These models and simulations have been tagged “Policing”.
Justice Reinvestment in Bourke
One part of this model is displaying the typical lifestyle of many adults and youth in the town Bourke, North West of New South Wales. This lifestyle involves committing crime, getting arrested for the crime by police (or getting away with it) and spending time in jail (for adults) or juvenile detention (for the youth) or simply getting discharged.
Additionally to this traditional lifestyle being modelled, an alternative option called community groups has also been incorporated into the model. The model is showing that members of Bourke have the option to join a community group which the government hopes will improve their lifestyle when they are immersed once again into society, thus reducing the rate of crime.
The Stocks Involved:
Adult- The adults living in BourkeYouth- The adolescents living in BourkePetty Crime- The standard crime committed by the youth of Bourke. This can include stealing cars and breaking into property.Crime- The common crime circulating among the adults of Bourke. This includes domestic violence often as a result of heavy drinking.Apprehended- Youth getting captured by the policeArrested- Adults getting caught by the policeJuvenile Detention- Alienation of youth by policeJail- Adults locked up by the policeCommunity Group- Groups formed for the people of Bourke to join. Includes development activities, sporting clubs and trade-skill learning classes.Positive Lifestyle- Adults and youth who have improved themselves as a result of joining these community groups (the goal of community engagement program expenditure).
The Variables Involved and How to Adjust Them:
1. Policing: The number of police in the town of Bourke. The level and amount of punishment is dependent on the quantity of police present.
Minimum amount is one as there should be at least one police existent.
2. Community Engagement Expenditure: The total amount of money spent into community groups to develop individuals.
The purpose of the government is to spend money on community engagement activities so the minimum is at least one percent of the money they have available to spend and the maximum is 100 percent of the money they can afford to spend.
--> Both variables have a slider that goes up and down by one step. You can adjust both variables at the same time but take into account both variables have their own minimum and maximum.
-Approximately 3000 people in Bourke
-Coefficients and initial values are arbitrarily chosen. These would be modified with real-life data.
-The only external influences on this model are police and community investment.
Suggested Settings for Interesting Results:
1. First move the policing and community expenditure sliders to their maximum. Hit the simulate button and look at the first time-series graph titled 'Youth Lifestyle'. Notice the delays between increase of each stock and the ordering: As Youth decreases, Petty Crime will increase. Then youth Apprehended will begin to increase followed by those going to Juvenile Detention. Youth will then start to increase again and the trend continues over the 3-year period displayed. Notice how the same pattern occurs for the time-series graph labelled 'Adult Lifestyle'.
2. Move the policing slider to 1 and the community expenditure slider to 100. Hit simulate. Notice in the 'Youth Lifestyle' graph how even with community expenditure at its maximum, over time, Petty Crime will still increase because there are hardly any police and hence hardly any youth getting caught so as a result the youth in Bourke keep to their regular immoral lifestyle. If you view the 'Adult Lifestyle' graph you will see the same pattern. (Note this point is a main reason for the conclusion drawn below).
3. Move the community engagement and policing slider to their minimum 1. Hit simulate. View the third display titled 'Community Engagement Program'. You will notice how Youth and Adult decrease and Crime and Petty Crime increase. Also, since community engagement is at its minimum too (not just policing) the amount of people in Community Groups decreases significantly and as a result the number of individuals creating a Positive Lifestyle for themselves decreases too.
4. Move the Community Engagement Expenditure slider to 1 and the Policing slider to 50 and look particularly at the last display labelled 'Adults and Youth: Membership and Crime Rates'. You will notice instantly how Community Group and Positive Lifestyle always have a lower number of individuals compared to the general Youth and Adult stocks as well as the Crime and Petty Crime stocks. This gives indication that a higher amount of investment should be put into the community engagement programs for better results.
A combination of policing and community engagement expenditure is the best solution for the people of Bourke as the policing will gradually reduce the amount of crime and the community development programs will help create a positive lifestyle for each individual that joins. Overall it is not efficient to just invest in community development programs. For the most effective outcome, an increase in policing is needed as well as investments in community engagement activities.
Note: You do not need to dive into any formulae. But feel free to move the sliders and hit that simulate button to view how the number of people in each stock changes based on the level of policing and community engagement expenditure!
statistics from the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) show that Bourke
Shire Regional Council has approximately 3000 residents, made up of 65-63% adults
and 35-37% youths.
variable is in the denominator to create a hyperbolic trend. The aim was to achieve a
lower crime rate if police expenditure was increased, thus also a higher crime
rate if police expenditure was decreased. The figure in the numerator can be changed with the ‘maximum crime rate’ variable
which represents the asymptotic crime rate percentage. Where police = 100 the selected crime rate is
the formula incorporated the police as a variable, where the total amount of convicted crimes was subtracted from the total amount of crimes committed. However, the constant flow of crimes from repeat offender/a created an unrealistic fluctuation in the simulation. I
settled for a constant avoidance rate of 25%. This assumes that an adult or youth committing a crime for the first time is just as likely to
avoid conviction as a repeat offender.
is difficult to predict in a mathematical model how many adults or youths are convicted of crimes they commit. I
determined a reasonable guess of maximum 75% conviction rate when Police = 100. In this formula, decreasing police spending equates into
decreased conviction rate, which is considered a realistic representation.
is assumed that the average sentence for a youth is approximately 6 months
detention. For an adult, it will be assumed that the average sentence is 12
months gaol. The discrepancy is due to a few basic considerations that include
1. Adults are more often involved in serious crime which carries a longer
sentence 2. youths are convicted with shorter sentences for the same crime, in
the hopes that they will have a higher probability of full rehabilitation.
of adult/youth engagement was estimated to be a linear relation. The maximum rate of engagement, assuming expenditure = 100,
is set to 80%. This rate of engagement is a reasonable guess with consideration that there will also exist adults who refused to engage in the community and end up in
crime, and adults or youth that refuse to engage in the community or crime.
Expenditure variable is in the denominator to create a hyperbolic trend. The aim was to achieve a
lower boredom rate with a higher engagement expenditure, and thus a higher
boredom rate with a lower engagement expenditure. The figure in the numerator of 25 represents the asymptotic boredom rate percentage,
where if engagement expenditure = 100 the adult/youth boredom rate is maximised at 25%.
remote north-western town of Bourke currently faces high incidences of petty
crime among the town’s youth.
of the problem stems from the alienation and lack of recreational activities
the youth face from being a small isolated town, which has meant that the
threat of being sent to Juvenile Detention isn't acting as much of a deterrent.
complex systems model aims to show how investing in different variables can
change this cycle.
there are numerous underlying factors that perpetrate the cycle of Bourke youth
being locked up, this model has a main focus on Youth Alienation
Simulation of this
model shows results over 3 years with Time Units in steps of 1 Month.
Population of Bourke stays static at 1200 over the 3 years.
model only looks as Individuals committing petty crimes as opposed to groups of
Youth getting together to commit petty crime (we are not considering peer
pressure as a factor of petty crime rates).
Point 0, all 1200 of Bourke Youth are in the Stock Home, and all other stocks are empty. Youth flow out from Home to other stocks from Time Point 1.
- Home = Number of Bourke youth at 'Home'.
not committing crimes but not taking part in Community Engagement Programs
- Community Engagement Programs = Number of
Bourke Youth taking part in Bourke's Community Engagement Programs.
Community Engagement Programs consist of
multiple things such as Sporting Clubs and Indigenous Community Events
- Petty Crime = Number of Bourke Youth committing
- Juvenile Detention = Number of Bourke Youth in
- Discharged = Number of Bourke Youth in state of
being Discharged from Juvenile Detention.
- Upstanding Citizen = Number of Bourke Youth
that are Upstanding members of the Bourke Community.
- Community Development Resource $ = Amount of
Money being Invested into Community Development
15000 = $15000 into Community Development Fund
- Police Officers = Number of Police Officer in
15 = 15 Active Police Officers
- Police Initiative Rate = % Amount of Investment
Police put into active Policing. (AKA Police efficiency)
0.1 = 10% effectiveness (police appear
to be corrupt)
- Positive Influences at Home = % of Bourke Youth
that have strong enough Positive Social Influences at Home to not want to
Positive Influences at Home is a constant 0.5%
0.5% of the juvenile population of Bourke
already have strong positive social influences at home that have them highly
unlikely to want to commit petty crimes.
at Home is a fixed variable as the factors affecting this % are too complex for
any reliable intervention.
- Boredom & Recklessness = % of Bourke Youth
that are Bored and Reckless enough to want to commit crimes.
Boredom and Recklessness is a constant 5%.
5% of the juvenile
population of Bourke is always going to be bored/reckless enough to want to
commit petty crimes.
- Youth Alienation = % of Bourke Youth that feel
Alienated/have no sense of community.
Youth Alienation is a dynamic percentage.
Community Development Program and Upstanding Citizen decreases Alienation. Everyone who partakes
in the community engagement programs is unalienated. All Upstanding Citizens are unalienated.
Before taking into
account those people that are in the Community
Development Program and Upstanding
Citizen stocks we assume that 90% of the Bourke youth population to be
i.e. when Upstanding
Citizen and Community Engagement Programs are both empty, Youth Alienation =
- Community Involvement (Dynamic Rate)
For every $1000
invested into Community Development Resource $,
the rate of flow from Home to Community Engagement Programs increases by 2%.
The rate of flow
from Home to Community Engagement Programs also is dependent on the attendance
of youth to Community Program itself (word of mouth advertising). For every 50
children coming to Community Engagement Programs
we have a percentage increase in Community
- Lack of Interest (Constant Rate)
Flow rate from Community Engagement Programs to Petty Crime is simply the % rate of the Boredom
& Recklessness variable.
- Temptation (Dynamic Rate)
rate from Home to Petty Crime is dependent on the 4 Variables of
Youth Alienation, Boredom & Recklessness, Police Officers and Police
Youth Alienation and
Boredom & Recklessness increase Temptation Flow.
Officers and Police Initiative Rate decrease Temptation Flow.
flow is also reduced by the 0.5% Positive Influences at Home
- Conviction (Dynamic Rate)
rate from Petty Crime to Juvenile Detention is dependent on the 2 variables
Police Officers and Police Initiative Rate.
Officers and Police Initiative Rate increase Conviction Flow.
- Not Caught (Dynamic Rate)
rate from Petty Crime back to Home is dependent on the Conviction Flow Rate.
Conviction Flow is directly proportional to a Decrease in the Not Caught Flow.
- Served Sentence (Constant Rate)
rate from Juvenile Detention to Discharged is just a delay of Juvenile
Detention population by 4 months.
average Petty Crime Conviction results in a 4 month Juvenile Detention Centre
- Further Negative Influence (Constant Rate)
rate from Discharged to Petty Crime is a constant 25%.
There is a constant 25% of Youth that having been convicted once are actually
more likely to commit petty crimes (for various reasons) and are no longer wary
- Active Rehabilitation (Dynamic Rate)
rate from Discharged to Community Engagement Programs is dependent on the
Community Development Resource $ variable.
Development Resource $ encourage Discharged Youth to want to change their ways.
every $2000 invested into Community Development Resource $'s Active
Rehabilitation Rate increase a percent.
- Unchanged (Dynamic Rate)
rate from Discharge to Home is dependent on Active Rehabilitation Rate and
Further Negative Influence Rate.
Increased Active Rehabilitation Flow is directly
proportional to decrease in the Unchanged Flow.
Unchanged Flow is also reduced by the Further
Negative Influences Flow of 25%.
- Inspired (Constant Rate)
rate from Home to Upstanding Citizen is simply the percentage rate of the
Positive Influences at Home variable.
- Self Improvement (Constant Rate)
rate from Community Engagement Programs to Upstanding Citizen is a constant 5%.
There is a constant 5% of Youth that have been partaking in the Community
Engagement Programs who have been so well received that they are conscientious
Upstanding Members of Bourke society.
- Hits Hard Times (Constant Rate)
Rate from Upstanding Citizen to Home is a constant 1%
Upstanding Citizens are not infallible and there are some circumstances which
lead to Upstanding Citizens suddenly being susceptible to the alienation,
boredom and recklessness.
EFFECT OF CHANGING VARIABLES
Police Officers = 10
Community Development Resource $ = 5,000
Police Initiative Rate = 1
Community Development Resource $
- Increases Community Involvement Flow, therefore
increasing Community Engagement Programs,
which in turn decreases Youth Alienation.
Decrease in Youth Alienation, decreases Temptation Flow.
- Increases Active
Rehabilitation Flow, therefore increasing
Community Engagement Programs.
- Increases Upstanding
Citizen due to the increase in Community
Community Development Resource $
- Decreases Community Involvement Flow, therefore
decreasing Community Engagement Programs,
which in turn increases Youth Alienation.
Increase in Youth Alienation, increases Temptation Flow.
- Decreases Active
Rehabilitation Flow, therefore decreasing
Community Engagement Programs .
- Decreases Upstanding
Citizen due to the decrease in Community
- Decreases Temptation Flow therefore decreasing Petty Crime.
- Increases Conviction Flow therefore increasing Juvenile Detention.
- Increases Temptation Flow therefore increasing Petty Crime.
- Decreases Conviction Flow therefore decreasing Juvenile Detention.
- Decreases Temptation
Flow therefore decreasing Petty Crime.
how Youth just constantly circulate between Home,
Petty Crime, Juvenile Detention and Discharged
with the amount of children in Community
Engagement and Upstanding Citizens
stocks seem Negligible
that while we have a lot of Petty Crime going unpunished we have a significant
proportion of the Bourke Youth in Community
Engagement Programs and becoming Upstanding
that the situation in Bourke looks very bleak, we have the majority of the
youth population committing crimes and even though there's never really any
improvement in the situation.
MKT563, Assessment 4
Student No: 11728701
About the Model:
The aim of this model is to show how investments in community programs can positively influence the population in Bourke. It models the cycle between crime and conviction in key groups such as adults and young people. It simulates the impact of community development and alienation over a period of time.
This model assumes Bourke has a population of 3000 people, with 60% being adults and 40% are young people. It only simulates the relationship between adults and domestic violence as that is the main concerning issue.
Police Presence: negative reinforcement. The number of resources put into policing determines whether individuals will commit crimes.
Alienation: the rate at which people involved in community programs will disconnect from their associated groups.
Community Development: the amount of government initiatives established to support community programs encourages individuals to participate.
Conviction: proportion in which individuals get convicted
When the effect of alienation and police presence is limited (0.2-0.3) and conviction rate is maxed out (1), investing in a minimal amount of community development (at least 0.3) will encourage some community cohesion and reduce the possibility of crimes, to a limited extent.
Further increasing deterrence strategies in Bourke through policing will significantly reduce crime and also the number of convictions.
Conviction (1), Community Development (0.3 and 0.7 vice versa), Police (0.7 and 0.3 vice versa), Alienation (0.3)
The impact of significant police presence can suppress crime but does not support youths to be part of the community.
The effect of major community development increases individuals to participate in community but the crime rate suffers, especially in the initial period. In the long term however, crime rates eventually drop.
A combination of these would be ideal.
Alexander, H. (2019, May 29). How NSW town labelled 'most dangerous in world' changed its destiny. Sydney Morning Herald. https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/how-nsw-town-labelled-most-dangerous-in-world-changed-its-destiny-20190527-p51ri6.html
Allam, L. (2018, October 9). Unique community policing sees crime rates plunge in Bourke. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2018/oct/09/unique-community-policing-sees-rates-plunge-in-bourke
Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2016). Census Data for Bourke (A). https://quickstats.censusdata.abs.gov.au/census_services/getproduct/census/2016/quickstat/LGA11150?opendocument
KPMG Impact Assessment. (2018). Maranguka Justice Reinvestment Project. https://www.justreinvest.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/Maranguka-Justice-Reinvestment-Project-KPMG-Impact-Assessment-FINAL-REPORT.pdf
Thompson, G., McGregor, L., & Davies, A. (2016, September 19). Backing Bourke: How a radical new approach is saving young people from a life of crime. ABC News. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-09-19/four-corners-bourkes-experiment-in-justice-reinvestment/7855114