Abstract
Using data collected from observations made of 279 properties located in two homogeneous Brisbane neighbourhoods, the current study examines guardianship intensity among Australian suburban residents. Comparisons between findings from similar studies conducted in The Hague (the Netherlands) and two U.S. cities suggest that some guardianship behaviours observed in Brisbane are unique to the suburban context. Furthermore, results from the current investigation reveal that certain physical and situational characteristics of Brisbane suburban neighbourhoods (i.e. surveillance opportunities, territoriality and accessibility) are significantly associated with residents’ guardianship intensity. Finally, current findings reveal that differences in guardianship intensity among neighbourhood residents do not vary by the type of housing commonly found in the Brisbane suburban context (i.e. the Queenslander). A discussion of the theoretical and policy implications of the current investigation is offered.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
In Reynald (2009), territorial definition was measured using four key indicators: (a) the height, extent and transparency of physical barriers, (b) presence of outdoor seating, (c) size of front garden and (d) private landscaping including the use of decorations and property signs. A 4-point scale was used to measure the extent to which the view from property windows was obstructed to form the measurement of surveillance opportunities. Image/maintenance was measured using three indicators: (a) presence of graffiti, (b) state of disrepair including presence of litter, paint/repairs were needed, and garden condition and (c) presence of broken lights or windows. Street-level characteristics observed whether social interaction between residents was observed, and the flow of pedestrians, cyclists and traffic per 3-min interval.
Reynald (2011) used different measurements of key variables compared to Reynald (2009) and examined the correlates at the street level (instead of property level). Territoriality was measured using seven indicators: (a) presence of outdoor seating, (b) height of barrier, (c) extent of barrier, (d) private landscaping, (e) presence of decorations, (f) presence of property signs/nameplates and (g) size of front yard. The measurement of image/maintenance was extended to four indicators including: (a) presence of graffiti, (b) state of disrepair, (c) presence of broken lights/windows and (d) presence of litter. Target hardening was also included in this study and measured whether gates, doors and windows were open and whether security bars and alarm systems were present. Surveillance opportunities, activity levels and social interaction were measured consistent with prior work (Reynald 2009).
The Australian Statistical Geographical Standard (ASGS) is the Australian Bureau of Statistics’ geographical framework (Australian Bureau of Statistics 2013b), but does not define suburbs. Instead, they use a hierarchical system of Statistical Area Level 4’s to Statistical Area Level 1’s. SA2s are the closest approximation of suburbs and are “general purpose medium sized areas” that interact socially and economically, and generally have populations of 3000–25,000 residents (average 10,000). The initial sampling frame included five SA4s: Brisbane North, Brisbane East, Brisbane South, Brisbane West and Brisbane Inner City, which collectively consist of 137 SA2s.
References
ACCESS. 2016. Housing in the Netherlands. The Hague: ACCESS Netherlands. Retrieved from http://www.access-nl.org/living-in-the-netherlands/living/housing.aspx.
Armitage, R. 2013. Crime prevention through housing design: Policy and practice. Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan.
Australian Bureau of Statistics. 2011a. 2011 Census community profiles. Retrieved from http://www.censusdata.abs.gov.au/census_services/getproduct/census/2011/communityprofile/3GBRI?opendocument&navpos=230.
Australian Bureau of Statistics. 2011b. Census community profiles. Retrieved from http://www.abs.gov.au/websitedbs/censushome.nsf/home/communityprofiles.
Australian Bureau of Statistics. 2011c. Census of population and housing: Socio-Economic Indexes for Areas (SEIFA), Australia, 2011. Retrieved from http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/2033.0.55.001.
Australian Bureau of Statistics. 2013a. Australian demographic statistics. Retrieved from http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/3101.0.
Australian Bureau of Statistics. 2013b. Australian Statistical Geography Standard (ASGS). Retrieved from http://abs.gov.au/websitedbs/D3310114.nsf/home/Australian+Statistical+Geography+Standard+%28ASGS%29.
Australian Bureau of Statistics. 2016. Census of population and housing: Reflecting Australia. Retrieved from http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/by%20Subject/2071.0~2016~Main%20Features~Apartment%20Living~20.
Bernasco, W. 2006. Co-offending and the choice of target areas in burglary. Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling 3 (3): 139–155. https://doi.org/10.1002/jip.49.
Brantingham, P.J., and P.L. Brantingham. 1995. Criminality of place: Crime generators and crime attractors. European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research 3 (3): 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02242925.
Cohen, L.E., and M. Felson. 1979. Social change and crime rate trends: A routine activity approach. American Sociological Review 44 (4): 588–608. https://doi.org/10.2307/2094589.
Ekblom, P. 2011. Deconstructing CPTED… and reconstructing it for practice, knowledge management and research. European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research 17 (1): 7–28. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10610-010-9132-9.
Federal Bureau of Investigation. (2016). Crime in the United States. Retrieved from https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2016/crime-in-the-u.s.-2016.
Felson, M., and E. Poulsen. 2003. Simple indicators of crime by time of day. International Journal of Forecasting 19 (4): 595–601. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-2070(03)00093-1.
Fisher, R., and B. Crozier. 1994. The Queensland house: A roof over our heads. Brisbane: Queensland Museum.
Gill, C., A. Wooditch, and D. Weisburd. 2017. Testing the “law of crime concentration at place” in a suburban setting: Implications for research and practice. Journal of Quantitative Criminology 33 (3): 519–545. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10940-016-9304-y.
Hart, T.C. 2014. Conjunctive analysis of case configurations. Retrieved from http://www.ucl.ac.uk/jdibrief/analysis/CACC.
Hart, T.C., C.M. Rennison, and T.D. Miethe. 2017. Identifying patterns of situational clustering and contextual variability in criminological data. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice 33 (2): 112–120. https://doi.org/10.1177/1043986216689746.
Hollis, M.E., D.M. Fenimore, M. Caballero, and S. Hankhouse. 2018. Examining guardianship in action in Waco, Texas. Crime Prevention and Community Safety. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41300-018-0056-5.
Hollis-Peel, M.E., M. Felson, and B. Welsh. 2013. The capable guardian in routine activities theory: A theoretical and conceptual reappraisal. Crime Prevention and Community Safety 15 (1): 65–79. https://doi.org/10.1057/cpcs.2012.14.
Hollis-Peel, M.E., D.M. Reynald, M. van Bavel, H. Elffers, and B. Welsh. 2011. Guardianship for crime prevention: A critical review of the literature. Crime, Law and Social Change 56 (1): 53–70. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10611-011-9309-2.
Hollis-Peel, M.E., D.M. Reynald, and B. Welsh. 2012. Guardianship and crime: An international comparative study of guardianship in action. Crime, Law and Social Change 58 (1): 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10611-012-9366-1.
Hollis-Peel, M.E., and B. Welsh. 2014. What makes a guardian capable? A test of guardianship in action. Security Journal 27 (3): 320–337. https://doi.org/10.1057/sj.2012.32.
Macintyre, S.D. 2001. Burglar decision making. PhD, Griffith University Brisbane.
Miethe, T.D., T.C. Hart, and W.C. Regoeczi. 2008. The conjunctive analysis of case configurations: An exploratory method for discrete multivariate analyses of crime data. Journal of Quantitative Criminology 24 (2): 227–241. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10940-008-9044-8.
Moir, E., T.C. Hart, D.M. Reynald, and A. Stewart. 2018. Typologies of suburban guardians: Understanding the role of responsibility, opportunities, and routine activities in facilitating surveillance. Crime Prevention and Community Safety 21 (1): 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41300-018-0057-4.
Moir, E., D.M. Reynald, T.C. Hart, and A. Stewart. 2019. Exploring the influence of daily microroutines on residential guardianship and monitoring patterns. Criminal Justice Studies 32 (2): 120–139. https://doi.org/10.1080/1478601X.2019.1600819.
Moir, E., A. Stewart, D.M. Reynald, and T.C. Hart. 2017. Guardianship in Action (GIA) within Brisbane suburbs: Examining the relationship between guardianship intensity and crime, and changes across time. Criminal Justice Review 42 (3): 254–269. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734016817724199.
Morenoff, J.D., R.J. Sampson, and S.W. Raudenbush. 2001. Neighborhood inequality, collective efficacy, and the spatial dynamics of urban violence. Criminology 39 (3): 517–558. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9125.2001.tb00932.x.
Morgan, R.E., and G. Kena. 2018. Criminal Victimization, 2016. U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics Retrieved from https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cv16re.pdf.
National Multifamily Housing Council. 2014. Quick facts: Resident demographics. Retrieved from http://nmhc.org/Content.aspx?id=4708.
Nee, C., and A. Meenaghan. 2006. Expert decision making in burglars. British Journal of Criminology 46 (5): 935–949. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjc/azl013.
Nee, C., and M. Taylor. 2000. Examining burglars’ target selection: Interview, experiment or ethnomethodology? Psychology, Crime & Law 6 (1): 45–59. https://doi.org/10.1080/10683160008410831.
Newman, O. 1972. Defensible space: Crime prevention through urban design. New York: Macmillan.
Peeters, M.P. 2013. Assessing the vulnerability of targets for burglary. Creating a multilevel observational instrument. In Crime, violence, justice and social order, ed. P. Ponsaers, A. Crawford, J. De Maillard, J. Shapland, and A. Verhagem, 171–206. Antwerpen: Maklu.
Poyner, B., and B. Webb. 1991. Crime free housing. Oxford: Butterworth-Architecture.
Queensland Police Service. 2015. Annual Statistical Review 2014/15. Brisbane: Queensland Police Service.
Reynald, D.M. 2009. Guardianship in action: Developing a new tool for measurement. Crime Prevention and Community Safety 11 (1): 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1057/cpcs.2008.19.
Reynald, D.M. 2010. Guardians on guardianship: Factors affecting the willingness to supervise, the ability to detect potential offenders, and the willingness to intervene. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 47 (3): 358–390. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022427810365904.
Reynald, D.M. 2011. Factors associated with the guardianship of places: Assessing the relative importance of the spatio-physical and sociodemographic contexts in generating opportunities for capable guardianship. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 48 (1): 110–142. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022427810384138.
Reynald, D.M. 2014. Informal Guardianship. In Encyclopedia of criminology and criminal justice, ed. G. Bruinsma and D. Weisburd, 2480–2489. New York: Springer.
Reynald, D.M., and H. Elffers. 2015. The routine activity of guardianship: Comparing self-reports of guardianship intensity patterns with proxy measures. Crime Prevention and Community Safety 17: 211–232. https://doi.org/10.1057/cpcs.2015.9.
Reynald, D.M., E. Moir, A. Cook, and Z. Vakhitova. 2018. Changing perspectives on guardianship against crime: An examination of the importance of micro-level factors. Crime Prevention and Community Safety 20 (4): 268–283. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41300-018-0049-4.
Roncek, D.W. 1981. Dangerous places: Crime and residential environment. Social Forces 60 (1): 74–96. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2577933.
Rosenbaum, D.P. 1988. Community crime prevention: A review and synthesis of the literature. Justice Quarterly 5 (3): 323–395. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418828800089781.
Sampson, R.J., S.W. Raudenbush, and F. Earls. 1997. Neighborhoods and violent crime: A multilevel study of collective efficacy. Science 277: 918–924. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.277.5328.918.
Taylor, R.B., B.A. Koons, E.M. Kurtz, J.R. Greene, and D.D. Perkins. 1995. Street blocks with more nonresidential land use have more physical deterioration. Urban Affairs Review 31 (1): 120–136. https://doi.org/10.1177/107808749503100106.
United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime. 2014. UNODC statistics: Crime and criminal justice. Vienna: United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime.
Warner, B.D. 2007. Directly intervene or call the authorities? A study of forms of neighborhood social control within a social disorganization framework. Criminology 45 (1): 99–129. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9125.2007.00073.x.
Weisburd, D., J.E. Eck, A.A. Braga, C.W. Telep, B. Cave, et al. 2016. Place matters: Criminology for the twenty-first century. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Weisburd, D., E.R. Groff, and S. Yang. 2012. The criminology of place: Street segments and our understanding of the crime problem. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Moir, E., Reynald, D.M., Hart, T.C. et al. Guardianship in action among Brisbane suburban residents: environmental facilitators of guardianship intensity and the influence of living in a Queenslander. Secur J 34, 77–96 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41284-019-00210-9
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41284-019-00210-9