Broken windows theory

Stelhi Silk Mill Lanco broken windows

Broken windows theory is a criminological theory that suggests visible signs of crime, anti-social behavior, and civil disorder create an urban environment that encourages further crime and disorder, including serious crimes. The theory was introduced by two social scientists, James Q. Wilson and George L. Kelling, in a 1982 article titled "Broken Windows" in The Atlantic Monthly. The title comes from the metaphor that if a window in a building is broken and left unrepaired, all the rest of the windows will soon be broken too. This is because the presence of the broken window sends a signal that no one cares, and so breaking more windows costs nothing.

Theory Overview

The broken windows theory argues that maintaining and monitoring urban environments in a well-ordered condition may stop further vandalism and escalation into more serious crime. The theory suggests that policing methods that target minor crimes such as vandalism, public drinking, and fare evasion help to create an atmosphere of order and lawfulness.

Supporters of the theory argue that it can lead to a significant reduction in crime, citing success stories in cities like New York City during the 1990s when police adopted a zero-tolerance approach towards minor offenses. Critics, however, argue that such policing strategies can lead to negative interactions between police officers and the community, particularly among minority populations. They also suggest that it may shift crime to other areas rather than reduce it.

Implementation

The most famous application of the broken windows theory was in New York City under the leadership of Mayor Rudy Giuliani and Police Commissioner William Bratton. The NYPD adopted a "zero tolerance" policy towards minor offenses. This approach was credited with a significant reduction in crime rates, although the extent to which broken windows policing was responsible has been debated.

Criticism and Controversy

Critics of the broken windows theory point out several concerns. Firstly, there is debate over causation versus correlation in the relationship between disorder and crime. Secondly, critics argue that the aggressive enforcement of minor offenses can lead to over-policing of disadvantaged communities, potentially undermining trust in law enforcement. Additionally, there is evidence suggesting that improvements in economic conditions and other factors may also contribute to crime reduction, independent of policing strategies.

See Also

• Community policing
• Zero tolerance (policing)
• Social disorder