201
Findings
The Research, Development and
Statistics Directorate exists to
improve policy making, decision
taking and practice in support
of the Home Office purpose and
aims, to provide the public and
Parliament with information
necessary for informed debate
and to publish information for
future use.
Findings are produced by the
Research, Development and
Statistics Directorate. For further
copies contact:
Communication Development Unit
Room 264,
Home Office,
50 Queen Anne’s Gate,
London SW1H 9AT.
The impact of high visibility patrols on personal robbery
Bethan Jones and Nick Tilley
The Policing Impact Initiative reported here covered the Humberside police force area and
was funded by the local authority. It was set up in April 2000 to tackle personal robbery and
alcohol related disorder, to address quality of life issues and increase police contact with the
Humberside community. Activity was concentrated on community engagement and high
visibility patrols between April 2000 and March 2001. These findings pre-date the onset of
the Street Crime Initiative (SCI), which was announced in March 2002 and helped to reduce
the level of robbery by 14% (National Crime Recording Standards (NCRS) adjusted) across
England and Wales in its first year (17% in the 10 SCI areas; NCRS adjusted figure not
available). Although Humberside was not part of this wider anti-robbery drive, high visibility
policing was identified as a key component of the police response to the robbery-street crime
problem. These findings provide empirical evidence that demonstrate the effectiveness of high
visibility patrols as a tactic for delivering reductions in personal robbery.
Key points
● In addition to the police’s regular patrol work, the grant provided an additional 23,952
hours of high visibility patrols, of which 11,170 officer hours were provided on Fridays
and Saturdays.
● Two types of high visibility patrol were funded:
Tel: 020 7273 2084
Fax: 020 7222 0211
•
publications.rds@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk
•
public order foot patrol 8pm–4am Friday and Saturday in Community Action Team
Area 1 – an area of three wards which included Hull city centre
general foot patrol from 8am–10pm daily in police division 4, which covers all of the
city of Hull.
● In 2001, there was a 16% year-on-year reduction in personal robbery in Community Action
Team Area 1, compared with an increase across the force of 5% and across the UK of 15%.
● The impact of these high visibility patrols was linked to the density of personal robberies –
reduction in personal robbery was greatest in the areas which had concentrated levels of
high visibility patrols combined with high concentrations of personal robbery.
© Crown copyright 2004
ISSN 1473-8406
Printed by: TABS
P revious re s e a rch has suggested that above
certain limits, the increase of general patrols
results in few additional returns – if there is some
police presence, the amount of patrolling makes
little difference (Clarke and Hough, 1984). One
experiment designed to demonstrate the impact
of additional officers showed that the number of
reported crimes per beat decreased when an
officer was put on patrol but there was no further
decrease in reported crime when patrol strength
was increased by two to four officers per beat
(Bright, 1969). This is not to say, however, that
high levels of patrol directed specifically to highcrime hot spots, i.e. small geographic areas of a
few streets or addresses, do not have an impact.
Directed patrols, proactive arrests and problem
solving at high-crime hot spots have all been
shown to be linked to crime prevention (Eck and
Maguire, 2000).
The potential impact of additional high visibility
p a t rols (HVP) in Humberside was assessed
using year-on-year comparisons. Results for
spe cif ic t yp es of re c o r de d c ri m e f or the
Community Action Team area, where a large
percentage of additional patrol was targeted,
were compared with the police division where
the additional HVP was completed and with UK
figures (Table 3).
The views expressed in these findings are those of the authors, not
necessarily those of the Home Office (nor do they reflect Government policy)
Findings 201
The areas where high visibility patrol schemes
operated
The HVP scheme took place in Hull – the population of just
under 258,000 (ONS, 2000) consists of 22% aged 0–15,
60% aged 16–64 and 17% over 65 years.
The scheme aimed to improve police visibility, tackle disorder
and provide public reassurance. It also aimed to target
‘street crime’ including personal robberies. Attempts were
therefore made to deploy the additional patrol in areas with
high levels of crime, disorder and footfall (the number of
people using an area at a particular time), and at times
when these areas were busiest (see Box below). This would
maximise the degree of contact between the police and
members of the public. It would also maximise any potential
deterrent effect at those times. The additional patrol was
therefore targeted at Humberside’s police force division 4,
with most HVPs being undertaken in the city centre.
Division 4 covers an area of 63.5 square miles – within
this division there are seven Community Action Te a m
(CAT) areas. One particular area (CAT area 1) includes
the city centre ward (ward 2) and covers the largest area
of division 4 at 16 square miles. HVPs were completed, in
varying amounts, in all seven CAT areas but most of these
p a t rols were concentrated in the city centre covering
approximately one square mile of CAT area 1. The other
six CAT areas are adjacent to or in close geographical
proximity to CAT area 1.
High visibility patrols in operation
High visibility patrols were conducted from April 2000 until
March 2001 with an additional 14 police officers across
police division 4. CAT officers were responsible for patrolling
one or more specific wards within a discrete geographical
area. They undertook two types of HVP:
• public order foot patrol targeted specifically on Friday
and Saturday nights in the city centre, involving 12
additional officers from 8pm to 4am
• general foot patrol, involving two additional officers
Monday to Sunday from 8am to 4pm and 2pm to
10pm daily across the whole of division 4.
They were not vehicle based and were not charged with
responding to calls for service or incidents unless they
were in close proximity. The main remit of HVP officers
was to engage the public, be accessible, challenge
antisocial behaviour and deal with offenders.
The majority of HVP time (44%; 10,537 hours) was
undertaken in CAT area 1 and particularly in ward 2,
including the city centre. Most recorded incidents occurred
on Friday, Saturday and Sunday. In addition the majority
of robberies occurred between Friday and Sunday, from
3pm to 5pm and 7pm to 10pm. Therefore the targeting of
roughly a third of the scheme between 8pm and 4am on
Friday and Saturday is appropriate. However, additional
patrols on a Sunday may have yielded further benefits.
Crime rates in Humberside's division 4, CAT area 1 and Hull city centre
Crime in division 4
Crime in CAT area 1
Crime rates in division 4 were consistently high, almost
twice the national average. Violent crime accounted for
25% of recorded crime in the city centre. Analysis of
recorded crime and CAD (command and deploy) data
led the police to target most of the HVPs in CAT area 1
within division 4 and particularly in ward 2 which
includes the city centre.
Table 1 shows that in 2000/01, 27% of all recorded
crime in the division took place in CAT area 1, whilst it
comprised 15% of the division’s population.
Table 1 Crime in CAT area 1 compared with
division 4 (2000/01)
Crime type
CAT
Division Percentage of
area 1 4
division 4 crime
in CAT area 1
No.
No.
%
1,569
67
163
968
3,939
281
516
5,085
40
24
29
19
1,655
2,277
4,507
500
1,462
273
225
8,398
8,937
11,722
1,612
7,914
622
868
20
25
38
31
18
44
26
13,677
50,013
27
Violence against
the person
Sexual offences
Personal robbery
Domestic burglary
Commercial
burglary
Vehicle crime
Other theft
Fraud/forgery
Criminal damage
Drugs
Other
Total
2
Crime in the city centre (ward 2)
Analysis of recorded crime data for 2000/01 shows that
most of the crime within CAT area 1 took place in the city
centre. All types of crime were higher in ward 2 than in
the other two wards combined that comprise CAT area 1
(although as it is a non-residential area, the number of
domestic burglaries are small). The city centre is a hot
spot for robbery. Analysis of personal robbery data for
2000/01 showed that 29% (163) of personal robberies
in the division took place in CAT area 1 (Table 2).
Table 2 Percentage of personal robberies in
each CAT area (2000/01)
CAT area
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Total
Frequency
163
35
34
74
90
79
41
516
%
29
6
6
13
16
14
7
100
Note: 572 personal robberies, 3 missing, 56 no beat
specified.
Findings 201
This £1m initiative paid for an additional 44,104 hours of
police activity which was used as follows:
• 54% (23,952 hours) was spent on high visibility
patrol. 47% of HVP (11,170 hours) was undertaken
on a Friday and Saturday
• the remaining hours were spent on community
involvement and dealing with arrests and incidents
• in total, 38% (16,937 hours) of the grant was
allocated to CAT area 1.
The majority of patrol was performed by PCs.
Impact of high visibility patrols on crime
Table 3 gives an initial indication of the possible impact of
the additional HVP on crime. It shows that in the city
c e n t re, where the majority of HVPs took place, these
patrols appear to have been effective on relevant crime
types (as there are few residential properties in CAT area
1, the impact on domestic burglary is likely to be lower).
The year-on-year percentage decreases in crime in the
city centre were above those experienced across the force
as a whole and the UK overall.
Table 3 Year-on-year changes in recorded
crime (2000/01 compared to 1999/00)
2000/01
Personal
robbery
UK
Police
force
Targeted CAT area 1
division 4 (inc. city
centre)
%
%
%
%
+15
+5
<1
–16
–7
–11
–13
–30
Vehicle theft
Domestic
burglary
Commercial
burglary
–9
–25
–21
–16
–7
–14
–10
–16
Vandalism
+2
+1
–2
–17
Personal robbery
Table 4 shows the year-on-year changes in numbers of
personal robberies within the various CAT areas where HVPs
operated. Whilst the figures are relatively small, the area
where the majority of the additional foot patrols were
targeted (the city centre) had the largest year-on-year
decrease in personal robbery.
Table 4 CAT area comparisons of year-onyear changes in recorded personal robbery
CAT area
2000/01 year-on-year
comparison with 1999/00
1 (inc. city centre)
2
3
4
5
6
7
–32
0
+4
+7
–8
+11
–1
Hours
of HVP
10,537
1,699
2,026
1,587
1,583
3,478
2,561
Attempts were made to link the decrease in re c o rd e d
personal robbery to the additional patrol undertaken in
the city centre by comparing monthly year- o n - y e a r
changes in robbery in conjunction with the number of
hours of HVP completed per month. Data shows that while
year-on-year personal robbery in CAT area 1 was higher
in April 2000/01 compared with 1999/2000, recorded
ro b b e r y decreased once additional HVP incre a s e d
s ubs tant i al ly a nd th e sche m e w as im pl eme nted
consistently (Table 5 and Figure 1).
T h e re is some evi dence (although no t statistically
significant) which suggests that impact on robberies may
be associated with the actual amount of increased HVP.
Table 5 and Figure 1 suggest that monthly personal
robberies decreased sharply as the number of HVP hours
in CAT area 1 increased from 800 to 1,200.
Table 5 Monthly robberies in CAT area 1 and
additional hours HVP
Month
April ‘00
May ‘00
June ‘00
July ‘00
August ‘00
September ‘00
October ‘00
November ‘00
December ‘00
January ‘01
February ‘01
March ‘01
Hours of HVP
793
1,158
991
879
884
1,035
1,048
1,119
1,206
354
823
190
No. of personal
robberies
21
9
13
15
19
12
7
11
9
9
15
23
Displacement/benefit diffusion
In CAT areas with high density of personal robberies per
square mile, which received a high level of HVP, the yearon-year reduction in robbery was greatest. CAT area 1
received about three times the patrol hours of the next
CAT area and there was a 16% drop in the number of
personal robberies (including attempts). This compares
with other CAT areas with high robbery density, which
received low levels of additional HVP, where ro b b e ry
actually increased (for example CAT area 6). However,
personal robbery also decreased in CAT area 5 (see Table
4). This area received the least additional patrol and has
a robbery concentration level similar to the city centre
(CAT area 1). Note: CAT areas 5 and 1 have robbery
concentration levels of 10 per square mile.
Given the geographical proximity of the seven CAT areas
it is possible that some of the personal robbery reduction
in CAT areas excluding the city centre (CAT area 1) was
the result of ‘benefit diffusion’. The additional HVP could
have produced either the spatial displacement of robbery
or spatial diffusion of robbery prevention.
3
Findings 201
Figure 1 Additional HVP hours each month shown in relation to the monthly number of
personal robberies in CAT area 1 for the period April 2000 to March 2001
Any such effects would be expected in CAT areas 2, 5 and
6. These are adja cent to CAT area 1, w he re mos t
robberies had been taking place and the additional HVP
was most intense. Table 4 shows that robbery remained
the same in area 2, went down in area 5 and up in area
6. This evidence is consistent with the occurrence both of
spatial displacement and of diffusion of benefits.
It is not possible to link the precise number of additional hours
of patrol completed in each CAT area to the decrease in
personal ro b b e ry observed there. However, the total
additional patrol does appear to have deterred robbery
across the whole division when changes in the division when
the patrol operated are compared with changes in the rest of
the force and in the country as a whole.
The level of reduction in robbery observed was also linked
to the amount of HVP and robbery concentration. Personal
robbery decreased in CAT areas with high levels of HVP
and robbery (e.g. CAT area 1) but robbery increased in
areas with lower levels of HVP but high levels of robbery
( C AT area 6). The impact of the additional HVP was
therefore linked to the density of personal robbery offences.
Conclusion
Although the general view is that the ‘Bobby on the Beat’
is the cornerstone of effective policing (Audit Commission,
1996), the re has be en little empir ical evidence to
demonstrate the effective impact of patrol on crime.
However, this study found that recorded personal robbery
in the city centre fell by 16% during the year of the
initiative. This compares with an increase across the force
of 5% and 15% in the UK for the same period. There is
also some evidence that higher levels of ‘hot spot’ HVP
were linked to greater monthly reductions and lower yearon-year increases in robbery for 2000/01.
Reduction in personal robbery was greater in areas of
high levels of HVP. Robbery increased in areas with lower
levels of HVP. These findings suggest that HVP patrolling
can reduce robbery in specific hotspots but that these
results should not be expected if the area is not a hotspot
or if the level of patrolling is not extremely high.
Methodological note
In order to receive payment for additional activities completed as part of the scheme, officers were required to fill in
activity forms which were designed specifically to monitor activities and duties undertaken. Police officers were
required to stipulate specific details including rank, the date activity was completed, patrol type undertaken, the
activity performed and any incidents dealt with and arrests made during the course of their shift. The forms also
specifically monitored the amount of HVP engaged in during the course of the shift and the location of patrol. The
content of these forms were analysed in conjunction with recorded crime statistics 1999/2001 for the police force
area, division where the initiative took place and the UK (England and Wales). Other data sources included calls for
service 2000/01 for the police force area and Crime and Disorder Audits 1998 and 2001.
References
Audit Commission. (1996). Streetwise. Effective Police
Patrol. London: HMSO.
Bright, J. A. (1969). The Beat Patrol Experiment. Home
O ffice Police Research and Development Branch.
(Unpublished).
Clarke, R. V. and Hough, M. (1984). Crime and Police
Effectiveness. Home Office Research Study 79. London:
HMSO.
Eck, J. E. and Maguire, E. R. (2000). ‘Have Changes in
Policing Reduced Violent Crime? An Assessment of the
Evidence’. In A. Blumstein and J. Wallman (Eds.) The
Crime Drop in America. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
O ffice for National Statistics. (2000). Mid 1999
Population Estimates. Series PE no 2. London: Office for
National Statistics.
Bethan Jones is a Senior Research Officer in the Crime and Policing Group, Home Office Research, Development and
Statistics Directorate. Nick Tilley is a Professor of Sociology at Nottingham Trent University and is seconded as a
consultant to the Crime and Policing Group, Home Office Research, Development and Statistics Directorate.
4