Signals of something deeper: what fear of crime really tells us
- samuelcraigie
- Aug 26
- 5 min read
Insights perspective
Sophie Davis, Director of Research | Manon Roberts, Senior Strategy & Insight Manager
Tuesday 19 August 2025
From anti-social behaviour to shoplifting and street-level phone snatching, political and media narratives are saturated with references to threat, lawlessness and loss of control. While these events may seem limited in scale — shoplifting, for example, is typically treated as a lower-level offence — they elicit strong reactions and their influence on public sentiment is considerable.
In this blog, published alongside a new paper commissioned by the Independent Commission on Neighbourhoods (ICON), Manon Roberts and Sophie Davis argue that it’s not the incidents themselves that matter most but what they represent: that no one is in charge, that social norms are eroding and that the fabric of everyday life is under threat. Â
Beyond the numbers: fear, disorder and the visibility of crime
Since the mid-1990s, the Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW) has shown long-term decreases in many categories of crime, including violent crime, theft offences and criminal damage. Yet public concern about crime remains stubbornly high, with 79% of CSEW respondents in the year ending March 2024 believing crime has gone up 'a little' or 'a lot' in the past few years, compared to 72% in the year ending September 2022.Â
This sense of rising crime is especially acute in disadvantaged areas, where residents frequently report high levels of concern about what are often termed low-level offences — such as drug use, graffiti, vandalism, and persistent anti-social behaviour. For example, research conducted by ICON found that residents in what they term ‘mission critical areas’ — those furthest away from achieving the government’s own targets — report high levels of concern about these issues. Similarly, the recent rise in shoplifting, though still classed as a relatively minor offence, has drawn significant public and political attention, reinforcing wider fears about breakdowns in order and enforcement.
How visible disorder reinforces a sense of decline
People’s concerns about disorder are shaped by more than what they see — they’re shaped by how they feel about their area; and their place within it.
Criminologists point to the concept of signal crimes — incidents or signs of disorder that stand in for something larger: institutional failure, social decay or the sense that no one is in control anymore.
Litter, drug use, graffiti and boarded-up shops may seem minor in isolation, but they function as powerful social signals. When experienced in an environment already marked by disadvantage, they act as reminders that the neighbourhood doesn’t matter, or that authorities won’t respond.
These perceptions are rooted in how connected people feel to their neighbourhood, how visible and responsive authorities are, and how confident residents feel about the future of their area. Indeed, a recent study in a post-industrial town in the north of England found that perceptions of disorder were significantly higher among people who felt economically insecure, had been victims of crime, were dissatisfied with their area, or felt let down by institutions.
In this context, disorder becomes a metaphor for something bigger. Whether it’s empty shops, shuttered youth services or rumours about barbershops doubling as illicit businesses, the specifics matter less than what they represent: decay, disconnection and the slow unraveling of the social contract.
These personal experiences are reinforced by wider societal narratives (from headlines about crime ‘epidemics’ to high-profile political calls to restore public order), and in turn help explain why they resonate. The cumulative effect is to create a broader mood: that institutions are losing control — of borders, of public space, even of the high street.
What happens when people feel abandoned?
As we highlight in our report, perceptions of anti-social behaviour are not just a consequence of harm; they are part of the harm. They erode civic pride, reduce trust in neighbours, and depress optimism about the future, making it harder to build resilient communities.
When disorder is ignored or dismissed as mere perception, people feel left to fend for themselves. Mistrust grows, both in institutions and between neighbours. People become less likely to report problems, intervene locally, or invest in their communities. Over time, the informal guardianship that keeps neighbourhoods safe (neighbourly care, mutual accountability, collective pride), begins to fray.
This creates a self-reinforcing loop: the more disorder is felt and seen, the more people disengage and the more vulnerable the area becomes to harm.
As one participant of ICON’s engagement put it: ‘Nobody likes to go out on an evening, no more, because you don't feel safe… And then you've got your local shops closing, and litter. It all has a knock-on effect’.
Importantly, this isn’t about people overreacting. They are responding to real social cues, political absences, and visible decline, even if crime rates on paper are down, or individual occurrences seem minor.
Towards a more grounded — and responsive  — approach
Despite this, policy responses often overlook the everyday experience of disorder. Political focus tends to land on high-level enforcement or structural reform — more police, tougher sentencing, long-term levelling up — rather than the visible, daily realities that shape how safe or cared-for a place feels.
As our report argues, enforcement has a role, but it cannot rebuild trust. That requires social investment, sustained local presence, and tangible improvements to public space and local services.
The Big Local programme offers an instructive example. Funded by the National Lottery and delivered by Local Trust, it gave 150 neighbourhoods £1 million each to spend over ten years, with decisions led by residents. The impact was striking: crime fell more sharply in Big Local areas than in comparable areas, with a 49% greater reduction in total crime over a ten-year period. Residents invested in youth services, community hubs and public realm improvements, all of which boosted feelings of safety and belonging.
In the short term, it means delivering quick, visible improvements that act as ‘reverse signals’: a clear intent to address the issues, however small, that matter to people and an indication that things are improving. In our report, we recommend the development of a ‘rapid repair’ toolkit for visible signs of disorder such as vandalism, broken lighting or fly-tipping — small-scale, rapid interventions that signal visible care, control and community investment.
If we want to take people’s fear of crime seriously, we need to take their experience of place seriously too. That means listening not just to statistics, but to people’s own accounts of their neighbourhoods, and understanding what those accounts reflect about social connection, civic pride and trust in institutions.
We need to start taking perceptions of disorder seriously — not just as distortions of reality but as reflections of it, shaped by how people experience power, place and the promise of being seen.
Sophie is our Director of Research and has experience working with government departments, police forces and senior audiences across the criminal justice sector.
If you would like to discuss any research questions or opportunities that arise from this report or other issues, please contact her on sophie.davis@crestadvisory.com