COMPLETE SCHOOL PROJECT TOPICS & MATERIALS :
CHAPTERS: Chapter 1-5
|
DOC FORMAT: MS WORD/PDF
|
PRICE: ₦5,000
EVALUATING THE ROLE OF NEIGHBORHOOD WATCH GROUPS IN CURBING BURGLARY AND THEFT IN ENUGU STATE.
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background of the Study
Community-based crime prevention represents a globally significant paradigm shift in criminological thinking and policing practice, moving from an exclusively state-centred, professional law enforcement model of crime control toward a collaborative framework in which communities are repositioned as active partners in preventing crime and maintaining public order (Crawford, 1998; Skogan, 2006). Within this paradigm, Neighbourhood Watch Groups (NWGs) also variously referred to as Community Watch Committees, Vigilante Groups, or Security Committees depending on the specific context occupy a central institutional position. At their most effective, NWGs function as organised systems of community surveillance and reporting that increase the perceived risk of detection for potential offenders, strengthen social cohesion among residents, and establish channels of communication between communities and formal law enforcement agencies (Bennett et al., 2008; Holloway et al., 2008).
The empirical record of NWG effectiveness in reducing property crime particularly burglary and theft is extensive but contextually contingent. Bennett et al.’s (2008) landmark systematic review and meta-analysis of twenty international studies found that Neighbourhood Watch programmes were associated with an average 16-26 percent reduction in crime rates relative to comparison areas. However, subsequent research has noted that this effect is not universal: NWGs perform most effectively where they are well-organised, enjoy broad community participation, receive active law enforcement support, and operate in communities with moderate to high levels of existing social cohesion (Holloway et al., 2008; Kondo et al., 2018). In communities characterised by high social fragmentation, deep poverty, or distrust of law enforcement, NWGs may fail to achieve meaningful crime reduction or may even produce negative consequences through the displacement of criminal activity, vigilante excess, or the exclusion of marginalised community members from safety networks (Meares, 2009; Baker, 2010).
Enugu State, in the South-East geopolitical zone of Nigeria, provides an instructive context for evaluating the role of NWGs in curbing property crime. The state has experienced significant increases in reported burglary and theft offences over the past decade, driven by a complex interplay of urbanisation pressures in Enugu city, youth unemployment, post-COVID economic hardship, and the weakening of traditional social controls as community structures adapt to rapid social change (Nigeria Police Force, Enugu State Command, 2022; Eze & Igbo, 2018). In response to perceived inadequacies in formal police coverage aggravated by the severe damage inflicted on police infrastructure and personnel during the October 2020 #EndSARS-related attacks Enugu State communities have increasingly organised or reinforced NWGs as supplementary mechanisms of property crime prevention (Enugu State Community Security Committee, 2021; Onwudiwe, 2004).
The Nigerian context for community-based policing and NWG activity is distinctive in several important respects. The Nigeria Police Force operates under severe resource constraints the 2022 Police Strength Report estimated one officer per approximately 600 citizens, far below the UN recommendation of 1 per 400 making community-based supplementation of formal law enforcement a practical necessity rather than merely a policy preference (Nigeria Police Force, 2022; Alemika & Chukwuma, 2004). Vigilante groups and community watch organisations have a long history in South-Eastern Nigeria, rooted in Igbo traditional institutions of community self-governance and collective security, including the Ebubeagu Community Vigilante Service and various ward security committees established by local government authorities (Baker, 2008; Onwudiwe, 2004). However, these community security structures are not without controversy: accusations of human rights abuses, extrajudicial action, internal corruption, and inadequate coordination with formal law enforcement have been levelled at various NWG formations across the South-East (Amnesty International, 2020; Human Rights Watch, 2022).
Burglary and theft constitute among the most economically damaging and psychologically disruptive categories of property crime affecting households and businesses in Enugu State. Data from the Enugu State Police Command indicates that property offences account for the largest share of recorded crime in the state, with housebreaking, motor vehicle theft, and shop-breaking representing the dominant categories (Nigeria Police Force, Enugu State Command, 2022). The economic consequences of these offences including direct losses of property, costs of insurance and security hardware, and the psychological burden of victimisation fall disproportionately on lower- and middle-income households with limited capacity to self-insure against property crime (Van Dijk et al., 2012; Igbo, 2007). NWGs, if effective, represent a comparatively low-cost, community-appropriate mechanism for addressing this burden. Their evaluation is therefore both a scholarly and policy priority.
The present study undertakes a systematic evaluation of the role of NWGs in curbing burglary and theft in Enugu State, examining their organisational characteristics, operational practices, community participation rates, relationships with formal law enforcement, and measurable impacts on burglary and theft rates in areas where they operate.
1.2 Statement of the Problem
Despite the proliferation of NWGs across communities in Enugu State and their significant investment of community time, resources, and social capital, no systematic evaluation of their effectiveness in reducing burglary and theft has been conducted in the state. Anecdotal evidence is contradictory: some communities report significant crime reduction attributable to their NWGs, while others report marginal impact, criminal displacement to adjacent areas, or problematic conduct by watch group members. Without rigorous empirical evaluation, the state government, local government authorities, and communities lack the evidence needed to determine whether to invest in, reform, or restructure these community security institutions. This study addresses that critical evaluation gap.
1.3 Research Questions
i. What are the organisational structures, operational practices, and resource bases of NWGs operating in Enugu State?
ii. What levels of community participation do NWGs achieve, and what factors predict participation?
iii. Is there a statistically significant association between the presence and activity level of NWGs and reported rates of burglary and theft in Enugu State communities?
iv. What is the nature and quality of the relationship between NWGs and the Nigeria Police Force in Enugu State?
v. What factors explain variations in NWG effectiveness across different communities within the state?
1.4 Objectives of the Study
i. To document and analyse the organisational structures, practices, and resource bases of NWGs in Enugu State.
ii. To assess community participation levels in NWG activities and the predictors of participation.
iii. To evaluate the statistical association between NWG presence and activity and rates of reported burglary and theft.
iv. To examine the quality and effectiveness of NWG-police collaboration in the state.
v. To identify the organisational, social, and contextual factors that explain differences in NWG effectiveness across communities.
1.5 Significance of the Study
Theoretically, the study contributes to situational crime prevention theory (Clarke, 1995), guardianship theory (Cohen & Felson, 1979), and collective efficacy theory (Sampson et al., 1997) by testing their explanatory power in the context of South-Eastern Nigerian community policing. Empirically, it produces the first rigorous evaluation of NWG effectiveness for property crime reduction specifically in Enugu State, filling a significant gap in Nigerian community policing literature. Practically, the findings will guide the Enugu State Government, Local Government Areas, the Nigeria Police Force‘s Community Policing Department, and community organisations in designing, resourcing, and regulating NWGs in ways that maximise their crime prevention effectiveness while protecting the rights of community members.
1.6 Scope of the Study
The study is geographically delimited to Enugu State and focuses specifically on NWGs operating at the community, ward, and neighbourhood levels in both urban (Enugu city) and semi-urban/rural communities across the state. The crime categories examined are burglary (residential housebreaking) and theft (including motor vehicle theft and shop-breaking). The temporal scope is 2016–2024. The study does not examine vigilante groups operating as political instruments, armed community security formations associated with ethnonationalist movements, or anti-kidnapping taskforces, which represent qualitatively different institutional formations.
1.7 Definition of Key Terms
Neighbourhood Watch Group (NWG): An organised community association whose members voluntarily participate in systematic surveillance of their neighbourhood, report suspicious activities to law enforcement, and engage in collective crime prevention activities.
Burglary: Unlawful entry into a building with intent to commit a felony, typically theft; includes housebreaking, building-breaking, and related offences under the Criminal Code Act Cap. C38 (Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004).
Theft: The dishonest taking and carrying away of property belonging to another with intent to permanently deprive the owner thereof (Criminal Code Act, 2004).
Collective Efficacy: The shared willingness of community members to intervene for the common good, combining social cohesion with shared expectations of informal social control.
Crime Displacement: The spatial, temporal, tactical, or target-based relocation of criminal activity in response to crime prevention interventions, such that overall crime levels are not reduced but merely shifted.
References
Alemika, E. E. O., & Chukwuma, I. C. (2004). Analysis of police and policing in Nigeria: A desk study on police and policing in Nigeria. CLEEN Foundation. https://www.cleen.org
Amnesty International. (2020). Nigeria: “They do not care if we die”: Security forces and armed groups leave people of southeast Nigeria at risk. Amnesty International.
Baker, B. (2008). Multi-choice policing in Africa. Nordiska Afrikainstitutet.
Baker, B. (2010). The future is non-state: The case of Rwanda. Policing and Society, 20(2), 190–210. https://doi.org/10.1080/10439461003668700
Barr, R., & Pease, K. (1990). Crime placement, displacement, and deflection. Crime and Justice, 12, 277–318. https://doi.org/10.1086/449194
Bennett, T., Holloway, K., & Farrington, D. P. (2008). The effectiveness of neighbourhood watch. Campbell Systematic Reviews, 4(1), 1–46. https://doi.org/10.4073/csr.2008.18
Clarke, R. V. (1995). Situational crime prevention. Crime and Justice, 19, 91–150. https://doi.org/10.1086/449230
Cohen, L. E., & Felson, M. (1979). Social change and crime rate trends: A routine activity approach. American Sociological Review, 44(4), 588–608. https://doi.org/10.2307/2094589
Crawford, A. (1998). Crime prevention and community safety: Politics, policies and practices. Longman.
Enugu State Community Security Committee. (2021). Report on community security initiatives in Enugu State 2020–2021. Enugu State Government.
Eze, U. O., & Igbo, E. U. M. (2018). Youth unemployment and property crime in Enugu State: A criminological analysis. Enugu Journal of Social Sciences, 4(1), 22–38.
Holloway, K., Bennett, T., & Farrington, D. P. (2008). The effectiveness of neighbourhood watch. Problem-Oriented Guides for Police, Response Guide Series No. 6. U.S. Department of Justice.
Human Rights Watch. (2022). “We will kill you if you cry”: Sexual violence in the Central African Republic. Human Rights Watch.
Igbo, E. U. M. (2007). Introduction to criminology. Enugu: CIDJAP Press.
Kondo, M. C., South, E. C., Branas, C. C., Richmond, T. S., & MacDonald, J. M. (2018). The association between urban tree cover and gun assault: A case-control and case-crossover study. American Journal of Epidemiology, 187(3), 455–462. https://doi.org/10.1093/aje/kwx269
Meares, T. L. (2009). The legitimacy of police among young African-American men. Marquette Law Review, 92(4), 651–666.
Nigeria Police Force. (2022). Annual police strength and deployment report. Nigeria Police Force Headquarters.
Nigeria Police Force, Enugu State Command. (2022). Annual crime statistics report, Enugu State 2021. Nigeria Police Force.
Onwudiwe, I. D. (2004). Vigilante justice in Nigeria: A critical examination of vigilantism as a response to crime. African Security Review, 13(4), 81–90. https://doi.org/10.1080/10246029.2004.9627988
Sampson, R. J., Raudenbush, S. W., & Earls, F. (1997). Neighborhoods and violent crime: A multilevel study of collective efficacy. Science, 277(5328), 918–924. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.277.5328.918
Skogan, W. G. (2006). Police and community in Chicago: A tale of three cities. Oxford University Press.
Van Dijk, J., van Kesteren, J., & Smit, P. (2012). Criminal victimisation in international perspective: Key findings from the 2004–2005 ICVS and EU ICS. WODC. https://www.unicri.it