ACONF. 187/7 L. Introduction and reducing crime opportunities. For the purposes of the present discussion it is useful to distinguish among four 1. The modern State seeks protection from crime different general approaches(three of which seek to reduce principally through the operations of the law enforcement criminal motivation), which are distinguished by their own and criminal justice systems. These"formal"systems of set ofobjectives and techniques. These four approaches to control serve the dual purpose of deterring law-breaking crime prevention are among the population at large and of apprehending (a) Child development. Research has documented punishing and treating those who offend. Governments a variety of risk factors in early childhood associated with have tried to improve the effectiveness of those systems by later delinquency and crime It follows that interventions such means as strengthening the police force, streamlining designed to address those factors through improved the judicial process, diverting less serious offenders from parenting skills, enriched early education and improved the system, increasing the severity of punishment for physical and mental health could lead to large reductions serious crimes and widening the range of penal treatments in future crime and delinquency for recidivist offenders (b) Community development. Ever since the 2. Complementing the formal system of control is what pioneering work of Shaw and McKay' in Chicago criminologists refer to as societys "informal" social criminologists have recognized that powerful forces in controls.These include a panoply of measures taken by local communities can promote or inhibit crime.An parents, schools and religious bodies to instil respect for important strand of preventive work therefore consists of the law among children and young people, to regulate the efforts to strengthen the economic viability and social conduct of people as they go about their daily lives and to cohesiveness of local communities, to provide more local afford protection to persons and property through routine services and facilities for community enhancement, to precautions and security measures strengthen residents' ties to their local communities, to 3. The formal and informal systems of control depend teach young people about the importance of the rule of law upon each other for their effectiveness. Without informal and to develop local police-community relations. Sustained social controls, the criminal justice system would soon be efforts along those lines have recently been made in many swamped with a multitude of crimes, both more and less Western countries, most notably in France (the serious, and would cease to function effectively. Equally, Bonnemaison initiatives), the United Kingdom of great without the existence of the criminal justice system to Britain and Northern Ireland("safer city" programmes), mpose the threat of arrest and punishment, informal social Italy(the anti-Mafia education of young people in controls would face a constant challenge to their legitimacy Palermo)and the United States of America(neighbourhood and credibility 4. As well as strengthening formal controls (e) Social development. This is the least advanced Governments have tried to bolster informal controls of the four approaches, but is of great interest in a United through pronouncements about the duty of parents, Nations context. It proceeds on the assumption that in schools. communities and other social institutions to developing countries and countries with economies in promote the rule of law. More recently, as they have come transition much crime results from poverty, lack of paid to recognize the limitations of the formal system in employment, poor education, discrimination and a variety controlling crime(and have had to meet its escalating of other social and economic deprivations. It is assumed costs), Governments have begun to explore more direct that social development will remove these"causes"of ways of improving informal social controls. Such activity crime. Unfortunately, there is no direct relationship falls under the general heading of "crime prevention", between social conditions and crime. Thus, crime has which covers a very wide range of possible actions increased affluence and improved social security Crime 5. Several detailed classifications of crime prevention also shows no direct relationship to levels of employment have been developed by academic criminologist in Western countries. However, these findings may not However,policy discussions usually distinguish between hold for developing countries and countries with just two kinds of prevention, social prevention and economies in transition, where the general social and situational prevention, which correspond to the two main economic conditions are much less favourable ways of preventing crime-reducing criminal motivationA/CONF.187/7 2 I. Introduction 1. The modern State seeks protection from crime principally through the operations of the law enforcement and criminal justice systems. These “formal” systems of control serve the dual purpose of deterring law-breaking among the population at large and of apprehending, punishing and treating those who offend. Governments have tried to improve the effectiveness of those systems by such means as strengthening the police force, streamlining the judicial process, diverting less serious offenders from the system, increasing the severity of punishment for serious crimes and widening the range of penal treatments for recidivist offenders. 2. Complementing the formal system of control is what criminologists refer to as society’s “informal” social controls. These include a panoply of measures taken by parents, schools and religious bodies to instil respect for the law among children and young people, to regulate the conduct of people as they go about their daily lives and to afford protection to persons and property through routine precautions and security measures. 3. The formal and informal systems of control depend upon each other for their effectiveness. Without informal social controls, the criminal justice system would soon be swamped with a multitude of crimes, both more and less serious, and would cease to function effectively. Equally, without the existence of the criminal justice system to impose the threat of arrest and punishment, informal social controls would face a constant challenge to their legitimacy and credibility. 4. As well as strengthening formal controls, Governments have tried to bolster informal controls through pronouncements about the duty of parents, schools, communities and other social institutions to promote the rule of law. More recently, as they have come to recognize the limitations of the formal system in controlling crime (and have had to meet its escalating costs), Governments have begun to explore more direct ways of improving informal social controls. Such activity falls under the general heading of “crime prevention”, which covers a very wide range of possible actions. 5. Several detailed classifications of crime prevention have been developed by academic criminologists. However, policy discussions usually distinguish between just two kinds of prevention, social prevention and situational prevention, which correspond to the two main ways of preventing crime—reducing criminal motivation and reducing crime opportunities. For the purposes of the present discussion it is useful to distinguish among four different general approaches (three of which seek to reduce criminal motivation), which are distinguished by their own set of objectives and techniques. These four approaches to crime prevention are: (a) Child development. Research has documented a variety of risk factors in early childhood associated with later delinquency and crime. It follows that interventions designed to address those factors through improved parenting skills, enriched early education and improved physical and mental health could lead to large reductions in future crime and delinquency; (b) Community development. Ever since the pioneering work of Shaw and McKay1 in Chicago, criminologists have recognized that powerful forces in local communities can promote or inhibit crime. An important strand of preventive work therefore consists of efforts to strengthen the economic viability and social cohesiveness of local communities, to provide more local services and facilities for community enhancement, to strengthen residents’ ties to their local communities, to teach young people about the importance of the rule of law and to develop local police-community relations. Sustained efforts along those lines have recently been made in many Western countries, most notably in France (the Bonnemaison initiatives), the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (“safer city” programmes), Italy (the anti-Mafia education of young people in Palermo) and the United States of America (neighbourhood watch and community policing); (c) Social development. This is the least advanced of the four approaches, but is of great interest in a United Nations context. It proceeds on the assumption that in developing countries and countries with economies in transition much crime results from poverty, lack of paid employment, poor education, discrimination and a variety of other social and economic deprivations. It is assumed that social development will remove these “causes” of crime. Unfortunately, there is no direct relationship between social conditions and crime. Thus, crime has unexpectedly increased in Western countries in times of increased affluence and improved social security. Crime also shows no direct relationship to levels of employment in Western countries. However, these findings may not hold for developing countries and countries with economies in transition, where the general social and economic conditions are much less favourable;