Routine activity theory

Routine activity theory is a law enforcement concept that helps authorities identify potential crime targets. Instead of focusing on who might commit the crime, the theory uses a problem analysis triangle to analyze the potential environment for a crime to be committed. The theory states that for a crime such as theft or assault to occur, three specific factors are necessary. First, a criminal with the motive and means to commit the crime must be present. Second, a target for that crime must exist. Third, the target must be missing some form of protection or guardian. It is one of a number of theories used by police, security agencies, and other law enforcement agents to prevent potential crime. It can also aid in predicting how social and environmental factors will impact crime rates.

Background

Since the last quarter of the twentieth century, experts have worked to understand the factors that influence crime and why criminal activity is more common in some areas than others. A number of different theories were developed to help explain patterns of criminal activity. For example, the social disorganization theory puts forth the idea that neighborhoods that lack a sense of community because people reside there briefly may experience more crime. The crime opportunity theory states that a person who wants to commit a crime will look for a place with plenty of targets—or opportunities for crime—so a pickpocket will go to venues that attract many people with money. The broken windows theory suggests that ignoring smaller crimes, such as graffiti and vandalism, creates an environment in which people stop promoting order and leads to more serious and potentially dangerous crimes. The crime pattern theory focuses on the impact of insufficient protection that leads to opportunities for crime, such as unguarded locker rooms where people frequently do not lock their lockers.

Many of these theories address only one factor in a crime, such as the motivation of the criminal to commit the crime, the circumstances in the environment that facilitated crime, or the actions of the victim that led to the potential for crime. In 1979, sociologists and criminologists Marcus Felson and Lawrence E. Cohen developed the routine activity theory. This theory said that all three—the criminal, the location, and insufficient protection for the victim—were factors in predicting and preventing crime

Overview

The routine activity theory focuses on predatory crime, or those crimes that have a human victim. These include assaults, burglaries, robberies, auto thefts, and other crimes that affect the person or belongings of an individual. These crimes can be of varying degrees of severity, from as little as having change stolen from an unlocked car to violent physical assaults with injury, such as rapes or murders.

According to Cohen and Felson's theory, the factors necessary for crimes such as this are a criminal with the motive and means and a target that lacks safeguards. They said that analyzing these factors can help identify likely crime targets. In addition, addressing problems with these factors can help deter criminals from committing crimes.

The first factor is a likely offender. Cohen and Felson's theory states that for a crime to happen, a person with the means, opportunity, and motivation to commit the crime must be present. According to the theory, several factors lead to the development of such offenders. For instance, most potential offenders have people in their lives with the ability to exert influence. Cohen and Felson call these people handlers and include parents, siblings or other relatives, teachers, coaches, and close friends in this category. Handlers' influence can be good or bad. A person whose handlers are absent or weak or who is extremely influenced by someone who is already a criminal is more likely to become an offender. This is especially true when the individual also has the necessary means to commit a crime, such as a weapon or burglary tools such as bolt cutters and lock picks. These factors increase the offender's chances of success and decrease the likelihood that the individual will be caught.

In predatory crimes, every offender has a target or victim. Cohen and Felson note that other factors, called guardians, can help protect these targets. Guardians include other people, such as caregivers and teachers when the potential target is a child; police, security guards and other law enforcement personnel; and other factors that can make crime more difficult or the target less appealing, such as security fences and alarms, lighting, locks, and other deterrents. When these human or situational guardians are missing, weak, or otherwise fail to serve as a deterrent, the target is more likely to be victimized.

The third factor that needs to be in place for a predatory crime to occur is a location. In the twenty-first century, someone owns or has responsibility for virtually every place where a crime is likely to occur. This includes schools, stores, parking lots, office buildings and factories, parks, and hotels. In each of these locations, someone is responsible for controlling access and tending to the safety of the grounds and the people who use them. This includes security guards, attendants and clerks, merchants, public works employees, and janitors. Cohen and Felson call these people place managers. These place managers are also responsible for non-human guardians such as alarms, locks, fences, and gates. An effective and involved place manager can lessen the likelihood of a crime occurring in that location, according to Cohen and Felson's theory.

The theory also proposes that these factors do not occur randomly. Each operates according to a series of routine behaviors, or activities. For instance, offenders generally have an area or territory with which they are familiar and where they feel comfortable. This is often an area where they are outside the influence of a handler; for example, away from the street where they live or go to school.

Potential targets and place managers also tend to have routine activities. For instance, high school athletes may routinely leave their phones and wallets in an unlocked locker room during events, or the parking lot attendants may routinely take a break for a cigarette at a certain time. Felson and Cohen said that crime is likely to happen at the intersection of these routine activities for the offender, the target, and the place manager. The theory also states that by analyzing these routines, it is possible to develop plans to effectively predict and prevent crime.

Bibliography

Clarke, Ronald V., and Marcus Felson. Routine Activity and Rational Choice : Volume 5. Routledge, 2017. EBSCOhost, research.ebsco.com/linkprocessor/plink?id=8e3a22ae-8163-38ab-a014-2b4252c0c5f6. Accessed 12 Sept. 2024.

Cohen, Lawrence E. and Marcus Felson. "Social Change and Crime Rate Trends: A Routine Activity Approach." American Sociological Review, vol. 44, no. 4, Aug. 1979, pp. 588-608. EBSCOhost, https://doi.org/10.2307/2094589. Accessed 12 Sept. 2024.

Felson, Marcus. Crime and Everyday Life: Insight and Implications for Society. Pine Forge P, 1994.

Perera, Ayesh. "Routine Activities Theory: Definition & Examples." Simply Psychology, 13 Feb. 2024, www.simplypsychology.org/routine-activities-theory.html. Accessed 12 Sept. 2024.

"A Theory of Crime Problems." Center for Problem-Orienting Policing, popcenter.asu.edu/sites/default/files/learning/pam/help/theory-2.html. Accessed 12 Sept. 2024.

"Why Crimes Occur in Hot Spots." National Institute of Justice, 13 Oct. 2009, www.nij.gov/topics/law-enforcement/strategies/hot-spot-policing/Pages/why-hot-spots-occur.aspx. Accessed 12 Sept. 2024.