The broken windows theory was proposed by James Q. Wilson and George Kelling in 1982, arguing that there was a connection between a person’s physical environment and their likelihood of committing a crime.
The theory is named after an analogy used to explain it. If a window in a building is broken and remains unrepaired for too long, the rest of the windows in that building will eventually be broken, too. According to Wilson and Kelling, the unrepaired window signals people in that neighbourhood that they can break windows without fear of consequence because nobody cares enough to stop it or fix it. Eventually, Wilson and Kelling argued, more serious crimes like robbery and violence will flourish.
It states that visible signs of disorder and misbehaviour in an environment encourage further disorder and misbehaviour, leading to serious crimes. The principle was developed to explain the decay of neighbourhoods, but it is often applied to work and educational environments.
The Theory complements the Social Disorganisation Theory of Criminal Behaviour in Urban Systems. Concentric Zone Theory should also be read, which studies and analyses urban crime.
Broken Windows Policing
In 2005, University of Chicago Law School professor Bernard Harcourt published a study finding no evidence that broken windows policing actually reduces crime. “We don’t deny that the ‘broken windows’ idea seems compelling,” wrote Harcourt. “The problem is that it doesn’t seem to work as claimed in practice.”
Harcourt concluded that for most cities, the costs of broken windows policing outweigh the benefits. “In our opinion, focusing on minor misdemeanors is a diversion of valuable police funding and time from what really seems to help—targeted police patrols against violence, gang activity and gun crimes in the highest-crime ‘hot spots.’”
Links and Sources:
Read more here
