Evaluation of Policy Impact

Background

The policy under focus is the implementation of CCTV in high-crime areas. High crime areas CCTV refers to a security surveillance system that entails putting up and fixing cameras in public places to assist with video monitoring. The surveillance recording footage is applicable in investigations or even for crime prevention purposes.

History and Context

CCTV utilization in high-crime areas traces its roots back to the necessity to improve public safety and prevent committing criminal acts. Its rise can be traced back to Great Britain between 1996 and 1998, wherein 75% of the Home Office budget was directed towards CCTV-related projects. The prevalence of urbanization, increased density of population, and hi-tech penetration have developed such a situation wherein surveillance systems serve as one of the prime tools adopted for responding to crime-related challenges (Piza et al., 2019). In the last quarter of the 20th and the beginning of the 21st century, the world has witnessed an upswing in criminal activities in urban areas. These incidents of breach of security were felt to be such that they not only constituted a threat to the safety of the people but also had social and economic implications. As such, the country’s policymakers, as well as the law enforcement agencies, were made aware of the necessity of providing measures that are innovative in meeting these challenges at the earliest, which then led to the implementation of CCTV cameras.

Program, Policy, or Practice Description

CCTV in high crime areas is the strategic placement of the monitoring cameras within the areas that have had a history in crime levels. The surveillance cameras are linked to the monitoring stations, and they record around the clock the happenings of the area (Piza et al., 2019). The footage is recorded and stored for a given time, which can be accessed afterward by law enforcement agencies to investigate various crimes, identify criminals, and get evidence that can lead to the prosecutions of the criminal. Some systems incorporate live monitoring capabilities such that law officers can handle incidents as they occur in real time. In addition, the installation of visible surveillance cameras is seen to prevent potential offenders who would have harbored such intentions because they know what they are going to do is constantly scrutinized.

Key Goals for the Policy, Program or Practice

The primary goals of implementing CCTV in high-crime areas are as follows:

• Crime prevention: The policy is aimed to reduce people’s involvement in criminal activities through observable watching. Visible video cameras deter the crime psychologically since the offenders are always aware of their wrongdoings’ scrutiny (National Institute of Justice, n.d).
• Improved Public Safety: The CCTV is expected to improve public safety by equipping law enforcement agencies with an accurate time observation tool in public spaces that they can use to make an immediate or timely response to incidents and emergencies reported.
• Crime Reduction: The policy, in the long run, is expected to reduce crime rates in areas where CCTV systems are put up (National Institute of Justice, n.d). Through deterring acts of criminal activities and increasing identification and apprehension of the culprits, it can be believed that the crime rate will be reduced.

Why the topic is essential to Evaluate

The Evaluation of CCTV in high-crime areas is critical for several reasons. First, crime areas are often susceptible to a heightened risk of criminal activities, leaving residents and businesses vulnerable. Evaluating the effectiveness of CCTV in these areas would be crucial in enhancing public safety and thus securing the environment for the community. Secondly, High-crime areas usually experience a reduction in community well-being. This culminates in the occupants living terrified, businesses incurring losses, or visitors being discouraged from carrying out any economic or social activities. Evaluation of the topic can urge community well-being improvements and foster a sense of security and revitalization in these areas. Besides, a robust Evaluation of this decision in policy gives the policymakers the ability to draw sensible decisions regarding its future. If the policy proves effective, it can be extended to cover other more expansive areas while any intervening factors and possible areas of improvement can be set right. Policymakers will naturally fine-tune the CCTV implementation up or down to optimize its impact. In addition, it offers the public transparency and accountability.

Needs Evaluation

The relevance of a needs evaluation

Conducting a needs evaluation is an essential initial step that warrants consideration should be given to developing or adopting a policy, program, or practice such as CCTV in high crime areas. It is through this Evaluation that the historical context of the problem will be understood, and the extent of and the population most affected by this problem will be established (Novisurvey, n.d). Through better need evaluation, letting the policymakers and stakeholders decide if they want a particular intervention, even if they actually have a problem, is the most effective way of solving the problem.

Defining the Problem: Crime in High-Crime Areas

The problem under assessment entails high crime areas. These are localized areas characterized by high criminal incidences that cause much harm to public security and community welfare. Appropriate measures to address the problem would be developed, implemented, and effectively evaluated.

Nature & Extent of Problem Assessment

The problem of high crime areas is, by definition, the status of unhealthy surveillance that allows a high prevalence of criminal activities. Crime rates stand out for all crimes relative to other locations, making crime soar significantly in these localities. The primary causes are property crime, which includes theft and vandalism. Violent crimes, such as assaults and robberies, also contribute to the overall crime rate. Estimation showed that the crime rate in places with poor lighting and under surveillance is about 50% more than in well-illuminated and monitored regions within specific areas (Shaw, 2010). These statistics underline the desperate necessity of proper interventions to tackle and reduce the nuisance of high crime areas, especially by such measures as putting in place Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) facilities for enhanced surveillance and deterrence against acts of crime.

The History of the Problem:

Historical events and socioeconomic and urban penetration played significant roles in the emergence of high-crime areas. Some of the localized eminent issues in these areas have been poverty, unemployment, and lack of access to quality educational and economic opportunities. Moreover, the Concentration activities of criminal elements are attributable to a history of disinvestment and neglect.

Possible sources of the problem:

The problem of high crime areas can be attributed to many factors. Root causes can be associated with economic disparities, restricted quality education opportunities, high rates of unemployment, and lack of community resources. These include social disorganization, decay of the neighborhood, and hopelessness, all contributing to an environment favorable for crime (Yigzaw et al., 2023). Other factors misguiding individuals into these problems consist of substance abuse, the presence of gangs, and easy access to firearms amongst others (Yigzaw et al., 2023). It is essential to identify these root causes so that crime-reducing and community-bettering strategies can be created.

People Affected by the Problem

The problem of high crime areas involves many varieties of people and groups from the community at large. They include:

• Residents: Individuals living in high-crime areas often find themselves directly affected by the increased risk of victimization and, hence, the consequent implications to their daily lives. Fear of the crimes and the consequences often shapes their routines, mobility, and general well-being.
  • Businesses: A business that operates within these localities incurs economic losses because of pilferage, vandalism, and other criminal activities. The loss can be financial penalties or a lowering of the business environment quality.
  • Visitors and Commuters: In high crime areas, people who visit or transit, including commuters who are used to passing in such places daily, risk becoming victims of criminals. Such fears will tend to prevent economic and social activities in such areas.

Target Population for the Intervention:

The target population of the intervention installing CCTV in high crime areas is directly the residents, businesses, and the greater community located within these particular areas. The target population captures the potential victims of crime who may be motivated to venture into the high crime areas at any cost, seeking better security, and also the potential offenders who can be motivated by the presence of surveillance.

Types of Data Needs Evaluation:

The following presents types of data that are required in needs evaluation and need to be collected from different sources:

• Crime Data: Statistics about various crimes elaborately describing the nature, sites, as well as the frequency of crimes are required in order to understand the magnitude and intensity of the problem.
• Socioeconomic Data: The root of the problem lies in gathering data on socioeconomic status, level of education, employment rate, and income distribution within high-crime areas.
• Community Surveys: Surveys may be helpful in the collection of vital information from the residents on their perceptions, fears, and experiences of crimes within their residential areas.
• Historical Records: Historical records such as reports on crimes or logs of incidents would provide an impression of the crime that occurred over the years and thus expose patterns and trends.

Evaluating Existing Resources:

Need Evaluation is critical in determining if there is an existing policy or other efforts in the program that exist to address the identified problem. In case there is an alternative intervention, it must be established if installing CCTVs is a better proposal as compared with the other proposals being presented. Other factors assessed will include cost-effectiveness, efficiency, and specificity of needs towards the high crime areas.

Using Scholarly Sources:

Scholarly sources will become priceless for extracting relevant data and historical perspectives and gaining insights from theoretical and evidence-based viewpoints. The two possible choices of scholarly sources which, if located, might be found to contribute to this Evaluation are:

• Criminal Justice Research Journals: These may include rate and crime causes description as well as the population affected mainly by the high crime areas analysis.
• Sociological Studies: It gives information on the socioeconomic situations, community relationships, and background of these problematic areas.

Theory Evaluation

Importance of Theory Evaluation:

Theory evaluation is essential in evaluating the effectiveness of a policy, program, or practice, such as that which involves the installation of CCTV in high-crime areas. This scrutiny would help examine the underlying assumptions, logic, and expected outcomes of the policy. Understanding the theory used helps to provide a formal assessment of the potential impact of the policy by identifying its limitations and unintended consequences (EvalCommunity, 2023). It also provides us the opportunity to evaluate the theory on grounds of validity as well as applicability in the crime prevention context, and that is required in the decision-making process.

Theoretical Rationale for CCTV in High Crime Areas

The theory underlying CCTV surveillance is the criminology theory, which argues that people prone to crime will be unlikely to commit the crime when they perceive someone is watching them (National Institute of Justice, n.d). This logic is premised on the fact that surveillance cameras make potential offenders more aware of the risk they are taking by upholding the law, thus discouraging going ahead with a crime. Criminals are supposed to have less intent on practicing criminal activities when they feel that someone is watching them since actual or imagined being caught and punished is indeed a potent inhibitor. Thus, as per the theory, CCTV is a preventative tool by influencing potential offenders to make their own decisions.

Evaluation of the Theory

The theory underlying the use of CCTV in crime prevention is likely logical to support the fundamentals of criminological principles. However, increased surveillance, as the rational choice theory suggests, reduces crime because it communicates that there is a high rate of getting caught. Therefore, even though the benefits are reduced, the crime costs, including the time in prison, still outweigh the benefits. In this perspective, the surveillance cameras introduce a significant cost (the risk of being caught) that may deter the criminal.

Limitations of the Theory:

• Deterrence Effectiveness: It is made in light of the assumption that people are generally regular actors who have an accurate appreciation of the risk of being caught (Moyo, 2019). Nonetheless, the actual deterrence effectiveness of CCTVs may differ depending on individual perceptions, characteristics of the offender as well as situational factors.
• Limited Applicability on Impulsive Crimes: The theory may be somewhat limited in its application to impulsive crimes since those involved in impulsive crimes are not guided by thoughts about the act’s consequences as the pre-med event individuals do.
• Privacy Issues: The theory does not consider the possible privacy issues and social costs associated with pervasive surveillance. Over-surveillance may result in ethical and civil liberties issues.

Supporting Research

The research on whether CCTV is an effective crime prevention mode elicits mixed results. Although some evidence has been able to support the theory stating that surveillance can decrease certain types of crimes like, for instance, property crime or disorderly conduct, when it comes to violent crime, the effects cannot be considered. For example, research such as “Assessing the Impact of CCTV on Crime” indicates that while CCTVs might succeed in reducing planned crime, they might fail to deter spontaneous offenses.

Potential Injuries and Unintended Results

Potential Harms and Unintended Consequences of Installation of CCTV in High Crime Areas. They may include:

• Privacy Infringement: Extensive surveillance might infringe upon an individual’s rights over privacy and thereby raise public awareness over constant state surveillance.
• Selective Crime Displacement: What the theory does not provide for is that the criminals may, immediately after learning that monitoring has been carried out in some areas, shift to new areas that would be left unmonitored. Hence, in this case, they displace crime rather than reduce it.
• Community Relations: Over-reliance on surveillance will likely strain community-police relations, eroding trust and cooperation in crime prevention endeavors.

Process Evaluation

Importance of Process Evaluations:

Process evaluation, therefore, is a vital part of assessing a policy, program, or practice, such as installing Closed-Circuit Television (CCTV) in high-crime areas. Process Evaluation checks whether program activities were implemented as intended and resulted in specific outputs (CDC, n.d). Such evaluations are keen to know how the policy is being implemented and if it is being followed as it ought.

Specifically, Process evaluations are necessary for the following reasons:

• Ensuring Fidelity: It ensures that the policy under implementation follows what was intended during its design.
• Identification of Challenges: These evaluations identify challenges and barriers against effective program implementation, ensuring necessary changes are made in due time.
• Quality Improvement: They offer reviews and feedback on the areas that may require improvement to enhance or modify the nature of the intervention or program.
• Accountability: Process evaluations keep practitioners and agencies accountable regarding the level of adherence to the intended procedures of the involved policy.

Practitioner Partnership:

To get a holistic view concerning the process of implementing CCTV in areas experiencing high crime calls for the development of partnerships with relevant practitioners. Some of the critical practitioner roles in the implementation of the policy, under that context, involve law enforcement officers enforcing the laws and handling those accused of violating the laws. There are also technical aspects of the implementation processes, such as experts in charge of installing cameras as well as maintaining them. Community engagement stakeholders should also be engaged as part of key role players in the CCTV systems.

Developing Trust with Practitioners:

Some of the steps that could be taken in order to build this trust with the practitioners are:

• Open Communication: The communication channel needs to open up so that information is shared with the practitioners as to the goals and objectives of the process evaluation.
• Collaborate: Involve practitioners in planning and undertaking a process evaluation. Seek their expertise and share the benefits by recognizing their contribution.
• Respect Professional Expertise: Recognize and respect the practice members’ competence in their respective roles, thereby availing in absolute terms; the Evaluation aims to enhance policy successes.
• Confidentiality Protection: It is necessary that the information given by the practitioners is treated with confidentiality and does not pose as a tool employed against them.

Process Measures:

• Three key process measures that can help understand whether the policy of installing CCTV in high crime-prone areas is getting implemented as desired or proposed to implement include:
• Camera Installation and Maintenance: This indicator gauges how effectively and timely the installations are affected and the adequacy in which maintenance is undertaken. (DHS, n.d) It is measured by constantly monitoring the number of installed cameras, debris sites noted, frequency, and success of maintaining the same.
• Training and Coordination: Assesses the training of the personnel from law enforcement who are in charge of monitoring the cameras, as well as their coordination when responding to an incident. This will identify whether the training was sufficient, operator competence, and effectiveness of communication-collaboration across the board.
• Public Awareness and Community Engagements: One measure is the reach establishment of public awareness campaigns, community feedback mechanisms, and a level of community engagement in enhancing safety through CCTV.

Data Sources for Process Measures:

The process measures described above may be appraised using the following data sources. These may be:

• Camera Installation Records: Through records, as maintained by the installation agency, details regarding the installation of CCTV cameras with location and specifications could be ascertained.
• Maintenance Logs: Data regarding the maintenance schedule, history of service and repairs conducted, and even records on incidents relating to the camera that show any pre-failure trends will come under this heading.
• Training Records: Training courses and individual training records for personnel shall be filed concerning operator proficiency and readiness.
• Public Engagement Reports – Agency reports for community relations will assist in the data gathering on public awareness campaigns, community feedback, and engagement activities.

Challenges in Accessing Data:

Various challenges are bound to face the access to data essential in a process evaluation:

• Data Availability: Some data may be rendered unavailable and accessible, susceptible information about camera placement points or unique law enforcement processes that can compromise security.
• Data Consistency: Variable format, quality, and completeness of the data collected from different sources when integrating and analyzing data.
• Privacy concerns: Data collection on public engagement and community feedback can give rise to privacy concerns; thus, personally identifiable information must be carefully managed.
• Interagency Cooperation: If several agencies are implementing the policy, coordination and cooperation from the interagency could be necessary to access comprehensive data.

Impact Evaluation

Significance of the Outcome and Impact Evaluations:

Through outcome and impact evaluation, one can evaluate the effectiveness and success of a policy, program, or practice, such as installing Closed-Circuit Television (CCTV) in high-crime areas. These assessments provide an understanding of the natural world in the policy’s dimensions, tending to include its reduction of crime to community safety. The resulting assessments are, therefore, significant in informing decision-making, resource allocation, and areas that need advancements in this evidence-based approach (EvalCommunity, 2023). Policymakers will assess whether the intended Set of Actions or Policy has yielded the desired outcomes and impacts and whether it is a cost-effective policy to address the problem.

Harnessing Success—Outcome Measures:

Because the installation of CCTV in high crime areas is a policy that is expected to have multiple effects, this policy’s success can be measured by the use of multiple outcome measures that pertain to the dimensions of the intended effect of public surveillance.

• Decreased Reported Crime Rates: A critical outcome measure includes tracking the general decrease of reported crime rates occurring in monitored areas. This borders on whether the CCTV presence resulted in a statistically significant reduction in property crimes, including violent crimes and disorderly conduct.
• Changes in Types of Crimes: It is essential to evaluate how the policy impacts the distribution of various types of crimes. This outcome measure will provide insight into whether there is a movement in the composition of crimes but with an emphasis that more serious offenses with a higher social cost, like violent crimes, are being reduced while still keeping that decrease in property crimes.
• Public Perception of Safety and Security: Feeling safety within the community is an essential measure for outcome. Feedback from residents and businesses in high crime areas can be sought to see if they feel safer and more secure and perceive that the CCTV has helped.

Types of Data Needed for Outcome Measures and Challenges:

The collection of the data necessary for outcome measures comes with different challenges:

1. Crime Statistics: Comparing crime statistics enforced by law agencies that assist them in assessing the rate at which the crime has been reported and reduced. On the other hand, these may be difficult to access based on crime data that are accurate and up-to-date since different police agencies in the country have varied recording and reporting methods when it comes to crime. Moreover, the level of reliability regarding data may be subject even more to the influence of changes regarding recording behavior as a result of the CCTV installation.
2. Categorizing Crimes: These changes in the types of crime committed are best identified using a systemic classification of incidents. Consistent with this, there must exist a consistent classification of crime so that comparisons before and after the policy can be reliable.
3. Perception Data: Some methods include surveys, interviews, and focus groups to ascertain the perceived level of safety and security. Some of the challenges encountered in these methods include response bias, lack of baseline data for comparison, and difficulties in quantification of qualitative data.

Studies Evaluating the Effectiveness of CCTV:

Some studies assess the impact of installing Closed-Circuit Television (CCTV) in high-crime areas. In one remarkable study, Piza et al. (2019) wanted to establish whether a hot spot in an urban area with a high crime rate, CCTV, can reduce crime. The most significant focus of this study was mainly on finding out whether the installation of CCTV cameras can lead to a significant reduction in crime. The findings from the data collected from this study showed a fantastic fall in most of the property crimes, majorly those associated with theft and vandalism cases. Such findings supported the theory that CCTV represents a deterrent from opportunistic but also premeditated, as the presence of cameras influences criminal behavior. This can provide a safer environment for high-crime areas.

Another study done by Gill & Angela (2005) only focused on the specific impact of CCTV in deterring violent crimes, that is, high-crime neighborhoods. The study aimed to evaluate if CCTV itself had a significant effect in reducing subjects of violent crimes since, more often than not, they were of an impulsive and spontaneous type. Emerging from the above research, the findings from this particular study demonstrated that it presented moderate effects of reducing subjects of violent crime with the use of CCTVs in areas with high crime rates. This indicates that while surveillance cameras are effective in suppressing pre-planned crimes, it has a lower deterrent effect when it comes to violent activities. This finding complicated the impact of the policy, signifying that its effectiveness may well depend on what type of crime is being targeted.

Viewed collectively, these studies help to reveal the varying effectiveness of CCTV in high-crime areas while shining a light on the nuanced relationship between surveillance and different categories of criminal behavior. While CCTVs seem highly effective in deterring certain types of crimes, their impact on many others may be less influential, whereby it does emphasize the importance of consideration of the particular context and nature of the crimes in high crime areas when weighing the overall effectiveness of this policy.

Cost-Efficiency Evaluation

Importance of Cost-Benefit Analysis:

Evaluating the policy for installing Closed-Circuit Television (CCTV) in high-crime areas calls for a cost-benefit analysis. Policymakers, based on this particular analysis, can be able to consider whether to come up with such a policy since the analysis helps weigh the costs involved and benefits associated with costs (EvalCommunity, n.d). It may involve a methodical judgment of cost-effective measures and whether the expected benefits of the policy satisfactorily offset the costs.

Identified Costs:

1. Initial Installation and Maintenance Costs: Some of the significant upfront costs related to CCTV implementation include the purchasing and installing of surveillance cameras, network infrastructure, and associated technology (kenvisiontechniks, n.d.). Another associated cost is maintenance and monitoring, and it incorporates keeping equipment in state-of-the-art condition, staff salaries, and system updates.
2. Privacy and Ethical Concerns: Though not financial, privacy and ethical concerns present costs regarding these intangible social and ethical considerations. Public concerns about privacy violations and civil liberties may damage reputation and community mistrust, with potential legal challenges.

Identified Benefits:

1. Crime Reduction and Enhanced Safety: One prior benefit is the possible decrease in crime rates, which translates to safer communities. The potential deterrence effect of CCTV can reduce property crimes, thus translating to the prior benefit being tangible concerning the financial loss for victims.
2. Community Reassurance: The CCTV’s existence in high crime areas can offer an intangible wherein the residents and business establishments gain a certain level of security (Lodge Service, n.d). It reassures people that they are not likely to suffer from harm or danger. It can do enough for them that even when something is stolen from them by criminals, there will be some degree of justice served. This intangible benefit may promote economic activity as well as investment.

Opportunity Costs:

Deciding to install the policy of CCTV for high crime areas portrays foregone opportunities. The resources used in installing CCTV could have been channeled towards alternative crime prevention strategies, other social programs, or various community development programs. These opportunity costs reflected lost opportunities to address crime root causes, invest in building community, and seek innovative solutions with potentially more significant and long-term results for reducing crime. Evaluating opportunity costs is essential for assessing whether CCTV is the most efficient use of available resources.

Conclusion

In conclusion, steps of the evaluation hierarchy are vital in deciding whether there is a need for policy continuation on installing Closed-Circuit Television (CCTV) in high crime areas. Each stage, from step one (needs assessment) to step seven (cost-efficiency analysis), helps expand a grasp that will assist in arriving at an evidence-based decision.

At this stage, the knowledge that we have developed is in the form of a theoretical rationale for the policy in order to enhance the perceived risk of apprehension and thereby deter crime. However, our knowledge at this stage still needs to be completed. Certain vital aspects, yet unexplored, will further help us make informed decisions about the policy in the future. First and foremost would be the efficacy and targeting issue of these CCTVs. Whether this surveillance deters such premeditated and even impulsive crimes from happening within massive crime densities needs to be established. The variety of crimes and how they work within different communities must be learned as a proportional prism for judgment.

Second, we have to discuss community and privacy implications. This includes further researching the community’s response to surveillance weighing the perception of being more safe because these systems are in place against concerns of privacy and civil liberties. Third, a critical cost-efficiency assessment should be carried out to determine whether the investment in CCTV is the most efficient outlay of expenditure concerning crime reduction within these high-risk zones.

Based on the above, I propose this sensitization to be done in phases. According to the deterrence theory, implementation for the start should be done in areas that have high levels of chances for premeditated crimes. Nonetheless, there should be rigorous impact evaluations to measure the effectiveness of the policy. In addition, the design of community engagement and awareness programs will tackle all those issues related to privacy aspects and give clear transparency in using such security systems provided by CCTV. Another critical element required for the process to gain success and acceptability of the policy is to achieve the tract of the targeted population.

References

CDC. (n.d). Types of Evaluation. (n.d.). https://www.cdc.gov/std/program/pupestd/types%20of%20evaluation.pdf

DHS. (n.d.). CCTV technology handbook. https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/CCTV-Tech-HBK_0713-508.pd

EvalCommunity. (2023). Impact evaluation: Definition. https://www.evalcommunity.com/career-center/impact-evaluation/

EvalCommunity. (2023, February 20). Evaluation theories: Understanding the frameworks of M&E. https://www.evalcommunity.com/career-center/evaluation-theories/

Gill, M. & Spriggs, A. (2005). Assessing the impact of CCTV. https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/assessing-impact-cctv

kenvisiontechniks . (n.d).CCTV surveillance design, installation and management. https://www.kenvisiontechniks.com/electronic-surveillance-management/cctv-surveillance-design-installation-management/

Lodge Service. (2023).Advantages of CCTV security: Safeguarding businesses: https://lodgeservice.com/advantages-of-cctv-security-safeguarding-businesses/

Moyo, S. (2019). Evaluating the use of CCTV surveillance systems for crime control and prevention: Selected case studies from Johannesburg and Tshwane, Gauteng. Retrieved November 5, 2023, from Core. ac.UK website: https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/286383944.pdf

National Institute of Justice. (n.d). Practice profile: Closed-circuit television (CCTV) surveillance. https://crimesolutions.ojp.gov/ratedpractices/25

Novisurvey. (n.d). Four beneficial reasons to conduct a needs assessment survey. https://novisurvey.net/blog/four-beneficial-reasons-to-conduct-a-needs-assessment-survey–.aspx

Piza, E. L., Welsh, B. C., Farrington, D. P., & Thomas, A. L. (2019). CCTV surveillance for crime prevention: A 40-year systematic review with meta-analysis. Criminology & Public Policy, 18(1), 135–159. doi:10.1111/1745-9133.12419

Shaw, M. (2010). Handbook on the crime prevention guidelines: Making them work. United Nations Publications.

Yigzaw, Y., Mekuriaw, A., & Amsalu, T. (2023). Analyzing physical and socioeconomic factors for property crime incidents in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. Heliyon, 9(2). https://www.cell.com/heliyon/pdf/S2405-8440(23)00489-9.pdf