Crime control | AQA A-Level Sociology
Updated: 6 days ago
For Specification 7192
AQA A-Level Sociology | Free Revision Notes
Estimated study time: 70 to 80 minutes
Crime control involves decisions about why crime occurs, what behaviour should be targeted and which strategies are most likely to reduce offending. This Crime control A-Level Sociology revision page compares sociological approaches including Left and Right Realism and examines strategies such as target hardening, zero tolerance, reducing inequality, multi-agency working, surveillance and punishment. It builds on the regulation of behaviour [Social order and social control] and provides the overview needed before studying surveillance in contemporary society [Surveillance], prevention and punishment in greater depth. AQA explicitly requires crime control within compulsory Crime and Deviance.
Learning Objectives 🎯
By the end of this revision page, you should be able to:
Define crime control and distinguish it from individual crime-control strategies.
Explain contrasting sociological approaches to controlling crime.
Describe strategies including target hardening, zero tolerance, reducing inequality and multi-agency working.
Analyse how explanations of crime influence preferred control strategies.
Explain why particular crime-control strategies may be ineffective.
Evaluate different sociological approaches to controlling crime.
Revision Notes 📚
Crime control A-Level Sociology revision
AQA requires students to be familiar with sociological explanations of crime control, surveillance, prevention and punishment, alongside victims and the role of the criminal justice system and other agencies.
These ideas overlap, but they are not identical.
Crime control is the broad attempt to regulate, reduce or respond to crime.
Within this broad area, societies may use:
crime prevention;
surveillance;
punishment;
criminal justice agencies;
social and community interventions;
attempts to change the social conditions associated with offending.
The AQA lesson plan therefore treats Crime control as the overview before separate lessons on crime prevention strategies [Crime prevention], punishment and the criminal justice system.
Crime control begins with an explanation of crime
Different sociological explanations lead to different approaches to crime control.
Consider two contrasting arguments:
Crime occurs because individuals make choices when opportunities and rewards outweigh the risks.
This suggests that crime might be controlled by:
making crime more difficult;
increasing the risks of being caught;
increasing deterrence.
By contrast:
Crime is connected to social inequality, relative deprivation and marginalisation.
This suggests that control might involve:
reducing inequality;
addressing deprivation;
working with communities;
tackling underlying social causes.
This difference is central to the contrast between Right Realism and Left Realism.
AQA assessed this debate directly in 2024.
Realist approaches to crime
Both Left and Right Realists treat crime as a significant social problem.
AQA's 2024 Paper 3 describes Realists as emphasising the damage crime causes to communities. However, Left and Right Realists disagree strongly about both:
the causes of crime;
the best ways to control it.
The basic contrast is:
Left Realism | Right Realism |
Emphasises structural causes | Emphasises individual choice |
Focuses on inequality | Focuses on rational self-interest |
Uses relative deprivation and marginalisation | Uses rational choice and increased risk |
Favours tackling social causes | Favours reducing opportunities and increasing risks |
Associated with social and community approaches | Associated with situational and environmental approaches |
AQA's 2024 mark scheme recognises concepts including relative deprivation, marginalisation, rational choice theory, target hardening, zero tolerance, surveillance, multi-agency approaches and situational, environmental and social/community crime prevention.
Right Realism
Right Realism focuses strongly on the individual offender and practical ways of making crime less attractive or more difficult.
AQA's 2024 examination item states that Right Realists see offenders as rationally self-interested individuals who choose to commit crime. Crime can therefore be reduced by increasing the risks of committing crime.
The basic relationship is:
perceived benefits of crime > perceived risks → crime becomes more attractive
Crime-control strategies therefore try to alter this calculation:
greater risk or difficulty → crime becomes less attractive → possible reduction in offending
This connects Right Realism closely with rational choice theory.
Rational choice theory
Rational choice theory assumes that offenders may make choices after considering potential risks and benefits.
AQA's specimen assessment uses this assumption directly in its description of situational crime prevention. It states that situational approaches assume an offender makes a rational decision based on perceived risks and benefits.
The implication for crime control is straightforward.
A strategy might aim to:
make the offence more difficult;
make detection more likely;
increase the potential cost of offending.
The hoped-for result is that the potential offender decides crime is no longer worthwhile.
Situational crime prevention
Situational crime prevention aims to reduce the opportunities available for crime.
AQA defines this approach in its specimen assessment as strategies designed to reduce criminal opportunity.
It therefore focuses mainly on the situation in which offending might occur, rather than attempting to transform the wider social structure.
AQA's example is installing a burglar alarm to reduce the likelihood of burglary.
The basic process is:
change the situation → increase difficulty or risk → discourage offending
Target hardening
One important situational strategy is target hardening.
Target hardening makes potential targets of crime more difficult or risky to attack.
AQA's 2022 mark scheme gives increased surveillance as an example and explains that people may be less likely to choose crime if they believe they are more likely to be caught.
The process is:
target becomes harder or riskier → perceived likelihood of detection increases → offending may become less attractive
AQA also identifies target hardening as a relevant concept in its 2024 realist mark scheme.
The role and significance of surveillance itself is examined fully in [Surveillance].
Evaluating target hardening
AQA's specimen mark scheme identifies several limitations of situational crime prevention.
One of the most important is displacement.
Displacement occurs when crime moves rather than disappears.
For example:
crime becomes difficult in one setting → offender moves to another setting → total offending may not fall
This means a successful strategy at one location does not automatically prove that crime has been reduced overall.
The same AQA mark scheme also accepts that situational approaches may:
fail where offending is not based on rational choice;
be less useful for corporate or white-collar crime;
ignore the causes of crime.
These are important general evaluations of opportunity-based crime control.
The limits of rational choice
Right Realist control strategies make most sense where offenders respond to changing risks.
However, AQA explicitly recognises crime not being a rational choice as a criticism of situational crime prevention.
This matters because not every offence necessarily follows a careful calculation.
If an offender does not respond rationally to:
risk;
potential reward;
likelihood of detection,
then increasing these risks may have less effect than the strategy assumes.
The criticism is therefore aimed at the assumption behind the control strategy.
Zero tolerance
Zero tolerance is another crime-control strategy recognised by AQA.
The 2022 mark scheme states that zero-tolerance strategies seek to increase the risks of committing crime. As these risks begin to outweigh the benefits, offending may become less likely.
A simplified Right Realist chain is:
greater enforcement → greater perceived risk → benefits less likely to outweigh costs → reduced offending
AQA's 2024 realist mark scheme also lists:
zero tolerance;
broken windows theory;
Wilson and Kelling
as relevant material.
Surveillance as crime control
Surveillance attempts to monitor behaviour and may increase the likelihood that offenders believe they will be detected.
This makes it compatible with Right Realist and situational approaches.
AQA's 2022 mark scheme explicitly uses increased surveillance as a form of target hardening.
However, surveillance does not necessarily reduce crime.
AQA's 2023 mark scheme accepts several limitations:
people may resist surveillance;
some groups may be disproportionately targeted;
targeting may contribute to a self-fulfilling prophecy;
crime may be displaced to areas with less surveillance;
some crimes may remain hidden;
offenders may conceal their identity.
These arguments are developed in detail in the next lesson, the social significance of surveillance [Surveillance].
Environmental crime prevention
AQA recognises environmental crime prevention as one of the overarching approaches students may use when discussing crime-control strategies.
AQA's 2024 realist mark scheme also identifies:
environmental crime prevention;
broken windows theory;
zero tolerance;
surveillance
as relevant material.
At this stage, the important distinction is that environmental approaches focus on changing the settings in which crime may occur.
The detailed operation and evaluation of these approaches belongs in strategies for preventing crime [Crime prevention].
Right Realism and individualism
AQA's realist mark scheme also recognises concepts such as:
individualism;
free will;
underclass theory;
control theory.
These concepts reinforce the Right Realist emphasis on individuals and social controls rather than treating inequality as the primary explanation of crime.
From this perspective, effective control is likely to focus on:
decisions made by offenders;
restraints on criminal opportunities;
perceived risks;
the consequences of offending.
This contrasts sharply with Left Realism.
Evaluating Right Realist crime control
Right Realist approaches have an obvious practical attraction.
Rather than waiting for broad social transformation, they target situations in which offending might occur.
They provide clear mechanisms:
increase risk
reduce opportunity
increase deterrence
However, AQA's own mark schemes provide several criticisms.
Displacement
Situational controls may move crime elsewhere rather than reduce its total amount.
Rational choice may be limited
Not every offence results from a careful calculation of risks and benefits.
Causes of crime may be ignored
Situational measures can control the opportunity while leaving underlying causes unchanged.
Some forms of crime fit the approach less well
The specimen mark scheme specifically accepts the criticism that situational prevention may be less effective for corporate or white-collar crime.
Control may be unevenly targeted
AQA's surveillance material recognises that ideas about the "typical offender" can lead particular groups to be disproportionately targeted.
These criticisms allow direct evaluation rather than simply placing Left Realism beside Right Realism.
Left Realism
Left Realism agrees that crime is a serious problem, particularly because of its effects on communities, but offers a more structural explanation.
AQA's 2024 examination item identifies two key causes:
relative deprivation;
marginalisation.
It states that Left Realists see an unequal society as contributing to crime and argue that one way to tackle crime is to reduce inequalities.
The basic relationship is:
inequality → relative deprivation and marginalisation → crime
Crime control therefore requires more than making criminal opportunities difficult.
It may require action aimed at the social conditions contributing to offending.
Relative deprivation
Relative deprivation means feeling disadvantaged in comparison with other people or with what someone believes they should have.
If social inequality contributes to feelings of relative deprivation, Left Realists argue that reducing those inequalities may reduce one cause of offending.
This produces a very different control strategy from Right Realism.
Right Realism:
crime opportunity → increase risk.
Left Realism:
structural inequality → address inequality.
AQA's 2022 crime-prevention mark scheme explicitly accepts the reduction of poverty and unemployment as a strategy because reducing inequality and deprivation may reduce feelings of relative deprivation associated with crime.
Marginalisation
Marginalisation refers to experiences of exclusion and powerlessness.
AQA's 2024 realist material treats marginalisation as another structural factor associated with crime.
The implication for crime control is that simply increasing surveillance or punishment may fail to tackle why some people feel excluded in the first place.
A Left Realist strategy can therefore focus more heavily on:
inequality;
deprivation;
community conditions;
support.
This is why AQA's realist mark scheme connects Left Realism with social and community crime prevention and multi-agency approaches.
Reducing poverty and unemployment
The 2022 AQA mark scheme explicitly recognises reducing poverty and unemployment as a crime-control strategy.
The explanation is:
less inequality and deprivation → less relative deprivation → lower likelihood of crime.
This is a good example of a strategy targeting the causes of offending rather than the immediate opportunity.
Compare:
Target hardening: change the criminal opportunity.
Reducing poverty: change a social condition associated with offending.
This distinction is one of the clearest ways to compare Left and Right Realist approaches.
Social and community crime prevention
AQA identifies social and community crime prevention as an overarching form of crime prevention.
Its 2024 realist mark scheme also explicitly recognises this approach as relevant to debates about controlling crime.
The central focus is broader than protecting an individual target.
It aims to address social or community circumstances associated with offending.
AQA's source material provides the clearest examples through:
reducing poverty;
reducing unemployment;
reducing relative deprivation;
multi-agency working.
These strategies are examined more fully in [Crime prevention].
Multi-agency approaches
AQA's 2022 mark scheme explicitly accepts a multi-agency approach as a way of reducing crime.
It explains that agencies such as:
police;
social workers;
teachers;
doctors
may work together so that the issues faced by individuals are better understood and support can be provided to reduce the risk of offending.
The process is:
different agencies share expertise and support → wider understanding of problems → support for individuals → reduced risk of offending
This is an important contrast with crime control based entirely on police enforcement.
Why multi-agency control is sociologically significant
A multi-agency approach recognises that offending can involve more than one social issue.
A person may come into contact with:
education;
health;
social services;
policing.
Crime control can therefore involve several institutions rather than one isolated agency.
This also prepares you for the role of formal agencies [The criminal justice system and other agencies].
The AQA specification explicitly includes both the criminal justice system and other agencies in Crime and Deviance.
Comparing Left and Right Realist control
Left Realism | Right Realism |
Crime has important structural causes | Crime involves rationally self-interested choices |
Emphasises inequality | Emphasises opportunity and risk |
Relative deprivation | Rational choice |
Marginalisation | Target hardening |
Reducing poverty and unemployment | Zero tolerance |
Social and community prevention | Situational prevention |
Multi-agency support | Surveillance and increased detection risk |
Attempts to reduce causes | Attempts to make offending more difficult or risky |
AQA's 2024 Paper 3 directly encouraged this contrast between reducing inequality and increasing the risks of crime.
Do Left and Right Realists disagree about everything?
No.
Both are Realist approaches.
AQA's 2024 item states that Realists regard crime as a genuine social problem and emphasise its damaging effects on communities.
Their disagreement is mainly over:
what causes crime;
what control strategies should follow.
This is a useful exam distinction.
Do not write:
"Left Realists think crime is real but Right Realists think it is socially constructed."
That would misunderstand the core agreement between the approaches.
Realism and corporate crime
AQA's 2024 mark scheme gives a useful criticism of realist explanations: they may neglect the causes of corporate crime.
This matters for crime control.
A strategy designed around:
target hardening;
street surveillance;
zero tolerance;
local community intervention
may fit some crimes more obviously than offences carried out through powerful organisations.
This provides a link with earlier work on powerful offenders [Social class and crime].
It also shows why no single control strategy should automatically be assumed to fit every type of crime.
Functionalist approaches to crime control
Crime control can also be understood through broader sociological theories.
A functionalist approach emphasises the contribution of social control to social order and shared values.
AQA's 2020 mark scheme identifies several possible functions of the criminal justice system:
deterrence;
rehabilitation;
restitution;
reinforcing shared values.
From a functionalist perspective, crime control can therefore contribute to:
conformity → shared values → social order
This develops ideas studied in [Social order and social control].
Deterrence
Deterrence aims to discourage offending through the expectation of negative consequences.
Deterrence can appear within several approaches.
Right Realist interpretation
Increasing the cost or risk of offending may change an offender's rational calculation.
Functionalist interpretation
Punishment can discourage behaviour that violates society's rules and therefore contribute to conformity.
AQA accepts deterrence as a function of the criminal justice system.
The detailed purposes and limitations of deterrence are covered in sociological explanations of punishment [Punishment].
Rehabilitation
Rehabilitation attempts to change offenders so they are less likely to offend again.
AQA's 2020 mark scheme identifies rehabilitation as a function of the criminal justice system and gives education and training within prisons as an example.
This represents a different model of control from simple deterrence.
Deterrence: discourage offending through consequences.
Rehabilitation: change the offender to reduce future offending.
Crime control therefore includes several different assumptions about how behaviour can be changed.
Reinforcing shared values
AQA's 2020 mark scheme also accepts the idea that the criminal justice system may reinforce shared values by reminding people which behaviours society regards as unacceptable.
From a consensus perspective:
formal response to crime → boundaries of acceptable behaviour reaffirmed → social solidarity and conformity
This links crime control to the functionalist concepts of:
value consensus;
boundary maintenance;
social solidarity.
The detailed relationship between punishment and social order is developed in [Punishment].
Conflict approaches to crime control
Conflict approaches question whether crime-control institutions operate equally in the interests of all groups.
AQA's 2020 criminal justice mark scheme recognises control of the working class as one possible function of the criminal justice system, noting that the working class may be more likely to be criminalised.
This produces a very different interpretation.
Consensus view:
crime control protects shared rules.
Conflict view:
crime control may disproportionately regulate less powerful groups.
The question therefore becomes:
Whose behaviour is being controlled, and whose interests does the system serve?
Selective control
Crime-control strategies do not necessarily affect all social groups equally.
AQA's surveillance mark scheme states that surveillance may be targeted at particular groups based on judgements about the "typical" offender.
This can result in:
greater surveillance → greater detection → greater criminalisation
It may also contribute to a self-fulfilling prophecy, because heavily monitored groups are more likely to be categorised as criminal.
This provides an important conflict and labelling critique of apparently neutral crime-control strategies.
Labelling theory and crime control
Labelling theory questions whether social control always reduces crime.
AQA's 2024 punishment mark scheme explicitly accepts the possibility that punishment may lead to labelling, with the stigma of being regarded as criminal contributing to a deviant career.
The possible process is:
formal punishment → criminal label → stigma → further deviance
Crime control may therefore sometimes contribute to the behaviour it was intended to reduce.
This is a powerful evaluation because it challenges the assumption:
more formal control automatically means less crime.
Punishment as crime control
Punishment is one method of controlling crime.
AQA's 2022 prevention mark scheme explicitly recognises imprisonment as potentially preventing crime because an offender who is removed from wider society cannot commit further offences there during that period.
This is a form of incapacitation.
However, AQA's 2024 assessment identifies several reasons why punishment may not successfully control crime:
labelling may lead to a deviant career;
offenders may learn additional criminal behaviour in prison;
punishment may fail to deter;
it may not tackle underlying causes such as inequality;
bias may mean some people escape punishment;
the cost of punishment may not outweigh the perceived benefit of offending.
These issues are examined fully in [Punishment].
Control versus causes of crime
One of the central debates running through crime control is whether strategies should target:
the opportunity for crime
or:
the causes of crime
Situational approaches focus largely on the first.
AQA's specimen mark scheme identifies "ignores causes of crime" as a criticism of situational prevention.
Left Realist and social/community strategies give greater attention to the second by addressing:
poverty;
unemployment;
inequality;
relative deprivation;
marginalisation.
This creates a useful examination comparison.
Immediate controls and structural controls
Crime-control strategies can therefore be organised according to what they try to change.
Focus of strategy | Examples recognised by AQA |
Opportunity | Target hardening, situational prevention |
Risk | Surveillance, zero tolerance |
Offender | Punishment, rehabilitation |
Social conditions | Reducing poverty and unemployment |
Community and support | Multi-agency approaches, social/community prevention |
Social order | Deterrence, reinforcement of shared values |
This framework helps you compare strategies without treating crime control as one single process.
Reactive and preventive crime control
Some crime-control strategies operate after crime has occurred.
Examples include:
punishment;
rehabilitation.
Others seek to prevent an offence before it takes place.
Examples include:
target hardening;
surveillance;
reducing opportunities;
reducing deprivation.
This distinction is useful, but there can be overlap.
For example, punishment may respond to an existing offence while also attempting to deter future offending.
Crime control therefore includes both reaction and prevention.
Can increased risk always control crime?
AQA's material suggests several reasons to be cautious.
Some offenders may resist control
The 2023 surveillance mark scheme explicitly accepts that not everyone is deterred by surveillance.
Crime may move
Surveillance or target hardening may cause displacement rather than an overall reduction.
Some crime remains hidden
AQA recognises that crimes occurring away from surveillance may remain undetected.
Risk may not outweigh benefit
The 2024 punishment mark scheme recognises that an offender's cost-benefit calculation may still favour offending.
Increasing risks can therefore be a strategy without guaranteeing success.
Can punishment always control crime?
Again, AQA's answer is clearly no.
The 2024 mark scheme identifies the possibility that:
punishment → labelling → deviant career
or:
prison → learning additional criminal behaviour → further crime.
Punishment may also fail to address underlying inequality.
This gives Left Realists and labelling theorists different reasons to criticise punishment:
Left Realism: underlying structural causes may remain.
Labelling theory: formal control may contribute to further deviance.
Can reducing inequality control crime?
AQA explicitly recognises this as a Left Realist strategy.
The 2024 item states that Left Realists argue crime can be tackled through reducing inequalities.
The 2022 mark scheme provides the more specific mechanism:
reduce poverty and unemployment → reduce inequality and deprivation → reduce relative deprivation → reduce likelihood of crime.
This has an important advantage over purely situational approaches because it targets a source of offending identified by the theory.
However, AQA's 2024 realist mark scheme also recognises evaluation concerning whether realist explanations adequately address forms such as corporate crime.
No control strategy should therefore be assumed to explain or prevent every type of crime.
Crime control and the type of crime
Different crimes may require different strategies.
The AQA specimen mark scheme specifically recognises that situational prevention may not be effective for some corporate or white-collar crime.
Similarly:
surveillance may not identify hidden offences;
local interventions may not deal adequately with globally organised crime;
punishment may not tackle structural causes;
inequality reduction does not explain every individual act.
This gives you an excellent general evaluation:
The effectiveness of crime control depends partly on the type and cause of crime being addressed.
Crime control and globalisation
Earlier you studied how some crime can cross national borders in global crime [Globalisation and crime].
Crime control may therefore also need to operate internationally.
AQA's globalisation material recognises that states may cooperate in tackling international crimes, including green crimes and human-rights abuses.
This shows that control cannot always be understood solely as local policing or individual punishment.
However, for this lesson the central AQA material remains the contrast between:
opportunity and risk-based controls;
social and community approaches;
criminal justice responses.
Crime control and victims
Realists emphasise the seriousness of crime because it can harm communities and victims.
AQA's 2024 item explicitly notes that Realists highlight the damage caused by crime.
This is important because one reason for controlling crime is to reduce victimisation.
However, strategies can also create unequal consequences.
For example, selective surveillance may increase the criminalisation of particular groups.
The social distribution and experience of victimisation is examined later in patterns of victimisation [Victims of crime].
Comparing major sociological approaches
Approach | View relevant to crime control | Likely emphasis in control | Possible criticism supported by AQA material |
Right Realism | Offenders may rationally choose crime | Increase risks, reduce opportunities | Crime may not always be rational; displacement |
Left Realism | Inequality creates relative deprivation and marginalisation | Reduce inequality, social/community approaches | Realist explanations may be less successful with some corporate crime |
Functionalism | Control can reinforce shared values and order | Deterrence, rehabilitation, punishment | Does not automatically address unequal criminalisation |
Conflict approaches | Control may reflect unequal power | Questions who is targeted and controlled | Challenges the assumption that control operates neutrally |
Labelling theory | Formal control can create labels | Warns against excessive criminalisation | Labelling may contribute to deviant careers |
The strongest answers compare the assumptions behind the strategies, not merely the names of techniques.
Evaluating crime-control strategies
A useful exam framework is to ask five questions.
1. What cause of crime does the strategy assume?
For example:
target hardening assumes opportunity matters.
inequality reduction assumes structural inequality matters.
2. Does it reduce crime or merely move it?
Displacement is a recognised criticism of situational prevention and surveillance.
3. Does it address the underlying cause?
AQA explicitly recognises failure to tackle root causes as a criticism of both situational prevention and punishment.
4. Does it work for every type of crime?
AQA recognises limits involving corporate and white-collar crime.
5. Is the control applied equally?
Surveillance and criminal justice control may disproportionately target some groups.
These five questions can generate focused AO3.
Strategy is not the same as theory
This distinction caused problems in the 2022 examination.
A theory or approach explains why crime happens or how it should be understood.
Examples include:
Left Realism;
Right Realism;
labelling theory.
A strategy is an action designed to control or prevent crime.
Examples include:
target hardening;
zero tolerance;
reducing poverty;
multi-agency intervention.
AQA's 2022 examiner report found that some students drifted into theory when the question specifically required three crime-prevention strategies.
Always answer the level of the question set.
Linking explanation to strategy
A strong sociological answer connects the two.
For example:
Right Realist explanation: offenders make choices according to risks and benefits.
Crime-control strategy: increase surveillance or harden targets.
Analysis: this raises the perceived cost or difficulty of crime.
Evaluation: crime may be displaced or not all offending is rational.
Another example:
Left Realist explanation: inequality creates relative deprivation.
Crime-control strategy: reduce poverty and unemployment.
Analysis: reduced inequality may reduce relative deprivation.
This is much more effective than listing theory and strategies separately.
Using sociologists
AQA's 2024 realist mark scheme identifies potentially relevant sociologists including:
Clarke;
Cornish and Clarke;
Felson;
Hirschi;
Lea and Young;
Murray;
Wilson and Kelling;
Young.
You do not need to include every name.
A named sociologist only adds value when their ideas are accurately connected to the question.
For this lesson, the most important secure connections from the supplied AQA material are:
Lea and Young with Left Realism;
Clarke / Cornish and Clarke with rational and situational approaches;
Wilson and Kelling with Right Realist material recognised in the mark scheme.
Do not substitute a list of names for explanation.
Building an evaluative essay
Suppose the question asks whether increasing risk is the most effective way to control crime.
A strong structure could be:
Right Realism: rational choice and increasing risks.
Situational control: target hardening and surveillance.
Evaluation: displacement and limits of rational choice.
Zero tolerance: raising the costs of offending.
Evaluation: selective control and different types of crime.
Left Realist alternative: inequality, relative deprivation and marginalisation.
Social/community strategies: reducing poverty and multi-agency intervention.
Labelling or conflict evaluation: formal control can criminalise groups unequally or contribute to further deviance.
Judgement: effectiveness depends on whether a strategy matches the causes and type of offending being addressed.
That gives sustained analysis rather than an inventory of crime-control methods.
Key Words 🔑
Key word | Student-friendly definition | How it may be used in an exam |
Crime control | Broad attempts to regulate, reduce or respond to criminal behaviour. | Use as the overall concept covering prevention, surveillance, punishment and criminal justice responses. |
Right Realism | A realist approach emphasising individual choice, risks and controls. | Use when explaining target hardening, rational choice and increased risks. |
Left Realism | A realist approach emphasising structural inequality, relative deprivation and marginalisation. | Use when explaining inequality reduction and social/community approaches. |
Rational choice | The idea that offenders may weigh the perceived risks and benefits of crime. | Use to explain why increasing risk may discourage offending. |
Situational crime prevention | Strategies that reduce opportunities for crime in particular situations. | Link to target hardening and rational choice. |
Target hardening | Making potential targets more difficult or risky to attack. | Use when explaining situational crime prevention. |
Zero tolerance | A control strategy that increases enforcement and the risks attached to offending. | Use in Right Realist explanations of crime control. |
Displacement | Crime moving to another place or situation rather than disappearing. | Use to evaluate situational prevention and surveillance. |
Relative deprivation | Feeling disadvantaged in comparison with others or expected standards. | Use to explain why Left Realists favour reducing inequalities. |
Multi-agency approach | Different agencies working together to address offending and related problems. | Use when explaining social and community approaches to crime control. |
Hints from the Examiner Reports 💡
Examiner hint: Distinguish a crime-control strategy from a theory about crime. In 2022, most students could identify three crime-prevention strategies, but some drifted into theory without actually providing a strategy.
Examiner hint: Make your short-answer points genuinely different. The 2022 report notes that some students repeated the same strategy instead of providing three separate ways of reducing crime.
Examiner hint: Do not overwrite 6-mark questions. The 2022 crime-prevention question produced especially high levels of overwriting, which examiners warned could affect timing elsewhere on the paper.
Examiner hint: In a theory question, connect crime-control strategies to the theory that justifies them. The 2024 examiner report notes that many students successfully discussed realist crime-prevention and crime-reduction strategies when evaluating Realism.
Examiner hint: Avoid juxtaposition. In 2024, some students wrote lengthy paragraphs about alternative theories such as functionalism without explaining how they evaluated the realist argument. AQA advises students to evaluate the point they have just made using appropriate theory.
Examiner hint: Long introductions are unnecessary in a 30-mark Paper 3 response. The 2024 report explicitly reminds students that they are working under time constraints and should focus on developing relevant sociology.
Common Mistakes ⚠️
Mistake: Treating crime control and crime prevention as exactly the same concept
Why this is incorrect: Crime control is broader. AQA's specification separately identifies control, surveillance, prevention and punishment.
How to improve: Think of crime control as the umbrella term. Prevention, surveillance and punishment are among the processes that may operate beneath it.
Mistake: Naming a theory when the question asks for a strategy
Why this is incorrect: "Right Realism" is an approach, not itself a practical crime-control strategy.
How to improve: Convert the theory into an action:
Right Realism → increase risks → target hardening or zero tolerance.
Mistake: Saying target hardening definitely reduces total crime
Why this is incorrect: AQA recognises displacement as a limitation. Crime may move rather than disappear.
How to improve: Distinguish between reducing crime at one target and reducing overall offending.
Mistake: Assuming every offender makes a rational cost-benefit calculation
Why this is incorrect: AQA's specimen mark scheme explicitly accepts the criticism that crime may not always result from rational choice.
How to improve: Evaluate whether the assumptions behind the strategy fit the type of offending being discussed.
Mistake: Saying Left Realists want tougher punishment because they are Realists
Why this is incorrect: AQA's 2024 item specifically associates Left Realism with structural inequality, relative deprivation, marginalisation and reducing inequalities.
How to improve: Remember:
Left → inequality and structural causes
Right → choice, risk and opportunity
Mistake: Assuming punishment automatically controls crime
Why this is incorrect: AQA identifies failures of deterrence, labelling, learning crime in prison and failure to tackle root causes as possible limitations.
How to improve: Explain the mechanism through which punishment is supposed to work and then evaluate whether that mechanism succeeds.
Mistake: Ignoring unequal social control
Why this is incorrect: AQA recognises disproportionate surveillance and the possibility that the criminal justice system may criminalise some groups more than others.
How to improve: Ask who is being controlled, as well as whether the strategy reduces crime.
Mistake: Using a completely unrelated theory as evaluation
Why this is incorrect: AQA examiners repeatedly identify simple juxtaposition as weaker AO3.
How to improve: Use the alternative theory to challenge a specific assumption. For example:
"Left Realism challenges situational prevention because reducing opportunities does not address the inequalities and relative deprivation that Left Realists identify as causes of offending."
Exam-Style Questions ✍️
Question 1
Define crime control. [1 mark]
Question 2
Explain one difference between a Right Realist and a Left Realist approach to controlling crime. [2 marks]
Question 3
Outline two ways in which increasing the risks of offending may help to control crime. [4 marks]
Question 4
Outline three different strategies that may be used to control crime. [6 marks]
Question 5
Explain two reasons why situational crime-control strategies may fail to reduce overall crime. [4 marks]
Question 6
Read Item A and answer the question that follows.
Item A
Some crime-control approaches assume that potential offenders consider whether the benefits of offending outweigh the risks. Strategies may therefore make targets more difficult to attack and increase the likelihood that offending will be detected.
Applying material from Item A, analyse two ways in which opportunity-based strategies may control crime. [10 marks]
Question 7
Read Item B and answer the question that follows.
Item B
Some sociologists argue that crime cannot be controlled effectively without addressing the social conditions that contribute to offending. Inequality may create feelings of relative deprivation, while individuals who are marginalised may require support from several agencies.
Applying material from Item B, analyse two ways in which structural and community-based strategies may control crime. [10 marks]
Question 8
Read Item C and answer the question that follows.
Item C
One approach to crime control is to increase the risks and reduce the opportunities associated with offending. This may involve target hardening, surveillance and strong enforcement. Other sociologists argue that such strategies neglect the social causes of crime and that inequality and marginalisation also need to be addressed.
Applying material from Item C and your knowledge, evaluate the view that crime is best controlled by increasing the risks and reducing the opportunities for offending. [30 marks]
Answers and mark scheme
Question 1
1 mark for an appropriate definition referring to attempts to regulate, reduce or respond to criminal behaviour.
Example answer: Crime control refers to attempts by society and its agencies to regulate, reduce or respond to crime.
Question 2
Award up to 2 marks.
Example answer: Right Realists emphasise increasing the risks and reducing the opportunities for offenders, whereas Left Realists place more emphasis on reducing structural inequalities such as deprivation that may contribute to crime.
One mark identifies an accurate difference. A second mark develops the contrast.
Question 3
Award 2 marks for each of two developed ways.
Possible answers include:
Target hardening: increasing surveillance or making a target harder to attack may increase the offender's perceived likelihood of being caught.
Zero tolerance: greater enforcement increases the perceived costs of offending so that they may outweigh the potential benefits.
Surveillance: monitoring can increase the likelihood that criminal activity will be detected, potentially deterring rational offenders.
Students should explain how risk affects the decision to offend.
Question 4
Award 2 marks for each of three genuinely different strategies.
Possible answers include:
Target hardening: making crime more difficult or increasing detection risk.
Zero tolerance: increasing the risks or consequences associated with offending.
Reducing poverty or unemployment: reducing inequality and relative deprivation.
Multi-agency working: police, teachers, social workers, doctors or other agencies working together to provide support.
Punishment: restricting offenders' ability to commit further crime or deterring offending.
Surveillance: monitoring behaviour to increase detection or deterrence.
Social and community crime prevention: addressing social conditions associated with offending.
One mark identifies the strategy. The second explains how it may reduce crime.
Question 5
Award 2 marks for each of two developed reasons.
Possible answers include:
Displacement: Making one target difficult may cause offenders to commit crime somewhere else, meaning crime is moved rather than reduced overall.
Crime may not be rational: If offending does not result from a calculated decision about risks and benefits, increasing risk may have limited deterrent effect.
Underlying causes remain: A situational strategy may reduce opportunity without tackling inequality or other social causes of crime.
Different types of crime: Opportunity-based strategies may be less effective for forms such as corporate or white-collar crime.
Question 6
Students should develop two different hooks from Item A.
Hook 1: making targets harder
Situational crime prevention and target hardening reduce opportunities for offending. An offender may decide not to commit a crime where the target becomes too difficult or costly to access.
Hook 2: increasing detection risk
Greater surveillance or other controls may raise the perceived likelihood of being caught. Rational choice theory suggests that if risks begin to outweigh benefits, offending becomes less attractive.
8 to 10 marks: Good knowledge and understanding of two ways, two developed applications of Item A and clear analysis linking opportunity, risk and offending decisions.
4 to 7 marks: Reasonable knowledge with some effective item application and analysis, although one point may be stronger.
1 to 3 marks: Limited knowledge, little effective use of Item A or general discussion of crime control without analysing the opportunity mechanism.
0 marks: No relevant material.
Question 7
Students should develop the two principal hooks in Item B.
Hook 1: inequality and relative deprivation
A Left Realist approach argues that structural inequality can generate relative deprivation. Strategies that reduce poverty, unemployment or inequality may therefore reduce one of the social conditions associated with offending.
Hook 2: marginalisation and several agencies
A multi-agency approach may involve police, teachers, doctors and social workers working together to understand problems and provide support. This may reduce the risk of offending by addressing a wider range of issues than enforcement alone.
8 to 10 marks: Good knowledge and understanding of two approaches, two developed applications of Item B and clear analysis linking intervention to the social causes of crime.
4 to 7 marks: Reasonable knowledge with some successful application and analysis.
1 to 3 marks: Limited knowledge, little effective use of the item or description of inequality without explaining crime control.
0 marks:No relevant material.
Question 8
This question requires knowledge and understanding, application, analysis and evaluation.
Indicative content may include:
Right Realist approaches
rational self-interest;
rational choice;
free will;
increasing risks;
target hardening;
situational crime prevention;
zero tolerance;
surveillance;
environmental crime prevention.
Students may argue that controlling opportunities and risks provides a practical means of discouraging some offending.
Evaluation of situational approaches
displacement;
some offending may not be rational;
strategies may ignore causes of crime;
possible limitations for corporate and white-collar crime;
offenders may resist surveillance;
some crime remains hidden.
These points directly question whether increasing risks produces an overall reduction.
inequality;
relative deprivation;
marginalisation;
reducing poverty and unemployment;
social and community crime prevention;
multi-agency approaches.
Students may argue that crime control must address structural conditions rather than only opportunities.
Functionalist material
deterrence;
rehabilitation;
reinforcement of shared values;
crime control as contributing to social order.
This may broaden the debate beyond Realism.
Conflict approaches
unequal criminalisation;
control of the working class;
selective enforcement;
disproportionate targeting through surveillance.
Students may question whether apparently neutral controls are applied equally.
Labelling
stigma;
deviant careers;
self-fulfilling prophecy.
This may be used to argue that some forms of formal control can contribute to further deviance.
Punishment
deterrence;
incapacitation;
rehabilitation;
failure to deter;
prison as a setting in which further criminal behaviour may be learned;
failure to address root causes.
25 to 30 marks: Sound, conceptually detailed knowledge of a range of crime-control approaches. Item material is applied accurately. Analysis and evaluation explicitly compare risk and opportunity strategies with approaches addressing structural causes, inequality, labelling and unequal control. A reasoned conclusion is reached.
19 to 24 marks: Accurate and reasonably broad or deep knowledge. Application is largely relevant and there is some explicit evaluation, although parts may be incomplete.
13 to 18 marks: Largely accurate but narrower knowledge. Application may be limited and evaluation may rely on juxtaposing alternative strategies rather than directly assessing them.
7 to 12 marks: Limited and undeveloped knowledge, with weak application and little evaluation.
1 to 6 marks: Very limited relevant material or a general discussion of crime with little focus on control strategies.
0 marks: No relevant material.
A strong conclusion should avoid claiming that one strategy can control every form of crime. Increasing risk and reducing opportunity may influence offending where individuals respond to changes in costs, benefits and opportunities. However, AQA-recognised criticisms show that crime can be displaced, some offending may not involve rational calculation and situational measures may leave structural causes untouched. Left Realist, functionalist, conflict and labelling perspectives therefore show that effective crime control depends partly on what causes the offending, which type of crime is being controlled and how the control itself affects different social groups.
Comments