Introduction
Hot spot policing and crime mapping have successfully reduced crime rates. Hot spot policing involves a place-based policing strategy that targets the police resources and increased enforcement of locations that report high criminal activity. It involves a wide range of activities ranging from offender-focused policing to increased enforcement and problem-oriented policing. Law enforcement agencies use analytical approaches to map and visualize the patterns of crime-related incidents. The agencies use information criminal information from a particular place to detect how criminal activities spatially. Mapping the information provided by law enforcement agencies helps effectively analyze where crimes occur.
Hot spot policing and crime mapping were implemented within the United States enforcement departments. Hot spot policing was first used in 1988 within the Minneapolis departments. By 2006, a survey of the United States police departments showed that the strategy of mapping crime and hot spot policing was adopted by 81% of the departments (Neocleous, A., & Kastrinou, 2016). There is evidence that the systems have reduced crime even though the effects of crime reduction may vary depending on the policy tactics adopted. Hot-spot policing integrated with criminal mapping activities has been reported to have reduced crime for more extended periods than the previous traditional police actions. Most departments have reported that mapping crime and the implementation of mapping activities is preferred because it does not result in issues of crime displacement to other adjacent locations. Small hot-spot places have used the offender policing strategy, significantly reducing crime. Increasing police enforcement and time within hot spot areas will likely minimize firearm assaults, theft and police calls. Crime mapping and hot spot policing also use surveillance devices to reduce and prevent crime within the regions.
Some studies have reported that hot spot policing and crime mapping have short term adverse effects on residents of areas, especially their perception of procedural justice. However, eventually, the residents become more willing to cooperate with the law enforcers in attempts to limit criminal activities. The association between hot spot policing and the racial disparity is still unclear. A study in Las Vegas showed little difference between the arrest rates of the minority groups and Whites in areas that have adopted the strategies. A study in Minneapolis showed more discretionary searches among the Black drivers than Hispanic or Whites. Racial bias can be limited in hot spot policing by carefully targeting specific streets. The paper explores how hot spot policing and crime mapping reduce criminal activities.
Discussions
Decades ago, the American public was very sceptical and untrusting of the police operations. The government responded to the public after incidents relating to the treatment of the minority groups by the police. The initiatives led to strategies such as open data sharing between the police and the general public. Currently, police agencies use their website to share data related to the crimes and provide crime maps so that the public can view them (Lynn, 2022). Websites and crime maps became dominant in 2013, beginning with static and interactive maps. Crime mapping helped in the hot spot policing programs since it helped identify areas constantly reporting crimes. Community policing relies majorly on the agencies’ mapping, which indicates the allocation of patrol officers in terms of crime rates and resources.
Research by Ariel et al. to measure how hot spot policing helped control crime in buses showed significant divergence in crime. The paper argues that the crime is motivated by a person’s rational behaviour. The success of hot spot related policies depends extensively on the enforcement agencies exploiting the uncertain conditions or opportunities with which criminals operate (Ariel & Partridge, 2017). The criminals have very little information about the environment where they commit crimes; therefore, the policies need to take advantage of such situations. Braga and Weisburd observed that offenders arrested when hot spot police are on operation have minimal information about the geographical area and operate under uncertain conditions. Some offenders whose rationalities are bounded often assume that police crackdown is not restricted to specific locations; instead, the result of an increase of the law enforcers. They are likely to refrain from crime when the police are present, even if they have no information about the deployment pattern of the enforcers. The police departments will therefore use mapping strategies to identify crime-prone areas to facilitate deployments. With police presence in an area frequently experiencing crimes, offences become less or less probable. The presence of police depicts a simple rule of do not offend, making the offender avoids their illegal activities.
A Pittsburg field study on the importance of small-scale programs related to hot spot policing showed a significant reduction in violent crimes. The program only targeted about 0.5% of the residential areas in Pittsburg using proactive patrols. Also, the study results showed a reduction o over-policing arrests of minority groups or races (Fitzpatrick et al., 2020). The study contributes to the debate on hotspot policing and its benefits in reducing potential harms within the community. To determine if one should implement the policing strategy within a particular jurisdiction requires an assessment of the impacts of the policing on the residents of that area. Supposing the policymaker’s examination confirms that the program’s benefits outweigh the risks, then an oversight procedure should be formulated to avoid the use of aggressive and harmful practices. The crimes committed within the city were reduced at the rate of 1.6% during the study period. Relatively, the city avoided using the $3.4 million crime cost to the citizens. The crime reduction is minimal compared to the overall city rates because of the little effort of the patrol officers, having patrolled for only thirty-five minutes per day. It is important to note that the benefits of hotspot policing strategies may experience diminishing benefits supposing the patrolled sites are increased within the city.
Temporary and chronic hot spots help identify the differences affecting the strategies that deter crime in proactive patrols. Regular hot spots are likely to experience or report crimes for years. Police are aware of the areas that experience high magnitudes of crimes, but the rates may remain high even with the patrols. When police patrol temporary hotspot zones, the resources are spread to residential areas with low crime rates instead of the commercial centres where crime is rampant. The study shows that patrols within areas that experience temporary crimes reduce crime significantly even though the volume of crimes is less than in areas with persistent crime.
According to a study done by Basford, foot patrols on hot spot zones reduced serious crimes and violence. The study was led by pracademic police officers in charge of compliance and implementation outcomes (Basford et al., 2021). The study found that violent crime can be prevented using visible policing strategies such as crime mapping and hot spot policing. Host spot policing was mentioned as a guardianship tool that generates an important influence on criminals or offenders without using any traditional or direct contact. The experiment demonstrated that adopting the patrol strategy in hot spot areas significantly reduced crime count and harm within the community. The study shows that hot spot policing has increased residents’ compliance level with laws by almost 98%. Police officers were allocated to eight different harm spots, which they had to visit daily. The mean count for crimes on the streets was reduced to approximately 0.13%. It showed comprehensive evidence of reduced crimes during the period police conducted foot patrols in the area.
Since 1990, the United States has reported a decline in crime rates, including property and violent crimes. According to a study done by Lazzatti, the reduction in crime rates in New York was so huge that the media companies referred to it as a New York Miracle (Lazzati & Menichini, 2016). The decline in crimes in New York generated debates among many United States criminal experts, with most of them citing hot spot policing strategies as the leading factor. The experts mentioned that hot spot policing focused resources from one place to another, thus minimizing crime issues (Kamalu & Onyeozili, 2018). The study evaluated the policing actions using a game-theoretical model, strongly emphasizing the displacement mechanism of crime. Areas prone to more offenders require a lot of hot spots policing resources to help in the processes that curb illegal activities.
A study analyzing how hot spot policing and crime mapping in cities of five different countries showed that the strategies reduced crime. The five cities included Montevideo, Horizonte, Zapopan, Bogota and Sucre. The research also attempted to establish the evolution of crime concentration in Latin America and the importance of the hot spot policing strategies in its reduction (Jaitman & Ajzenman, 2016). The study’s main objective was to determine if the concentration of crime occurs in one place over time. It assessed the policing actions that combined hot spot detection and hierarchical crime mapping, adjacent location analysis, and blocks’ transitioning. Bogota’s city analysis showed a decline in the concentration of crime in hot spot areas after the enforcers implemented a policing strategy that used information on criminal activities to help deter crime. The police department in Montevideo reported a decline in crime concentration in 2013 after using deterrence strategies in hot spot zones More resources were allocated to the city’s hot spot zones; an emergency service was established with installed digital CCTV systems, thus influencing crime reduction.
Conclusion
In summary, hot spot policing and mapping crime are essential strategies that have helped limit criminal activities within different regions. Hot spot policing has helped the police departments and enforcement agencies to help distribute resources in crime-prone areas to minimize illegal activities. Mapping crime is used to provide the difference in rates of criminal activities between different regions. It is important to implement hotspot policing programs since it visualizes the crime rates with respect to the resources required. The programs might have a short-term negative impact on the general public but eventually influence their corporation with the police to keep the community secure and safe.
The police agencies adopted the mapping strategy since the public distrusted police operations, especially among the minority groups. They created websites that were useful and accessible to the public to assess the difference in crime rates in different areas. Crime being dependent on an individual’s rational behaviour was transformed by hot spot policing. Criminal activities were reduced when police officers were on parole, and there was quite a low probability that one would involve in illegal activity. Areas with low criminal activities benefit more from the hot spot policing programs than areas with persistent crimes.
Crime mapping and hotspot policing have provided better outcomes than traditional methods used by police to prevent crimes. The policing programs do not shift criminal activities to other regions; they manage them beyond expected levels. The new techniques have led to a decline in almost all types of crimes, including violent and property-related crimes. Policymakers should examine the benefits of the hotspot policing programs and crime mapping before initiating them in a geographical area.
References
Ariel, B., & Partridge, H. (2017). Predictable policing: Measuring the crime control benefits of hotspots policing at bus stops. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 33(4), 809-833.
Basford, L., Sims, C., Agar, I., Harinam, V., & Strang, H. (2021). Effects of One-a-Day Foot Patrols on Hot Spots of Serious Violence and Crime Harm: a Randomised Crossover Trial. Cambridge Journal of Evidence-Based Policing, 5(3), 119-133.
Fitzpatrick, D. J., Gorr, W. L., & Neill, D. B. (2020). Policing Chronic and Temporary Hot Spots of Violent Crime: A Controlled Field Experiment.
Jaitman, L., & Ajzenman, N. (2016). Crime concentration and hot spot dynamics in Latin America (No. IDB-WP-699). IDB Working Paper Series.
Kamalu, N. C., & Onyeozili, E. C. (2018). A Critical Analysis of the the ‘Broken Windows’ Policing in New York City and Its Impact: Implications for the Criminal Justice System and the African American Community. African Journal of Criminology & Justice Studies, 11(1).
Lazzati, N., & Menichini, A. A. (2016). Hot Spot Policing: A Study of Place‐Based Strategies for Crime Prevention. Southern Economic Journal, 82(3), 893-913.
Lynn, K. (2021). Open Crime Maps: How Are Police Departments Doing So Far? Doctoral dissertation, Portland State University.
Neocleous, A., & Kastrinou, M. (2016). The EU hotspot: Police war against the migrant.
write