No abstract

Several theoretical perspectives posit a negative association between the extent of a neighborhood's organizational infrastructure and crime; yet, empirical support for this proposition has been limited in that researchers generally examine only a few types of organizations or combine them into one aggregate measure. Studies with few measures may omit organizations that are effective at reducing crime, whereas those using aggregate measures obscure differences across organizations in their ability to control crime. Using data from 74 block groups in the South Bronx, NY, this research seeks to specify more clearly the relationship between organizations and crime in a disadvantaged urban environment. We examine the relationship among nine different types of organizations and violent and property crime controlling for prior crime, land use, and area sociodemographic characteristics. Consistent with theories that highlight the importance of organizations for establishing ties outside the neighborhood, we find that block groups with more organizations that bridge to the larger community experience a decrease in crime. Property crime also is reduced in block groups with more organizations that promote the well‐being of families and children. We find that schools are associated with an increase in property crime, whereas the effects of other organizations are context specific and vary based on neighborhood racial composition, commercial land use, and disadvantage.

This paper examines how hot spots shift by hour of day and day of week. Hot spot analysis is more likely to have a substantial impact on crime patterns if spatiotemporal shifts are incorporated into the crime analysis process. Even in some of the highest crime neighborhoods in Bronx County (NY), not all micro-level geographies (e.g. street segments and property lots) contain substantial (if any) amounts of crime over the 5-year study period. Moreover, while there are 168 h in a week, even the hottest hot spots do not contain crime 24 h a day, 7 days a week, and 52 weeks a year. Hot spots shift by both space and time and it is important to illustrate these dual shifts when researching and analyzing different levels of geographies and/or hot spots. Spatiotemporal crime analyses are appearing much more frequently in our academic literature in recent years and have become a principal contributor to the progression of routine activities, crime pattern theory, place-management and situational crime prevention. In addition, spatiotemporal hot spots provide important subject and opportunity context and can help answer some of the questions about what specific types of crime opportunities are available inside of hot spots based on land-use and people's movement patterns. When studying geographical hot spots, it becomes important to measure and illustrate the interrelated temporal shifts within each of the specific hot spots (i.e. not all hot spots are the same) that are generated. Similarly, when studying temporal hot spots, it is important to measure and illustrate the interrelated spatial shifts within each of the temporal frame(s) that are examined. Examples of space-time and time-space hot spot analysis are provided using violent crime data from the New York City Police Department. Key findings of this research include significant shifting of hot spots from weekday to weekend and afternoon to evening, as well as decisive spatiotemporal pattern variations between school-day robberies vs. non-school day robberies.

Price disparity contributes to a recurrent process whereby irregular users who are able to gain access to cheaper heroin in urban areas, return to the mid-Hudson and sell premium-priced heroin to other users who do not have access to cheaper heroin. This process contributes to the diffusion of heroin abuse.