See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/258198414

Place and Crime

Integrating Sociology of
Place and Environmental
Criminology
Article in Urban Affairs Review January 2013
DOI: 10.1177/1078087412465401

CITATIONS

READS

116

3 authors, including:
Sangmoon Kim

Cecil L. Willis

Dongguk University

University of North C

10 PUBLICATIONS 241

25 PUBLICATIONS 110

CITATIONS

CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

SEE PROFILE

Available from: Cecil L. Willis

Retrieved on: 15 November 2016

Urban Affairs Review

http://uar.sagepub.com/

Place and Crime: Integrating Sociology of Place and Environmental

Criminology
Sangmoon Kim, Randy L. LaGrange and Cecil L. Willis
Urban Affairs Review published online 18 November 2012
DOI: 10.1177/1078087412465401
The online version of this article can be found at:
http://uar.sagepub.com/content/early/2012/11/15/1078087412465401

Published by:
http://www.sagepublications.com

On behalf of:

The Urban Politics Section, American Political Science Association

Additional services and information for Urban Affairs Review can be found at:
Email Alerts: http://uar.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts
Subscriptions: http://uar.sagepub.com/subscriptions
Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav
Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

>> OnlineFirst Version of Record - Nov 18, 2012

Downloaded from uar.sagepub.com at Randall Library, UNC Wilmington on November 26, 2012

What is This?

465401
2465401Urban Affairs ReviewKim et al.
The Author(s) 2011

UARXXX10.1177/107808741

Reprints and permission:

sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

Place and Crime:

Integrating Sociology of
Place and Environmental
Criminology

Urban Affairs Review

XX(X) 115
The Author(s) 2012
Reprints and permission:
sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/1078087412465401
http://uar.sagepub.com

Sangmoon Kim1, Randy L. LaGrange1,

and Cecil L. Willis1

Abstract
Standard sociology and criminology have not been sufficiently sensitive to the
unique characteristics that places have. It has been implicitly assumed that
one place (be it a neighborhood, census track, or metropolitan area) is interchangeable with another, given certain demographic and economic variables.
This article attempts to recast environmental criminology within a sociological
framework known as the sociology of place. The unequal spatial distribution
of crime makes it an ideal candidate for analysis within this sociological framework: crime is universal, yet spatially concentrated; targets everyone, yet not
everyone equally; is socially constructed, yet has a very real physical reality to
it. The article addresses the important linkage between crime and place.
Keywords
sociology of place, environmental criminology, spatial distribution

Introduction
For much of the twentieth century, sociologists left the analysis of the
physical world to geographers (Lobao and Saenz 2002; Wainwright and
Barnes 2009) and other social scientists (Kent 1984). The historical neglect
1

University of North Carolina Wilmington, Wilmington, NC, USA

Corresponding Author:
Sangmoon Kim, Department of Sociology and Criminology, University of North Carolina
Wilmington, Wilmington, NC 28403-5978, USA
Email: kims@uncw.edu

Downloaded from uar.sagepub.com at Randall Library, UNC Wilmington on November 26, 2012

Urban Affairs Review XX(X)

of the physical world in sociology is odd given that many of its founders
gave critical attention to this dimension. Simmel analyzed the fundamental
elements of space, Louis Wirth and Robert Redfield analyzed social patterns
within the context of space, Marx often couched class conflict within the
framework of space, and Durkheim provided analytic insights that used different forms of space (Smith 1999; Urry 2001).
More recently sociologists have focused on this dimension of the physical
world and have linked it to key sociological variables of stratification, race,
gender, political economy, and crime (Baldry 1999; Barker 1968; Bell 1997;
Chapin 1974; Gieryn 2000; Jessop, Brenner, and Jones 2008; Michelson
1970; Smith 1999; Tickamyer 2000; Tita, Cohen, and Engberg 2005; Urry
2001). The physical world is an important analytical concept in sociology
that may be applied to varied forms of social phenomena, most notably to
crime and crime prevention.
The aim of this article is to suggest an integration of two theoretical frameworks: sociology of place and environmental criminology. We believe that
such an integration adds important insights into the well-known observation
that there exist certain crime-prone subsections within an urban city where
some neighborhoods have consistently higher levels of crime than other
neighborhoods. As explained below, there is an important theoretical and
empirical distinction to be made between the concepts of space and place
within the physical world. This distinction has direct bearing on the type of
crimes that are more likely in a given area and how we might configure
houses, buildings, blocks, neighborhoods, and larger physical surroundings
to guard against crime.

Sociology of Place
The impact of the physical environment on human behavior has been widely
noted (e.g., Barker 1968; Bell 1997; Chapin 1974; Gieryn 2000; Michelson
1970). In his thoughtful essay on the sociology of place, Gieryn (2000) made
a strong argument for incorporating the notion of place into sociological
analyses. He wrote that place persists as a constituent element of social life
and historical change (Gieryn 2000, p. 462). In an earlier writing, Barker
(1968) characterized the ecological environment as an objective reality that
influences human behavior. Barker specifically noted that behavior settings
have standing patterns of social activity that persist even as the participants
change. Similarly, Chapin (1974) examined the activity patterns of urban
residents, thus demonstrating the tendency of people to act in certain ways in
a given urban environment.

Downloaded from uar.sagepub.com at Randall Library, UNC Wilmington on November 26, 2012

Kim et al.

Scholarly interest in environmental forces on human behavior has led to a

differentiation of the physical environment into space and place. Gieryn
(2000, p. 465) noted that space and place are related concepts but have an
important theoretical distinction: Space is what place becomes when the
unique gathering of things, meanings, and values are sucked out . . . (while)
place is space filled with people, practices, objects, and representations. Bell
(1997, p. 833) argued that space is the three dimensional coordinates of
things and place is a particular space that has meaning. To Bell, ghosts are
what turn a space into a place; ghosts being social experiences of the physical world that give meaning to a place and provide a social tie to this physical
world.
Smith (1999) argued that one can apply Durkheimian concepts toward
identifying four elementary forms of place: sacred (pure), profane (evil and
polluted), liminal (special places where everyday rules are absent), and mundane (between sacred and profane and are associated with everyday life).
From this vantage point, it is clear that not all places are created equal or the
same. Places are distinguished by their history, social perceptions, and character. Accordingly, the role they play with respect to social behavior and
social phenomena vary based on the type or forms of place that exist.
Gieryn (2000, p. 466) argued that place is not simply where social
action occurs but is also an identifiable force that has independent effects
on social life. A major social function of place is that it enhances stability in
structural patterns such as gender differences, social hierarchies, and power.
The importance of power in analyzing place is provided by Baldry (1999)
who argued that the control of work areas and the physical structure of work
areas serve as mechanisms for controlling the labor force. The physical nature
of the area provides cues for how one is to behave in an area and reinforces
what behavior is appropriate or inappropriate. Work areas are often stratified
by the size and location of the space allocated. Work areas also reflect who
controls the physical location. For instance, a supervisor may be able to go
into any section at any time, whereas employees may be strictly limited to a
specific area. This ordering reflects power differentials within a place and is
differentially distributed according to a persons location in the social structure (Lobao and Saenz 2002).
A study by Tita, Cohen, and Engberg (2005) shows that place is an important factor for hardcore urban gangs because gangs need an identifiable physical space to hang out. These subneighborhood, geographically defined,
somewhat small areas are called set spaces by the authors. Gangs impart
meaning and identity into an area and transform a space into place. The focus
on place rather than individuals emphasizes the role of social context and

Downloaded from uar.sagepub.com at Randall Library, UNC Wilmington on November 26, 2012

Urban Affairs Review XX(X)

allows for an analysis of the unique types of social activities at specific

places. It also enhances the understanding of crime and the control of crime.
For example, Tita, Cohen, and Engberg found that violent predatory gangs
were more likely to prosper in areas with weakened social control and characterized by underclass features. Their analysis provides us with two contributions useful for our study. One is the notion of set space that refers to a
specific physical location with certain social features. The other is the role
that place plays in formulating crime prevention efforts by identifying the
criminogenic features of a place.
Our review of the literature regarding the sociology of place clearly shows
that place is an important factor worthy of sociological analysis. Place is the
locale where all things social occur. It is more than a space with physical
boundaries and physical characteristics. Place is where social interactions
and relationships occur and can influence the nature and extent of these relationships. Place is dynamic and subject to change in character, usage, and
meaning. There are different types of places based in part on their past history
and social experiences. Places vary in size ranging from units (e.g., cities) to
small (e.g., set spaces), to very small (e.g., houses or rooms in houses). Places
are differentiated in terms of power, size, gender, race, and class. Place also
acts and has an impact on social interactions and on other social phenomena.
With respect to crime, a place may manifest certain features that foster and
support crime. By identifying these features, we can begin to formulate placespecific crime prevention strategies.

Environmental Criminology
Environmental criminology critically examines the link between crime and
physical location and how our activities are spatially shaped (Brantingham
and Brantingham 1984). Rooted in the literature on urbanism and human
ecology (Palen 2012), environmental criminology studies crime, criminality,
and victimization as they relate to place, space, and their interaction especially
in the urban setting. The end goal is to identify ways to manipulate attributes
of physical environment to reduce opportunities to commit crime at various
points in time. It is the emphasis on targets and physical location that sets
environmental criminology apart from other, more traditional criminological
schools of thought such as classical criminology and positivism.
To say that others have made the connection between location and crime
would be stating the obviousthe link between location and crime is a firmly
established empirical fact dating back to earliest recorded history. Crime
finds benefit in certain locations as criminals gravitate to vulnerable and

Downloaded from uar.sagepub.com at Randall Library, UNC Wilmington on November 26, 2012

Kim et al.

lucrative places to ply their trade. Conversely, certain places carry special
meaning and are generally off-limits (e.g., churches, synagogues, hospitals,
mortuaries) or out of reach (e.g., gated communities, highly monitored corporate offices, remote locations) for many would-be offenders. Thus, in terms
of crime, location clearly matters.
Quetelet (1835) was among the first to statistically demonstrate the
unequal spatial distribution of crime and thus sow the seeds for environmental criminology. In the 1920s and 1930s, researchers at the University of
Chicago made substantial advances to both theory and research (Burgess
1916; Shaw 1929; Shaw and McKay 1931). One innovative method of the
Chicago researchers was to map concentric zones spreading outward from
the center of the city. The maps revealed a definite patternDelinquency
decreased as one moved outward from the center city to the more affluent
suburbs. Another important contribution to this mode of analysis is mental
maps of potential target locations that offenders develop (Brantingham and
Brantingham 1984). Inspired by the concept of behavior settings (Barker
1968), Brantingham and Brantingham (1984) argued that the location of
crime is not random but rather predictable through offenders mental maps.
That is, their subjective awareness of certain locations is formed by past history and social experiences. Broken windows theory (Wilson and Kelling
1982) emphasizes how physical and social disorder is interpreted by various
social actors and thus affects crime and perceptions of safety.
Recent attention has focused on crime hot spots. Sherman (1995) noted
that repeat crime addresses are far more predictive of crime than repeat
criminals. He pointed out that 18% of the individuals produced more than
50% of the arrests in Philadelphia in 1945 compared with the 3% of places
producing 50% of police calls in Minneapolis in 1986. Although extrapolating from these diverse data sets is wrought with logistical concerns, Sherman
(1995, p. 37) asked, For if future crime is six times more predictable by the
addresses of the occurrence than by the identity of the offender, why arent
we doing more about it? Other spatial studies of crime have discovered that
criminals tend to live close to the locations of their crimes, often on the same
block or in the same neighborhood (Bernasco 2010). Recognizing that many
offenders live close to where they commit crime is an important element in
our study of place and crime.

The Emplacement Process

Emplacement refers to the social-psychological process of turning a space
into a meaningful, territorially defined, place. Schwarz (2009, pp. 147-48)

Downloaded from uar.sagepub.com at Randall Library, UNC Wilmington on November 26, 2012

Urban Affairs Review XX(X)

defined emplacement in terms of how place can come to be a powerful

fusion of self, space and time. Emplacement occurs when a group has established a particular location as its own and erects boundaries that reinforce its
unique identity. That is to say, a certain locale is uniquely associated with the
members of a particular group that distinguishes them from outsiders and
reinforces their sense of collective identity. When applied to crime, the concept of emplacement is related to collective efficacy characterized by a
mutual trust and willingness to intervene against outsiders or potential
offenders (Sampson, Raudenbush, and Earls 1997, p. 919).
Emplacement provides another view on how variables such as length of
residence, homeownership, and residential turnover have an influence on
crime. A number of explanations have been proposed for the link among
these variables (Brown, Perkins, and Brown 2004). For example, the inverse
relationship between homeownership and crime is partly explained by the
fact that renters tend to be relatively young and often more transient, and also
because of the poorer surveillance opportunities that rental units provide.
However, according to the place-sensitive perspective, the connection may
be at least partly because homeowners and longtime residents have more
meaningful attachments to their houses and neighborhoods than renters.
Using Michelsons (1970) terms, renters are more cosmopolitans (not bound
to one place), whereas homeowners are more local (strong ties to one place).
The emplacement has a crime-deterring effect as it puts potential offenders
on guard.
Just as place is dynamic and subject to change, the emplacement process
is also dynamic. Gieryn (2000) referred to this as struggles over place making. When residents have weak place attachment due, for example, to a high
turnover rate, the area turns into instrumental spaceAs Wilson and Kelling
(1982, p. 32) put it, The neighborhood is not their home but the place
where they live. As potential offenders increasingly hang out in such an
area, they begin to impart their own meaning and identity to the area, thus
transforming simple space into a meaningful place or home turf (Tani 2002;
Tita, Cohen, and Engberg 2005). Crime prevention through environmental
design (CPTED) can be viewed from this perspective (Jeffery 1971; Newman
1972, 1996). That is, by facilitating place making of law-abiding citizens, the
physical design of houses, blocks, and neighborhoods may help legitimate
residents win the struggle against potential offenders.

PlaceCrime Connection
The theoretical and empirical connections between place and crime are
clearly suggested in the literature but have not been fully developed or tested.

Downloaded from uar.sagepub.com at Randall Library, UNC Wilmington on November 26, 2012

Kim et al.

Place is where social interaction occurs. Place is also where the meanings of
social interactions are defined. Once formed via emotional attachment, a
place defines self-identity as an individual or as a member of a group. Thus,
it is not strange that a gang member once admitted, Fellows around here
dont know what to do except within a radius of about three hundred yards
(Whyte 1943, p. 256). It seems reasonable to assume that the interaction
within place is different than the interaction in space. For instance, outsiders
are readily identified and distinguished in a place filled with meaning to
insiders. The interaction of members toward outsiders tends to be suspicious
and even aggressive. Interaction in space, however, tends to be more indifferent, diffuse, and pragmatic. In short, our behavior tends to be expressive
in place and instrumental in space.
The differences in behavior between place and space have important
implications for the type of crime that is committed. Put bluntly, crimes in
place tend to be more expressive and violent, whereas crimes in space tend to
be more instrumental and acquisition oriented. Of course, this is an oversimplification but there are identifiable and patterned differences between
expressive and instrumental crimes that are location sensitive. Expressive
crimes tend to be less planned, less concerned with risk of capture, aggressive
in nature, and target trespassers. Instrumental crimes tend to be more planned,
in pursuit of material gain, and target either properties or strangers.
The literature indicates that crimes closer to an offenders place of residence are more violent and personal and tend to become more acquisition
oriented as we move farther away (Fritzon 2001; White 1932). Lersch and
Hart (2011) noted that as expressive crimes are more emotional, they may be
committed closer to the offenders home, whereas instrumental crimes are
committed outside a buffer zone to lessen the chances of detection.
Furthermore, it has been widely noted that gang locales tend to have high
violent crime rates as gang members try to maintain the control over their
turfs from outsiders and nonmember residents (Tita, Cohen, and Engberg
2005). This pattern of crime might be partly explained when the differences
between place and space are taken into account.
As a result of the tendencies above, we expect that the ratio of instrumental crime to expressive crime varies across the continuum of placespace: It
is lower in meaningful places and higher in less meaningful space (see Figure 1).
An empirical examination of the above hypothesis requires data with clear
information on two critical variables: the type of crime committed (expressive vs. instrumental) and the characteristics of the area (place vs. space).
Unable to find such data at the national level, we reuse a portion of the
Minneapolis Repeat Complaint Address Policing (RECAP) data (Buerger
1993), which record the number and the nature of 911 calls received for each

Downloaded from uar.sagepub.com at Randall Library, UNC Wilmington on November 26, 2012

crime

Urban Affairs Review XX(X)

space

Expressive
Instrumental

place

Figure 1. An expected pattern of crime by the level of emplacement by offenders

address in Minneapolis, Minnesota, during 1985-1987. Each address is then

classified as either residential or commercial. The original researchers randomly selected about 500 addresses out of the most crime active addresses in
the baseline year (1985-1986). About a half of the 500 addresses were commercial and the other half were residential. Although the data set contains
information on the nature of crime and some clues for the spaceplace distinction, it is collected from high crime areas within a single city and thus
may not be nationally representative.
In our reanalysis, we collapsed 5 crimes in the data set into instrumental
crime and another 5 crimes into expressive crime.1 These 10 crimes are
selected on the basis of feasibility in both commercial and residential
addresses. For example, crimes such as shoplifting and domestic violence are
much too unique to commercial and residential addresses, respectively, to be
included here for analysis, even though their nature is obvious. Adding such
crimes would have the effect of substantially inflating the gap in the ratios of
instrumental crime to expressive crime between commercial and residential
addresses. In addition, we put both residential and business burglary into the
instrumental crime category even though the former contains some attributes
of expressive crime (see Tunnell 2006). To sum, our selection and classification of the 10 crimes are conservative to avoid potential spurious findings.
To make the placespace distinction of the addresses without clear indicators, we classify the addresses based on their main use: residential or commercial. We assume that commercial areas are likely to be nearer to the space
end of the continuum, and that residential areas are likely to be nearer to the
place end. A commercial area is essentially an open and instrumental area to
the diverse population that uses the space (business men and women,

Downloaded from uar.sagepub.com at Randall Library, UNC Wilmington on November 26, 2012

Kim et al.
Table 1. The Number of Expressive and Instrumental Crimes in Residential and
Commercial Addresses
Instrumental Crime

Expressive Crime

Ratio

1,744
2,401
4,145

1,319
1,159
2,478

1.32
2.07
1.67

Residential address (n = 246)

Commercial address (n = 234)
Total
Source: Buerger (1993).

Table 2. Correlation Coefficients Between the Type of Address and Crimea

Instrumental crime
Expressive crime
Total crimeb

Instrumental Crime

Expressive Crime

Total Crime

.29
.80

.38

.32

.77
.78

a. The correlations above the diagonal (upper triangle) are from residential addresses,
whereas those below the diagonal (lower triangle) are from commercial addresses.
b. Total crime is the sum of all property and personal crimes.

shoppers, visitors, loiters, etc.). In such an open area, people do not expect the
same level of personal/collective privacy and security as they do in their
homes and residential neighborhoods. In addition, people may not have emotional investment in an instrumental area as much as they may in a residential
one. Thus, intrusion in a commercial area is likely perceived less threatening
and less likely to lead to aggressive defense than it is in a residential area.
Table 1 supports our expectation that the ratio of instrumental to expressive crime is higher in space than in place. The average ratios are 2.07
(2,401/1,159) in commercial addressesabout two instrumental crimes per
expressive crimeand 1.32 (1,744/1,319) in residential addresses. That is,
the odds of instrumental crime are about 57% higher in commercial areas
than in residential areas. In addition, Table 2 shows that there is a noticeably
stronger correlation in commercial areas between total crime and instrumental crime (r = .80) than between the total crime and expressive crime (r = .32).
In other words, crime hot spots in commercial areas largely overlap with high
instrumental crime areas. However, the correlations are almost identical in
residential areas (.77 vs. .78).
We acknowledge that the analysis above is based on limited information,
and that alternative explanations to the findings may exist, such as the presence of a vulnerable target available to each type of address. However, the
availability of vulnerable targets does not explain why presumably a small

Downloaded from uar.sagepub.com at Randall Library, UNC Wilmington on November 26, 2012

10

Urban Affairs Review XX(X)

conflict tends to escalate into violence (expressive crime) in commercial

addresses (nearer to space), less often than it does in residential addresses
(nearer to place). The characteristics of location where an offender finds
his or her target may have significant influences on the type of offense
committed.

Differential Crime Prevention Strategies

The placespace distinction suggests that differential crime prevention strategies are advisable. As stated above, crimes in space are more likely to be
instrumental and thus can be prevented by increasing surveillance and risk of
capture. In fact, several studies have reported that crime prevention measures
such as Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) and improved lighting are most
effective in spaces (e.g., parking lots) and for acquisitive crimes (Welsh and
Farrington 2004). In addition, concerted efforts by public officials and citizens to prevent these sensitive urban locations becoming emplaced by
offenders would go a long way toward minimizing crime.
Crimes in place, however, are somewhat different. They are generally
more difficult to prevent as offenders are more influenced by emotions and
less concerned about risk. For this reason, a simple increase in surveillance
may be less effective unless it is combined with other efforts. Assisting
neighborhoods to win the struggle over place making is vital especially if the
locale is also heavily emplaced with offenders. Effective prevention strategies might include increased police patrols to help residents to further
emplace their homes and neighborhoods. These efforts include community
policing programs that strengthen the trust between residents and the police.
As previous research shows, crime prevention efforts are least successful in
areas where residents have few resources and feel threatened when contacting neighbors whom they perceive as dangerous (Hope 1995). The most
effective prevention strategies are often preemptive enforcement strategies
such as proactive zero-tolerance policing and aggressive patrol (Sherman
1998). In a worst case scenario where an area is severely taken over by
offenders, termination of the place may be considered by urban renewal or
regentrification (Sherman 1995).

Summary and Conclusion

Sociology of place and environmental criminology both point to the crucial
role of space and place in the understanding of crime. Core concepts and
ideas in the sociology of place help inform environmental criminology and,

Downloaded from uar.sagepub.com at Randall Library, UNC Wilmington on November 26, 2012

11

Kim et al.

ultimately, the prevention of crime. To that end, we have distinguished space

from place and tried to show how this distinction helps to understand how
spatial factors contribute to crime. Place is more meaningful to individuals
and groups, whereas space is more impersonal and generates less emotion
and attachment for individuals and groups. As a result, the behaviors in
space and place take on a different character. While general causes may
motivate the general offender, particular environments often inspire particular types of crime.
Attempts to confirm or reject our integrated approach require proper operational definitions of place and space. Without such definitions and proper
data, the empirical findings we reported above should not be overstated.
Future research might incorporate findings from environmental psychology
showing that attachment of individuals to a place is essentially emotional
rather than functional. The qualities of emotional attachment are often
expressed by action and behavior (Low and Altman 1992). In other words, if
individuals feel a given structure is their home and the place they attach
deep personal meaning, they are more likely to keep it clean (e.g., no litter or
graffiti), repaired (e.g., no broken windows), and attractively landscaped in
the front and backyards (Brown, Perkins, and Brown 2004; Taylor,
Gottfredson, and Brower 1985).
The work of Skogan (spiral of decay), Wilson and Kelling (broken windows), and Sampson, Raudenbush, and Earls (collective efficacy) suggest
that residential instability and social neglect contribute to the retreat of the
law-abiding citizens (Sampson, Raudenbush, and Earls 1997; Skogan 1990;
Wilson and Kelling 1982). Real estate agents may refer to this as curb appeal
in which a simple drive through a street or neighborhood yields images that
indicate whether residents are making an effort to maintain the physical
appearances of their neighborhood. Empirical indicators might also take the
form of the number of offenders per capita, number of bars/taverns per resident, ratio of abandoned buildings to occupied structures, ratio of apartments
to single-family homes, quality of leisure/entertainment venues (e.g., museums vs. strip joints), and so forth.
Moreover, efforts should continue toward formulating crime prevention
strategies reflecting the place versus space distinction as it relates to type of
crime. Tani (2002) made an interesting observation regarding sexualized
space. Tani argued that physical locations may be elastic in its meaning and
change depending on time and circumstances. During the night, for instance,
the space becomes sexualized and is controlled by the prostitutes and kerb
crawlers, while during the day, it is nonsexual and controlled by the residents. Future research may also serve to sharpen the expressive crime and

Downloaded from uar.sagepub.com at Randall Library, UNC Wilmington on November 26, 2012

12

Urban Affairs Review XX(X)

instrumental crime concepts as they are related to decisions by offenders to

commit a crime.
The central thesis of this article is that the sociology of place can serve to
inform environmental criminology toward a better understanding of the spatial distribution of crime and crime prevention efforts. Emplacement is
offered as the core concept for forging this link and for understanding how
the social aspects of place contribute to crime and its prevention. Future
efforts could be geared to formulating more empirically based indicators and
testable statements regarding the fundamental argument put forth in this
work. There is a strong need for interdisciplinary efforts to develop the thesis
we propose here, as it intersects various disciplines.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank the anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments
and suggestions.

Authors Note
The authors contributed equally to this research.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research,
authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Note
1. There are a total of 40 crimes in the categories of property and personal crimes,
of which we classified 10 crimes. Instrumental crime includes auto theft, burglary
(both business and dwelling), mysterious disappearance of property or money,
and theft. Expressive crime includes assault, fight with weapons, shooting, robbery of person, and stabbing. The 10 crimes together account for about 56.3%
of all property and personal crimes in residential addresses and about 41.7% in
commercial addresses. The percentage is lower in commercial address, as shoplifting, the single most common crime in commercial areas, is not included in the
analyses. Finally, we acknowledge that robbery of person can be viewed as an
instrumental, rather than expressive, crime. However, Porter and Alison (2006)
showed that the nature of interaction between offenders and victims in personal
robberies is different than that in commercial robberies. For one, they pointed out

Downloaded from uar.sagepub.com at Randall Library, UNC Wilmington on November 26, 2012

13

Kim et al.

that robbers of businesses are more likely to wear a disguise and to use a surprise
attack, whereas personal robberies are more likely to involve violence and victim
resistance. Offenders may also come from a different offending culture. Street
robbers often seek to demonstrate they are tough and to establish or reinforce a
reputation of masculinity (expressive).

References
Baldry, Chris. 1999. SpaceThe final frontier. Sociology 33 (3): 535-53.
Barker, Roger. 1968. Ecological psychology: Concepts and methods for studying the
environment of human behavior. Stanford: Stanford Univ. Press.
Bell, Michael Mayerfeld. 1997. The ghosts of place. Theory and Society 26:813-36.
Bernasco, Wim. 2010. A sentimental journey to crime: Effects of residential history
on crime location choice. Criminology 48 (2): 389-416.
Brantingham, Paul, and Patricia Brantingham. 1984. Patterns in crime. New York:
Macmillan.
Brown, Barbara, Douglas Perkins, and Graham Brown. 2004. Incivilities, place
attachment and crime: Block and individual effects. Journal of Environmental
Psychology 24 (3): 359-71.
Buerger, Michael. 1993. Reexamining the Minneapolis repeat complaint address
policing (RECAP) experiment, 1986-1987. [Computer file]. Minneapolis: Crime
Control Institute [producer], 1993. Ann Arbor: Inter-university Consortium for
Political and Social Research [distributor], 1994.
Burgess, Ernest W. 1916. Juvenile delinquency in a small city. Journal of the American
Institute of Criminal Law and Criminology 6:724-28.
Chapin, F. Stuart. 1974. Human activity patterns in the city: Things people do in time
and space. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Fritzon, Katarina. 2001. An examination of the relationship between distance travelled and motivational aspects of fire setting behavior. Journal of Environmental
Psychology 21 (1): 45-60.
Gieryn, Thomas F. 2000. A space for place in sociology. Annual Review of Sociology
26:463-96.
Hope, Tim. 1995. Community crime prevention. In Building a safer society: Crime
and justice. Vol. 19, edited by Michael Tonry and David P. Farrington, 21-89.
Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.
Jeffery, C. Ray. 1971. Crime prevention through environmental design. Beverley
Hills: SAGE.
Jessop, Bob, Neil Brenner, and Martin Jones. 2008. Theorizing sociospatial relations.
Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 26:389-401.
Kent, Susan. 1984. Analyzing activity areas: An ethnoarchaeological study of the use
of space. Albuquerque: Univ. of New Mexico Press.

Downloaded from uar.sagepub.com at Randall Library, UNC Wilmington on November 26, 2012

14

Urban Affairs Review XX(X)

Lersch, Kim M., and Timothy Hart. 2011. Space, time, and crime. Durham: Carolina
Academic Press.
Lobao, Linda, and Rogelio Saenz. 2002. Spatial inequality and diversity as an emerging research area. Rural Sociology 67 (1): 497-511.
Low, S., and I. Altman. 1992. Place attachment: A conceptual inquiry. In Place
attachment, edited by I. Altman and S. Low, 1-12. New York: Plenum.
Michelson, William. 1970. Man and his urban environment: Sociological approach.
Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Newman, Oscar. 1972. Defensible space. New York: Macmillan.
Newman, Oscar. 1996. Creating defensible space. Washington, DC: U.S. Department
of Housing and Urban Development.
Palen, J. John. 2012. The urban world. Boulder: Paradigm.
Porter, Louise E., and Laurence J. Alison. 2006. Behavioural coherence in group robbery: A circumplex model of offender and victim interactions. Aggressive Behavior 32:330-42.
Quetelet, A. 1835. Sur l homme et le developpement de ses facultes, ou Essai dune
physique sociale [A treatise on man and the development of his faculties]. Paris:
Bachelier.
Sampson, Robert, S. W. Raudenbush, and E. Earls. 1997. Neighborhoods and violent
crime: A multilevel study of collective efficacy. Science 277:918-24.
Schwarz, Maureen T. 2009. Emplacement and contamination: Mediation of Navajo
identity through excorporated blood. Body & Society 15 (2): 145-68.
Shaw, Clifford R. 1929. Delinquency areas. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.
Shaw, Clifford R., and Henry D. McKay. 1931. Social factors in juvenile delinquency.
Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
Sherman, Lawrence. 1995. Hot spots of crime and criminal careers of places. In
Crime and place: Crime prevention studies, edited by John Eck and David
Weisburd, 35-52. Monsey, NY: Willow Tree Press.
Sherman, Lawrence. 1998. Policing for crime prevention. In Preventing crime:
What works, what doesnt, whats promising, edited by Lawrence W. Sherman,
Denise Gottfredson, Doris MacKenzie, John Eck, Peter Reuter, and Shawn
Bushway, A Report to the United States Congress, Prepared for the National
Institute of Justice. http://www.ncjrs.gov/works/index.htm (accessed October
17, 2012).
Skogan, W. G. 1990. Disorder and decline: Crime and the spiral of decay in American
neighborhoods. New York: Free Press.
Smith, Philip. 1999. The elementary forms of place and their transformation: A
Durkheimian model. Qualitative Sociology 22 (1): 13-36.
Tani, Sirpa. 2002. Whose place is this space? Life in the street prostitution area of
Helsinki, Finland. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 26 (2):
343-59.

Downloaded from uar.sagepub.com at Randall Library, UNC Wilmington on November 26, 2012

15

Kim et al.

Taylor, Ralph, Stephen Gottfredson, and Sidney Brower. 1985. Attachment to place:
Discriminant validity and impacts of disorder and diversity. American Journal of
Community Psychology 13 (5): 525-42.
Tickamyer, Ann R. 2000. Space matters! Spatial inequality in future sociology. Contemporary Sociology 29 (6): 805-13.
Tita, George E., Jacqueline Cohen, and John Engberg. 2005. An ecological study of
the location of gang set space. Social Problems 52 (2): 272-99.
Tunnell, Kenneth D. 2006. Living off crime. New York: Rowman & Littlefield.
Urry, John. 2001. The sociology of space and place. In The Blackwell companion to sociology, edited by Judith Blau, 3-15. Malden, Massachusetts: Blackwell Publishers.
Wainwright, Joel, and Trevor J. Barnes. 2009. Nature, economy, and the space-place
distinction. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 27:966-86.
Welsh, Brandon, and David Farrington. 2004. Surveillance for crime prevention in
public space: Results and policy choices in Britain and America. Criminology &
Public Policy 3 (3): 497-526.
White, R. C. 1932. The relations of felonies to environmental factors in Indianapolis.
Social Forces 10 (4): 498-509.
Whyte, William F. 1943. Street corner society. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.
Wilson, James Q., and George L. Kelling. 1982. Broken windows: The police and
neighborhood safety. Atlantic Monthly, March, 29-38.

Bios
Sangmoon Kim is an associate professor of sociology at University of North
Carolina Wilmington. His research interests involve social structure, network analysis, and socioeconomic development. His recent publications include The Diffusion
of the Internet in Social Science Research and Embedded Trade: A Third Party
Effect in Social Science Quarterly.
Randy L. LaGrange is a professor at the University of North Carolina Wilmington
where he teaches courses in sociology and criminology. He received his Ph.D. in
sociology from Rutgers University in 1983. He has published in numerous journals
on a variety of topics, including police work, juvenile delinquency, fear of crime, and
comparative criminology. His current scholarly interests focus on social control in the
community, environmental criminology, and the sociology of sport.
Cecil L. Willis is a professor of criminology at the University of North Carolina
Wilmington. He has published articles in Criminology, The American Sociologist,
Sociological Inquiry, Science Communication, Journal of Criminal Justice, and the
Journal of Crime and Justice on policing, stratification in science, comparative
criminology, criminal justice theory, and academic administration. His current
research interests include environmental criminology and the sociology of place.

Downloaded from uar.sagepub.com at Randall Library, UNC Wilmington on November 26, 2012