NCJ Number
177905
Journal
Crime & Delinquency Volume: 45 Issue: 2 Dated: April 1999 Pages: 256-271
Date Published
1999
Length
16 pages
Annotation
This article reports on the methodology and findings of research designed to test two theories of the prevalence of crime at public housing sites in Australia: the environmental design hypothesis and the allocation hypothesis (crime occurs in public housing because of residents' economic and social disadvantage).
Abstract
The number of juveniles participating in crime in a given postcode in Sydney (Australia) was computed by determining the number of juveniles residing in that postcode who had one or more appearances before the New South Wales Children's Court for a property or violent offense between July 1, 1990, and June 30, 1995. This number was then converted into an age-specific rate by dividing it by the number of 10- to 17-year-olds who were residing in that postcode at the time of the 1991 census. The measure of adult participation in crime was computed in a similar manner, except that the numerator for the rate calculation was the number of persons with one or more appearances before the New South Wales Local Courts between January 1, 1990, and December 31, 1993, and the denominator was the population of persons older than age 18 who were residing in the postcode at the time of the 1991 census. Two measures of the quantity of public housing, both drawn from the Basic Community Profile -- a set of descriptive statistics based on the 1991 Australian census -- were used. Five measures of the influence of public housing design were constructed. Two separate sets of regression analyses were conducted. The first was to assess whether the quantity of public housing or public renters influenced rates of participation in crime; the second was to assess whether the type of public housing influenced rates of participation in crime. None of the housing or public renters influenced rates of participation in crime; the second was to assess whether the type of public housing influenced rates of participation in crime. None of the housing design variables were found to be significant in explaining juvenile or adult crime. Both public housing and public renters exerted significant independent effects on adult participation in crime; however, the amount of variation explained by each variable in the presence of the control variables was less than 0.01 percent, and the regression coefficient for each variable was negative. This suggests that crime rates are actually lower in areas where the quantity of public housing or the number of public renters is higher. 4 tables and 16 references