As increases in crime dominate the headlines, commentators are pushing a return of “Broken Windows policing,” a law enforcement crackdown on minor offenses to prevent more serious offenses—unfortunately, this kind of policing does nothing to address the real roots of crime and has not been proven to reduce it. Instead, Broken Windows policing starts a cycle where the most vulnerable community members get trapped in our criminal legal system. It’s a pointless exercise that keeps none of us safe.
Broken Windows policing is an outdated law enforcement strategy that arose in the 1980s. It claimed that visible signs of social disorder, such as Broken Windows, homelessness, and public drinking, created an environment that encouraged more serious crimes. Most American police departments took this as a call to increase arrests for minor and often nonviolent offenses and implemented varied Broken Windows policing policies in the name of “order maintenance.” Now, more than 40 years later, we know that Broken Windows doesn’t work. It doesn’t lower crime and it harms Black and Brown communities. Yet, there is still a nonsensical push for its continued use.
A recent examination of arrest rates from 2013 to 2022 is being used by these commentators to make a false claim that abandoning Broken Windows led to a rise in crime, and that we should bring it back. Such simple analyses are seriously flawed. They rely on basic correlation, not even feigning to offer evidence of a causal relationship or to consider the many influential factors affecting crime rates. Even without sophisticated analyses, examining historical patterns requires an extensive and dependable data set. Limiting analyses to short periods is not useful, instead of overall trends all you see are snapshots.
Spencer Platt/Getty Images
Rigorous studies, on the other hand, including one synthesis of 28 high-quality studies from 2019 involving 30 independent tests and nine randomized controlled trials, found that Broken Windows policing doesn’t yield substantial crime reductions. Furthermore, a comprehensive body of research spanning back to 2001 indicates that fluctuating crime rates cannot be singularly attributed to a specific policing strategy. Instead, they should be attributed to factors such as increased economic stability, the waning crack-cocaine epidemic, and ongoing shifts in policing policies and strategies.
It’s widely acknowledged that crime began declining across the United States in the 1990s. That’s even in large cities that did not adopt Broken Windows, such as New Haven, Boston, San Diego, and San Francisco. That’s why researchers have consistently searched for and identified other explanations. For instance, the period from 1990 to 2019 witnessed a notable increase in median household income from $30,056 (in 2020 dollars, adjusted for inflation) to $68,703 (in 2020 dollars). This economic upswing, accompanied by reduced unemployment and poverty rates, has been strongly connected to reduced crime rates. Additionally, the decline in the crack cocaine epidemic during the early 1990s played a pivotal role in curbing crime. The simultaneous emergence of community-oriented policing, a strategy focused on police-community relations, was federally funded for nationwide implementation. These factors, along with demographic shifts and the evolution of community-based crime prevention initiatives, collectively led to decreasing crime rates.
Returning to Broken Windows policing is yet another knee-jerk reaction by police departments to address the increase in crime that has led to devastating impacts on communities of color. It has disproportionately targeted minority communities, fostered an environment of aggressive and discriminatory enforcement, and contributed to strained community-police relations. While Broken Windows theory focuses on reducing disorder, the downsides to a law enforcement approach make it clear that Broken Windows policing isn’t necessary. Considering emergent alternatives, no rationale or evidence supports its continued use.
Instead, one innovative solution yielding promising outcomes is community reinvestment, which emphasizes reshaping government infrastructure to make long-term financial investments in community-defined priorities. Another approach is restorative justice, which aims to repair harm by bringing together offenders, victims, and community members to discuss the impact of the crime and collaboratively determine appropriate resolutions. Community based violence intervention programs are also gaining traction, which involve “credible messengers” trained in conflict resolution, de-escalation techniques and trauma-informed care to navigate situations involving violence and prioritize harm prevention and community welfare.
Notably, there is growing interest and attention shifting police functions to alternate first response models (AFR), a strategy in which trained social workers, mental health professionals, and crisis intervention specialists respond to situations in the community instead of sending armed officers. Typical 911 calls—for public intoxication, petty theft, and homelessness—have been previously considered Broken Window offenses and would lead to arrests. Rather than “cracking down” by relying on the criminal legal system to fix what are essentially crimes of poverty, AFR teams provide people with the services and resources they need (i.e., housing, food, transportation, treatment).
While no single approach is a panacea, continuing to use Broken Windows policing is an enormous mistake. It’s time to embrace contemporary solutions with promising results that more directly address the structural causes of crime and align with the needs of our communities.
Cassandra Ramdath, Ph.D., is the Director of Research and Evaluation at the Center for Innovations in Community Safety at Georgetown Law.
The views expressed in this article are the writer’s own.