ABSTRACT
In crime prevention it seems there are two dominant stories: removing motivated offenders and target hardening (Graycar et al. 2001). Fear of crime reduction on the other hand is a more complex issue made difficult because of the multitude of external factors that impact upon the levels of fear in a particular community. Offenders and crimes are somewhat concrete and able to be addressed directly. Fear of crime is an abstract concept that can vary from person to person and place to place. It seemingly exists independent of official crime statistics and levels of police presence (Tulloch and Enders 1998: 189). Indeed, some argue that fear of crime does not exist, at least in an objective form (Lee 2007: 202). It is therefore not surprising that most policing strategies aimed at reducing fear of crime focus on the people and things that are thought to create the fear, offenders and offences, and most local government strategies focus on the physical environment, improving safety by target hardening (NSWP 2006: 29; Enders 1998a; NSW Attorney General’s Department 1998). While both these approaches can be effective at preventing or reducing crime they will not necessarily reduce fear of crime (Bennett 1991: 12). A plethora of research has indicated the subjective nature of fear of crime means that it is difficult to measure, let alone reduce (Hale 1996). Moreover, internal debates in the field of fear of crime studies have even had trouble agreeing on its rational or irrational basis and whether it is real or imagined (Sparks 1992; Young 1988). Recent studies also suggest that a distinction should be made between fear of crime and worry or anger about crime (for example, Ditton et al. 1999), another complication.
