DOES CRIME JUST MOVE AROUND THE CORNER? A CONTROLLED STUDY OF SPATIAL DISPLACEMENT AND DIFFUSION OF CRIME CONTROL BENEFITS*

Recent studies point to the potential theoretical and practical benefits of focusing police resources on crime hot spots. However, many scholars have noted that such approaches risk displacing crime or disorder to other places where programs are not in place. Although much attention has been paid to the idea of displacement, methodological problems associated with measuring it have often been overlooked. We try to fill these gaps in measurement and understanding of displacement and the related phenomenon of diffusion of crime control benefits. Our main focus is on immediate spatial displacement or diffusion of crime to areas near the targeted sites of an intervention. Do focused crime prevention efforts at places simply result in a movement of offenders to areas nearby targeted sites—“do they simply move crime around the corner”? Or, conversely, will a crime prevention effort focusing on specific places lead to improvement in areas nearby—what has come to be termed a diffusion of crime control benefits? Our data are drawn from a controlled study of displacement and diffusion in Jersey City, New Jersey. Two sites with substantial street‐level crime and disorder were targeted and carefully monitored during an experimental period. Two neighboring areas were selected as “catchment areas” from which to assess immediate spatial displacement or diffusion. Intensive police interventions were applied to each target site but not to the catchment areas. More than 6,000 20‐minute social observations were conducted in the target and catchment areas. They were supplemented by interviews and ethnographic field observations. Our findings indicate that, at least for crime markets involving drugs and prostitution, crime does not simply move around the corner. Indeed, this study supports the position that the most likely outcome of such focused crime prevention efforts is a diffusion of crime control benefits to nearby areas.     

公私领域划分与国际法中的性别歧视

国际法通过公私领域的划分确定其管辖范围,并避免干涉主权国家的内政。女性主义者指出,这种划分包含着对女性的规范性歧视和结构性歧视。国际法的基本术语如国家、主权等,排除了国际法对国内违反人权事项的管辖,维护了男性在国内的特权地位。在国际人权法领域,在确定是否给予女性以人权保护时,也是以维护男性利益为出发点。女性主义方法揭示了国际法中存在的性别歧视,但该方法也存在许多问题,需要加以注意。     

论公共利益与私有财产权保护

公共利益需要构成限制私有财产权的理由。保护私有财产权,必须防止公共利益的无限扩张及公共利益的误用与滥用。要正确认识和处理公共利益与个人利益的关系,遵循利益衡量原则、比例原则和信赖保护原则,协调好公共利益与个人利益的冲突,并借助于宪法解释制度明确公共利益的涵义,通过具体立法界定公共利益的范围,建立违宪审查制度,保障公共利益设定的合宪性。     

浅谈公安新闻写作与受众心理

公安新闻写作必须重视和研究受众心理。受众的求新求异心理、求知得益心理、逆反心理、休闲娱乐心理等对公安新闻作品都提出了新的要求。只有重视受众心理 ,才能产生好的公安新闻作品     

传媒对公共情绪宣导抚慰功能的研究设计

大众传媒作为社会危机的“调节器,”在帮助危机中的民众树立正确的心态、减缓并摆脱焦虑与不安的折磨、唤起他们内心的自信等方面,发挥了它自身的影响力。媒介到底对公共情绪的哪些部分产生了作用,如何运用情绪心理学进行解释,这是我们所要关注的。情绪与个体发展、社会化问题、生活色调、认知活动、健康等方面密切相关。这些关系都是建构新型的大众传播对公共情绪影响理论模型的基础,与人的个体发展密切相关。     

公共决策中的理性:价值问题研究

本文尝试对公共决策过程中的理性,尤其是工具理性的含义、内容及其与价值的关系进行探讨,并提出理性面对不同层面的价值时有不同的反应、诉求和精神体现。工具理性在对待价值问题时所暴露出来的局限是其自身无法克服的,而且也给决策实践带来了诸多问题。     

论经济法视野中的公共利益原则

公共利益一直以来都是法学的重要范畴,同时也是宪政、公共管理等领域所关注的重点。当公共利益作为现代国家干预市场主体行为的合法性基础与理由时,公共利益原则便构成了经济法的逻辑起点。经济法视野下公共利益原则的内涵、特征、边界及其与他法中的价值区分等问题都值得探讨,尤其在构建有限有效的法治政府目标更为迫切的中国实践中。     

法律选择方法演变与构建国际和谐社会

法律选择理论是国际私法的核心理论,主要是以各种法律选择学说为载体,具体表现为各种法律选择方法。从十四世纪意大利巴托鲁斯创立法则区别说以来,法律选择方法一直处于不断的演变之中,体现了国际社会追求和谐的要求。本文以法律选择方法的历史演变为线索,以法律选择方法的价值追求——正义为研究视角,探讨法律选择方法的演变与构建国际和谐社会之间的联系。     

从非营利组织看事业单位的改革

中国在推进事业单位改革的过程中开始提出和使用非营利组织的概念,正确看待非营利组织现状和在中国公益事业中的作用,让事业单位和民间非营利组织平等发展,甚至相互竞争来促进事业单位提高服务意识和服务质量。使公益性,非营利性得到真正体现,并让改革的成果惠及全体人民。     

媒体对定罪量刑活动可能带来负面影响的作用机制

媒体对定罪量刑活动所带来的负面影响,主要是以舆论为中介,其作用机制表现为:媒体传播引发舆论,舆论会带来民愤与民怜两方面效果,民愤与民怜成为影响定罪量刑的两大因素。媒体对定罪量刑活动所带来的负面影响程度受刑事立法、媒体和司法制度等方面因素影响。