Scholarlink

<p>This study evaluates outdoor environmental interventions implemented by a municipal public housing provider in police-designated vulnerable residential areas in Gothenburg, Sweden. Using geocoded address-level crime data (2019–2023) and a staggered difference-in-differences design, we estimate the effects of such interventions on outdoor-related crime drawing on crime prevention through environmental design (CPTED) and related environmental crime prevention approaches. Across multiple specifications and control groups, we find no statistically significant reductions following intervention exposure. Event-study estimates indicate no differential pre-treatment trends, and robustness checks yield substantively similar results. Descriptive spatial analyses show no consistent evidence of crime displacement. The findings suggest that broad, multi-purpose housing-led improvement strategies do not automatically translate into measurable crime reductions when preventive mechanisms are diffuse or weakly aligned with specific crime problems. The study highlights the importance of aligning environmental interventions with clearly defined crime problems and contributes to debates on the role of public housing providers in community safety governance.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Estimating the effects of outdoor crime prevention interventions using a staggered difference-in-differences model

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年3月1日

查看全文
  • Jens Widmark

摘要

This study evaluates outdoor environmental interventions implemented by a municipal public housing provider in police-designated vulnerable residential areas in Gothenburg, Sweden. Using geocoded address-level crime data (2019–2023) and a staggered difference-in-differences design, we estimate the effects of such interventions on outdoor-related crime drawing on crime prevention through environmental design (CPTED) and related environmental crime prevention approaches. Across multiple specifications and control groups, we find no statistically significant reductions following intervention exposure. Event-study estimates indicate no differential pre-treatment trends, and robustness checks yield substantively similar results. Descriptive spatial analyses show no consistent evidence of crime displacement. The findings suggest that broad, multi-purpose housing-led improvement strategies do not automatically translate into measurable crime reductions when preventive mechanisms are diffuse or weakly aligned with specific crime problems. The study highlights the importance of aligning environmental interventions with clearly defined crime problems and contributes to debates on the role of public housing providers in community safety governance.