The Interurban network of criminal collaboration in Canada

The interurban network of criminal collaboration in Canada is described, and possible explanations for its structure are explored. The data include all police-reported co-offences in the 32 major cities of Canada during 2006–09. Component analysis and graph drawings in network space and in geospace...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Carrington, Peter J. (Author)
Contributors: Graham, Alexander V.
Format: Electronic Article
Language:English
Published: 2022
In: Canadian journal of criminology and criminal justice
Year: 2022, Volume: 64, Issue: 2, Pages: 101-123
Online Access: Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Journals Online & Print:
Drawer...
Check availability: HBZ Gateway
Keywords:
Census metropolitan area
Co-offending
Criminal collaboration
Criminal network
Instrumental crime
Noninstrumental crime
Spatial network
Description
Summary:The interurban network of criminal collaboration in Canada is described, and possible explanations for its structure are explored. The data include all police-reported co-offences in the 32 major cities of Canada during 2006–09. Component analysis and graph drawings in network space and in geospace elucidate the structure of the network. Quadratic assignment procedure multiple regressions, repeated separately on the networks of instrumental and noninstrumental co-offences, test hypotheses about possible determinants of the network structure. The cities form one connected component, containing two clusters connected by a link between Toronto and Vancouver. One cluster, centred on the triad of Toronto, Montreal, and Ottawa, comprises the cities in Ontario and Quebec, with weak links to cities in the Atlantic provinces. The other cluster, centred on Vancouver, comprises the cities in the four western provinces. The structure is strongly correlated with the residential mobility of the general population, which in turn is strongly correlated with intercity distances. The correlation with mobility is less strong for instrumental than for noninstrumental crimes. The structure of this co-offending network can be explained by criminals’ routine activities, namely ordinary residential mobility, but the alternative explanation of purposive interurban criminal collaboration is more plausible for instrumental crime.
ISSN:1911-0219
DOI:10.3138/cjccj.2022-0004