Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Getting a handle on crime: A further extension of routine activities theory

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Security Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Routine activities theory has had considerable influence, stimulating subsequent theoretical development, generating an empirical literature on crime patterns and informing the design of prevention strategies. Despite these numerous applications of the theory to date, a promising vein for theoretical development, research and prevention remains untapped. The concept of handlers, or those who control potential offenders, has received relatively little attention since introduced by Felson (1986). This article examines the reasons for the lack of attention to handlers and extends routine activities theory by proposing a model of handler effectiveness that addresses these issues. In addition, the model explicitly links routine activities theory with two of its complements – the rational choice perspective and situational crime prevention – to articulate the mechanism by which handling prevents crime. We conclude by discussing the broad range of prevention possibilities offered by the model of handler effectiveness.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Figure 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Hirschi (1969) identified four social bonds that, when absent or weak, leave the individual free to consider crime: attachment, commitment, involvement and belief. Attachment refers to emotional closeness to people. This is a form of indirect, relational control; the individual cares what the other thinks and is sensitive to his or her opinions. People avoid committing crimes because they do not want to disappoint those to whom they are attached. Commitment refers to the rational component of law abiding behavior. The more invested one is in conventional activities, the more they have to lose if they commit crime. Involvement represents the opportunity element of social bonds. Those who are deeply involved in conventional activities will have little time for offending, while those without ties to jobs, schools, prosocial friendships and so on are available for crime. Finally, belief describes an individual's bond to the conventional value system.

  2. For exceptions, see Cullen et al (2002) for a discussion of parole and probation officers as handlers and Fisher et al (2002) for a brief discussion of potential handlers for stalkers.

  3. Note that there are other controllers (that is, place managers and guardians) who may lack one or more of these characteristics, yet still effectively supervise places or protect targets. This model explains the effectiveness of handlers, whose relationship to the potential offender allows them to discourage specific crimes. Further, some individuals possess such small degrees of these characteristics that their ability to effectively handle a particular offender is compromised.

  4. See Tillyer and Kennedy (2008) for examples of how controllers operationalize the techniques of situational crime prevention in focused deterrence violence reduction programs.

  5. Felson's recent work on co-offending emphasizes the harm caused by co-offending and implications for prevention in light of the prevalence of co-offending (see Felson, 2003; Andresen and Felson, 2010). Specifically, he suggests disrupting offender convergence settings (that is, informal, stable settings in which offenders encounter suitable co-offenders) to impede the accomplice regeneration process. In other words, make it more difficult for offenders to find one another. Rather than focusing on disrupting the offender convergence process, our model of handler effectiveness aims to exploit the co-offender relationship once it has formed. If the rationality of one offender can be effectively leveraged to recognize real or perceived risks, he or she may become a handler for the co-offender(s).

  6. Sampson and Laub's (1993) age-grade theory of informal social control does explain within-individual change in offending across the lifecourse. However, the within-individual variation we discuss does not necessarily include desistance, but rather the decision to offend in some situations and not others.

References

  • Andresen, M.A. and Felson, M. (2010) The impact of co-offending. British Journal of Criminology 50: 66–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bowers, K.J. and Johnson, S.D. (2005) Domestic burglary repeats and space-time clusters: The dimensions of risk. The European Journal of Criminology 2: 67–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brantingham, P.L. and Brantingham, P.J. (1993) Nodes, paths, and edges: Considerations on the complexity of crime and the physical environment. Journal of Environmental Psychology 13: 3–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brantingham, P.L. and Brantingham, P.J. (1995) Criminality of place: Crime generators and crime attractors. European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research 3: 5–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, R.V. (1983) Situational crime prevention: Its theoretical basis and practical scope. Crime and Justice 4: 225–256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, R.V. (2004) Technology, criminology and crime science. European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research 10: 55–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, R.V. and Cornish, D.B. (1985) Modeling offenders’ decisions: A framework for research and policy. Crime and Justice 6: 147–185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, L.E. and Felson, M. (1979) Social change and crime rate trends: A routine activity approach. American Sociological Review 44: 588–608.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, L.E., Kluegel, J.R. and Land, K.C. (1981) Social inequality and predatory criminal victimization: An exposition and test of a formal theory. American Sociological Review 46: 505–524.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cornish, D.B. and Clarke, R.V. (2003) Opportunities, precipitators, and criminal decisions: A reply to Wortley's critique of situational crime prevention. In: M.J. Smith and D.B. Cornish (eds.) Theory for Practice in situational Crime Prevention. Monsey, NY: Criminal Justice Press, pp. 41–96.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cullen, F.T., Eck, J.E. and Lowenkamp, C.T. (2002) Environmental corrections: A new framework for effective probation and parole supervision. Federal Probation 66: 28–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eck, J.E. (1994) Drug markets and drug places: A case-control study of the spatial structure of illicit drug dealing. PhD dissertation, University of Maryland, College Park.

  • Eck, J.E. (1998) Preventing crime by controlling drug dealing on private rental property. Security Journal 11: 37–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eck, J.E. (2001) Policing and crime event concentration. In: R.F. Meier, L.W. Kennedy and V. Sacco (eds.) The Process and Structure of Crime: Criminal Events and Crime Analysis, Theoretical Advances in Criminology. New Brunswick, NJ: Transactions, pp. 249–276.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eck, J.E. (2003) Police problems: The complexity of problem theory, research and evaluation. In: J. Knutsson (ed.) Problem-Oriented Policing: From Innovation to Mainstream. Monsey, NY: Criminal Justice Press, pp. 79–113.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eck, J.E. and Spelman, W. (1987) Who ya gonna call? The police as problem-busters. Crime and Delinquency 33: 31–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eck, J.E., Clarke, R.V. and Guerette, R.T. (2007) Risky facilities: Crime concentration in homogeneous sets of establishments and facilities. In: G. Farrell, K.J. Bowers, S.D. Johnson and M. Townsley (eds.) Imagination for Crime Prevention: Essays in Honour of Ken Pease. Monsey, NY: Criminal Justice Press, pp. 225–264.

    Google Scholar 

  • Farrell, G., Sousa, W.H. and Weisel, D.L. (2002) The time-window effect in the measurement of repeat victimization: A methodology for its examination, and an empirical study. In: N. Tilley (ed.) Analysis for Crime Prevention. Monsey, NY: Criminal Justice Press, pp. 15–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Felson, M. (1986) Linking criminal choices, routine activities, informal control, and criminal outcomes. In: D.B. Cornish and R.V. Clarke (eds.) The Reasoning Criminal: Rational Choice Perspectives on Offending. New York: Springer-Verlag, pp. 119–128.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Felson, M. (1995) Those who discourage crime. In: J.E. Eck and D. Weisburd (eds.) Crime and Place. Monsey, NY: Criminal Justice Press, pp. 53–66.

    Google Scholar 

  • Felson, M. (2003) The process of co-offending. In: M.J. Smith and D.B. Cornish (eds.) Theory for Practice in Situational Crime Prevention. Monsey, NY: Criminal Justice Press, pp. 149–167.

    Google Scholar 

  • Felson, M. and Clarke, R.V. (1998) Opportunity Makes the Thief: Practical Theory for Crime Prevention. London: Home Office. Police Research Series, Paper 98, edited by B. Webb.

  • Fisher, B.S., Cullen, F.T. and Turner, M.G. (2002) Being pursued: Stalking victimization in a national study of college women. Criminology and Public Policy 1: 257–308.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, B.S., Sloan, J.J., Cullen, F.T. and Lu, C. (1998) Crime in the ivory tower: The level and sources of student victimization. Criminology 36: 671–710.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldstein, H. (1979) Improving policing: A problem-oriented approach. Crime and Delinquency 25: 236–258.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hirschi, T. (1969) Causes of Delinquency. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hirschi, T. (1986) On the compatibility of rational choice and social control theories of crime. In: D.B. Cornish and R.V. Clarke (eds.) The Reasoning Criminal: Rational Choice Perspectives on Offending. New York: Springer-Verlag, pp. 105–118.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy, L.W. and Forde, D.R. (1990) Routine activities and crime: An analysis of victimization in Canada. Criminology 28: 137–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lynch, J.P. and Cantor, D. (1992) Ecological and behavioral influences on property victimization at home: Implications for opportunity theory. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 29: 335–362.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Madensen, T.D. (2007) Bar management and crime: Toward a dynamic theory of place management and crime hotspots. PhD dissertation, University of Cincinnati.

  • Massey, J.L., Krohn, M.D. and Bonati, L.M. (1989) Property crime and the routine activities of individuals. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 26: 378–400.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mazerolle, L.G., Kadleck, C. and Roehl, J. (1998) Controlling drug and disorder problems: The role of place managers. Criminology 36: 371–403.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Messner, S.F. and Blau, J.R. (1987) Routine leisure activities and rates of crime: A macro-level analysis. Social Forces 65: 1035–1052.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miethe, T.D., Stafford, M.C. and Long, J.S. (1987) Social differentiation in criminal victimization: A test of routine activities/lifestyle theories. American Sociological Review 52: 184–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mustaine, E.E. and Tewksbury, R. (1998) Predicting risks of larceny theft victimization: A routine activity analysis using refined lifestyles measures. Criminology 36: 829–857.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mustaine, E.E. and Tewksbury, R. (1999) A routine activity theory explanation for women's stalking victimizations. Violence Against Women 5: 43–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nye, F.I. (1958) Family Relationships and Delinquent Behavior. New York: John Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sampson, R.J. (1987) Personal violence by strangers: An extension and test of the opportunity model of predatory victimization. The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology 78: 327–356.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sampson, R.J. and Laub, J.H. (1993) Crime in the Making: Pathways and Turning Points through Life. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, M.D. and Pitts, V.L. (1995) Exploring a feminist routine activities approach to explaining sexual assault. Justice Quarterly 12: 9–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sherman, L.W., Gartin, P.R. and Buerger, M.E. (1989) Hot spots of predatory crime: Routine activities and the criminology of place. Criminology 27: 27–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tillyer, M.S. and Kennedy, D.M. (2008) Locating focused deterrence approaches within a situational crime prevention framework. Crime Prevention and Community Safety 10: 75–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilcox, P., Madensen, T.D. and Tillyer, M.S. (2007) Guardianship in context: Implications for burglary victimization risk and prevention. Criminology 45: 771–803.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wortley, R. (2001) A classification of techniques for controlling situational precipitators of crime. Security Journal 14: 63–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Criminal Justice, University of Texas at San Antonio, 501 W. Durango Blvd., San Antonio, 78207, TX, USA

    Marie Skubak Tillyer

  2. School of Criminal Justice, University of Cincinnati, 600 Dyer Hall, P.O. Box 210389, Cincinnati, 45221, OH, USA

    John E Eck

Authors
  1. Marie Skubak Tillyer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. John E Eck
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Tillyer, M., Eck, J. Getting a handle on crime: A further extension of routine activities theory. Secur J 24, 179–193 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1057/sj.2010.2

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/sj.2010.2

Keywords

Search

Navigation