论文标题
警务慢性和临时暴力犯罪热点：受控野外实验
Policing Chronic and Temporary Hot Spots of Violent Crime: A Controlled Field Experiment
论文作者
论文摘要
基于热点的警务计划旨在通过在高犯罪地点增加积极的巡逻来阻止犯罪。虽然大多数热点计划的目标是易于确定的慢性热点，但我们介绍了预测临时热点的模型，以解决预防犯罪的有效性和公平目标，并从跨界实验中提出了评估热点预测的调查结果，以防止在宾夕法尼亚州匹兹堡进行严重的暴力犯罪。在一个为期12个月的实验期内，匹兹堡警察局将身穿制服的巡逻人员指定为每周预测的严重暴力犯罪的慢性和临时热点，占该市地区0.5％的地区。 We find statistically and practically significant reductions in serious violent crime counts within treatment hot spots as compared to control hot spots, with an overall reduction of 25.3 percent in the FBI-classified Part 1 Violent (P1V) crimes of homicide, rape, robbery, and aggravated assault, and a 39.7 percent reduction of African-American and other non-white victims of P1V crimes.我们发现，暂时的热点增加了巡逻的空间分散体，并且P1V犯罪的百分比比慢性热点更大，但预防犯罪的总数却更少。只有步行巡逻，而不是汽车巡逻，在热点地区造成了统计学意义的犯罪降低。我们没有发现犯罪流离失所的证据；取而代之的是，我们发现对邻近地区预防犯罪福利的统计学意义较弱。此外，我们没有发现以社区为导向的热点巡逻队产生过度抛弃少数人或其他人口的证据。
Hot-spot-based policing programs aim to deter crime through increased proactive patrols at high-crime locations. While most hot spot programs target easily identified chronic hot spots, we introduce models for predicting temporary hot spots to address effectiveness and equity objectives for crime prevention, and present findings from a crossover experiment evaluating application of hot spot predictions to prevent serious violent crime in Pittsburgh, PA. Over a 12-month experimental period, the Pittsburgh Bureau of Police assigned uniformed patrol officers to weekly predicted chronic and temporary hot spots of serious violent crimes comprising 0.5 percent of the city's area. We find statistically and practically significant reductions in serious violent crime counts within treatment hot spots as compared to control hot spots, with an overall reduction of 25.3 percent in the FBI-classified Part 1 Violent (P1V) crimes of homicide, rape, robbery, and aggravated assault, and a 39.7 percent reduction of African-American and other non-white victims of P1V crimes. We find that temporary hot spots increase spatial dispersion of patrols and have a greater percentage reduction in P1V crimes than chronic hot spots but fewer total number of crimes prevented. Only foot patrols, not car patrols, had statistically significant crime reductions in hot spots. We find no evidence of crime displacement; instead, we find weakly statistically significant spillover of crime prevention benefits to adjacent areas. In addition, we find no evidence that the community-oriented hot spot patrols produced over-policing arrests of minority or other populations.
