Theft and Shoplifting

V. Conclusion

Theft has very immediate and costly consequences. It is one of the most prevalent forms of criminal behavior in the United States, consistently accounting for around 80% of all crimes reported to the police in a given year. However, the social processes reflected in theft are extremely complex. More so than almost any other crime, theft is heavily dependent on opportunity. Even the most motivated offenders may ignore attractive targets if they are well guarded. This fundamental consideration has led many criminologists to approach the study of theft in terms of routine activities theory, the most enduring explanatory framework that accounts for variables such as time, place, space, and situations.

Routine activities theory is linked to both opportunity and lifestyle, and living arrangements. This, in turn, has led to an increasing focus on the role of environmental context in shaping theft outcomes, and more recent research has made an effort to conceptualize routine activities variables in broader terms, incorporating variables related to neighborhood social organization. This inevitably opens the door to readdressing issues of income inequality, unemployment, and community poverty and exploring how these interrelated variables coalesce to constitute risk environments, shaping both opportunity and motivation in new and unique ways.

Such conclusions have important crime-prevention implications. Prior research has focused on either situational theft and theft prevention or aggregate-level rates of theft in countries or states, highlighting socioeconomic inequality. Recent research suggests that incorporating these two broad explanatory frameworks is useful in effectively understanding the whens and whys of theft. Such possibilities suggest the use of more context-driven crime-prevention policies that incorporate new and inventive understandings of social environments as well as economic factors.

Browse criminal justice research papers or view criminal justice research topics.

Bibliography:

  1. Akins, S. (2003). Racial segregation and property crime: Examining the mediating effect of police strength. Justice Quarterly, 20(4), 675–695.
  2. Allen, C. (2005). The links between heroin, crack cocaine and crime: Where does street crime fit in? British Journal of Criminology, 45, 355–372.
  3. Allen, R. C., & Stone, J. H. (1999). Market and public policy mechanisms in poverty reduction: The differential effects on property crime. Review of Social Economy, 62, 156–173.
  4. Anderson, T. L. (2008). Neither villain nor victim: Empowerment and agency among women substance abusers. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
  5. Anderson, T. L., Kavanaugh, P. R., Bachman, R., & Harrison, L. D. (2007). Exploring the drugs–crime connection within the electronic dance music and hip-hop nightclub scenes. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice.
  6. Bernasco,W., & Nieuwbeerta, P. (2005). How do residential burglars select target areas? A new approach to the analysis of criminal location choice. British Journal of Criminology, 45, 296–315.
  7. Best, D., Sidwell, C., Gossop, M., Harris, J., & Strang, J. (2001). Crime and expenditure amongst polydrug misusers seeking treatment: The connection between prescribed methadone and crack use, and criminal involvement. British Journal of Criminology, 41, 119–126.
  8. Blumstein, A., & Wallman, J. (Eds.). (2005). The crime drop in America. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
  9. Bowers, K. J., Johnson, S. D., & Hirschfield, A. F. (2004). Closing off opportunities for crime: An evaluation of alleygating. European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research, 10, 285–308.
  10. Brantingham, P. L., & Brantingham, P. J. (1999). A theoretical model of crime hot spot generation. Studies on Crime and Crime Prevention, 8, 7–26.
  11. Britt, C. L. (1997). Reconsidering the unemployment and crime relationship: Variations by age group and historical period. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 13, 405–428.
  12. Bromley, M. L., & Cochran, J. K. (2002). Auto burglaries in an entertainment district hotspot: Applying the SARA model in a security context. Security Journal, 15, 63–72.
  13. Bureau of Justice Statistics. (2005a). Drugs and Crime Facts. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice.
  14. Bureau of Justice Statistics. (2005b). Sourcebook of criminal justice statistics. Albany: State University of New York Press.
  15. Bureau of Justice Statistics. (2006). Sourcebook of criminal justice statistics. Albany: State University of New York Press.
  16. Burns, R. (2000). Culture as a determinant of crime: An alternative perspective. Environment and Behavior, 32, 347–360.
  17. Bursik. R. J., Jr., & Grasmick, H. G. (1993). Neighborhoods and crime: The dimensions of effective community control. New York: Lexington.
  18. Cantor, D., & Land, K. C. (1985). Unemployment and crime rates in the post–World War II United States: A theoretical and empirical analysis. American Sociological Review, 50, 317–332.
  19. Carmichael, F., &Ward, R. (2001).Male unemployment and crime in England and Wales. Economics Letters, 73, 111–115.
  20. Cohen, L., & Felson, M. (1979). Social change and crime rate trends: A routine activities approach. American Sociological Review, 44, 588–607.
  21. Coupe, T., & Blake, L. (2006). Daylight and darkness targeting strategies and the risks of being seen at residential burglaries. Criminology, 44, 431–464.
  22. Cross, J. C., Johnson, B. D., Davis, R.W., & Liberty, H. J. (2001). Supporting the habit: Income generation activities of frequent crack users compared with frequent users of other hard drugs. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 64, 191–201.
  23. Federal Bureau of Investigation. (2008). Uniform Crime Reports 2006.Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice.
  24. Felson, M. (1996). Preventing retail theft: An application of environmental criminology. Security Journal, 7, 71–75.
  25. Forrester, D., Chatterton, M., & Pease, K. (1988). The Kirkholt Burglary Prevention Project, Rochdale (Crime Prevention Unit Paper 13). London: Home Office.
  26. Goldstein, P. J. (1985). The drugs/violence nexus: A tripartite conceptual framework. Journal of Drug Issues, 15, 493–506.
  27. Hakim, S., Gaffney, M. A., Rengert, G., & Shachmurove, J. (1995). Costs and benefits of alarms to the community: Burglary patterns and security measures in Tredyffrin Township, Pennsylvania. Security Journal, 6, 197–204.
  28. Harris, D. K., & Benson, M. L. (1999). Theft in nursing homes: An overlooked form of elder abuse. Journal of Elder Abuse and Neglect, 11, 73–90.
  29. Herzog, S. (2005). The relationship between economic hardship and crime: The case of Israel and the Palestinians. Sociological Perspectives, 48, 189–211.
  30. Hunter, A. J. (1985). Private, parochial, and public school orders: The problem of crime and incivility in urban communities. In G. D. Suttles & M. N. Zald (Eds.), The challenge of social control: Citizenship and institution building in modern society (pp. 230–242). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
  31. Kane, R. J. (2006). On the limits of social control: Structural deterrence and the policing of “suppressible” crimes. Justice Quarterly, 23, 186–213.
  32. Kleck, G., & Chiricos, T. (2002). Unemployment and property crime: A target-specific assessment of opportunity and motivation as mediating factors. Criminology, 40, 649–680.
  33. Land, K. C., Cantor, D., & Russell, S. (1995). Unemployment and crime rate fluctuations in the post–World War II United States: Statistical time-series properties and alternative models. In J. Hagan & R. D. Peterson (Eds.), Crime and inequality (pp. 55–79). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
  34. Lu, Y. (2006). Spatial choice of auto thefts in an urban environment. Security Journal, 19, 143–166.
  35. Manzoni, P., Brochu, S., Fischer, B., & Rehm, J. (2006). Determinants of property crime among illicit opiate users outside of treatment across Canada. Deviant Behavior, 27, 351–376.
  36. Mawby, R. I., & Jones, C. (2006). Evaluation of a national burglary reduction initiative targeting older people. Crime Prevention and Community Safety, 8, 209–227.
  37. Merton, R. K. (1938). Social structure and anomie. American Sociological Review, 3, 672–682.
  38. Miethe, T. D., & Meier, R. F. (1994). Crime and its social context: Toward an integrated theory of offenders, victims, and situations. Albany: State University of New York Press.
  39. Mustaine, E. E., & Tewksbury, R. (1998). Predicting risks of larceny theft victimization: A routine activity analysis using refined lifestyle measures. Criminology, 36, 829–857.
  40. Painter, K. A., & Farrington, D. P. (1998). Criminal victimization on a Caribbean island. International Review of Victimology, 6, 1–16.
  41. Palmer, E. J., Holmes, A., & Hollon, C. R. (2002). Investigating burglars’ decisions: Factors influencing target choice, method of entry, reasons for offending, repeat victimization of a property. Security Journal, 15, 7–18.
  42. Rengert, G. F., &Wasilchick, J. (2000). Suburban burglary: A tale of two suburbs (2nd ed.). Springfield, IL: Charles C Thomas.
  43. Reilly, B., & Witt, R. (1996). Crime, deterrence and unemployment in England and Wales: An empirical analysis. Bulletin of Economic Research, 48, 137–159.
  44. Reisig, M. D., & Cancino, J. M. (2004). Incivilities in nonmetropolitan communities: The effects of structural constraints, social conditions, and crime. Journal of Criminal Justice, 32, 15–29.
  45. Reppetto, T. A. (1974). Residential crime. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.
  46. Rice, K. J., & Smith, W. R. (2002). Socioecological models of automotive theft: Integrating routine activity and social disorganization approaches. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 39, 304–336.
  47. Rosenfeld, R., & Fornango, R. (2007). The impact of economic conditions on robbery and property crime: The role of consumer sentiment. Criminology, 45, 735–769.
  48. Sampson, R. J., Raudenbush, S. W., & Earls, F. (1997). Neighborhoods and violent crime: A multilevel study of collective efficacy. Science, 277, 918–924.
  49. Shaw, C. R., & McKay, H. D. (1942). Juvenile delinquency and urban areas. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  50. Smith, C., Bowers, K. J., & Johnson, S. D. (2006). Understanding bag theft within licensed premises in Westminster: Identifying initial steps towards prevention. Security Journal, 19, 3–21.
  51. Tilley, N., &Webb, J. (1994). Burglary reduction: Findings from Safer Cities schemes. (Crime Prevention Unit Paper 51). London: Home Office.
  52. Tseloni, A., Wittebrood, K., Farrell, G., & Pease, K. (2004). Burglary victimization in England and Wales, the United States and the Netherlands. British Journal of Criminology, 44, 66–91.
  53. Van der Zanden, B. P., Dijkgraaf, M. G., Blanken, P., Van Ree, J.M., & Van den Brink, W. (2006). Patterns of acquisitive crime during methadone maintenance treatment among patients eligible for heroin assisted treatment. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 86, 84–90.
  54. Von Hofer, H., & Tham, H. (2000). Theft in Sweden 1831–1998. Journal of Scandinavian Studies in Criminology and Crime Prevention, 1, 195–210.
  55. Walsh, J. A., & Taylor, R. B. (2007). Community structural predictors of spatially aggregated motor vehicle theft rates: Do they replicate? Journal of Criminal Justice, 35, 297–311.
  56. Weatherburn, D., Lind, B., & Ku, S. (2001). The short-run effects of economic adversity on property crime: An Australian case study. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Criminology, 34, 134–148.
  57. Wellsmith, M., & Burrell, A. (2005).The influence of purchase price and ownership levels of theft targets: The example of domestic burglary. British Journal of Criminology, 45, 741–764.
  58. Wilcox, P., Madensen, T. D., & Tillyer, M. S. (2007). Guardianship in context: Implications for burglary victimization risk and prevention. Criminology, 45, 771–803.
  59. Wilson, W. J. (1987). The truly disadvantaged. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  60. Witt, R., Clarke, A., & Fielding, N. (1996). Are higher long-term unemployment rates associated with higher crime? Surrey, UK: Department of Economics, University of Surrey.
  61. Wittebrood, K., & Nieuwbeerta, P. (2000). Criminal victimization during one’s life course: The effects of previous victimization and patterns of routine activities. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 37, 91–122.