Urban Stratification of Places, Routine Activities and Suburban Crime Rates

Cohen and Felson's (1979) theory of "routine activities" is evaluated using 1972 and 1980 crime rate data for 676 American suburbs. Cross-sectional and change influences of criminal motivation (percent poor, percent unemployed, percent black, and percent youth), criminal opportunities (employment concentration and percent multiple housing) and guardianship (police employment, police expenditure, and female labor force nonparticipation) on suburban crime rates, 1980 and change in crime rates, 1972-80 are estimated using maximum likelihood (LISREL) techniques. Consistent with the routine activities model, a multiplicative effect of the preconditions for crime on crime rates is also estimated. Motivation, opportunities, and guardianship are found to have direct andlor indirect additive effects on violent andlor property crime rates-supporting the "routine activities" model. A multiplicative effect of the preconditions of crime is found for property crime but not for violent crime rates. Suburbs have historically been immune from many of the urban problems that plague central cities. However, urban problems have begun to invade the suburbs-traffic congestion and air pollution; rising crime and delinquency rates; deteriorating housing; poverty and unemployment (Gold 1982). Of particular interest has been the recent rapid increase in suburban crime rates. Uniform Crime Report (UCR) data indicate that suburban violent crime rates increased by 130.7 percent from 1970 to 1980 compared to a 47.4 percent increase for central cities. The UCR shows increases for property crime rates of 146.0 percent for suburbs and 93.5 percent for central cities. Empirical questions arising are what types of suburbs have begun to experience increases in crime rates? And why? To answer these questions, a model of suburban property and violent crime rates is expli*We thank the anonymous referees, and especially David F. Greenberg, for their helpful comments and criticisms on earlier versions of this paper. Address correspondence to John M. Stahura, Department of Sociology, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907. ?D 1988 The University of North Carolina Press