Elin Waring

Problem-Oriented Policing, Deterrence, and Youth Violence: An Evaluation of Boston's Operation Ceasefire

Operation Ceasefire is a problem-oriented policing intervention aimed at reducing youth homicide and youth firearms violence in Boston. It represented an innovative partnership between researchers and practitioners to assess the citys youth homicide problem and implement an intervention designed to have a substantial near-term impact on the problem. Operation Ceasefire was based on the “pulling levers” deterrence strategy that focused criminal justice attention on a small number of chronically offending gang-involved youth responsible for much of Bostons youth homicide problem. Our impact evaluation suggests that the Ceasefire intervention was associated with significant reductions in youth homicide victimization, shots-fired calls for service, and gun assault incidents in Boston. A comparative analysis of youth homicide trends in Boston relative to youth homicide trends in other major U.S. and New England cities also supports a unique program effect associated with the Ceasefire intervention.

Coercive mobility and crime: A preliminary examination of concentrated incarceration and social disorganization

This article explores how incarceration affects crime rates at the neighborhood level. Incarceration is analyzed as a form of residential mobility that may damage local network structures and undermine informal control. Geocoded data are combined with census data, data on incarceration convictions and releases, and crime data for Tallahassee, Florida. The results show a positive relationship between the rate of releases one year and the communitys crime rates the following year. They also show that low rates of admissions to prison have an uncertain impact on crime rates, moderate rates reduce crime, and higher rates increase crime. Implications for criminal justice policies are discussed.

White-Collar Crime and Criminal Careers: Some Preliminary Findings

The criminal career paradigm has become an increasingly important perspective in the study of street crimes, but it has generated little interest among scholars concerned with white-collar criminality. Behind this neglect lies a common assumption about white-collar criminals. Although street criminals are assumed highly likely to recidivate, white-collar offenders are thought to be “one-shot” criminals unlikely to be processed in the justice system after their initial brush with the law. This article examines the extent to which this image of white-collar criminals is reflected in the criminal records of defendants convicted under white-collar crime statutes. Findings show that white-collar criminals are often repeat offenders. The data also suggest that such offenders are likely to begin their “careers” later, and evidence lower frequency of offending than do street criminals. The article concludes by examining the implications of these findings for white-collar crime research and policy.

Prisoner Reentry and Crime in America: COMMUNITIES AND REENTRY

It is easy to view reentry through the lens of the individuals who are personally involved. Coming home from prison, as Joan Petersilia (2003) has termed it, is an intense personal experience. To come home is to rejoin the lives of families, associates, and other intimates. The personal issues that arise for the ex-prisoner coming home pose weighty challenges for the individual and his or her close associates, and it is not difficult to see why they matter. A growing literature now examines the significance of reentry for the individuals who experience it. Yet the focus of this chapter is reentry as a community (rather than an individual) phenomenon. It is less obvious how reentry manifests itself at the community level, although its impact on communities is worthy of special attention. Reentry, because it is highly stigmatizing as well as concentrated among people already troubled by poverty and exclusion, can be a significant factor of community life – one that transcends the sum of individual experiences. We also consider the effects of incarceration. Incarceration sets the stage for reentry, affecting the same communities that reentry does and thereby compounding the effects of reentry in poor communities that have high rates of residents cycling in and out of prison. We have referred to these intertwined processes as “reentry cycling” and their impact on the community as “coercive mobility” (Clear, Rose, Waring, and Scully 2003).