Self-protective behaviours against crime in urban settings: An empirical approach to vulnerability and victimization models
| Author | César San-Juan,Anabel Vergara,Laura Vozmediano |
| DOI | 10.1177/1477370812454369 |
| Published date | 01 November 2012 |
| Date | 01 November 2012 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
European Journal of Criminology
9(6) 652 –667
© The Author(s) 2012
Reprints and permission: sagepub.
co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/1477370812454369
euc.sagepub.com
Self-protective behaviours
against crime in urban settings:
An empirical approach to
vulnerability and victimization
models
César San-Juan, Laura Vozmediano
and Anabel Vergara
University of the Basque Country, Spain
Abstract
Previous research on the relationships between age, sex, ethnic group or previous victimization
experience and fear of crime is controversial, as inconsistent results have been obtained, many
of them attributable to a lack of methodological and conceptual consensus. We propose the
study of self-protective behaviours motivated by fear of crime as a useful alternative that pays
attention to the consequences of fear for urban quality of life. A survey with a representative
sample of residents in a major city in Spain provides evidence about sex and age differences in
self-protective behaviours against crime. Results from the ‘classical’ vulnerability and victimization
models are discussed and the suitability of the evolutionary and the routine activities perspectives
is also considered.
Keywords
Evolutionary, fear of crime, self-protective behaviours, victimization, vulnerability
Introduction
Fear of crime has been widely studied in criminology since the 1970s. But it represents
a multidisciplinary field of study; the factors that produce fear of crime and the conse-
quences of that fear both involve a variety of disciplines. Despite intensive research,
results have often been disparate, making it difficult to reach the consensus required to
propose social, judicial and political measures. In addition, there has been a certain level
Corresponding author:
César San-Juan, University of the Basque Country, Basque Institute of Criminology, Pz. Elhuyar, 2, San
Sebastian, 20018, Spain.
Email: cesar.sanjuan@ehu.es
454369EUC9610.1177/1477370812454369European Journal of CriminologySan-Juan et al.
2012
Article
San-Juan et al. 653
of stagnation in the research. Some topics have become recurrent (Farrall and Lee, 2009;
Fernández-Ramírez, 2008). Of all the explanations for this stagnation, a methodological
issue may be the most significant: there is no unanimously agreed-upon instrument for
measuring fear of crime. A large part of the research deals with variability in the concep-
tion of fear and the operationalization of related factors, and the search for more reliable
and valid measures has remained a constant concern throughout the years (Farrall et al.,
1997; Ferraro and LaGrange, 1987; Gray et al., 2008; Jackson, 2005; Vozmediano et al.,
2008). Vanderveen (2006) characterizes the fear of crime as an ‘umbrella’ concept, under
which different constructs (such as fear, risk and victimization) have been included. In
this study we approach the fear of crime research from a different perspective, by exam-
ining the question ‘what do you do to avoid the risk of being the victim of a crime?’
Informed self-protective behaviour as a relevant focus of interest
The behaviours related to the perceptions of insecurity have been addressed in the litera-
ture from different points of view. Insecurity has been perceived as a consequence of fear
(Ferraro, 1995; Garofalo, 1981) and as a part of a tri-dimensional ‘fear of crime’ con-
struct (Gabriel and Greve, 2003). It has also been perceived as an antecedent, in an esca-
lating loop where fear leads to avoidance and these measures influence the fear of crime
(Liska et al., 1988). Precautionary or protective behaviours would be, therefore, closely
linked to what we consider to be indicators of subjective security. The Liska, Sanchirico
and Reed (1988) study provides a very interesting alternative, because the results can be
contrasted with results from studies focused on the fear of crime or on variables of a
more cognitive nature (such as risk estimation).
Proposing crime self-protection behaviours as the focus of analysis emphasizes an
especially relevant aspect of subjective evaluations of crime: their effect on urban quality
of life. Frequently, fear-motivated behaviours imply that citizens’ right to move freely
through public spaces in urban areas cannot effectively be satisfied. Evaluating and, when
necessary, proposing solutions for this loss of urban quality of life should be one of the
objectives in this area of research. Furthermore, as Sacco and Nakhaie (2001) point out,
paying attention to the behavioural aspects of fear of crime makes it possible to move
beyond debates about the rationality of citizens’ attitudes, emotions and perceptions of
crime, while establishing an area of study that leads to intervention. For example, the fact
that a large number of citizens avoid walking through a specific zone is a clear indicator
of the need for intervention to convert this space into a place where people want to walk.
This type of intervention would be more appropriate and less ethically questionable for
public institutions than one that attempts to modify people’s perceptions and emotions.
Vulnerability and victimization models applied to self-protective behaviour
In literature reviews of fear of crime (Hale, 1996; Miceli et al., 2004; and explicitly in Van
Beek, 2004), three different perspectives are used to analyse, understand and predict fear
of crime: (1) the socio-demographic perspective, related to vulnerability models; (2) expe-
rience of crime; and (3) the ecological perspective, which includes variables such as urban-
ism, lack of civility and community life. When elaborating crime prevention or urban
To continue reading
Request your trial