Crime Models
These models and simulations have been tagged “Crime”.
These models and simulations have been tagged “Crime”.
About the Model
This model is designed to simulate the youth population in Bourke, specifically focusing on the number of criminals and incarcerated dependent on a few key variables.
Within the model, a young person living in Bourke can be classified as being in any of five states:
Young Community Member: The portion of the youth population that is not committing crime and will not commit crime in the future. Essentially the well behaved youths. A percentage of these youths will become alienated and at risk.
Alienated and At Risk Youths: The youths of Bourke that are on the path of becoming criminals, this could be caused by disruptive home lives, alcohol and drug problems, and peer pressure, among other things.
Criminal: The youths of Bourke who are committing crimes. Of these criminals a percentage will be caught and convicted and become imprisoned, while the remainder will either go back to being at risk and commit more crimes, or change their behaviour and go back to being a behaving community member.
Imprisoned: The youths of Bourke who are currently serving time in a juvenile detention centre. Half of the imprisoned are released every period at a delay of 6 months.
Released: Those youths that have been released from a detention centre. All released youths either rehabilitate and go back to being a community member or are likely to re-offend and become an alienated and at risk youth.
The variables used in the model are:
Police- This determines the police expenditure in Bourke, which relates to the number of police officers, the investment in surveillance methods and investment in criminal investigations. The level of expenditure effects how many youths are becoming criminals and how many are being caught. An increase in police expenditure causes an increase in imprisoned youths and a decrease in criminals.
Community Engagement Programs- The level of investment in community engagement programs that are targeted to keep youths in Bourke from becoming criminals. The programs include sporting facilities and clubs, educational seminars, mentoring programs and driving lessons. Increasing the expenditure in community engagement programs causes more young community members and less criminals and at risk youths.
Community Service Programs- The level of investment in community service programs that are provided for youths released from juvenile detention to help them rehabilitate and reintegrate back into the community. An increase in community service expenditure leads to more released prisoners going back into the community, rather than continuing to be at risk. Since community service programs are giving back to the community, the model also shows that an increase in expenditure causes a decrease in the amount of at risk youths.
All three of these variables are adjustable. The number of variables has been kept at three in order to ensure the simulation runs smoothly at all times without complicated outputs, limitations have also been set on how the variables can be adjusted as the simulation does not act the same out of these boundaries.
Key Assumptions:
The model does not account for the youths’ memory or learning.
There is no differentiation in the type of criminals and the sentences they serve. Realistically, not all crimes would justify juvenile detention and some crimes would actually have a longer than six-month sentence.
The constants within in the calculations of the model have been chosen arbitrarily and should be adjusted based on actual Bourke population data if this model were to be a realistic representation of Bourke’s population.
The model assumes that there are no other factors affecting youth crime and imprisonment in Bourke.
There are 1500 youths in Bourke. At the beginning of the simulation:
Young Community Member = 700
Alienated and At Risk Youth = 300
Criminal = 300
Imprisoned = 200
Noteworthy observations:
Raising Police expenditure has a very minimal effect on the number of at risk youths. This can be clearly seen by raising Police expenditure to the maximum of twenty and leaving the other two variables at a minimum. The number of Alienated and at Risk Youths is significantly higher than the other states.
Leaving Police expenditure at the minimum of one and increasing community development programs and community service programs to their maximum values shows that, in this model, crime can be decreased to nearly zero through community initiatives alone.
Leaving all the variables at the minimum position results in a relatively large amount of crime, a very low amount of imprisoned youth, and a very large proportion of the population alienated and at risk.
An ideal and more realistic simulation can be found by using the settings: Police = 12, Community Engagement Programs = 14, Community Service Programs = 10. This results in a large proportion of the population being young community members and relatively low amounts of criminals and imprisoned.
The traditional lifestyle for youth in this town involves either a chosen path of committing crimes, or, that of community activity and various forms of education.
The model has been designed to mimic a system where community expenditure and support services are adopted in order to inject a positive lifestyle for the youth population. The phenomena studied in this simulation is the balance between policing, community support and social influence versus not using them.
Assumptions
-1000 Youth Population
-Youth are either influenced by criminal activity or by productive educational activities.
- Adoption rate of community activities is influenced by personality, relating to current personal skill level of youth and willingness.
-If youth you do not become involved in community activity or some form of Education, then they turn to the path of crime.
-Punishment facility time is up to 12 months with a 2 year probation period
-Community expenditure and support only begins in the probation period, unless “Juvenile Support” slider is used.
-For the purpose of this study on youth crime and support before a crime is committed, we do not include a possibility of relapse in the rehabilitation phase.
STOCKS
VARIABLES
Policing Units – Policing Bourke's criminal activity, and convicting after a crime has been committed.
Juvenile Support Units – The variable change in crime IF the community funds Support Units for youth before a crime is committed.
Social Support Units – The number of social support units available for released offenders during rehabilitation phase.
Community expenditure – the amount of time and money being spent on social services and policing.
Birth rate, crime rate, dicharge rate, recidivism & conviction rate
INTERESTING RESULTS
Slide any of the 3 variables to the extreme.
This model shows that adoption rate of a positive lifestyle is directly influenced by social influences.
1/ Juvenile Support Unit impact
Press Simulate.
Slide Juvenile Support Units to the extreme. Simulate again.
Juxtaposition of Juvenile Support impact on Behavior Graph shows that Crime and Reoffend rates drop significantly. More people turn to law-abiding positive activity.
This will again all change with the manipulation of the Social Support unit slider…..
2/ Social Support Unit impact
Social Support Units only influence those released from the Punishment facility. The more social services on hand to support rehabilitation phase the less chance of committing crime for the second time, with Reoffend rates dropping significantly when the Social Support Units Slider is adjusted to the extreme.
Rehabilitation rates only increase marginally, in spite of more social support feeding into that phase.
The greatest impact is shown on Law-Abiding and Crime. How could this be? A logical conclusion is that there is a finite number of youth in the community and those who have received positive social support during a learning phase of rehabilitation, then go on to influence their friends, their family, and have a positive influence on those around them.
3/ Police Unit Impact
Slide Policing Units to the extremes. Simulate. Policing Units Graph shows there is a significant decrease in Reoffend rates, and a higher rate of Conviction.
Curiously, rehabilitation rates drop and crime rates go up. How could this happen? A logical conclusion is that conviction and punishment is not a crime deterrent. It needs the added influence of social support services for there to be a positive impact on decreasing criminal instincts and activity on the whole.
Conclusions
Social support and home visits need to happen in the flow between Youth Population and Crime - “Juvenile Support Units”.
Investment in youth via these juvenile social support officers before they commit an offence, limits the amount of criminal activity over time. So, crime effectively decreases with the direct influence of social services at a young age.
Equally, with more police presence in the community, for those tempted to re-offend, they have a deterrent.
The most efficient management of the community issues faced in Bourke however lies with a combination of both Policing and Social Support services at all levels within the community.
<!--EndFragment-->
The traditional lifestyle for youth in this town involves either a chosen path of committing crimes, or, that of community activity and various forms of education.
The model has been designed to mimic a system where community expenditure and support services are adopted in order to inject a positive lifestyle for the youth population. The phenomena studied in this simulation is the balance between policing, community support and social influence versus not using them.
Assumptions
-1000 Youth Population
-Youth are either influenced by criminal activity or by productive educational activities.
- Adoption rate of community activities is influenced by personality, relating to current personal skill level of youth and willingness.
-If youth you do not become involved in community activity or some form of Education, then they turn to the path of crime.
-Punishment facility time is up to 12 months with a 2 year probation period
-Community expenditure and support only begins in the probation period, unless “Juvenile Support” slider is used.
-For the purpose of this study on youth crime and support before a crime is committed, we do not include a possibility of relapse in the rehabilitation phase.
STOCKS
VARIABLES
Policing Units – Policing Bourke's criminal activity, and convicting after a crime has been committed.
Juvenile Support Units – The variable change in crime IF the community funds Support Units for youth before a crime is committed.
Social Support Units – The number of social support units available for released offenders during rehabilitation phase.
Community expenditure – the amount of time and money being spent on social services and policing.
Birth rate, crime rate, dicharge rate, recidivism & conviction rate
INTERESTING RESULTS
Slide any of the 3 variables to the extreme.
This model shows that adoption rate of a positive lifestyle is directly influenced by social influences.
1/ Juvenile Support Unit impact
Press Simulate.
Slide Juvenile Support Units to the extreme. Simulate again.
Juxtaposition of Juvenile Support impact on Behavior Graph shows that Crime and Reoffend rates drop significantly. More people turn to law-abiding positive activity.
This will again all change with the manipulation of the Social Support unit slider…..
2/ Social Support Unit impact
Social Support Units only influence those released from the Punishment facility. The more social services on hand to support rehabilitation phase the less chance of committing crime for the second time, with Reoffend rates dropping significantly when the Social Support Units Slider is adjusted to the extreme.
Rehabilitation rates only increase marginally, in spite of more social support feeding into that phase.
The greatest impact is shown on Law-Abiding and Crime. How could this be? A logical conclusion is that there is a finite number of youth in the community and those who have received positive social support during a learning phase of rehabilitation, then go on to influence their friends, their family, and have a positive influence on those around them.
3/ Police Unit Impact
Slide Policing Units to the extremes. Simulate. Policing Units Graph shows there is a significant decrease in Reoffend rates, and a higher rate of Conviction.
Curiously, rehabilitation rates drop and crime rates go up. How could this happen? A logical conclusion is that conviction and punishment is not a crime deterrent. It needs the added influence of social support services for there to be a positive impact on decreasing criminal instincts and activity on the whole.
Conclusions
Social support and home visits need to happen in the flow between Youth Population and Crime - “Juvenile Support Units”.
Investment in youth via these juvenile social support officers before they commit an offence, limits the amount of criminal activity over time. So, crime effectively decreases with the direct influence of social services at a young age.
Equally, with more police presence in the community, for those tempted to re-offend, they have a deterrent.
The most efficient management of the community issues faced in Bourke however lies with a combination of both Policing and Social Support services at all levels within the community.
<!--EndFragment-->
Underlying assumptions:
Constants:
Things to note:
Initial values:
Youth in town: 1200.
Criminals: 100.
Juvenile Detention: 100.
Violent families: 300
Detected violent families: 100.
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%.
The traditional lifestyle for youth in this town involves either a chosen path of committing crimes, or, that of community activity and various forms of education.
The model has been designed to mimic a system where community expenditure and support services are adopted in order to inject a positive lifestyle for the youth population. The phenomena studied in this simulation is the balance between policing, community support and social influence versus not using them.
Assumptions
-1000 Youth Population
-Youth are either influenced by criminal activity or by productive educational activities.
- Adoption rate of community activities is influenced by personality, relating to current personal skill level of youth and willingness.
-If youth you do not become involved in community activity or some form of Education, then they turn to the path of crime.
-Punishment facility time is up to 12 months with a 2 year probation period
-Community expenditure and support only begins in the probation period, unless “Juvenile Support” slider is used.
-For the purpose of this study on youth crime and support before a crime is committed, we do not include a possibility of relapse in the rehabilitation phase.
STOCKS
VARIABLES
Policing Units – Policing Bourke's criminal activity, and convicting after a crime has been committed.
Juvenile Support Units – The variable change in crime IF the community funds Support Units for youth before a crime is committed.
Social Support Units – The number of social support units available for released offenders during rehabilitation phase.
Community expenditure – the amount of time and money being spent on social services and policing.
Birth rate, crime rate, dicharge rate, recidivism & conviction rate
INTERESTING RESULTS
Slide any of the 3 variables to the extreme.
This model shows that adoption rate of a positive lifestyle is directly influenced by social influences.
1/ Juvenile Support Unit impact
Press Simulate.
Slide Juvenile Support Units to the extreme. Simulate again.
Juxtaposition of Juvenile Support impact on Behavior Graph shows that Crime and Reoffend rates drop significantly. More people turn to law-abiding positive activity.
This will again all change with the manipulation of the Social Support unit slider…..
2/ Social Support Unit impact
Social Support Units only influence those released from the Punishment facility. The more social services on hand to support rehabilitation phase the less chance of committing crime for the second time, with Reoffend rates dropping significantly when the Social Support Units Slider is adjusted to the extreme.
Rehabilitation rates only increase marginally, in spite of more social support feeding into that phase.
The greatest impact is shown on Law-Abiding and Crime. How could this be? A logical conclusion is that there is a finite number of youth in the community and those who have received positive social support during a learning phase of rehabilitation, then go on to influence their friends, their family, and have a positive influence on those around them.
3/ Police Unit Impact
Slide Policing Units to the extremes. Simulate. Policing Units Graph shows there is a significant decrease in Reoffend rates, and a higher rate of Conviction.
Curiously, rehabilitation rates drop and crime rates go up. How could this happen? A logical conclusion is that conviction and punishment is not a crime deterrent. It needs the added influence of social support services for there to be a positive impact on decreasing criminal instincts and activity on the whole.
Conclusions
Social support and home visits need to happen in the flow between Youth Population and Crime - “Juvenile Support Units”.
Investment in youth via these juvenile social support officers before they commit an offence, limits the amount of criminal activity over time. So, crime effectively decreases with the direct influence of social services at a young age.
Equally, with more police presence in the community, for those tempted to re-offend, they have a deterrent.
The most efficient management of the community issues faced in Bourke however lies with a combination of both Policing and Social Support services at all levels within the community.
<!--EndFragment-->
The traditional lifestyle for youth in this town involves either a chosen path of committing crimes, or, that of community activity and various forms of education.
The model has been designed to mimic a system where community expenditure and support services are adopted in order to inject a positive lifestyle for the youth population. The phenomena studied in this simulation is the balance between policing, community support and social influence versus not using them.
Assumptions
-1000 Youth Population
-Youth are either influenced by criminal activity or by productive educational activities.
- Adoption rate of community activities is influenced by personality, relating to current personal skill level of youth and willingness.
-If youth you do not become involved in community activity or some form of Education, then they turn to the path of crime.
-Punishment facility time is up to 12 months with a 2 year probation period
-Community expenditure and support only begins in the probation period, unless “Juvenile Support” slider is used.
-For the purpose of this study on youth crime and support before a crime is committed, we do not include a possibility of relapse in the rehabilitation phase.
STOCKS
VARIABLES
Policing Units – Policing Bourke's criminal activity, and convicting after a crime has been committed.
Juvenile Support Units – The variable change in crime IF the community funds Support Units for youth before a crime is committed.
Social Support Units – The number of social support units available for released offenders during rehabilitation phase.
Community expenditure – the amount of time and money being spent on social services and policing.
Birth rate, crime rate, dicharge rate, recidivism & conviction rate
INTERESTING RESULTS
Slide any of the 3 variables to the extreme.
This model shows that adoption rate of a positive lifestyle is directly influenced by social influences.
1/ Juvenile Support Unit impact
Press Simulate.
Slide Juvenile Support Units to the extreme. Simulate again.
Juxtaposition of Juvenile Support impact on Behavior Graph shows that Crime and Reoffend rates drop significantly. More people turn to law-abiding positive activity.
This will again all change with the manipulation of the Social Support unit slider…..
2/ Social Support Unit impact
Social Support Units only influence those released from the Punishment facility. The more social services on hand to support rehabilitation phase the less chance of committing crime for the second time, with Reoffend rates dropping significantly when the Social Support Units Slider is adjusted to the extreme.
Rehabilitation rates only increase marginally, in spite of more social support feeding into that phase.
The greatest impact is shown on Law-Abiding and Crime. How could this be? A logical conclusion is that there is a finite number of youth in the community and those who have received positive social support during a learning phase of rehabilitation, then go on to influence their friends, their family, and have a positive influence on those around them.
3/ Police Unit Impact
Slide Policing Units to the extremes. Simulate. Policing Units Graph shows there is a significant decrease in Reoffend rates, and a higher rate of Conviction.
Curiously, rehabilitation rates drop and crime rates go up. How could this happen? A logical conclusion is that conviction and punishment is not a crime deterrent. It needs the added influence of social support services for there to be a positive impact on decreasing criminal instincts and activity on the whole.
Conclusions
Social support and home visits need to happen in the flow between Youth Population and Crime - “Juvenile Support Units”.
Investment in youth via these juvenile social support officers before they commit an offence, limits the amount of criminal activity over time. So, crime effectively decreases with the direct influence of social services at a young age.
Equally, with more police presence in the community, for those tempted to re-offend, they have a deterrent.
The most efficient management of the community issues faced in Bourke however lies with a combination of both Policing and Social Support services at all levels within the community.
<!--EndFragment-->
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!
The traditional lifestyle for youth in this town involves either a chosen path of committing crimes, or, that of community activity and various forms of education.
The model has been designed to mimic a system where community expenditure and support services are adopted in order to inject a positive lifestyle for the youth population. The phenomena studied in this simulation is the balance between policing, community support and social influence versus not using them.
Assumptions
-1000 Youth Population
-Youth are either influenced by criminal activity or by productive educational activities.
- Adoption rate of community activities is influenced by personality, relating to current personal skill level of youth and willingness.
-If youth you do not become involved in community activity or some form of Education, then they turn to the path of crime.
-Punishment facility time is up to 12 months with a 2 year probation period
-Community expenditure and support only begins in the probation period, unless “Juvenile Support” slider is used.
-For the purpose of this study on youth crime and support before a crime is committed, we do not include a possibility of relapse in the rehabilitation phase.
STOCKS
VARIABLES
Policing Units – Policing Bourke's criminal activity, and convicting after a crime has been committed.
Juvenile Support Units – The variable change in crime IF the community funds Support Units for youth before a crime is committed.
Social Support Units – The number of social support units available for released offenders during rehabilitation phase.
Community expenditure – the amount of time and money being spent on social services and policing.
Birth rate, crime rate, dicharge rate, recidivism & conviction rate
INTERESTING RESULTS
Slide any of the 3 variables to the extreme.
This model shows that adoption rate of a positive lifestyle is directly influenced by social influences.
1/ Juvenile Support Unit impact
Press Simulate.
Slide Juvenile Support Units to the extreme. Simulate again.
Juxtaposition of Juvenile Support impact on Behavior Graph shows that Crime and Reoffend rates drop significantly. More people turn to law-abiding positive activity.
This will again all change with the manipulation of the Social Support unit slider…..
2/ Social Support Unit impact
Social Support Units only influence those released from the Punishment facility. The more social services on hand to support rehabilitation phase the less chance of committing crime for the second time, with Reoffend rates dropping significantly when the Social Support Units Slider is adjusted to the extreme.
Rehabilitation rates only increase marginally, in spite of more social support feeding into that phase.
The greatest impact is shown on Law-Abiding and Crime. How could this be? A logical conclusion is that there is a finite number of youth in the community and those who have received positive social support during a learning phase of rehabilitation, then go on to influence their friends, their family, and have a positive influence on those around them.
3/ Police Unit Impact
Slide Policing Units to the extremes. Simulate. Policing Units Graph shows there is a significant decrease in Reoffend rates, and a higher rate of Conviction.
Curiously, rehabilitation rates drop and crime rates go up. How could this happen? A logical conclusion is that conviction and punishment is not a crime deterrent. It needs the added influence of social support services for there to be a positive impact on decreasing criminal instincts and activity on the whole.
Conclusions
Social support and home visits need to happen in the flow between Youth Population and Crime - “Juvenile Support Units”.
Investment in youth via these juvenile social support officers before they commit an offence, limits the amount of criminal activity over time. So, crime effectively decreases with the direct influence of social services at a young age.
Equally, with more police presence in the community, for those tempted to re-offend, they have a deterrent.
The most efficient management of the community issues faced in Bourke however lies with a combination of both Policing and Social Support services at all levels within the community.
<!--EndFragment-->
The traditional lifestyle for youth in this town involves either a chosen path of committing crimes, or, that of community activity and various forms of education.
The model has been designed to mimic a system where community expenditure and support services are adopted in order to inject a positive lifestyle for the youth population. The phenomena studied in this simulation is the balance between policing, community support and social influence versus not using them.
Assumptions
-1000 Youth Population
-Youth are either influenced by criminal activity or by productive educational activities.
- Adoption rate of community activities is influenced by personality, relating to current personal skill level of youth and willingness.
-If youth you do not become involved in community activity or some form of Education, then they turn to the path of crime.
-Punishment facility time is up to 12 months with a 2 year probation period
-Community expenditure and support only begins in the probation period, unless “Juvenile Support” slider is used.
-For the purpose of this study on youth crime and support before a crime is committed, we do not include a possibility of relapse in the rehabilitation phase.
STOCKS
VARIABLES
Policing Units – Policing Bourke's criminal activity, and convicting after a crime has been committed.
Juvenile Support Units – The variable change in crime IF the community funds Support Units for youth before a crime is committed.
Social Support Units – The number of social support units available for released offenders during rehabilitation phase.
Community expenditure – the amount of time and money being spent on social services and policing.
Birth rate, crime rate, dicharge rate, recidivism & conviction rate
INTERESTING RESULTS
Slide any of the 3 variables to the extreme.
This model shows that adoption rate of a positive lifestyle is directly influenced by social influences.
1/ Juvenile Support Unit impact
Press Simulate.
Slide Juvenile Support Units to the extreme. Simulate again.
Juxtaposition of Juvenile Support impact on Behavior Graph shows that Crime and Reoffend rates drop significantly. More people turn to law-abiding positive activity.
This will again all change with the manipulation of the Social Support unit slider…..
2/ Social Support Unit impact
Social Support Units only influence those released from the Punishment facility. The more social services on hand to support rehabilitation phase the less chance of committing crime for the second time, with Reoffend rates dropping significantly when the Social Support Units Slider is adjusted to the extreme.
Rehabilitation rates only increase marginally, in spite of more social support feeding into that phase.
The greatest impact is shown on Law-Abiding and Crime. How could this be? A logical conclusion is that there is a finite number of youth in the community and those who have received positive social support during a learning phase of rehabilitation, then go on to influence their friends, their family, and have a positive influence on those around them.
3/ Police Unit Impact
Slide Policing Units to the extremes. Simulate. Policing Units Graph shows there is a significant decrease in Reoffend rates, and a higher rate of Conviction.
Curiously, rehabilitation rates drop and crime rates go up. How could this happen? A logical conclusion is that conviction and punishment is not a crime deterrent. It needs the added influence of social support services for there to be a positive impact on decreasing criminal instincts and activity on the whole.
Conclusions
Social support and home visits need to happen in the flow between Youth Population and Crime - “Juvenile Support Units”.
Investment in youth via these juvenile social support officers before they commit an offence, limits the amount of criminal activity over time. So, crime effectively decreases with the direct influence of social services at a young age.
Equally, with more police presence in the community, for those tempted to re-offend, they have a deterrent.
The most efficient management of the community issues faced in Bourke however lies with a combination of both Policing and Social Support services at all levels within the community.
<!--EndFragment-->
Background
The town of Bourke is in north-west New South Wales and became the first pilot site to implement an Aboriginal-let model of justice reinvestment in 2013, known as the Maranguka Justice Reinvestment Project. The project aimed to demonstrate that sustainable outcomes can be achieved by redirecting funding to the underlying causes of youth crime.
Model explanation
This complex systems model depicts the relationships between different players and helps simulate youth crime patterns when influenced by funded community engagement activities, fluctuating levels of alienation, and police funding over a period of 2 years. The funding of community engagement activities aims to increase youth participation and therefore reduce the rate of criminal activity.
Assumptions
75% of Bourke’s youth are disengaged from society.
25% of Bourke’s youth are engaged with society.
50% of Bourke’s engaged youth are not interested in the community activities.
60% of disengaged youth are alienated.
Police expenditure: 30
Community engagement expenditure: 60
Stocks
Youth of Bourke
Total youth population in Bourke. We are assuming there are 500 youths susceptible
to committing crime within Bourke.
Community activities
Community programs aimed at youths which could include sports, arts and cultural
programs, counselling, support groups, learner driving school, school holiday
programs and health and development checks.
Disengaged Youth
Youths who are not engaged in positive community activities and are at risk of committing
criminal activities. These youths may be affected by domestic and family violence,
drugs, alcohol or abuse.
Engaged Youth
Youths who are engaged in society in a positive way. The aim of this program is
to have all youths positively engaged in Bourke’s community.
Crime
Youths who have committed a criminal offence.
Prison/detention
Youths who are found guilty of a criminal offence and are now in prison or
detention.
Rehabilitation
Youths who have left prison/detention and are now attending rehabilitation
programs. This rehabilitation should decrease the likelihood of youths re-offending.
Variables
Police expenditure
Funding for police presence to decrease the number of youths participating in
criminal activities and whether they are convicted and imprisoned. If youths
are imprisoned, police expenditure can also help move them towards rehabilitation
to lessen the chance of re-offence.
Community engagement expenditure
Funding of community activities aimed at the youth of Bourke. These activities are
designed to positively impact the lives of youth and lessen the chance of
alienation and disengagement from the community.
Alienation
Contributing factors to alienation of youths in Bourke include domestic and family
violence, drugs, alcohol, abuse, homelessness, and lack of education.
School/VET attendance
The rate at which Bourke’s youth attend school or vocational education and
training courses (VET) to further their education and increase their engagement
in the community.
Conclusions
This complex model indicates the impact of only a few variables, yet there are many more that can be considered. However, this model shows that over a period of 2 years, the combination of community engagement funding, police funding and education can improve the lives of Bourke’s susceptible youth. The most significant impact is made by the community engagement funding. If this funding is decreased, the rate of engaged youth decreases, and the rate of disengaged youth does not improve.
The traditional lifestyle for youth in this town involves either a chosen path of committing crimes, or, that of community activity and various forms of education.
The model has been designed to mimic a system where community expenditure and support services are adopted in order to inject a positive lifestyle for the youth population. The phenomena studied in this simulation is the balance between policing, community support and social influence versus not using them.
Assumptions
-1000 Youth Population
-Youth are either influenced by criminal activity or by productive educational activities.
- Adoption rate of community activities is influenced by personality, relating to current personal skill level of youth and willingness.
-If youth you do not become involved in community activity or some form of Education, then they turn to the path of crime.
-Punishment facility time is up to 12 months with a 2 year probation period
-Community expenditure and support only begins in the probation period, unless “Juvenile Support” slider is used.
-For the purpose of this study on youth crime and support before a crime is committed, we do not include a possibility of relapse in the rehabilitation phase.
STOCKS
VARIABLES
Policing Units – Policing Bourke's criminal activity, and convicting after a crime has been committed.
Juvenile Support Units – The variable change in crime IF the community funds Support Units for youth before a crime is committed.
Social Support Units – The number of social support units available for released offenders during rehabilitation phase.
Community expenditure – the amount of time and money being spent on social services and policing.
Birth rate, crime rate, dicharge rate, recidivism & conviction rate
INTERESTING RESULTS
Slide any of the 3 variables to the extreme.
This model shows that adoption rate of a positive lifestyle is directly influenced by social influences.
1/ Juvenile Support Unit impact
Press Simulate.
Slide Juvenile Support Units to the extreme. Simulate again.
Juxtaposition of Juvenile Support impact on Behavior Graph shows that Crime and Reoffend rates drop significantly. More people turn to law-abiding positive activity.
This will again all change with the manipulation of the Social Support unit slider…..
2/ Social Support Unit impact
Social Support Units only influence those released from the Punishment facility. The more social services on hand to support rehabilitation phase the less chance of committing crime for the second time, with Reoffend rates dropping significantly when the Social Support Units Slider is adjusted to the extreme.
Rehabilitation rates only increase marginally, in spite of more social support feeding into that phase.
The greatest impact is shown on Law-Abiding and Crime. How could this be? A logical conclusion is that there is a finite number of youth in the community and those who have received positive social support during a learning phase of rehabilitation, then go on to influence their friends, their family, and have a positive influence on those around them.
3/ Police Unit Impact
Slide Policing Units to the extremes. Simulate. Policing Units Graph shows there is a significant decrease in Reoffend rates, and a higher rate of Conviction.
Curiously, rehabilitation rates drop and crime rates go up. How could this happen? A logical conclusion is that conviction and punishment is not a crime deterrent. It needs the added influence of social support services for there to be a positive impact on decreasing criminal instincts and activity on the whole.
Conclusions
Social support and home visits need to happen in the flow between Youth Population and Crime - “Juvenile Support Units”.
Investment in youth via these juvenile social support officers before they commit an offence, limits the amount of criminal activity over time. So, crime effectively decreases with the direct influence of social services at a young age.
Equally, with more police presence in the community, for those tempted to re-offend, they have a deterrent.
The most efficient management of the community issues faced in Bourke however lies with a combination of both Policing and Social Support services at all levels within the community.
<!--EndFragment-->