Policing | Insight Maker

Justice Reinvestment in Bourke

Model Explanation:

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 Bourke
Youth- The adolescents living in Bourke
Petty 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 police
Arrested- Adults getting caught by the police
Juvenile Detention- Alienation of youth by police
Jail- Adults locked up by the police
Community 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.

Underlying Assumptions:

-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.

Conclusions:

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!

Justice Reinvestment in Bourke - 44622554

Steven D'Alessandro

Aim The purpose 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

Aim

The purpose 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.

Assumptions

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.

Variables

Police Presence: negative reinforcement. The amount of resources put into policing (deterrence) 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

Patterns

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.

Suggestions

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.

44839960 Policing and Community Development in Bourke

Timothy Tsang

Justice Reinvestment in Bourke

Model Explanation:

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 Bourke
Youth- The adolescents living in Bourke
Petty 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 police
Arrested- Adults getting caught by the police
Juvenile Detention- Alienation of youth by police
Jail- Adults locked up by the police
Community 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.

Underlying Assumptions:

-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.

Conclusions:

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!

Clone of Justice Reinvestment in Bourke - 44622554

Alexander Soetrisno

Yu Mao's questionable and barely functional model on Bourke's crime landscape with consideration of community development and police.

SID: 43626971.

Model displays the impacts of community development and police simultaneously on offenders in both youth and adult age groups. Also considers these variables simultaneously.

Model of Bourke's crime problem

Yu Mao

This insight illustrates the relationship between the funding of policing and community development initiatives, to reduce crime rates in Bourke, NSW.

The insight categorises community members into four groups:

'At risk community members' are individuals who have been identified as likely to commit crime.

'Charged' community members are individuals who have committed a crime, have been caught and charged.

'Community development program members' are individuals who have been identified as at risk, but have also been selected to take part in a community development progam.

'Community members' are individuals who are not classified as at risk.

This insight shows the process of how individuals transfer between categories, with finance as the independent variable. Finance can be altered from a minimum of $250,000 to a maximum of $1,000,000. The finance variable can be altered using the total finance slider located on the right hand side.

Assumptions

Here is a list of assumptions made about this scenario. Assumptions are also found in the story of this insight.

*Bourke comprises of 3000 individuals. 2750 are classified as at risk and 250 as community members at time 0

*The average jail sentence is two years

*The government pays $1,000 per year for each individual who is charged and jailed

*The average cost of a community development program is $4,000 per year, per individual

*The average individual will relapse and commit a crime or be rehabilitated within three years

Affect of Funding on Policing and Community Development Initiative in Bourke, NSW

Natalie Doig

BACKGROUND

The remote north-western town of Bourke currently faces high incidences of petty crime among the town’s youth.

Part 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.

This complex systems model aims to show how investing in different variables can change this cycle.

While there are numerous underlying factors that perpetrate the cycle of Bourke youth being locked up, this model has a main focus on Youth Alienation

MODEL EXPLAINED

Simulation of this model shows results over 3 years with Time Units in steps of 1 Month.

Total Youth Population of Bourke stays static at 1200 over the 3 years.

This 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).

At Time 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.

STOCKS

- Home = Number of Bourke youth at 'Home'.

i.e. 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 Petty Crimes.

- Juvenile Detention = Number of Bourke Youth in Juvenile Detention.

- 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.

ADJUSTABLE VARIABLES

- Community Development Resource $ = Amount of Money being Invested into Community Development

i.e. 15000 = $15000 into Community Development Fund

- Police Officers = Number of Police Officer in Bourke

i.e. 15 = 15 Active Police Officers

- Police Initiative Rate = % Amount of Investment Police put into active Policing. (AKA Police efficiency)

i.e. 0.1 = 10% effectiveness (police appear to be corrupt)

UN-ADJUSTABLE VARIABLES

- Positive Influences at Home = % of Bourke Youth that have strong enough Positive Social Influences at Home to not want to commit crimes.

Positive Influences at Home is a constant 0.5% percent.

Assumptions:

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.

Positive Influences 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%.

Assumptions:

5% of the juvenile population of Bourke is always going to be bored/reckless enough to want to commit petty crimes.

DYNAMIC VARIABLES

- Youth Alienation = % of Bourke Youth that feel Alienated/have no sense of community.

Youth Alienation is a dynamic percentage.

Assumptions:

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 Alienated.

i.e. when Upstanding Citizen and Community Engagement Programs are both empty, Youth Alienation = 90%

FLOWS

- 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 Involvement rate.

- 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)

Flow rate from Home to Petty Crime is dependent on the 4 Variables of Youth Alienation, Boredom & Recklessness, Police Officers and Police Initiative Rate.

Youth Alienation and Boredom & Recklessness increase Temptation Flow.

Police Officers and Police Initiative Rate decrease Temptation Flow.

Temptation flow is also reduced by the 0.5% Positive Influences at Home

- Conviction (Dynamic Rate)

Flow rate from Petty Crime to Juvenile Detention is dependent on the 2 variables Police Officers and Police Initiative Rate.

Police Officers and Police Initiative Rate increase Conviction Flow.

- Not Caught (Dynamic Rate)

Flow rate from Petty Crime back to Home is dependent on the Conviction Flow Rate.

Increased Conviction Flow is directly proportional to a Decrease in the Not Caught Flow.

- Served Sentence (Constant Rate)

Flow rate from Juvenile Detention to Discharged is just a delay of Juvenile Detention population by 4 months.

Assumption: The average Petty Crime Conviction results in a 4 month Juvenile Detention Centre Sentence.

- Further Negative Influence (Constant Rate)

Flow rate from Discharged to Petty Crime is a constant 25%.

Assumption: 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 of Police.

- Active Rehabilitation (Dynamic Rate)

Flow rate from Discharged to Community Engagement Programs is dependent on the Community Development Resource $ variable.

Community Development Resource $ encourage Discharged Youth to want to change their ways.

For every $2000 invested into Community Development Resource $'s Active Rehabilitation Rate increase a percent.

- Unchanged (Dynamic Rate)

Flow 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)

Flow rate from Home to Upstanding Citizen is simply the percentage rate of the Positive Influences at Home variable.

- Self Improvement (Constant Rate)

Flow rate from Community Engagement Programs to Upstanding Citizen is a constant 5%.

Assumption: 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)

Flow Rate from Upstanding Citizen to Home is a constant 1%

Assumption: 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

Base Settings:

Police Officers = 10

Community Development Resource $ = 5,000

Police Initiative Rate = 1

⮝ Increasing 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 Engagement Programs.

⮟ Decreasing 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 Engagement Programs.

⮝ Increasing Police Officers

- Decreases Temptation Flow therefore decreasing Petty Crime.

- Increases Conviction Flow therefore increasing Juvenile Detention.

⮟ Decreasing Police Officers

- Increases Temptation Flow therefore increasing Petty Crime.

- Decreases Conviction Flow therefore decreasing Juvenile Detention.

⮝ Increasing Police Initiative

- Decreases Temptation Flow therefore decreasing Petty Crime.

- Increases Conviction Flow therefore increasing Juvenile Detention.

⮟ Decreasing Police Initiative

- Increases Temptation Flow therefore increasing Petty Crime.

- Decreases Conviction Flow therefore decreasing Juvenile Detention.

INTERESTING POINTS

Try setting Community Development Resource $ to 0 , Police Officers to 30 and Police Initiative Rate to 1.

Notice 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

Try setting Community Development Resource $ to 30,000 , Police Officers to 1 and Police Initiative Rate to 1.

Notice 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 Citizens

Try setting Community Development Resource $ to 0 , Police Officers to 30 and Police Initiative Rate to 0.1.

Notice 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.

43324525 - Justice Reinvestment in Bourke - Youth Crime Cycle

Desnica Kumar

Aim

The purpose 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.

Assumptions

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.

Variables

Police Presence: negative reinforcement. The amount of resources put into policing (deterrence) 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

Patterns

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.

Suggestions

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.

Clone of 44839960 Policing and Community Development in Bourke

Uranchimeg Byambajav

MKT563, Assessment 4

Uranchimeg Byambajav

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.

Assumptions:

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.

Variables:

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

Patterns:

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.

Suggestions

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.

References:

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

Uranchimeg Byambajav 11728701 Policing and Community Development in Bourke

Uranchimeg Byambajav

This model simulated possible crime rates of youths in Bourke.

Crime, Policing and Community Programs involving Youths in Bourke

Lauren Attwood

The complex systems model ‘Engagement vs Police Expenditure for Justice Reinvestment in Bourke, NSW’ evaluates the effectiveness of allocating government funding to either community engagement activities or law enforcement. In this model, it is possible for the user to designate resources from a scale of 20-100 and to also modify the crime rate for both adults and youth. Below, there are detailed notes that describe the reasoning and assumptions that justify the logic applied to this model. Similar notes can be found when stocks, flows and variables is clicked under the field ‘notes’.

Portions

Government 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.

Crime Rate

Police 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 maximised.

Avoiding Gaol

Originally 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.

Conviction

It 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.

Released

It 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.

Engagement

Rate 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.

Boredom

Engagement 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%.

Assessment #3 Justice Reinvestment in Bourke, NSW 44841396

Mark Robinson

Yu Mao's questionable and barely functional model on Bourke's crime landscape with consideration of community development and police.

SID: 43626971.

Model displays the impacts of community development and police simultaneously on offenders in both youth and adult age groups. Also considers these variables simultaneously.

Clone of Model of Bourke's crime problem

Ray Madachy

Justice Reinvestment in Bourke

Model Explanation:

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 Bourke
Youth- The adolescents living in Bourke
Petty 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 police
Arrested- Adults getting caught by the police
Juvenile Detention- Alienation of youth by police
Jail- Adults locked up by the police
Community 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.

Underlying Assumptions:

-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.

Conclusions:

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!

Justice Reinvestment in Bourke - 44622554

Christine Fadly

4

Policing Models