A methodology to tackle burglary

An integral methodology to develop an information-led and community- orientated policy to tackle domestic burglary

Transcript

1. An integral methodology to develop an information-led and community- orientated policy to tackle domestic burglary A methodology to tackle burglary With financial support from the Prevention of and Fight against Crime Programme of the European Union European Commission – Directorate-General Home Affairs
2. Table of contents • Introduction • Scope • Methodologies – Cost-benefit analyses – Advisory board – Focus groups – Terrain visits – World Café • Content – Action plan
3. Official partners • General Inspectorate of the Romanian Police • National Police Chief Directorate, Bulgaria • Landeskriminalamt Nordrhein-Westfalen, Germany • Federal Police, Property Crime Department • Governor of the Province of Antwerp • Ministry of Justice, Federal Department for Criminal Policy
4. Introduction • Battle against domestic burglary • National and European policy • Methodologies • analysis’ of content + action plan
5. Scope • Strictest form of domestic burglary • In Belgium • Pragmatic approaches • Methodologies
6. Cost-benefit analyses • Who does what?! – Police component – Judicial component – Policy component – Private sector – Analysing the current policy • Methodology – Pragmatic vs scientific – Pro’s vs con’s
7. Advisory board • Interdisciplinary – Potential users of the results – +/- 20 persons • Opinions and visions on the phenomenon • Extra information/ help towards the other activities – Quality check • Pro’s vs con’s
8. Focus groups • National and international experts • Small groups • 4 different themes • Pro’s vs con’s
9. Focus group results • Mobile criminal groups from an integral perspective – European problem – Basic problems • Who lives where? – Slow legislation – Slow information exchange • New technologies regarding domestic burglary – Same technologies, different implications + different privacy laws – Private industry • Costs – Does not solve it all • False sense of security • Does it work?!
10. Focus group results • A visible and tangible policy regarding burglary in houses – Harmonisation of the policy – EUCPN – Databases – Private sector • Victimization in case of domestic burglary – Unsecure feelings – Lose of faith in police • Victim survey – Neighbourhood watches • Repeat victimisation – Preventive measures • Old habits • Obliging?
11. Reflections on the focus groups John Radmer Senior Adviser Danish National Police, National Centre for Crime Prevention Participated in both focus groups
12. World Café • Practitioners in the field • The numbers: – 4 discussion rounds – 7 statements – 11 moderators – 68 participants • Pro’s vs con’s
13. Terrain visits • 21 terrain visits – 13 Flemish – 1 Brussels – 7 Wallonia – All provinces except 2 • Pro’s vs con’s
14. Terrain visit analysis The ‘leader’ and the ‘nature’ of the project. • Leader – Prevention Services: 7 – Police services: 14 – Administrative services: 1 – Judiciary: 2 • Nature – Preventive: 18 – Policing-related: 11 – Judicial: 4 – Follow-up: 2 Specific partners • Domestic Burglary Prevention Consultants: 9 • Neighbourhood watches: 2 • District police agents: 6 • Community watches: 5 • Media: 7 • Budget • Estimated personnel needed • Effectiveness Transferability and evaluation
15. Which discussed methodology are you interested in / would you use? Question:
16. Action plan • Action points gathered through the methodologies • European level • National level – New technology and (techno-) preventive measures – Civilian participation – Cooperation – Imaging • Schedule
17. Action plan schedule Primary prevention Secondary prevention Tertiary prevention Situation-oriented prevention 1. Building codes 2. Label secure living 3. Scientific research 4. Increasing awareness 5. Information exchange via uniform databases 6. Cooperation with private sector 1. Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design 2. Target hardening (special doors, locks, alarms,…) 3. Social control 1. Closing down criminal places 2. Elevated surveillance (hotspot, -times) 3. Broken windows effect Victim-oriented prevention 1. Prevention campaigns (social media, videos,…) 2. Registration of goods 3. Lowering insurance premium 1. Neighbourhood watch (flagrante notifications – fast reactions) 2. Social media campaigns 1. Domestic burglary prevention consultant 2. Federal tax advantage 3. Burglary prevention measures for municipalities Offender-oriented prevention 1. Handling stolen goods 2. Identity database 1. Effective prosecution and punishment policy
18. Statements • Can you relate to the following statements or not, and why so? • The effective implementation of CPTED is more important than increasing social control.
19. Statements • Cooperation with the private sector is more important than having good identity databases of offenders. • An effective prosecution and punishment policy is more important than having mandatory building codes (techno-preventive measures).
20. Statements • Victim-orientated prevention is more important than offender-orientated prevention. • Is this action plan a good basis to work further towards decreasing domestic burglary?
21. The results of the project • Disseminate results towards member states • Guide • Website: www.domesticburglary.eu • Article on EUCPN website • Future…