More Green, Less Guns: A Call for Improvement of Community Spaces in the Pursuit of Gun Violence Reduction

Photo by Scott Webb on Unsplash

Megan M. Trafford
University of New Haven

Gun violence constitutes one of the leading public health concerns within the United States. Firearms remain among the most commonly used weapons during the commission of crimes nationally, and the state of Connecticut is no exception. Recent annual reports of crime in Connecticut suggest that a considerable percentage of violent crimes including murder, aggravated assault, and robbery, as well as suicides, are committed with firearms (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2022). Adopting a public health approach to gun violence reduction can produce a multitude of benefits in the areas of crime and public safety, improved quality of life, and positive youth development. Improving the environment, engaging the community, reducing substance abuse, addressing mental health concerns, and improving gun policy are among some of the interventions that have been implemented across the United States to address gun violence. Although some interventions have been found to be more effective than others, improving the environment is shown to produce timely, scalable, cost-effective results.

Statement of the Problem

Despite efforts to reduce gun violence in major U.S cities, firearm related deaths continue to rise, increasing by 23% between 2019 and 2021 (Gramlich, 2023). This brief encourages CT policymakers to ask themselves what role they can play in adopting a more holistic approach to gun violence reduction within their cities, and it provides evidence-based suggestions for addressing what some consider a public health epidemic. The recommended policy centers on improving the local environment through cleaning, greening, and restoration of vacant lots and dilapidated buildings. Improving the physical environment has been associated with numerous benefits, including reduced firearm related crime and improved mental health among residents (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2023)

Gun violence continues to be a growing public health concern within the United States. In Connecticut, in the year 2022 alone, firearms were involved in nearly 80% of homicide deaths, nearly 35% of robberies, and approximately 17% of aggravated assaults (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2022). Among the minority of those arrested with a weapon, nearly 70% were in possession of a firearm. In addition, the state of Connecticut records an average of 115 suicides by firearm annually (Crimes Analysis Unit, 2022). Moreover, firearms were reported as being involved in 283,503 non-fatal, violent crimes in the year 2019 (Federal Bureau of Investigation, 2019b). The impacts of gun violence are far reaching: families and communities are destroyed, the sense of security and safety is diminished, trust in and support of law enforcement is strained, and post-traumatic stress plagues victims and their families.

Collaboration between public health, social science, law, and other researchers has resulted in the identification of a number of effective strategies for reducing gun violence within communities across the U.S. (John Jay Research Advisory Group on Preventing and Reducing Community Violence, 2020). Adopting an interdisciplinary model of gun violence reduction strategies may prove to be more successful than conventional methods that focus heavily on law enforcement intervention.

Pre-existing Policies

Impacts of gun violence are widespread, reaching beyond physical injury to victims and extending to entire communities as the sense of safety becomes diminished. Firearm discourse is often polarized, yet numerous policies and programs have been implemented across the U.S. to address concerns over gun violence. Amending gun policy, addressing mental health concerns, engaging the community, and improving the environment are among such initiatives.

The state of Connecticut has already implemented a number of strong firearm regulations, including mandatory background checks for the purchase of both firearms and ammunition, as well as permitting the seizure of firearms from individuals who have been deemed a risk to themselves or others. On June 6, 2023, House Bill 6667 was signed into CT state law. This bill bans open carry, updates pre-existing bans on AR-15s and similar fully automatic weapons, restricts the sale of high-capacity magazines, and limits the sale of handguns to three per month. Additionally, this bill raises the purchasing age for semiautomatic rifles from 18-21 and increases training requirements for permit holders (CT Mirror Explains, 2023). However, the bill has already faced legal pushback and criticism, with opponents claiming that tighter regulations infringe upon the constitutional right to bear arms, as well as criticizing the bill for being too focused on guns themselves and not focused enough on addressing urban poverty (Pazniokas, 2023).

Addressing Mental Health and Substance Use

Addressing mental health concerns and targeting substance abuse are among some of the public health gun violence interventions that have been implemented across numerous U.S. cities. Mental health professionals have used risk assessment tools to identify risk factors and subsequent risk management interventions. Risk scores of potentially at-risk individuals are compared to base rates of matched others who have a known history of violence, and subsequently, individual risk and protective factors are used to inform personalized risk management interventions (Kinschereff et al. 2013). Important to note, however, is that even when used as intended, risk assessment tools cannot predict with 100% accuracy whether someone will commit an act of gun violence.

The Safe and Successful Youth Initiative (SSYI) implemented across Massachusetts has been rated as promising by the National Institute of Justice for its role in reducing gun crime (National Institute of Justice, 2021). SSYI incorporates a mental health component to its gang and gun violence reduction strategy, which works through identification of individual mental health needs and connection of at-risk participants to the appropriate services. Although reviews of SSYI do not clearly define the effect of mental health services, statistically significant reductions in gun violence have been observed in the intervention areas where these services were provided (Campie et al., 2014; Petrosino et al., 2014). These results show promise for the addition of mental health components to gun violence reduction strategies.

Substance use is a known correlate of violent crime (Whiting et al., 2021) and, according to Trangenstein and colleagues (2020), reduced density of alcohol outlets may help to curb the violence. Twenty percent reductions in density of these establishments have been associated with the prevention of 51 homicide deaths and a cost savings of nearly $64 million per annum (Trangenstein et al., 2020). However, the study did not specify whether firearms were used in the commission of the homicides. Although firearms are the most commonly used weapon in homicide deaths (FBI, 2019a), the findings should be received with caution.

Engaging the Community

Across numerous firearm violence reduction strategies, credible messengers, outreach workers, and violence interrupters work to facilitate interpersonal relationships and trust, connect those at risk for violence with appropriate services, and help to change pro-violence attitudes. Cure Violence New York City, Baltimore’s Safe Streets Program, Chicago’s Violence Reduction Strategy (VRS), Philadelphia’s CeaseFire program, and the Safe and Successful Youth Initiative (SSYI) of Massachusetts are among community based public health approaches to reducing firearm violence that have seen success.

Cure Violence initiatives are largely staffed by formerly incarcerated individuals or former members of street gangs who are familiar with the area due to current or prior residency. Staff are then trained in skill building, motivational interviewing, active listening, conflict mediation, and suicide prevention. Furthermore, staff work to build relationships with at-risk youth in the community and intervene to de-escalate situations with the potential to result in gun violence (Delgado et al., 2017). Evaluations of Cure Violence programs revealed statistically significant reductions in gun violence and positive attitudes toward non-violent means of conflict resolution relative to comparison areas (Butts & Delgado, 2017; Delgado et al., 2017), as well as statistically significant increased confidence in police, though confidence in police also increased non-significantly in comparison areas (Butts & Delgado, 2017).

Baltimore’s Safe Streets Program and Chicago’s Violence Reduction Strategy (VRS) use outreach workers to attempt to facilitate non-violent resolutions to conflict, and formerly gang affiliated “credible messengers” to mediate conflict prior to its escalation, respectively in each program (Fontaine et al., 2017; Webster et al., 2010). The Safe Streets intervention was associated with statistically significant reductions in homicides and non-fatal shootings in Cherry Hill, but results were mixed in other areas (Webster et al., 2012). An impact evaluation of Chicago’s VRS found a non-statistically significant reduction in shooting perpetration and victimization, but the effect was present only in the short term (Fontaine et al., 2017). Importantly, the evaluation suggests that mutual mistrust between law enforcement and community members may threaten the efficacy of the VRS intervention, and that improved police/citizen relations are paramount for sustained long term program efficacy.

Philadelphia’s CeaseFire program utilized violence interrupters versed in conflict mediation to de-escalate potentially violent incidents from resulting in firearm injury or death. Violence interrupters were formerly incarcerated, well-known gang members with close, well-established ties to the intervention community. Moreover, Philadelphia CeaseFire employed outreach workers who served as mentors and case managers for high-risk youths and young adults. CeaseFire staff also worked to rally the community to adopt anti-violence norms and to change preexisting beliefs that violence could not be prevented (Roman et al., 2017). This intervention contributed to significant reductions in shootings by approximately 30% in target areas.

The Safe and Successful Youth Initiative (SSYI) of Massachusetts is a public health approach to gun violence reduction that targets youths who have a history of violent offending with firearms or knives, or who have been violently victimized themselves. SSYI curates individualized plans for participants aged 14-24, connecting them with outreach workers, behavioral health services, education, and skills training. This intervention is associated with a significantly reduced likelihood of incarceration for SSYI participants, as well as significant reductions in violent crime victimization among young males, and significant reductions in homicide and aggravated assault overall (Campie et al., 2014; Petrosino et al., 2014).

Improving the Environment

A number of studies have been conducted regarding the efficacy of remediating vacant lots and improving the overall quality of neighborhoods as a means of firearm violence reduction. The literature suggests that “cleaning and greening” (Sadatsafavi et al., 2022) reduces gun violence through the creation of spaces where social interactions can foster stronger community relationships, increase opportunities to engage in nature, improve the local climate, and blur territorial lines, while also decreasing available spaces which may be used to sell, store, hide, or dispose of firearms (Branas et al., 2011; Shepley et al., 2019; Sivak et al., 2021). Moreover, reducing the number of abandoned buildings has been shown to be an effective means of reducing firearm violence (Branas et al., 2016; Kondo et al., 2015). Mowing initiatives were not successful in reducing gun violence, but greening and gardening initiatives produced significant reductions in gun violence. Sadatsafavi and colleagues (2022) conducted a cost-benefit analysis and found that approximately 8%-21% of costs associated with environmental interventions can be recovered by the reduction in costs associated with firearm violence, dependent on the size of the city.

Although environmental initiatives for reducing gun violence are feasible and may result in numerous unintended public health benefits, Sadatsafavi and colleagues (2022) address one major concern: gentrification. Gentrification is of particular concern in lower income communities, as the remediation of vacant lots through greening and gardening initiatives enhances the appeal of the area to wealthier individuals who may ultimately cause displacement of long-time residents (Lee & Newman, 2021). Lee and Newman (2021) suggest that a potential strategy for reducing the likelihood of gentrification effects may be to fix property tax rates for those residing in treatment communities prior to and throughout the duration of the initiative.

Policy Options

Option 1: Engage the Community

Cure Violence programs are associated with measurable declines in firearm violence and positive attitudes toward violent conflict resolution among young community members, as well as increased confidence in police. Gang and gun violence are prominent across Connecticut, and utilizing former gang affiliates or formerly incarcerated individuals as a bridge to at-risk individuals may prove effective in reducing gun violence. When expectations about gun violence are communicated by prominent individuals in the community, as opposed to coming from police officers or the justice system, there may be a greater degree of trust and an enhanced willingness to receive the message.

Advantages:

1. Increased confidence in police officers
2. Fosters community relationships

Disadvantages:

1. Fails to reach those at-risk of suicide or otherwise unaffiliated with street groups
2. Police and citizen relationships must be fostered for sustained long term efficacy
3. Relies on formerly incarcerated/affiliated community members’ willing participation

Option 2: Improve the Environment

Cleaning and greening initiatives have been found to be effective at reducing gun violence within communities. Greening and gardening are among the initiatives to show the greatest success, indicating modest reductions in gun violence while also being cost effective. Improving the environment also serves to create spaces where social interactions can foster stronger community relationships, increase opportunities to engage in nature, improve the local climate, and blur territorial lines, while also decreasing available spaces which may be used to sell, store, hide, or dispose of firearms (Branas et al., 2011; Shepley et al., 2019; Sivak et al., 2021).

Advantages:

1. Scalable
2. Cost-effective
3. Improved feelings of safety and security
4. Increased opportunity for social bonding
5. Blurs territorial lines
6. Improved community appearance

Disadvantages:

1. Potential for gentrification
2. Potential for displacement
3. Requires consistent maintenance

Option 3: Address Substance Abuse

Substance use is a well-established correlate of violent crime (Webster, 2022). One way to reduce substance use is to limit access to substances, particularly alcohol. Foremost, alcohol outlets that do not conform to state and local regulations should be shut down. Additionally, the density of remaining alcohol outlets should dictate the number of additional closures. Although a reduction in density of 20% has been associated with reduced homicide deaths and cost savings (Trangenstein et al., 2020), disgruntled business owners are another likely outcome, therefore the number closures should be relative to the size and population density in a given city or community.

Advantages:

1. Addresses multiple public health concerns simultaneously
2. Considerable monetary savings to victims and the justice system

Disadvantages:

1. May further stigmatize substance users
2. May strain public opinion of local legislators
3. May result in an unintended shift from alcohol consumption to street drug consumption where convenient alcohol outlets are shut down
4. May result in increased violence and crime among alcoholics whose access has been limited

Policy Recommendation

In 2022, nationwide approximately 132 people died from firearm-related injuries each day, totaling nearly 50,000 firearm related deaths within a single calendar year (CDC, 2023). The associated harms of gun violence are widespread and include substantial costs to the country, in terms of medical care, lost productivity, reduced sense of safety and security in affected and adjacent communities, and post-traumatic stress symptoms among victims and their loved ones. In terms of gun violence reduction, the state of Connecticut has largely focused on the enactment of legislation that tightens restrictions on the sale and purchase of firearms and ammunition, along with increasing the training threshold for permit holders (Pazniokas, 2023).

To supplement statutory efforts to reduce gun violence in Connecticut, policymakers should make sincere efforts to improve the local environment in high-risk communities. Environmentally focused interventions are scalable, sustainable, and cost-effective measures that can be taken to achieve reductions in gun violence, fear, and stress relatively quickly after implementation. According to Kuo and Sullivan (2001), nature exposure can produce therapeutic effects that result in reduced levels of aggression and anger which are often precursory to violence. Moreover, cleaning and greening initiatives provide tangible evidence of investment by local leaders which suggests to residents that they are valued members of the community. When community members feel valued, they may be more inclined to invest into their communities through development of neighborly relationships which has the added benefit of increasing informal social control and cohesion in these areas (Kuo & Sullivan, 2001; MacDonald et al., 2022).

Although this approach would require regular maintenance, the return on investment may be substantial. According to Branas and colleagues (2016), for every dollar spent on interventions to improve the environment, society at large can expect to see liberal returns estimated at around $45 to over $400, not accounting for inflation. For perspective, the approximate costs of maintaining greening and remediation initiatives are calculated at $180 annually. As such, improving the environment is a viable, standalone policy option for reducing gun violence within Connecticut communities.

Existing gun violence reduction strategies focused on improving the environment consist largely of vacant lot remediation, cleaning, and greening interventions (Branas et al., 2018; Moyer et al., 2018; Sadatsafavi et al., 2022; Webster, 2022). However, these strategies could benefit from the added components of updating unused, underused, and otherwise blighted spaces. The proposed policy would work to identify vacant lots, dilapidated buildings, and blighted spaces within Connecticut’s urban communities and transform them into usable spaces with purpose through cleaning, greening, gardening, covering graffiti with murals created by local artists, and turning vacant lots and blighted spaces into parks. Importantly, this policy option does not seek to prepare these spaces for commercial use, but rather for community enjoyment, with the goal being to create spaces that foster interpersonal connection and community ties.

Improving the environment is a scalable, cost-effective means of reducing gun violence, while simultaneously improving mental health and community relations. However, the potential for gentrification must be taken seriously. This policy recommendation intentionally includes provisions aimed at protecting the intervention communities from gentrification, by stipulating that remediated lots and buildings are to be improved for community use recreationally, rather than for the encroachment and expansion of suburban developers. Additionally, property tax rates for intervention area residents should remain fixed throughout the duration of the intervention and follow-up period.

Furthermore, there is the concern that improving the environment in one community will displace, rather than reduce, gun violence. Law enforcement in neighboring, non-intervention communities should be briefed regarding the intervention and potential displacement outcomes so that the appropriate measures can be taken to ensure safety of their residents as well. However, displacement is less of a concern when adjacent communities do not contain excess vacant or blighted lots and other characteristics that are targeted by the intervention. Paramount to the intervention is harm reduction targeted at gun violence, and in doing so, it is imperative that we do not cause harm to communities in other ways, such as through gentrification.

References

Branas, C. C., Cheney, R. A., MacDonald, J. M., Tam, V. W., Jackson, T. D., & Ten Have, T. R. (2011). A difference-in-differences analysis of health, safety, and greening vacant urban space. American Journal of Epidemiology, 174(11), 1296–1306. https://doi.org/10.1093/aje/kwr273

Over a ten-year period, Branas and colleagues assessed differences in health and safety outcomes in treatment areas in Philadelphia compared to control areas that were deemed eligible for treatment but did not receive it. The treatment provided in this study was the greening of vacant lots, and the treatment areas experienced reductions in gun violence, vandalism, and reported stress among residents.

Branas, C. C., Kondo, M. C., Murphy, S. M., South, E. C., Polsky, D., & MacDonald, J. M. (2016). Urban blight remediation as a cost-beneficial solution to firearm violence. American Journal of Public Health, 106(12), 2158-2164. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2016.303434

This study involved a cost-benefit analysis of urban blight remediation in Philadelphia to assess whether vacant lot and abandoned building remediation are cost effective means of reducing general violence and gun violence. The authors found that both vacant lot and abandoned building remediation resulted in significant reductions in gun violence, but not in other forms of violence.

Branas, C. C., South, E., Kondo, M. C., Hohl, B. C., Bourgois, P., Wiebe, D. J., & MacDonald, J. M. (2018). Citywide cluster randomized trial to restore blighted vacant land and its effects on violence, crime, and fear. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115(12), 2946-2951. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1718503115

This study found significant reductions in perceptions of crime and safety concerns among participants living near treatment lots. This study also found significant reductions in gun violence and overall crime by 29.1% and 13.3%, respectively.

Butts, J. A., & Delgado, S. A. (2017). Repairing trust young men in neighborhoods with Cure Violence Programs report growing confidence in police [Research Brief 2017-01]. John Jay Research and Evaluation Center. https://johnjayrec.nyc/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Repairing2017.pdf  

This research brief discusses statistically significant increases in trust and confidence in law enforcement within Cure Violence treatment areas in New York City. Although support for law enforcement increased generally during the research period, Cure Violence areas experienced larger increases in trust, as well as decreases in support for violent means of conflict resolution.

Campie, P. E., Vriniotis, M., Read, N., Fronius, T., & Petrosino, A. (2014) A Comparative Study Using Propensity Score Matching to Predict Incarceration Likelihoods Among SSYI and Non-SSYI Youth from 2011 to 2013. U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs. https://www.ojp.gov/library/publications/comparative-study-using-propensity-score-matching-predict-incarceration

This source presents the findings of evaluations of the Safe and Successful Youth Initiative (SSYI) which was implemented to reduce gun violence in Massachusetts cities. The findings suggest that active SSYI participation can reduce incarceration among youth by 42%. However, youth who were eligible for SSYI but did not receive services were twice as likely as non-SSYI youth to be incarcerated, suggesting that SSYI is a successful intervention only when youth are active participants and receive services.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2022, June 6). Firearm deaths grow, disparities widen. Comprehensive strategies can prevent violence and help reduce racial and ethnic disparities. https://www.cdc.gov/vitalsigns/firearm-deaths/index.html

In this article, the CDC presents firearm injury and death statistics as well as a list of factors that may have disproportionately impacted young, Black males during and after the COVID-19 pandemic. According to the CDC, a number of stressors, including poverty, may have contributed to increases in firearm injury and death rates among this population. Public health approaches to firearm violence reduction are presented.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2023, September 19). Fast facts: Firearm violence and injury prevention. https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/firearms/fastfact.html

In this article, the CDC outlines holistic preventative measures that can be taken to reduce and/or prevent firearm violence, as well as presenting statistics related to firearm injury.

CT Mirror Explains. (2023, June 19). A new CT gun law passed in 2023. Here’s what to know about it. CT Mirror. https://ctmirror.org/2023/06/19/new-ct-gun-laws-2023-bill-what-to-know/

This source explains the components of House Bill 6667 which was signed into law by CT governor Ned Lamont on June 6, 2023. This article lays out the updates to CT gun laws that resulted from the passing of the bill.

Crimes Analysis Unit Department of Emergency Services & Public Protection. (2022). Crime in Connecticut annual report of the Uniform Crime Reporting Program. https://portal.ct.gov/-/media/despp/csp/crimes-analysis/2022/crime-in-connecticut-annual-report-2022.pdf

This annual report provides crime data for the state of Connecticut broken down by crime type, weapons used, etc. Comparisons between incidence rates over ten years for the state of Connecticut and the United States are presented.

Delgado, S. A., Alsabahi, L., Wolff, K., Alexander, N., Cobar, P., & Butts, J. A. (2017). The effects of cure violence in the South Bronx and East New York, Brooklyn. In Denormalizing Violence: A Series of Reports from the John Jay College Evaluation of Cure Violence Programs in New York City. New York, NY: Research and Evaluation Center, John Jay College of Criminal Justice, City University of New York. https://academicworks.cuny.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1436&context=jj_pubs

This report examines the outcomes of two NYC Cure Violence programs: Man Up! Inc. in Brooklyn and Save Our Streets South Bronx. Compared to non-program neighborhoods with similar demographic makeups and crime trends, Cure Violence neighborhoods experienced significant reductions in gun violence and pro-violence attitudes. Save Our Streets South Bronx neighborhoods saw reductions in gun injury by 37% and shooting victimization by 63%. Man Up! Inc. in Brooklyn resulted in a 50% reduction in gun injury, as well as a non-statistically significant 15% reduction in shooting victimization.

Federal Bureau of Investigation. (2019a) Crime in the United States, Expanded Homicide Data Table 8, Murder Victims by Weapon, 2015-2019. https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2019/crime-in-the-u.s.-2019/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-8.xls

This table provides expanded homicide data by weapon type from 2015-2019. Notably, firearm homicide data are further broken down by firearm type (e.g., handgun, shotgun, etc.).

Federal Bureau of Investigation. (2019b). Crime in the United States, Table 15, Crime Trends Additional Information about Selected Offenses by Population Group, 2018-2019. https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2019/crime-in-the-u.s.-2019/topic-pages/tables/table-15

This table details changes in crime rates from 2018 to 2019 across offense types and city size. Furthermore, this table breaks down offenses by weapon type and whether force was used, where applicable.

Fontaine, J., Jannetta, J., Papachristos, A., Leitson, D., & Dwivedi, A. (2017). Put the guns down outcomes and impacts of the Chicago Violence Reduction Strategy. Justice Policy Center Urban Institute. https://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/publication/92321/2017.07.31_vrs_full_report_finalized_0.pdf

This research report provides a comprehensive evaluation of the outcomes and impacts of the Chicago Violence Reduction Strategy (VRS). The authors found that the VRS was associated with significant short-term reductions in shooting perpetration and victimization. The authors suggest that trust between communities and the police officers that serve them is imperative for the success of VRS programs in reducing gun violence.

Gramlich, J. (2023, April 26). What the data says about gun deaths in the U.S. Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/04/26/what-the-data-says-about-gun-deaths-in-the-u-s/

This annual report provides crime data for the state of Connecticut broken down by crime type, weapons used, etc. Comparisons between incidence rates over ten years for the state of Connecticut and the United States are presented.

John Jay College Research Advisory Group on Preventing and Reducing Community Violence. (2020). Reducing Violence without Police: A Review of Research Evidence. New York, NY: Research and Evaluation Center, John Jay College of Criminal Justice, City University of New York. https://johnjayrec.nyc/2020/11/09/av2020/#major

This report outlines seven evidence-based strategies for gun violence reduction that do not depend on law enforcement personnel for implementation and provides numerous recommendations for reducing violence within communities.

Kinscherff, R., Evans Jr., A. C., Randazzo, M. R., & Cornell, D. (2013). What works: Gun violence prediction and prevention at the individual level. American Psychological Association. https://www.apa.org/pubs/reports/gun-violence-prevention

Kinscherff and colleagues discuss violent risk assessments and their usefulness in the identification of individuals at risk for engaging in gun violence. Individual static and dynamic risk factors are compared to known base rates of matched individuals who have a history of impulsive violence. These risk assessments can be used to identify dynamic risk factors and to inform treatment plans to address individual needs and reduce the risk of violence.

Kondo, M. C., Keene, D., Hohl, B. C., MacDonald, J. M., & Branas, C. C. (2015). A difference-in-differences study of the effects of a new abandoned building remediation strategy on safety. PLOS One, 10(8). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0129582  

Kondo and colleagues assessed whether enforcing a doors and windows ordinance in Philadelphia resulted in crime reduction outcomes. The authors found statistically significant reductions in overall crime, total assault, and firearm assault in the treated areas compared to matched control areas. Importantly, there were no displacement effects found by the authors. However, certain drug crime and property crime increases occurred simultaneously.

Kuo, F. E., & Sullivan, W. C. (2001). Environment and crime in the inner city. Does vegetation reduce crime? Environment and Behavior, 33(3), 343-367. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916501333002

Kuo and Sullivan sought to examine the relationship between inner-city crime and vegetation. The authors found that vegetation was significantly related to reductions in property crime and violent crime. Specifically, the authors found that compared to areas with low levels of vegetation, high vegetation areas experienced significant reductions in total crime by 52%, violent crime by 56%, and property crime by 48%.

Lee, R. J., & Newman, G. (2021). The relationship between vacant properties and neighborhood gentrification. Land Use Policy, 101, Article 105185. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.105185 

Lee and Newman assess types of vacant properties and their respective relationships with gentrification. The authors found that vacant residential and commercial buildings are positively associated with gentrification, whereas institutional vacancies are negatively associated with gentrification. Industrial and recreational vacancies are not significantly associated with gentrification outcomes. The authors posit that greening initiatives may be best suited to address vacancies at high-risk for gentrification.

MacDonald, J., Nguyen, V., Jensen, S. T., & Branas, C. C. (2022). Reducing crime by remediating vacant lots: the moderating effect of nearby land uses. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 18(3), 639-664. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11292-020-09452-9

This article estimates the impact of vacant lot remediation and greening initiatives on crime rates in Philadelphia. The authors found that greening vacant lots was associated with reductions in total crime however, these reductions were smaller for vacant lots located near alcohol outlets. Further, the authors suggest that greening initiatives may be more successful in communities with stronger collective efficacy.

Moyer, R., MacDonald, J. M., Ridgeway, G., & Branas, C. C. (2018). Effect of remediating blighted vacant land on shootings: a citywide cluster randomized trial. American Journal of Public Health, 109(1), 140-144. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2018.304752

This study sought to determine if remediating blighted land in urban areas decreased firearm related deaths and/or injuries. Greening, mowing, and cleaning were found to have significantly reduced shooting victimizations in the treatment areas without resulting in displacement.

National Institute of Justice. (2021, April 9). Program profile: Safe and successful youth initiative (SSYI) (Massachusetts). Crime Solutions. https://crimesolutions.ojp.gov/ratedprograms/717#2-0

This program profile provides an overview of the Massachusetts Safe and Successful Youth Initiative (SSYI). Based on multiple evaluation studies, the National Institute of Justice rated this program as promising due to statistically significant findings of reduced violent victimization and odds of incarceration for participants.

Pazniokas, M. (2023, June 3). Senate passes update of Connecticut’s strong gun laws. CT Mirror. https://ctmirror.org/2023/06/03/ct-gun-safety-law-open-carry-ar-15-senate-bill/

Pazniokas describes the provisions laid out in House Bill 6667 and comments on the distribution of votes for and against the passing of the bill. Furthermore, Paznoikas presents a number of arguments from proponents and opponents to the bill and details the first legal challenge to arise.

Petrosino, A., Turner, H., Hanson, T. L., Fronius, T., & Campie, P. E. (2014). The Impact of the Safe and Successful Youth Initiative (SSYI) on City-Level Youth Crime Victimization Rates. An Interrupted Time Series Analysis with Comparison Groups. Boston, Mass.: Massachusetts Executive Office of Health and Human Services.

This impact evaluation of the Safe and Successful Youth Initiative (SSYI) discusses statistically significant reductions in violent crime victimizations in treatment areas. The authors focus on rates of homicide and aggravated assault because these offenses commonly involve firearms, and SSYI targets young men at risk of firearm violence.

Roman, C. G., Klein, H. Wolff, K. T., Davis Bellamy, M., & Reeves, K. (2017). Philadelphia CeaseFire Findings from the Impact Evaluation. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Center for Bioethics, Urban Health, and Policy at the Lewis Katz School of Medicine. https://cvg.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/SummaryofPhilaCeaseFireFindingsFormatted_Jan2017.pdf

This impact evaluation assessed whether there were significant reductions in shootings in CeaseFire areas in Philadelphia. The authors found that CeaseFire was associated with statistically significant reductions in shootings. Although some comparison areas also experienced reductions in shootings, these outcomes were insignificant statistically and/or produced smaller effects than in CeaseFire areas.

Sadatsafavi, H., Sachs, N. A., Shepley, M. M., Kondo, M. C., & Barankevich, R. A. (2022). Vacant lot remediation and firearm violence- A meta-analysis and benefit-to-cost evaluation. Landscape and Urban Planning, 218. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2021.104281

This meta-analysis included eight studies of vacant lot remediation interventions with before-and-after designs to determine the effect of remediation on gun violence. Mowing interventions did not significantly reduce gun violence, but greening and gardening interventions resulted in reductions in gun violence by 5.84% and 5.34%, respectively. The authors also include a cost-benefit analysis which suggests that 8.17%- 21.06% of costs associated with program implementation can be recovered depending on city size.

Sivak, C. J., Pearson, A. L., & Hurlburt, P. (2021). Effects of vacant lots on human health: A systematic review of the evidence. Landscape and Urban Planning, 208. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2020.104020

Sivak and colleagues conducted a systematic review of the literature pertaining to human health and vacant lots, focusing on outcomes like crime and mental health. Findings suggest that greening of vacant lots is associated with better health, although one included study found that greening was associated with worse health outcomes.

Shepley, M., Sachs, N., Sadatsafavi, H., Fournier, C., & Peditto, K. (2019). The impact of green space on violent crime in urban environments: an evidence synthesis. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 16(24), 1–5. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16245119

Shepley and colleagues compiled a systematic literature review to synthesize the literature pertaining to the effect of green spaces on violent crime rates in Urban areas. The authors found that most studies that examined the relationship between green spaces and gun violence found that green spaces were associated with reductions in gun violence. Furthermore, they found that community gardens and greening initiatives were negatively associated with gun violence. The authors note that some studies produced contradictory results.

Trangenstein, P. J., Eck, R. H., Lu, Y., Webster, D., Jennings, J. M., Latkin, C., Milam, A. J., Furr-Holden, D., & Jernigan, D. H. (2020). The violence prevention potential of reducing alcohol outlet access in Baltimore, Maryland. Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs, 81(1), 24-33. https://doi.org/10.15288/jsad.2020.81.24

This article provides a cost effectiveness analysis of reduced alcohol density and homicide rates in Baltimore. The authors found that 51 homicides could be prevented annually by reducing alcohol outlets by 20%, a cost savings of $63.7 million per annum.

Webster, D. W., Mendel Whitehill, J., Vernick, J. S., & Parker, E. M. (2012). Evaluation of Baltimore’s Safe Streets program: Effects on attitudes, participants’ experiences, and gun violence. In Johns Hopkins Center for the Prevention of Youth Violence. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.

This impact evaluation of Baltimore’s Safe Streets Program found statistically significant reductions in homicide and/or non-fatal shootings associated with the program, as well as significant reductions in willingness to use firearms as a means of conflict resolution.

Webster, D. W. (2022). Public health approaches to reducing community gun violence. Dædalus, the Journal of the American Academy of Arts & Sciences, 151(1), 38-48. https://doi.org/10.1162/daed_a_01886

This article discusses public health approaches that can be taken toward gun violence reduction. Webster focuses on the reduction of alcohol outlet density, and vacancy remediation and greening initiatives as cost-effective options for addressing gun violence.

Whiting, D., Lchtenstein, P., & Fazel, S. (2021). Violence and mental disorders: A structured review of associations by individual diagnoses, risk factors, and risk assessment. Lancet Psychiatry, 8(2), 150-161. https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanpsy/article/PIIS2215-0366(20)30262-5/abstract#section-3d6acba1-acea-4be2-8dc9-b7e14e5b6583

This review summarizes literature pertaining to mental disorders, including substance use disorders, and their association with violence. Whiting and colleagues found that substance use disorders are associated with elevated rates of violence, and that comorbid substance use disorders and prior criminality are strong predictors of subsequent violence.