Exploring the relationship between drug and alcohol treatment facilities and violent and property crime

A socioeconomic contingent relationship

Travis A. Taniguchi, Christopher Salvatore

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

6 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Siting of drug and alcohol treatment facilities is often met with negative reactions because of the assumption that these facilities increase crime by attracting drug users (and possibly dealers) to an area. This assumption, however, rests on weak empirical footings that have not been subjected to strong empirical analyses. Using census block groups from Philadelphia, PA, it was found that the criminogenic impact of treatment facilities in and near a neighborhood on its violent and property crime rates may be contingent on the socioeconomic status (SES) of the neighborhood. Paying attention to both the density and proximity of facilities in and around neighborhoods, results showed that the criminogenic impact of treatment facilities depended largely on neighborhood SES. Under some conditions more treatment facilities nearby was associated with lower crime. Reasons why the presumed criminogenic impact of treatment facilities appears only under some conditions were suggested.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)95-115
Number of pages21
JournalSecurity Journal
Volume25
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - 1 Apr 2012

Fingerprint

Crime
Alcohols
alcohol
offense
drug
social status
crime rate
Alcohol
Socio-economics
Drugs
census

Keywords

  • drug treatment facilities
  • environmental criminology
  • land use
  • negative binomial regression
  • place management

Cite this

@article{f4d7f657ed3d42239f961bb27f682d28,
title = "Exploring the relationship between drug and alcohol treatment facilities and violent and property crime: A socioeconomic contingent relationship",
abstract = "Siting of drug and alcohol treatment facilities is often met with negative reactions because of the assumption that these facilities increase crime by attracting drug users (and possibly dealers) to an area. This assumption, however, rests on weak empirical footings that have not been subjected to strong empirical analyses. Using census block groups from Philadelphia, PA, it was found that the criminogenic impact of treatment facilities in and near a neighborhood on its violent and property crime rates may be contingent on the socioeconomic status (SES) of the neighborhood. Paying attention to both the density and proximity of facilities in and around neighborhoods, results showed that the criminogenic impact of treatment facilities depended largely on neighborhood SES. Under some conditions more treatment facilities nearby was associated with lower crime. Reasons why the presumed criminogenic impact of treatment facilities appears only under some conditions were suggested.",
keywords = "drug treatment facilities, environmental criminology, land use, negative binomial regression, place management",
author = "Taniguchi, {Travis A.} and Christopher Salvatore",
year = "2012",
month = "4",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1057/sj.2011.8",
language = "English",
volume = "25",
pages = "95--115",
journal = "Security Journal",
issn = "0955-1662",
publisher = "Palgrave Macmillan Ltd.",
number = "2",

}

Exploring the relationship between drug and alcohol treatment facilities and violent and property crime : A socioeconomic contingent relationship. / Taniguchi, Travis A.; Salvatore, Christopher.

In: Security Journal, Vol. 25, No. 2, 01.04.2012, p. 95-115.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Exploring the relationship between drug and alcohol treatment facilities and violent and property crime

T2 - A socioeconomic contingent relationship

AU - Taniguchi, Travis A.

AU - Salvatore, Christopher

PY - 2012/4/1

Y1 - 2012/4/1

N2 - Siting of drug and alcohol treatment facilities is often met with negative reactions because of the assumption that these facilities increase crime by attracting drug users (and possibly dealers) to an area. This assumption, however, rests on weak empirical footings that have not been subjected to strong empirical analyses. Using census block groups from Philadelphia, PA, it was found that the criminogenic impact of treatment facilities in and near a neighborhood on its violent and property crime rates may be contingent on the socioeconomic status (SES) of the neighborhood. Paying attention to both the density and proximity of facilities in and around neighborhoods, results showed that the criminogenic impact of treatment facilities depended largely on neighborhood SES. Under some conditions more treatment facilities nearby was associated with lower crime. Reasons why the presumed criminogenic impact of treatment facilities appears only under some conditions were suggested.

AB - Siting of drug and alcohol treatment facilities is often met with negative reactions because of the assumption that these facilities increase crime by attracting drug users (and possibly dealers) to an area. This assumption, however, rests on weak empirical footings that have not been subjected to strong empirical analyses. Using census block groups from Philadelphia, PA, it was found that the criminogenic impact of treatment facilities in and near a neighborhood on its violent and property crime rates may be contingent on the socioeconomic status (SES) of the neighborhood. Paying attention to both the density and proximity of facilities in and around neighborhoods, results showed that the criminogenic impact of treatment facilities depended largely on neighborhood SES. Under some conditions more treatment facilities nearby was associated with lower crime. Reasons why the presumed criminogenic impact of treatment facilities appears only under some conditions were suggested.

KW - drug treatment facilities

KW - environmental criminology

KW - land use

KW - negative binomial regression

KW - place management

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84859897863&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1057/sj.2011.8

DO - 10.1057/sj.2011.8

M3 - Article

VL - 25

SP - 95

EP - 115

JO - Security Journal

JF - Security Journal

SN - 0955-1662

IS - 2

ER -