Hostname: page-component-669899f699-cf6xr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-30T21:47:04.802Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

An Examination of the Assumption that Adult Businesses Are Associated with Crime in Surrounding Areas: A Secondary Effects Study in Charlotte, North Carolina

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2024

Daniel Linz ,
Bryant Paul ,
Kenneth C. Land ,
Michael E. Ezell  and
Jay R. Williams
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Recent Supreme Court decisions have signaled the need for sound empirical studies of the secondary effects of adult businesses on the surrounding areas for use in conjunction with local zoning restrictions. This study seeks to determine whether a relationship exists between adult erotic dance clubs and negative secondary effects in the form of increased numbers of crimes reported in the areas surrounding the adult businesses, in Charlotte, North Carolina. For each of 20 businesses, a control site (matched on the basis of demographic characteristics related to crime risk) is compared for crime events over the period of three years (1998–2000) using data on crime incidents reported to the police. We find that the presence of an adult nightclub does not increase the number of crime incidents reported in localized areas surrounding the club (defined by circular areas of 500- and 1,000-foot radii) as compared to the number of crime incidents reported in comparable localized areas that do not contain such an adult business. Indeed, the analyses imply the opposite, namely, that the nearby areas surrounding the adult business sites have smaller numbers of reported crime incidents than do corresponding areas surrounding the three control sites studied. These findings are interpreted in terms of the business mandates of profitability and continuity of existence of the businesses.

Type
Articles Of General Interest
Information
Law & Society Review , Volume 38 , Issue 1 , January 2004 , pp. 69 - 104
Copyright
© 2004 Law and Society Association.

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Footnotes

We thank John Couchell, Assistant Director, Strategic Planning & Analysis, Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department for providing the data analyzed in this study and for helpful advice. Any inadequacies of analysis or errors of interpretation are, however, solely the responsibility of the authors of this article.

References

Babbie, E. (1999) The Basics of Social Research. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.Google Scholar
Campbell, D. T., & Stanley, J. C. (1963) Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Research. Chicago: Rand McNally.Google Scholar
Cohen, L. E., & Felson, M. (1979) “Social Change and Crime Rate Trends: A Routine Activity Approach,” 44 American Sociological Rev. 588–608.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, J., Gorr, W., & Olligschlaeger, A. (1993) Modeling Street-Level Illicit Drug Markets, Working paper 93–64, The H. John Heinz III School of Public Policy and Management. Pittsburgh: Carnegie Mellon University.Google Scholar
Cohen, L. E., Kluegel, J. R., & Land, K. C. (1981) “Social Inequality and Predatory Criminal Victimization: An Exposition and Test of a Formal Theory,” 46 American Sociological Rev. 505–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davidson, R., & McKinnon, J. G. (1993) Estimation and Inference in Econometrics. New York: Oxford Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Duffala, D. C. (1976) “Convenience Stores, Armed Robbery, and Physical Environmental Features,” 20 American Behavioral Scientist 227–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Engstad, P. A. (1975) “Environmental Opportunities and the Ecology of Crime,” in Silverman, R. A. & Teevan, J. J., eds., Crime in Canadian Society. Toronto: Butterworths.Google Scholar
Fulton County Police (1997) Study of Calls for Service to Adult Entertainment Establishments Which Serve Alcoholic Beverages, January 1995–May 1997. Report to the Board of Commissioners of Fulton County, Georgia.Google Scholar
Hanna, J. L. (2001) “Reality and Myth, What Neighbors Say About Exotic Dance Clubs: A Case Study in Charlotte, North Carolina,” Unpublished manuscript, Univ. of Maryland.Google Scholar
Hannan, M. T., & Young, A. A. (1977) “Estimation in Panel Models: Results on Pooling Cross-Sections and Time Series,” 1977 Sociological Methodology 52–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hsiao, C. (1986) Analysis of Panel Data: Econometric Society Monographs. New York: Cambridge.Google Scholar
Linz, D., & Paul, B. (2002) “Testing Assumptions Made by the Supreme Court Concerning the Negative Secondary Effects of Adult Businesses: A Quasi-Experimental Approach to a First Amendment Issue,” Paper presented at the 2002 International Communication Association, Acapulco, Mexico.Google Scholar
Long, J. S., & Ervin, H. (2000) “Correcting for Heteroskedasticity with Heteroskedasticity-Consistent Standard Errors in the Linear Regression Model: Small Sample Considerations,” 54 The American Statistician 217–24.Google Scholar
McKinnon, J. G., & White, H. (1985) “Some Heteroskedasticity-Consistent Covariance Matrix Estimators with Improved Finite Sample Properties,” 29 J. of Econometrics 53–57.Google Scholar
Miethe, Terance D., & McDowall, David (1993) “Contextual Effects in Models of Criminal Victimization,” 71 Social Forces 741–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miethe, T. D., & Meier, R. F. (1994) Crime and Its Social Context: Toward an Integrated Theory of Offenders, Victims, and Situations. Albany, NY: State Univ. of New York Press.Google Scholar
Paul, B., Linz, D. G., & Shafer, B. J. (2001) “Government Regulation of Adult Businesses Through Zoning and Anti-Nudity Ordinances: Debunking the Legal Myth of Negative Secondary Effects,” 6 Communications in Law & Policy 355–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Planning Department, City of Phoenix, Arizona (1979) Relation of Criminal Activity and Adult Businesses.Google Scholar
Popper, K. (1959) The Logic of Scientific Discovery. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Roncek, D. W., & Maier, P. A. (1991) “Bars, Blocks, and Crimes Revisited: Linking the Theory of Routine Activities to the Empiricism of ‘Hot Spots,’ 29 Criminology 725–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sherman, Lawrence W., Gartin, Patrick R., & Buerger, Michael E. (1989) “Hot Spots of Preditory Crime: Routine Activities and the Criminology of Place,” 27 Criminology 27–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Singleton, R. A. Jr., Straits, B. C., & Straits, M. M. (1993) Approaches to Social Research. London: Oxford Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Smith, W. R., Frazee, S. G., & Davison, E. L. (2000) “Furthering the Integration of Routine Activity and Social Disorganization Theories: Small Units of Analysis and the Study of Street Robbery as a Diffusion Process,” 38 Criminology 489–524.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stark, Rodney (1987) “Deviant Places: A Theory of the Ecology of Crime,” 25 Criminology 893–909.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation (2000) Crime in the United States, 1999. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
White, H. (1980) “A Heteroskedastic-Consistent Covariance Matrix and a Direct Test of Heteroskedasticity,” 48 Econometrica 817–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar