Explore the vast range of titles available.

Objective. Whether a community can demonstrate resilience following a disaster largely depends on the pre-disaster context. Community disadvantage, the concentration of vulnerable and ethnically diverse groups, and high levels of residential mobility in the pre-disaster environment make it difficult for communities to “bounce back” following a disaster. The lack of social capital in the pre-disaster context also hinders community resilience. Yet there is scant research that assesses the extent to which pre-disaster structural conditions and the availability of local social capital influence community resilience post-disaster. Methods. We use administrative and longitudinal survey data from over 4,000 residents living in 148 urban communities in an Australian capital city (Brisbane). The survey data were collected before a major flooding event in 2011 and again 15 months post-disaster to examine the influence of prior levels of social capital on community resilience. Our indicator of community resilience is an index of perceived community problems before and after disaster. Results. Community problems were significantly lower in flooded communities when compared with nonflooded communities. Although higher levels of social capital were associated with lower community problems post-flood, the effect of social capital on these problems did not differ in flooded and nonflooded areas. However, the concentration of vulnerable groups did lead to greater problems in flooded communities post-disaster. Conclusion. Although social capital may reduce local community problems under normal conditions, it may have a limited effect on reducing community problems in a post-disaster environment. In contrast, the structural conditions of a neighborhood before flood have lasting and negative effects on community problems.

Ecological theories of racially or ethnically motivated hate crime are largely derived from the States, where racial segregation is highly pronounced. The extent to which these theories hate crime in more ethnically integrated countries is presently unclear. We focus on the neighbourhood characteristics influencing self-reported hate crime for 4,396 residents in a city growing ethnic diversity. We find that the neighbourhood antecedents of hate crime the Australian context differ from those seen in the United States. While residents speaking a language other than English is a powerful predictor of incidents, neither residential mobility increases in in-migration are associated with hate victimization, and neighbourhood place decreases the likelihood of victimization. Our findings suggest that ecological theories of crime derived from the United States may be limited in their applicability in multi-ethnic settings.

Official definitions of hate crime are viewed as overly narrow and unnecessarily exclusive. To enable more inclusive practices, many jurisdictions have embraced alternative terminologies such as bias crime, targeted crime and prejudice motivated crime. In this article, we examine how police agencies in Victoria, Australia, are grappling with incidents and responses to hate crime. Drawing on the accounts of high priority victim groups, we illustrate how victims and victim advocates make sense of new hate crime terminologies and whether these terminologies facilitate hate crime incident reporting Our findings speak to the importance of shared understanding and vocabularies; however, police responses to prejudice motivated crime incidents and police interactions with victims remain a significant barrier to reporting behaviour.

The local neighborhood forms an integral part of our lives. It provides the context through which social networks are nurtured and the foundation from which a sense of attachment and cohesion with fellow residents can be established. Whereas much of the previous research has examined the role of social and demographic characteristic in relation to the level of neighboring and cohesion, this paper explores whether particular environmental features in the neighborhood affect social porosity. We define social porosity as the degree to which social ties flow over the surface of a neighborhood. The focus of our paper is to examine the extent to which a neighborhood's environmental features impede the level of social porosity present among residents. To do this, we integrate data from the census, topographic databases and a 2010 survey of 4,351 residents from 146 neighborhoods in Australia. The study introduces the concepts of wedges and social holes. The presence of two sources of wedges is measured: rivers and highways. The presence of two sources of social holes is measured: parks and industrial areas. Borrowing from the geography literature, several measures are constructed to capture how these features collectively carve up the physical environment of neighborhoods. We then consider how this influences residents' neighboring behavior, their level of attachment to the neighborhood and their sense of neighborhood cohesion. We find that the distance of a neighborhood to one form of social hole-industrial areas-has a particularly strong negative effect on all three dependent variables. The presence of the other form of social hole-parks-has a weaker negative effect. Neighborhood wedges also impact social interaction. Both the length of a river and the number of highway fragments in a neighborhood has a consistent negative effect on neighboring, attachment and cohesion.

Background In many countries, policy makers and practitioners turn to prejudice reduction programs and interventions to tackle prejudice in the community. However, successfully addressing prejudice requires an effective intervention that can scale to match the broad span of the problem. The scalability assessment frameworks from health sciences have varying emphasis on four categories—intervention, delivery, costs, and context. For example, the high-level factors in the two Milat et al. scalability assessments are weighted towards details of the intervention (Milae et al. in Health Promot Int 28(3):285–981, 2013; Health Res Policy Syst 2:1–17, 2020). Investigation into scalability, specific to prejudice reduction, is necessary to understand how scalability frameworks apply in a different discipline. Methods Using a Delphi approach—a structured method to obtain consensus from experts (Milae et al. Health Promot Int 28(3):285–981, 2013; Linstone and Turoff in The Delphi method—techniques and applications, Addison-Wesley, 1975; de Meyrick in Health Educ 103(1):7–16, 2003)—to bring together 16 prejudice reduction experts from multiple sectors including NGOs, private, government and academia, we developed a scalability assessment framework of criteria that are important for the successful scaling of prejudice interventions. We then applied that framework to exemplars of prejudice reduction interventions published in the academic literature. Results For prejudice reduction interventions, contextual factors are key considerations for successful scaling. Commonly used prejudice reduction intervention approaches like contact, whether face-to-face or online, can have limited scalability. Conclusions To reduce prejudice there needs to be consideration of scalability. This paper presents a first-of-its-kind framework for assessing scalability for prejudice reduction interventions. Applying the empirically developed framework to actual interventions demonstrated that for interventions to be effective and scalable, a greater focus on approaches beyond face-to-face contact is required.

Natural hazards are increasing because of climate change, and they disproportionately affect vulnerable populations. Prior reviews of the mental health consequences of natural hazard events have not focused on the particular experiences of vulnerable groups. Based on the expected increase in fires and droughts in the coming years, the aim of this systematic review is to synthesize the global evidence about the mental health of vulnerable populations after experiencing natural hazards. We searched databases such as Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and Ovid PsycInfo using a systematic strategy, which yielded 3,401 publications. We identified 18 eligible studies conducted in five different countries with 15,959 participants. The most common vulnerabilities were living in a rural area, occupying a low socioeconomic position, being a member of an ethnic minority and having a medical condition. Common experiences reported by vulnerable individuals affected by drought included worry, hopelessness, isolation and suicidal thoughts and behaviors. Those affected by fire reported experiencing posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and anger. These mental health problems exacerbated existing health and socioeconomic challenges. The evidence base about mental health in vulnerable communities affected by natural hazards can be improved by including standardized measures and comparison groups, examining the role of intersectional vulnerabilities, and disaggregating data routinely to allow for analyses of the particular experiences of vulnerable communities. Such efforts will help ensure that programs are informed by an understanding of the unique needs of these communities.

Objectives Cross-sectional studies consistently find that neighborhoods with higher levels of collective efficacy experience fewer social problems. Particularly robust is the relationship between collective efficacy and violent crime, which holds regardless of the socio-structural conditions of neighborhoods. Yet due to the limited availability of neighborhood panel data, the temporal relationship between neighborhood structure, collective efficacy and crime is less well understood. Methods In this paper, we provide an empirical test of the collective efficacy-crime association over time by bringing together multiple waves of survey and census data and counts of violent crime incident data collected across 148 neighborhoods in Brisbane, Australia. Utilizing three different longitudinal models that make different assumptions about the temporal nature of these relationships, we examine the reciprocal relationships between neighborhood features and collective efficacy with violent crime. We also consider the spatial embeddedness of these neighborhood characteristics and their association with collective efficacy and the concentration of violence longitudinally. Results Notably, our findings reveal no direct relationship between collective efficacy and violent crime over time. However, we find a strong reciprocal relationship between collective efficacy and disadvantage and between disadvantage and violence, indicating an indirect relationship between collective efficacy and violence. Conclusions The null direct effects for collective efficacy on crime in a longitudinal design suggest that this relationship may not be as straightforward as presumed in the literature. More longitudinal research is needed to understand the dynamics of disadvantage, collective efficacy, and violence in neighborhoods.

Neighbourhood places like shops, cafes and parks support a variety of social interactions ranging from the ephemeral to the intimate. Repeated interactions at neighbourhood places over time lay the foundation for the development of social cohesion and collective efficacy. In this study, we examine the proposition that changes in the presence or arrangement of neighbourhood places can destabilise social cohesion and collective efficacy, which has implications for crime. Using spatially integrated crime, social survey and parcel-level land-use classification data, we estimate mixed effects panel models predicting changes in theft and nuisance crimes across 147 Australian neighbourhoods. The findings are consistent with neighbourhood social control and crime opportunity theories. Neighbourhood development – indicated by fewer vacant properties and fewer industrial and agricultural sites – is associated with higher collective efficacy and less crime over time. Conversely, introducing more restaurants, transit stations and cinemas is associated with higher theft and nuisance over time regardless of neighbourhood collective efficacy. We argue that the addition of socially conducive places can leave neighbourhoods vulnerable to crime until new patterns of sociability emerge and collective efficacy develops. 商店、咖啡馆和公园等邻里场所支持各种各样的社交互动，既有短暂的，也有亲密的。随着时间的推移，邻里之间的反复互动为社会凝聚力和集体效能的发展奠定了基础。在本研究中，我们研究这样一个命题，即邻里场所是否存在、如何安排方面的变化会破坏社会凝聚力和集体效能，从而对犯罪产生影响。利用空间整合型犯罪、社会调查和地块级别的土地使用分类数据，我们建立了一个估计的混合效应面板模型，预测澳大利亚147个街区盗窃和妨害犯罪的变化。这些发现与邻里社会控制和犯罪机会理论相吻合。随着时间的推移，邻里发展（表现为空置房产减少、工业和农业用地减少）与更高的集体效能和更少的犯罪相关。相反，随着时间的推移，引入更多的餐馆、公交站点和电影院与更高的盗窃和妨害犯罪相关，无论街区的集体效能如何。我们认为，在新的社交模式出现和集体效能得到发展之前，增加方便社交的场所会使社区容易受到犯罪的伤害。

In neighborhood research, the concept of collective efficacy has been particularly successful in capturing social cohesion and behavioral expectations among residents. Research has spread beyond the U.S. where it originated, and many studies from different countries have shown that collective efficacy is related to structural disadvantage in similar ways and affects outcomes as crime, education or health. However, methodological issues about measurement and modeling persist, and no study has yet investigated the cross-cultural measurement equivalence of this scale. We close this gap using two recent neighborhood surveys from Australia and Germany with large samples of respondents (N = ca. 12.800) and neighborhoods (N = ca. 440) in four cities. We employ multilevel structural equation modeling to test for measurement equivalence of collective efficacy across countries and to model its association with concentrated poverty, ethnic diversity, and residential stability. We find that the measurement of collective efficacy is metrically equivalent in both countries, modeling two latent factors on the respondent level—the two components informal social control and social cohesion/trust—but only one latent factor on the neighborhood level. Considering the relationship between the key correlates of collective efficacy, we find broad similarities but also substantial differences across contexts and compared to U.S. research, particularly concerning the role of ethnic diversity which has a stronger diminishing effect in Germany than in Australia. Possible explanations for these differences are discussed.

This paper explores the association between neighbourhood land use features and informal social control. More specifically, we examine the extent to which such features in combination with the socio-demographic context of the neighbourhood facilitate or impede collective efficacy and local civic actions.We achieve this through spatially integrating data from the census, topographic databases and a 2012 survey of 4132 residents from 148 neighbourhoods in Brisbane, Australia. The study creates a new classification of a neighbourhood’s physical environment by creating novel categories of land use features that depict social conduits, social holes and social wedges. Social conduits are features of the neighbourhood that facilitate interaction between individuals, social holes are land uses that create situations where there is no occupancy, and social wedges are features that carve up neighbourhoods. We find some evidence to suggest that residents’ reports of collective efficacy are higher in neighbourhoods with a greater density of social conduits. Density of social conduits is also positively associated with local civic action. However, in neighbourhoods with more greenspace, residents are less likely to engage in local civic actions. 本文探讨了街区土地利用特点与非正式社会管控之间的联系。更具体而言，我们考察了这些特点与街区的社会人口背景结合的情况下，促进或阻碍集体效力和地方公民行动的程度。我们通过在空间上整合人口普查、地形学数据库以及 2012 年对澳大利亚布里斯班 148 个街区 4,132 位居民做的一项调查，实现了这一点。本研究描绘了社会导管、社会孔洞和社会楔子这三类新的土地利用特点，从而建立了街区物理环境的新分类系统。社会导管是促进个人之间互动的街区特点，社会孔洞是建立无占据情形的土地利用，而社会楔子是瓜分街区的特点。我们发现一些证据表明，在社会导管密度更高的街区，居民报告的集体效力也更高。社会导管的密度也与地方公民行动正向相关。但是，在绿地更多的街区，居民参与地方公民行动的几率更低。