Crime Patterns and Routine Activity Theory: A Modern Perspective

Routine Activity theory is influential in explaining crime trends and informing crime prevention strategies. It encourages the notion that criminal acts stem from the routine activities of individuals and their interactions within environments. This blog will give details on how the Routine Activity theory overviews crime from the perspective of a ‘motivated offender’. Routine activities in a person’s daily life may have the tendency to influence criminal opportunities. A class of crime trends gets affected leading to direct contact predatory crimes, which are the illegal acts wherein the person intentionally damages another person or his property.

| Routine Activity Theory |

The theory emerges from the theory of criminal opportunity which specifically focuses on the convergence of time and space which leads to crime situations. This was developed by Marcus Felson and Lawrence Cohen in 1979. It does not explain criminality but crime. It portrays the offender as a decision maker who analysis and chooses a situation for committing the crime where the decisions are on the target of crime. The aggregate level approach known as “Routine activity theory" attempted to explain changes in crime rates in society.

Cohen and Feldman found substantial support for their theory using time series data collected at the national level, especially for any factors associated with shifts in the usual activities for the following types of offences: non-negligent homicide, forcible rape, aggravated assault, robbery, and burglary. There are three elements of direct contact predatory crime:

• Motivated offenders.

• Suitable targets.

• Absence of capable guardian.

If there are any changes in the routine, i.e. daily activities, it can alter the likelihood of convergence in time and space. Such can lead to more occurrence of crime and control becomes difficult. For the successful completion of crime, an offender requires criminal inclinations and the ability to carry out such. When society undergoes changes such as urbanization and technological advancements, it influences the routine activities of an individual, leading to an increase in crime rates. Routine legitimate activities not only provide guidance in commission of crime, but also with suitable targets.

Bonger (1916), Durkheim (1951), and Fleisher (1966) had attempted to link rates of illegal activities with the economic condition of society. Routine activities would also include provision of standard food, shelter, leisure, and social interaction along with formalized work. Such activities may affect the location of property of the targets which is accessible and can influence risk of victimization. The theory approaches that family activities have comparatively lower risk of criminal victimization than the non-family activities and households.

Motivated offenders

The criminologists noted that for a crime, a target must exist for an offender and consequently absence of a guardian. Felson argued that it is not important for an offender for a crime to happen. It is only a positioning of target which is favorable which is sufficient to instigate a crime to rise in a particular scenario even if they are not motivated to commit crime. The hypothesis held that only elements affecting the offender's capacity would impact the possibility of the offender committing the crime; changes in the surrounding conditions would not affect the strength of desire.

Target suitability

A target may be anything which is readily to identity and to be engaged by the offender to commit the crime, it can either be a person or a property. The exact form of suitable target is determined by the nature of wrongdoing. The personal preferences of an offender and his/her perception might have an important role in his choice of the target. Furthermore, nonhuman objects—like pricey homes or pricey necklaces—can be targets for theft and burglary, but a person wearing or occupying such an item could draw the attention of a determined criminal. Cohen and Felson claim that targets that are portable, strong, and have a high resale value are profitable and that criminals tend to choose them.

The major components are Value, Visibility, Accessibility & Inertia.

• Value: The real or symbolic value (from the offender’s perspective) of engaging the target.

• Inertia: The suitable target’s weight, shape, size or other physical attributes that function as impediments to the motivated offender.

• Visibility: The exposure of a target to an offender, marking it suitable for assault.

• Access: The target’s placement and the site’s design increasing the vulnerability to attack.

It makes it likely that people who are, live in single-adult families, or work outside the home would feel less pressure to dedicate their time to domestic chores. According to routine activity theory, these individuals and their households ought to experience greater rates of victimization by predatory criminals. Nonetheless, these rates align with the routine activity approach presented here: the high victimization rates experienced by the unemployed could be attributed to their age and racial composition, as well as their residential proximity to high concentrations of potential offenders; on the other hand, handicapped people are more likely to become victims themselves because they are less able to fend off motivated offenders.

Absence of capable guardian

According to Routine Activity Theory, a capable guardian is able to protect the target. This can apply to any member of the public, family, friends, or neighbors. Another option for the guardian could be a non-living object, such as a CCTV. Pratt and Cullen's (2005) meta- analysis-based research, which examined the role of guardianship in crimes, provided empirical evidence for the value of having a guardian in averting crimes.

At least ten women were murdered in Los Angeles in the late 1970s by Kenneth Bianchi, one of the Hillside Stranglers, and his cousin Angelo Buono. Bianchi allegedly stated that in order to prevent someone from interfering or becoming a witness, he would first check the victims' surroundings to see if their father was around before kidnapping them. He had a reputation for meticulously organizing his attacks, frequently focusing on young women while keeping an eye on their surrounds to make sure no one could stop him.

Conclusion

The theory uses the term "routine" to describe ordinary behaviour rather than a unique act; that is, to say, the theory of routine activity is explained by the opportunities for criminal action that arise in people's daily life. Though Felson again connected poverty and inequality to routine activities, the theory is criticized for ignoring their roles as local causes of crime. This is because a high concentration of crimes is only found near isolated, low-traffic areas that are not frequented by large numbers of people at night. Felson also seems to be ignoring the role that politics plays in shaping the patterns of crime that emerge because of opportunities that appear in specific urban areas. This went to a region that Felson had not yet explored. Routine Activity Theory's practical applications are highly relevant to contemporary police and are essential in the formulation of preventive strategies. It has made a substantial contribution to the study of criminology by bringing the examination of crime patterns on a spatiotemporal basis.

Mahak Sharma is a dedicated 4th-year law student at UPES, Dehradun, who is passionate about legal studies and focused on developing expertise in the field of law.