Using Spatial Analysis to Look at Crime: An article review
Purpose
Byun and Ha (2017) used spatial analysis to look at how elementary students experienced fear of crime and actual crime on street environments surrounding elementary schools in order to propose directions to improve crime-related safety near elementary schools. The authors had four main objectives;
“1) Analyze elementary students’ experiences of fear of crime and actual crime, 2) analyze elementary students’ experiences of fear of crime and actual crime according to the pedestrian environment, 3) analyze the relationship between elementary students’ fear of crime and actual crime and street characteristics, and 4) using geographical analysis, analyze the environmental characteristics of fear of crime and actual crime” (p. 46).
Methods/Spatial Analysis
Four school districts in the area of Songpa-gu in Seoul City, Korea, were chosen as study sites due to their high risk exposure to street crime. The authors conducted a survey on fifth and sixth graders to determine “fear of crime”. The survey used maps of the target school districts and had students describe where they experienced a “fear of crime”, the reason, or where actual crime was experienced and the details of the crime. They also surveyed for gender, transportation and companions. The authors uses a t-test to determine the statistical difference of fear of crime and actual crime by commuting type. The only significant difference found was fear of crime experienced by gender, where females experienced a higher level of fear of crime.
They classified ‘land use’ into six categories; low-rise residential buildings, high-rise residential buildings, non-residential buildings, park areas, advanced schools, and the main entrance to the elementary school. In order to better understand the street environment, they divided up streets into footpaths and these were analyzed based on width, distance from the main gate of the elementary school, location of parks and advanced schools, and use of buildings adjacent to the streets.
Byun and Ha (2017) then looked at the correlations between fear of crime and actual crime in relation to where it occurred, why it occurred and the type of crime if actually experienced. Using simple statistics, they calculated probabilities among the different relationships, and then looked at those probabilities in relation to distance from an elementary school.
Locations of fear of crime and actual crime were split up into “point elements”, where fear of crime or actual crime actually occurred, and “planar elements” which refers to fear of crime or actual crime in relation to specific spaces, such as buildings or parks.
Byun and Ha (2017) performed a density analysis to compare the intensities of fear of crime against actual crime. Kernel density analysis was conducted on places where fear of crime and actual crime were experienced. Frequencies were classified using natural breaks. They also looked at density of non-residential buildings in school districts. They created 3 maps for each study area visualizing these three intensity variables.
Results
Byun and Ha (2017) found that students’ fear of crime was mostly attributed to human factors such as many bullies or few people. Most students’ experienced fear of crime and actual crime within 500m of school. Fear of crime and actual crime were experienced mostly on small roads less than 8m wide and near small parks and advanced schools. In contrast to previous studies, their results found that fear of crime and actual crime were closely correlated. Finally, students experience fear of crime and actual crime on streets with densely populated residential areas.
I rate this paper 8/10. Although Byun and Ha (2017) performed a fairly simplistic statistical and spatial analysis, they went into great detail which led to planning suggestions to improve a students walk to school. For example, since fear of crime and actual crime were correlated, they recommended measuring the history of 911 calls and adding security in these areas. Also, this study highlighted the fact that the presence of non-residential spaces increases monitoring and can provide evacuation spaces to escape perceived danger. It would have been interesting to see the authors perform a dual-surface kernel estimation to create a risk-adjusted map instead of just an intensity map to see if results differed.
Reference
Byun, G., Ha, M. (2017). Are Children Safe from Crime?: Focusing on Streets in Elementary School Zones. Journal of Asian Architecture and Building Engineering 16(1), 45-52.
DOI http://doi.org/10.3130/jaabe.16.45