U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.

NCJRS Virtual Library

The Virtual Library houses over 235,000 criminal justice resources, including all known OJP works.
Click here to search the NCJRS Virtual Library

Target-Hardening - How Much of an Answer? (From Coping With Burglary, P 29-44, 1984, Ronald Clark and Tim Hope, eds. - See NCJ-101397)

NCJ Number
101399
Author(s)
P Mayhew
Date Published
1984
Length
16 pages
Annotation
This British study examines householders' physical security measures against burglary, the possibility of getting householders to improve such security, and whether target hardening deters burglars.
Abstract
Relevant information was obtained from British research, particularly the British Crime Survey, a Home Office study of burglary in Kent, and a study of burglary in the Thames Valley area. Most householders' physical security measures are below the standards recommended by police, and many report leaving windows and doors unlocked when the house is unoccupied during the day. Broad publicity campaigns are not likely to cause householders to improve physical security. Localized campaigns that target high-risk groups, however, are more likely to be successful. Householders could deter a significant percentage of burglars by using high-quality security hardware to protect entry points, visibly advertising participation in property-marking schemes, restricting access to the housing site, using burglar alarms, and having devices that suggest the house is occupied. Physical security for houses frequently unoccupied and located in high-risk areas is not likely to deter any but amateur burglars. Campaigns for target hardening are not likely to reduce overall levels of burglary, because target-hardening improvements will be marginal, many residences will continue at high risk because of location and family patterns, and needed improvements are too costly for some households. 41 references.