The purpose of this paper is to discuss the relevance of Situational Crime Prevention

The purpose of this paper is to discuss the relevance of Situational Crime Prevention (SCP) principles in relation to domestic and international security. The structure entails the introduction, the relevance of SCP to levels of domestic and international security and the conclusion.
Situational crime prevention is a set of recipes for steering and channeling behavior in ways that reduce the occurrence of criminal activity (Hirsch, Garland, & Wakefield, 2000). This idea utilizes a preventative approach by concentrating on techniques to decrease the doors open for crime. Domestic security is prevention against threats that are unconventional in approach and directed towards the interior of a state (Arotake, 2003). Focus is on threats, military or otherwise and vulnerabilities that are on home soil. International security is on how human collectiveness relate in terms of threats and vulnerabilities, which can also be threats from the natural environment (Buzan, Waever, & Wilde, 1998). Unlike domestic security, the threats here are global and mutually addressed by unions.
SCP is characterized by measures; directed at specific forms of crime, involving management, design or manipulation of the immediate environment to reduce the opportunities for crime and increase its risks as perceived by offenders (Clarke, 1983). There are five principles of SCP namely; increasing the effort, increasing the risk, reducing the rewards, reducing provocations and removing excuses (Krohn, Lizotte, & Hall, 2009).
Increasing the effort, means the effort that the offender invests in offending. It includes hardening targets such as installing unbreakable glass, technological advances like having owner’s photo on access cards and credit cards (Siegel, 2009). Also to increase the effort one can remove the opportunity for crime (Siegel, 2009). Crime may occur because there was an opportunity. The environment shapes factors that contribute to development of criminal opportunities according to the Opportunity Ideology (Meena, 2016). If targets are hardened, accesses and tools controlled thus reducing opportunities, this will maintain security at both domestic and international levels. Taking away opportunity hence protecting civilians from threat or harm.
Secondly to increase the risks of getting caught whilst offending. Managing crime falls under discouragers who can be guardians to monitor the target, handlers to monitor potential offenders and managers who monitor places of potential offending (Siegel, 2009). Crime discourages are meant to prevent potential offending which is possible if the risks outweigh the benefits. According to the Routine Activity Ideology, presence of guardianship deter criminals with fear of being caught (Meena, 2016). Criminals often commit crime for some benefit which means that once the benefit is no longer guaranteed they may conform. Domestic and international security may be maintained if this principle is followed by ensuring proper surveillance and guardianship in places.
Reducing rewards is to take away the value to be obtained by the offender in institution of the criminal act (Brantingham, Brantingham, ; Taylor, 2005). It includes to conceal and remove targets, identify property and disrupt markets (Krohn, Lizotte, ; Hall, 2009). For instance removing car batteries when it is parked overnight or marking your property may maintain levels of domestic security. Whereas concealing vulnerable citizens like street kids may prevent them from being trafficked hence maintaining levels of international security.
Reducing provocations entail frustrations, stresses, emotional arousals that may cause disputes (Krohn, Lizotte, ; Hall, 2009). Some crimes are a result of extreme provocation which reduction may reduce conflict for example road rage (Siegel ; Worral, 2014). This principle acknowledges the idea that some threats are a result of adverse arousals. This therefore means that if nations and citizens maintain mechanisms of avoiding and solving disputes, then security on both domestic and international levels may be preserved.
Removing excuses comprises of strategies to; set rules and instructions, alert the conscience and assist compliances (Krohn, Lizotte, ; Hall, 2009). Crime may be curbed by making it difficult for people to defend their wrongful acts like making excuses of not knowing it was illegal (Siegel ; Worral, 2014). It is important that people are made aware of what is permitted and not. Levels of domestic and international security may be preserved by this principle if at all people are made to comply to rules for example obeying road rules or laws against pollution of rivers.
SCP principles are not only measures for environmental criminality but also to security at both domestic and international level. Increasing the effort and risk may deter potential offenders if costs outweigh the benefits. Reducing rewards, provocation and excuse may limit the levels of offending and victimization hence protection of people on both levels of security.