FIVE

VIOLENCE PREVENTION STRATEGIES

THAT WORK

MARGIT AVERDIJK, PH.D.

CRIMINOLOGYWEB.COM
1 ANTI-BULLYING PROGRAMS
Bullying in school can have serious consequences for victims. Children who have been bullied have a
higher risk of being depressed or anxious later on. However, there are ways to reduce bullying using anti-
bullying programs.

THE PROGRAMS
Anti-bullying programs in school use a range of different strategies, such as instructions, role-playing,
classroom discussions, virtual learning on the internet, games, and playground supervision. Some
programs last only days, others months. Some include the entire school, others focus only on bullying in
the classroom.

HOW EFFECTIVE ARE THEY?

Findings show that anti-bullying programs reduce bullying by about 15 to 20%. This means that of every
100 bullying incidents, 15 to 20 are prevented by these programs. But not all programs are equally
effective. Programs that work better are programs that:

- involve the whole school with all teachers and students (versus programs that are just focused on
the classroom)
- last for more than 20 hours
- include clear rules against bullying and where children who bully receive some form of
punishment
- involve the parents, by giving them information about bullying and the anti-bullying program
- include more playground supervision

EXAMPLES OF PROGRAMS
- Olweus Bullying Prevention Program
- Friendly Schools
- Kiva Anti-Bullying Program

RESOURCES
Farrington, D. P., & Ttofi, M. M. (2009). School-Based Programs to Reduce Bullying and Victimization. Campbell
Systematic Reviews, 6, 1–147.
Gaffney, H., Ttofi, M. M., & Farrington, D. P. (2018). Evaluating the effectiveness of school-bullying prevention
programs: An updated meta-analytical review. Aggression and Violent Behavior.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2018.07.001

2
2 RESTORATIVE JUSTICE
Violence has negative consequences for several parties. The victims suffer the practical, financial, and
emotional consequences of crime. The people around the victim, and sometimes entire communities may
be affected. And, finally, offenders are often rejected by their communities because of what they did.

THE PROGRAM
Restorative justice aims to restore the relations between the offender, the victim, and their communities.
Often times, it takes the form of a face-to-face meeting where all parties come together and discuss what
happened and what the offender can do to repair some of the damage. The victim has the opportunity to
tell the offender about the consequences of the crime, and to ask questions. The offender has the
opportunity to express remorse, apologize, and ultimately be reintegrated into the community.

HOW EFFECTIVE ARE THEY?

Victims who participate in these programs are more satisfied with the process than other victims.

Offenders who participate in restorative justice programs are less likely to commit new crimes: They have
7 to 45% fewer repeat convictions or arrests than other offenders.

Restorative justice programs are also cost-effective (i.e., they save more money than they cost): For every
1 USD spent on restorative justice conferences, 3.70 to 8.10 USD in cost of crime were prevented.

But not all programs are equally effective. Programs that worked better have:

- a high level of supervision and monitoring by a professional facilitator

- attention for the needs of the victim, not just for the offender

EXAMPLES OF PROGRAMS
- Restorative Justice Initiative Midlands
- Project Turnaround

RESOURCES
Latimer, J., Dowden, C., & Muise, D. (2005). The effectiveness of restorative justice practices: A meta-analysis. The
Prison Journal, 85(2), 127-144.
Schwalbe, C. S., Gearing, R. E., MacKenzie, M. J., Brewer, K. B., & Ibrahim, R. (2012). A meta-analysis of experimental
studies of diversion programs for juvenile offenders. Clinical Psychology Review, 32(1), 26-33.
Sherman, L. W., Strang, H., Mayo-Wilson, E., Woods, D. J., & Ariel, B. (2015). Are restorative justice conferences
effective in reducing repeat offending? Findings from a Campbell systematic review. Journal of Quantitative
Criminology, 31(1), 1-24.

3
3 HOT SPOT POLICING
Some places have more crime than other places. Places with high crime rates are so-called “hot spots”.
Hot spots are often places where lots of people gather, or where there are attractive crime opportunities.
Examples can be shopping areas, drug markets, entertainment areas, public transport stations, and places
where lots of cash is available.

THE INTERVENTION
Hot spot policing focuses on the places with the most crime problems and increases the number of police
officers there. These police officers use strategies such as extra foot patrols, crackdowns, and gun
searches. “Problem-oriented policing” (POP) goes a step further by also partnering with residents and
local agencies, and together identifying and changing the problems that lead to crime in the area.

HOW EFFECTIVE IS IT?

Hot spot policing and POP have been found to lead to less violence, public disorder offenses, and drug
offenses.

Importantly, hot spot policing and POP do not seem to lead to crime displacement (i.e., crime moving
around the corner). Instead, nearby places show no changes in crime, or even small crime reductions.

EXAMPLES OF INTERVENTIONS
- Problem-Oriented Policing
- Hot Spot Policing

RESOURCES
Braga, A. A., Papachristos, A. V., & Hureau, D. M. (2014). The effects of hot spots policing on crime: An updated
systematic review and meta-analysis. Justice Quarterly, 31(4), 633-663.
Groff, E. R., Ratcliffe, J. H., Haberman, C. P., Sorg, E. T., Joyce, N. M., & Taylor, R. B. (2015). Does what police do at
hot spots matter? The Philadelphia policing tactics experiment. Criminology, 53(1), 23-53.

4
4 CHANGING THINKING PATTERNS
There is evidence that criminal offending is partly the result of distorted thinking patterns. Such thinking
patterns may include, for example, that offenders may play down the harm that they do, or deny that
they have responsibility for the crime, and blame the victim instead.

THE PROGRAM
So-called “cognitive behavioral programs” change these distorted thinking patterns. In the first step,
offenders review what they were thinking leading up to the crime. In the second step, mental health
specialists help them to identify distorted thinking patterns, and change them.

HOW EFFECTIVE ARE THEY

Findings show that these programs reduce crime. Twelve months after the program, offenders who had
followed the program had 25% fewer new offenses compared to other offenders.

Not all programs are equally effective. Programs that work better are:

- led by well-trained mental health professionals

- focused especially on how to solve problems when dealing with other people, and on how to
control anger

EXAMPLES OF PROGRAMS
- Reasoning and Rehabilitation Program
- Moral Reconation Therapy
- Aggression Replacement Training

RESOURCES
Lipsey, M. W., Landenberger, N. A., & Wilson, S. J. (2007). Effects of cognitive-behavioral programs for criminal
offenders. Campbell Systematic Reviews, 6(1), 27.
Joy Tong, L. S., & Farrington, D. P. (2006). How effective is the “Reasoning and Rehabilitation” programme in reducing
reoffending? A meta-analysis of evaluations in four countries. Psychology, Crime & Law, 12(1), 3-24.
Ferguson, L. M., & Wormith, J. S. (2013). A meta-analysis of Moral Reconation Therapy. International Journal of
Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 57(9), 1076-1106.

5
5 STRICTER RULES FOR ALCOHOL CONSUMPTION
Alcohol consumption has been linked to both offending and to becoming the victim of a crime. When
people are under the influence of alcohol, they lose their temper more easily, which in turn can lead to
an escalation of conflicts. Also, people who are under the influence of alcohol have more difficulty to
coordinate their physical movements and their brain functioning.

THE INTERVENTION
Policy makers can change the rules for alcohol consumption to reduce drinking. Examples of policy
changes include increasing the taxes on alcohol, raising the minimum drinking age, and imposing stricter
regulations on when and where alcohol can be sold.

HOW EFFECTIVE IS IT?

Increasing taxes on beer, wine, and spirits results in less alcohol consumption and less heavy drinking.
More specifically, a 10% increase in alcohol prices can result in 3 to 10% less alcohol consumption. There
is some evidence that higher taxes are also related to less violence.

Increasing the minimum drinking age reduces drinking among youths. These laws are most effective when
they are consistently enforced.

Restricting the places and times at which alcohol can be sold seems to reduce drinking and violence.

RESOURCES
Elder, R. W., Lawrence, B., Ferguson, A., Naimi, T. S., Brewer, R. D., Chattopadhyay, S. K., ... & Task Force on
Community Preventive Services. (2010). The effectiveness of tax policy interventions for reducing excessive
alcohol consumption and related harms. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 38(2), 217-229.
Wagenaar, A. C., & Toomey, T. L. (2002). Effects of minimum drinking age laws: review and analyses of the literature
from 1960 to 2000. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, supplement, (14), 206-225.
Popova, S., Giesbrecht, N., Bekmuradov, D., & Patra, J. (2009). Hours and days of sale and density of alcohol outlets:
impacts on alcohol consumption and damage: a systematic review. Alcohol & Alcoholism, 44(5), 500-516.

6
© 2018 www.criminologyweb.com

Please do not duplicate without permission.

These strategies are based on an updated version of the following publication:

Averdijk, M., Eisner, M., Luciano, E., Valdebenito, S., & Obsuth, I. (2014). Wirksame Gewaltprävention.
Eine Übersicht zum internationalen Wissenstand [Effective violence prevention. An overview of the
international knowledge base]. Berne: Ministry of Social Insurances.