基于犯罪模式理论的犯罪出行空间特征与影响因素——以长春市南关区扒窃为例

doi:10.11821/dlyj020191027

地理研究 ›› 2021, Vol. 40 ›› Issue (3): 885-899.doi: 10.11821/dlyj020191027

基于犯罪模式理论的犯罪出行空间特征与影响因素——以长春市南关区扒窃为例

赵梓渝¹(), 刘大千², 肖建红¹, 王士君³()

1.青岛大学旅游与地理科学学院,青岛 266071
2.中国科学院东北地理与农业生态研究所,长春 130102
3.东北师范大学地理科学学院,长春 130024

收稿日期:2019-11-25 接受日期:2020-10-25 出版日期:2021-03-10 发布日期:2021-05-10
通讯作者: 王士君
作者简介:赵梓渝（1986-）,男,吉林长春人,博士,讲师,硕士生导师,研究方向为城市网络与人口流动。E-mail: 171462539@qq.com
基金资助:
国家自然科学基金(41630749);国家自然科学基金(41771161);国家自然科学基金(42001176);教育部人文社会科学研究青年基金(20YJCZH241)

Spatial characteristics and influencing factors analysis of journey-to-crime based on crime pattern theory: A study of theft crime in Nanguan District, Changchun

ZHAO Ziyu¹(), LIU Daqian², XIAO Jianhong¹, WANG Shijun³()

1. School of Tourism and Geography Science, Qingdao University, Qingdao 266071, Shandong, China
2. Northeast Institute of Geography and Agroecology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Changchun 130102, China
3. School of Geographical Sciences, Northeast Normal University, Changchun 130024, China

Received:2019-11-25 Accepted:2020-10-25 Online:2021-03-10 Published:2021-05-10
Contact: WANG Shijun

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

犯罪出行是犯罪地理学的重要研究议题,在犯罪防控、侦破等警务实践中具有突出的技术贡献。受制于研究数据的限制,中国犯罪出行实证研究较为缺乏。论文研究了2010—2016年长春市南关区扒窃犯罪出行的空间模式与影响因素,并指出：① 2010—2016年长春市南关区扒窃犯罪出行平均距离为5.74 km,存在明显的空间衰减效应,空间模式为就近掠夺,在距离犯罪者居住地2 km处出现犯罪缓冲区。② 南关区扒窃犯罪高发区与犯罪群体主要聚居地在空间上呈现重叠,该区域犯罪以就近掠夺的空间模式为主。③ 回归模型验证了犯罪者人口属性中性别、户籍地、是否就业和具有前科劣迹、涉案金额、犯罪地点所属类型对于出行距离的显著影响,其中户籍地变量为理解转型期中国大城市犯罪行为具有一定意义。

关键词: 犯罪地理学, 犯罪者行为, 犯罪出行, 出行模式, 长春市

Abstract:

Journey-to-crime is a behavioral process of criminals searching for the targets and places that meet the needs of crime. It measures the spatial distance of the criminal from the initial location to the predetermined location. This is an important technical contribution of criminal geography in crime prevention, case detection and other police practices. Restricted by the limited research data, empirical research on journey-to-crime in China is relatively lacking. This paper studies the spatial pattern and influencing factors of journey-to-crime in pickpocketing in Nanguan District of Changchun from 2010 to 2016. The paper points out that: 1) The average distance of journey-to-crime in the study area from 2010 to 2016 is 5.74 kilometers, which shows an obvious spatial attenuation effect. The spatial pattern is plunder nearby, and there is a crime buffer zone, 2 kilometers away from the criminal′s residence; 2) There is an overlap in space of the areas with high incidence of pickpocketing crime and the residence of crime groups. And the spatial pattern of crime in this area is mainly plunder nearby; 3) By constructing a sequencing logit model, the influence of the uncertainty of measuring journey-to-crime distance on analysis results can be weakened. The regression model verifies the significant impact of gender, domicile, employment and criminal record, amount of money involved and type of crime location on journey-to-crime distance. Among them, the positive correlation between the amount of money involved and the travel distance verifies the prediction of the rational choice theory on criminal motivation. Based on the case study of pickpocketing crime in China′s big cities, this paper indicates that the average journey-to-crime distance, spatial pattern and influencing factors of pickpocketing crime in China and western cities are similar or consistent, which further promotes the combination of criminal geography on criminal behavior research between China and Western countries. Through analyzing the influence of the residence of crime groups on their journey pattern, the urban crime phenomenon and the social management problems of floating population in China under the background of high-speed urbanization can be hopefully reflected upon, thereby expanding the current literature on journey-to-crime. This paper is of a practical significance to criminal profiling, crime risk assessing in residential space, guiding crime prevention and assisting case detection.

Key words: criminal geography, criminal behavior, journey-to-crime, journey pattern, Changchun

赵梓渝, 刘大千, 肖建红, 王士君. 基于犯罪模式理论的犯罪出行空间特征与影响因素——以长春市南关区扒窃为例[J]. 地理研究, 2021, 40(3): 885-899.

ZHAO Ziyu, LIU Daqian, XIAO Jianhong, WANG Shijun. Spatial characteristics and influencing factors analysis of journey-to-crime based on crime pattern theory: A study of theft crime in Nanguan District, Changchun[J]. GEOGRAPHICAL RESEARCH, 2021, 40(3): 885-899.

图/表 7

图1

表1

表2

图2

图3

图4

表3

参考文献 53

[1]	Kent J, Leitner M, Curtis A. Evaluating the usefulness of functional distance measures when calibrating journey-to-crime distance decay functions. Computers Environment & Urban Systems, 2006,30(2):181-200. DOI: 10.1016/j.compenvurbsys.2004.10.002.
[2]	龙冬平, 柳林, 周素红, 等. 地理学视角下犯罪者行为研究进展. 地理科学进展, 2017,36(7):886-902.
	[ Long Dongping, Liu Lin, Zhou Suhong, et al. Research progress of criminal behavior from the perspective of geography. Progress in Geography, 2017,36(7):886-902.]. DOI: 10.18306/dlkxjz.2017.07.010.
[3]	Vandeviver C, Neutens T, Daele S V, et al. A discrete spatial choice model of burglary target selection at the house-level. Applied Geography, 2015,64:24-34. DOI: 10.1016/j.apgeog.2015.08.004.
[4]	Worrall J L, Wheeler A P. Evaluating community prosecution code enforcement in Dallas, Texas. Justice Quarterly, 2019,36(5):870-899. DOI: 10.1080/07418825.2018.1438497.
[5]	Lammers M, Menting B, Ruiter S, et al. Biting once, twice: The influence of prior on subsquent crime location choice. Criminology, 2015,53(3):309-329. DOI: 10.1111/1745-9125.12071.
[6]	Van Daele S, Beken T V. Outbound offending: The journey to crime and crime sprees. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 2011,31(1):70-78. DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvp.2010.09.002.
[7]	Brantingham P L, Brantingham P J. Situational crime prevention in practice. Canadian Journal to Criminology, 1990,32(1):17-40. DOI: 10.1177/0022427890027001005.
[8]	Andresen M A, Frank R, Felson M. Age and the distance to crime. Criminology and Criminal Justice, 2014,14(3):314-333. DOI: 10.1177/1748895813494870. doi: 10.1177/1748895813494870
[9]	王洋, 金利霞, 张虹鸥, 等. 社会空间视角下广州居住地犯罪风险的格局与模式. 地理研究, 2017,36(12):2465-2478. doi: 10.11821/dlyj201712016
	[ Wang Yang, Jin Lixia, Zhang Hong'ou, et al. Pattern and model of residential criminal risk based on social space in Guangzhou, China. Geographical Research, 2017,36(12):2465-2478.]. DOI: 10.11821/dlyj201712016.
[10]	Bernasco W, Johnson S D, Ruiter S. Learning where to offend: Effects of past on future burglary locations. Applied Geography, 2015,60:120-129. DOI: 10.1016/j.apgeog.2015.03.014.
[11]	侯超, 陈鹏. 基于不同个体要素的犯罪人出行距离统计特征分析. 犯罪研究, 2018, (1):37-43.
	[ Hou Chao, Chen Peng. Statistical characteristics of travelers' distances based on individual elements of criminal. Chinese Criminology Review, 2018, (1):37-43.]. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1671-1130.2018.01.005.
[12]	赵勇, 刘民, 柏书华, 等. 系列入室盗窃案件的犯罪距离研究. 中国人民公安大学学报(社会科学版), 2010, (2):143-149.
	[ Zhao Yong, Liu Min, Bai Shuhua, et al. Research on crime distance of serial burglary cases. Journal of Chinese People's Public Security University(Social Sciences Edition), 2010, (2):143-149.]
[13]	徐永胜. 系列入室盗窃犯罪距离个体差异影响因素分析. 中国刑警学院学报, 2014, (2):3-8.
	[ Xu Yongsheng. Analysis of influencing factors on individual distance differences of serial burglary offense. Journal of National Police University of China, 2014, (2):3-8.]. DOI: 10.14060/j.cnki.zgxjxyxb.2014.02.014.
[14]	Berenson J A, Appelbaum P S. A geospatial analysis of the impact of sex offender residency restrictions in two New York counties. Law & Human Behavior, 2011,35(3):235-246. DOI: 10.1007/s10979-010-9235-3.
[15]	Block R, Galary A, Brice D. The journey to crime: Victims and offenders converge in violent index offences in Chicago. Security Journal, 2007,20(2):123-137. DOI: 10.1057/palgrave.sj.8350030.
[16]	Wellsmith M, Burrell A. The influence of purchase price and ownership levels on theft targets: The example of domestic burglary. British Journal of Criminology, 2005,45(5):741-764. DOI: 10.1093/bjc/azi003.
[17]	Ackerman J M, Rossmo D K. How far to travel? A multilevel analysis of the residence-to-crime distance. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 2015,31(2):237-262. DOI: 10.1007/s10940-014-9232-7.
[18]	Rengert G F, Piquero A R, Jones P R. Distance decay reexamined. Criminology, 2006,37(2):427-446. DOI: 10.1111/j.1745-9125.1999.tb00492.x.
[19]	Pizarro J M, Corsaro N, Yu S S V. Journey to crime and victimization: An application of routine activities theory and environmental criminology to homicide. Victims & Offenders, 2007,2(4):375-394. DOI: 10.1080/15564880701568520.
[20]	Davies T, Johnson S D. Examining the relationship between road structure and burglary risk via quantitative network analysis. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 2015,31(3):481-507. DOI: 10.1007/s10940-014-9235-4.
[21]	Bernasco W, Block R, Ruiter S. Go where the money is: Modeling street robbers' location choices. Journal of Economic Geography, 2013,13(1):119-143. DOI: 10.1093/jeg/lbs005.
[22]	Xiao L Z, Liu L, Song G W, et al. Journey-to-crime distances of residential burglars in China disentangled: Origin and destination effects. International Journal of Geo-Information, 2018,7(325):1-15. DOI: 10.3390/ijgi7080325.
[23]	刘大千, 修春亮, 宋伟. 基于因子分析的长春市犯罪分区研究. 人文地理, 2015,30(5):38-42.
	[ Liu Daqian, Xiu Chunliang, Song Wei. Research on classification of crimes in Changchun using factor analysis. Human Geography, 2015,30(5):38-42.]. DOI: 10.13959/j.issn.1003-2398.2015.05.006.
[24]	肖露子, 柳林, 周素红, 等. ZG市工作日地铁站点扒窃案件的时空分布及其影响因素. 地理科学, 2018,38(8):1227-1234.
	[ Xiao Luzi, Liu Lin, Zhou Suhong, et al. Spatio-temporal pattern of pickpocketing at subway stations on weekdays of ZG city and its influencing factors. Scientia Geographica Sinica, 2018,38(8):1227-1234.]. DOI: 10.13249/j.cnki.sgs.2018.08.004.
[25]	Bernasco W, Ruiter S, Block R. Do street robbery location choices vary over time of day or day of week? A test in Chicago. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 2017,54(2):244-275. DOI: 10.1177/0022427816680681.
[26]	Johnson S D, Summers L. Testing ecological theories of offender spatial decision making using a discrete choice model. Crime & Delinquency, 2015,61(3):454-480. DOI: 10.1177/0011128714540276. doi: 10.1177/0011128714540276 pmid: 25866412
[27]	Deakin J, Smithson H, Spencer J, et al. Taxing on the streets: Understanding the methods and process of street robbery. Crime Prevention and Community Safety, 2007,9(1):52-67. DOI: 10.1057/palgrave.cpcs.8150033.
[28]	Hasisi B, Perry S, Ilan Y, et al. Concentrated and close to home: The spatial clustering and distance decay of lone terrorist vehicular attacks. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 2020,36(3):607-645. DOI: 10.1007/s10940-019-09414-z.
[29]	戴侃, 李卫红, 闻磊, 等. 系列案件犯罪地理目标模型下空间点群综合距离算法优化. 地理科学研究, 2015, (4):16-26.
	[ Dai Kan, Li Weihong, Wen Lei, et al. Criminal geographic target model optimal integrated distance between spatial points of serial burglaries. Geographical Science Research, 2015, (4):16-26.]. DOI: 10.12677/GSER.2015.41003.
[30]	Ferraro V. Immigration and crime in the new destinations, 2000-2007: A test of the disorganizing effect of migration. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 2016,32(1) : 23-45. DOI: 10.1007/s10940-015-9252-y.
[31]	Breetzke G D. The effect of altitude and slope on the spatial patterning of burglary. Applied Geography, 2012,34:66-75. DOI: 10.1016/j.apgeog.2011.10.017.
[32]	Levine N. Crime mapping and the crime stat program. Geographical Analysis, 2006,38(1):41-56. DOI: 10.1111/j.0016-7363.2005.00673.x.
[33]	Snook B. Individual differences in distance travelled by serial burglars. Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling, 2004, (1):53-66. DOI: 10.1002/jip.3.
[34]	Morselli C, Royer M N. Criminal mobility and criminal achievement. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 2008,45(1):4-21. DOI: 10.1177/0022427807309630.
[35]	Amy B, Ray B, John W B, et al. Testing the impact of group offending on behavioural similarity in serial robbery. Psychology, Crime & Law, 2015,21(6):1-19. DOI: 10.1080/1068316X.2014.999063.
[36]	Van Koppen P J, Jansen R W J. The road to the robbery: Travel patterns in commercial robberies. British Journal of Criminology, 1998,38(2):230-246. DOI: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.bjc.a014233.
[37]	Bernasco W, Block R. Where offenders choose to attack: A discrete choice model of robberies in Chicago. Criminology, 2009,47(1):93-130. DOI: 10.1111/j.1745-9125.2009.00140.x.
[38]	Cornwell C, Trumbull W N. Estimating the economic model of crime with panel data. Review of Economics & Statistics, 1994,76(2):360-366. DOI: https: //doi.org/10.2307/2109893.
[39]	Chainey S, Chapman J. A problem-oriented approach to the production of strategic intelligence assessments. Policing, 2013,36(3):474-490. DOI: 10.1108/PIJPSM-02-2012-0012.
[40]	Schwanen T, Dieleman F M, Dust M. The impact of metropolitan structure on commute behavior in the Netherlands: A multilevel approach. Growth and Change, 2004,35:304-333. DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-2257.2004.00251.x.
[41]	Reynald D, Averdijk M, Elffers H, et al. Do social barriers affect urban crime trips? The effects of ethnic and economic neighbourhood compositions on the flow of crime in the Hague, the Netherlands. Built Environment, 2008,34(1):21-31. DOI: https: //doi.org/10.2148/benv.34.1.21.
[42]	Townsley M, Birks D, Ruiter S, et al. Target selection models with preference variation between offenders. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 2016,32(2):283-304. DOI: 10.1007/s10940-015-9264-7.
[43]	赵梓渝, 王士君. 2015年我国春运人口省际流动的时空格局. 人口研究, 2017,41(3):101-112.
	[ Zhao Ziyu, Wang Shijun. A spatial-temporal study of inter-provincial migration pattern during Chinese Spring Festival travel rush. Population Research, 2017,41(3):101-112.]
[44]	Liu L, Feng J, Ren F, et al. Examining the relationship between neighborhood environment and residential locations of juvenile and adult migrant burglars in China. Cities, 2018, (82):10-18. DOI: 10.1016/j.cities.2018.04.014.
[45]	赵梓渝, 庞瑞秋, 王士君. 长春市大型零售设施空间可达性绩效测度. 地理研究, 2016,35(3):431-441.
	[ Zhao Ziyu, Pang Ruiqiu, Wang Shijun. Measurement of spatial accessibility performance of large retailing facilities in Changchun. Geographical Research, 2016,35(3):431-441.]. DOI: 10.11821/dlyj201603003.
[46]	刘瑜. 社会感知视角下的若干人文地理学基本问题再思考. 地理学报, 2016,71(4):564-575.
	[ Liu Yu. Revisiting several basic geographical concepts: A social sensing perspective. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2016,71(4):564-575.]. DOI: 10.11821/dlxb201604003.
[47]	Long J S, Freese J. Regression Models for Categorical Dependent Variables Using Stata (3rd ed). College Station, TX: Stata Press, 2014: 310-314.
[48]	Braga A A, Bond B J. Policing crime and disorder hot spots: A randomized controlled trial. Criminology, 2008,46(3):577-607. DOI: 10.1111/j.1745-9125.2008.00124.x.
[49]	Cohen L E, Felson M. Social change and crime rate trends: A routine activity approach. American Sociological Review, 1979,44(4):588-608. DOI: 10.2307/2094589.
[50]	郑文升, 卓蓉蓉, 罗静, 等. 基于空间句法的武汉城区“两抢一盗”犯罪分布环境. 地理学报, 2016,71(10):1710-1720.
	[ Zheng Wensheng, Zhuo Rongrong, Luo Jing, et al. The distribution environment of robbery, snatch, and theft crime based on space syntax: A case study of the central area of Wuhan. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2016,71(10):1710-1720.]. DOI: 10.11821/dlxb201610004.
[51]	Bernasco W, Block R. Robberies in Chicago: A block level analysis of the influence of crime generators, crime attractors, and offender anchor points. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 2011,48(1):33-57. DOI: 10.1177/0022427810384135.
[52]	De Bekker-Grob E W, Donkers B, Jonker M F, et al. Sample size requirements for discrete-choice experiments in healthcare: A practical guide. Patient-patient Centered Outcomes Research, 2015,8(5):373-384. DOI: 10.1007/s40271-015-0118-z.
[53]	National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. Improving Health Research on Small Populations: Proceedings of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2018: 91.

变量名称	定义			均值（频次）	标准差（比例%）
出行距离		距离	1=就近掠夺 2=缓冲区犯罪 3=外出犯罪	1.98	0.80
犯罪者人口学特征		性别	1=男 0=女	0.87	0.33
		年龄	连续变量（岁）	31.57	11.59
		从业	1=从业 0=无业	0.25	0.43
		前科劣迹	1=有前科 0=无前科	0.35	0.48
		学历	1=文盲 2=小学 3=初中 4=中专、高中5=大专、大学	2.87	0.88
		户籍地	1=长春市中心城区 2=吉林省非长春市中心城区 3=外省	2.03	0.73
犯罪金额		金额数额	连续变量（元）	0.86	2.64
犯罪空间载体	热力	热力	连续变量	72.38	14.21
	地点	公共服务设施	参照组	（179）	（58.31）
		室外空间	1=室外空间 0=其他	（76）	（24.76）
		住宅小区	1=住宅小区 0=其他	（52）	（16.94）
犯罪时间载体	季节	春季	参照组	（75）	（24.43）
		夏季	1=夏 0=其他	（95）	（30.94）
		秋季	1=秋 0=其他	（54）	（17.59）
		冬季	1=冬 0=其他	（83）	（27.04）
	工作日	工作日	1=工作日 0=非工作日	0.74	0.44
	24小时时间段	0—8时	参照组	（89）	（28.99）
		8—16时	1=8—16点 0=其他	（95）	（30.94）
		16—24时	1=16—24点 0=其他	（123）	（40.07）

变量		变量
性别	t值=-1.172	犯罪金额	Pearson=0.145**
年龄	Pearson=-0.016	热力	Pearson=-0.116**
从业	t值=-2.812***	犯罪地点	F值=3.390**
前科劣迹	t值=-0.431	犯罪季节	F值=0.470
学历	Spearman=-0.108*	工作日	t值=-0.509
户籍地	Spearman=-0.088	24小时时间段	F值=1.600

	ordered logit model		OLS
	系数	标准误	系数	标准误
年龄	-0.019*	(0.012)	-0.025	(0.027)
学历	-0.193	(0.141)	-0.588*	(0.315)
户籍地	-0.341**	(0.162)	-0.700*	(0.373)
前科劣迹	0.451*	(0.273)	0.403	(0.630)
从业	-0.697**	(0.281)	-1.260**	(0.637)
犯罪金额	0.092**	(0.054)	0.241**	(0.102)
热力	-0.040**	(0.09)	-0.220**	(0.20)
室外空间	0.349	(0.298)	0.515	(0.686)
住宅小区	0.586*	(0.341)	1.187	(0.764)
切点1	-2.691***	(0.918)
切点2	-1.042	(0.905)
常数项			10.900***	(2.032)
卡方值	25.430***
F值			2.702***
pseudo R²	0.043
R²			0.085

基于犯罪模式理论的犯罪出行空间特征与影响因素——以长春市南关区扒窃为例

Spatial characteristics and influencing factors analysis of journey-to-crime based on crime pattern theory: A study of theft crime in Nanguan District, Changchun

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

赞

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 7

参考文献 53

相关文章 8

Metrics

本文评价

推荐阅读 0

[1]	浩飞龙, 王士君, 冯章献, 于婷婷, 马丽. 基于POI数据的长春市商业空间格局及行业分布[J]. 地理研究, 2018, 37(2): 366-378.
[2]	申庆喜, 李诚固, 刘仲仪, 胡述聚, 刘倩. 长春市公共服务设施空间与居住空间格局特征[J]. 地理研究, 2018, 37(11): 2249-2258.
[3]	柳林, 姜超, 周素红, 刘凯, 徐冲, 曹晶晶. 城市入室盗窃犯罪的多尺度时空格局分析——基于中国H市DP半岛的案例研究[J]. 地理研究, 2017, 36(12): 2451-2464.
[4]	申庆喜, 李诚固, 周国磊, 马佐澎. 2002-2012年长春市城市功能空间耦合研究[J]. 地理研究, 2015, 34(10): 1897-1910.
[5]	侯松岩, 姜洪涛. 基于城市公共交通的长春市医院可达性分析[J]. 地理研究, 2014, 33(5): 915-925.
[6]	王蕾, 张树文, 姚允龙. 绿地景观对城市热环境的影响——以长春市建成区为例[J]. 地理研究, 2014, 33(11): 2095-2104.
[7]	杨青山, 张鹏, 张佳, 王岩, 肖超伟. 单中心扩展型城市的交叉口交通量时空演变——以长春市为例[J]. 地理研究, 2010, 29(11): 2070-2079.
[8]	王发曾. 城市犯罪空间盲区的综合治理研究[J]. 地理研究, 2010, 29(1): 57-67.