including qualitative and quantitative tools. It conducted 21 semistructured interviews with local authorities from both cities, as well as police officers, business association representatives, civil society organizations (CSOs), and school representatives. In addition, the research team carried out phone interviews with 602 respondents living in Aracaju and Feira de Santana. The survey data show that 56 percent of the Aracaju respondents are not satisfied with their street lighting, rating it as regular (37 percent), bad (7 percent), or terrible (12 percent). In Feira de Santana, an even larger share of the population (approximately 71 percent) think the same: 37 percent consider it regular, 9 percent consider it bad, and 25 percent rate it as terrible. Seventy-seven respondents, or 12 percent of the total, declared they had been a victim of nighttime crime within the previous 12 months. Almost 62 percent of them saw a link between poor lighting and crime. People from both cities feel less safe while walking on the streets during nighttime hours as opposed to walking during the day. Data also show that women feel less safe than men both during the day and in the evening or night. Poor lighting is one of the main reasons for this sense of insecurity, although empty streets were mentioned as an even more important factor. Since perceptions of security directly affect people’s behavior, 32 percent of all respondents from both cities reported that they always change routes in search of better lighting.

Washington, DC: World Bank, 2020. 143p.