The author(s) shown below used Federal funds provided by the U.S. Department of Justice and prepared the following final report: Document Title: Does Crime Just Move Around the Corner? A Study of Displacement and Diffusion in Jersey City, NJ Author(s): David Weisburd, Laura A. Wyckoff, Justin Ready, John E. Eck, Josh Hinkle, Frank Gajewski Document No.: 211679 Date Received: October 2005 Award Number: 97-IJ-CX-0055 This report has not been published by the U.S. Department of Justice. To provide better customer service, NCJRS has made this Federally- funded grant final report available electronically in addition to traditional paper copies. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Does Crime Just Move Around the Corner? A Study of Displacement and Diffusion in Jersey City, NJ David Weisburd Laura A. Wyckoff Justin Ready John E. Eck Josh Hinkle Frank Gajewski POLICE FOUNDATION Prepared for the U.S. Department of Justice National Institute of Justice Grant No. 97-IJ-CX-0055 December 2004 1 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. Introduction Over the last decade there have been a substantial number of research studies on hot spots and hot spots policing efforts (Weisburd and Braga, 2003). Overall, these studies show that hot spots policing approaches have strong impacts upon crime in targeted sites (Weisburd and Eck, 2004). However, there is often concern that focusing police resources on hot spots will simply displace the crime to non-targeted areas. In turn, when immediate spatial displacement has been examined, the findings generally support the position that displacement is small and that diffusion of crime control benefits is more likely. However, studies that are designed to measure direct program impacts are often flawed when they are used to examine displacement and diffusion. This study was designed to overcome such methodological flaws by focusing the intervention and data collection on the possibility and characteristics of displacement and diffusion, rather than on evaluating the direct impacts of the program on targeted crimes/areas. Thus the main focus of this study was immediate spatial displacement or diffusion to areas near the targeted sites of intervention. Do focused prevention efforts “simply move crime around the corner?” Or conversely, have the hot spots policing efforts that were brought in unusually high dosage to the target areas “diffused” to areas immediately surrounding the direct focus of the policing efforts? To answer these questions, two study sites were selected in Jersey City, New Jersey. One was an area plagued with drugs and violent crime, and the other had a high level of prostitution. Methodology In each site, small target areas were selected to receive intensive police enforcement. To capture any displacement or diffusion effects, two catchment areas 2 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. surrounding the targeted areas were also defined for each site. To allow us to distinguish between movement to a block immediately adjacent to the target area and one more distant, we divided the catchment area into an area immediately next to the target area (1st catchment area) and an area more removed (2nd catchment area). These catchment areas received no extra police attention, with the assumption that displacement and diffusion would most likely be evidenced in these locations that were both close to the targeted sites and offered new potential opportunities for continued criminal involvement. Figures 1 and 2 present maps of both sites depicting the target and catchment areas for each. Figure 1 3 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. Figure 2 To assess displacement and diffusion at each site, we used multiple measures including systematic social and physical observations, arrestee interviews, ethnographic observations, and official crime data. Social observations of social disorder, crime, and various social behaviors were collected by a team of carefully trained research assistants who were randomly assigned to the study sites’ street segments during the study period. Physical observations were conducted before, at the mid-point, and after the intervention. These observations involved carefully coding the signs and severity of physical disorder, including items like broken glass in the street, as well as indicators of targeted crimes through condoms/condom wrappers and needles and other drug paraphernalia on the street. For our qualitative data collection, members of the research team conducted 4 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. interviews with individuals arrested in the target areas of both sites, and an independent ethnographer was hired to conduct field interviews and observations in and around the prostitution target site. With regard to official crime data, police call for service data was provided by the Jersey City Police Department. We use these measures both to evaluate the magnitude and types of displacement and diffusion that can be expected to result from place-focused policing interventions, and to assess the validity and the reliability of different measures of displacement and diffusion.1 Effect of the Intervention For there to be any reason to suspect possible displacement or diffusion of benefits, it is necessary for the intervention to have a strong impact on crime in the targeted areas. Our data show that the police implemented intensive and targeted crime prevention initiatives at both of the sites examined in our study. An analysis of police administrative calls showed an increase in the target areas during the intervention period, and our arrestee and ethnographic interviews showed that offenders were keenly aware that a police crackdown was occurring, as indicated by the following quote from a prostitute interview. “In the last three months, [prostitution is] not worth it…too much police activity…definitely more police, now on bikes…never used to be on blocks…more undercover…roadblocks are new, random checkpoints…johns are afraid to stop so they drive around too much, so they are too visible and make things worse for themselves.” The following quote from an individual arrested in the violent crime/drug site illustrates that offenders in that site were also well aware of the increased police activity. 1 See the full report for more detailed description of the target sites, their selection and the data collection methodology for each data source. 5 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. “…lately Narcotic come around Monday and Thursday and someone is going to get arrested on those days…that is a sure bet. On these days I just stay underground until the cops go home because I’m not stupid. When the cops are around I stay underground until they leave to go home, then I come out. The rest of the days there are just regular cops. They know me and they don’t arrest you. As opposed to narcotics that come and rip things up.” In turn, we have multiple data sources that suggest that there was, as expected given the intensity of the treatments, a crime prevention outcome in the target areas of each site. The strongest evidence of this effect was found in the social observation data, which showed a dramatic and intense reduction of street level prostitution (see Figure 3) and disorder at the Corneilson Avenue prostitution site from the first month of intervention, as well as strong changes in observed drug (see Figure 4) and disorder activity at the Storms Avenue violent crime/drug site. Figure 32 Prostitution Site: Target Area Average Number of Observed Prostitution Activities per Wave 3.50 3.00 2.50 2.00 1.50 1.00 Prostitution Activities Average Number of Observed 0.50 0.00 Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Wave 2 The start and end of the intervention is indicated on the figures by the vertical blue lines. 6 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S.