CMY2602 Exam Notes and Past Papers Study Guide: Principles of Crime Prevention, Reduction and Control at UNISA

This study guide brings together the core ideas, exam themes, and answer structures commonly required in CMY2602: Principles of Crime Prevention, Reduction and Control at UNISA. It is written as a practical revision resource for students preparing for tests, assignments, and final examinations, with particular attention to the way past-paper questions typically demand both theory and application. The guide emphasises the relationship between crime, social control, prevention strategies, and South African policing and justice realities.

1. The Scope of Crime Prevention, Reduction, and Control in CMY2602

Crime prevention, reduction, and control are often treated as separate ideas in casual conversation, but in criminology they are connected parts of a wider social and institutional response to harmful behaviour. In CMY2602, the central task is not simply to memorise definitions, but to understand how different strategies aim to stop crime before it happens, limit its continuation, or reduce its impact on individuals and communities. A strong exam answer therefore shows that crime control is not limited to arrests and punishment, but includes planning, coordination, social policy, environmental design, community participation, and rehabilitation.

At the most basic level, crime prevention refers to interventions designed to stop crime from occurring. Crime reduction refers to measures that lower the volume, frequency, seriousness, or repetition of crime. Crime control refers to the broader management of crime through formal and informal mechanisms, including the police, courts, prisons, communities, schools, families, and local institutions. These ideas overlap. A neighbourhood patrol may prevent opportunistic burglary, reduce fear of crime, and control visible disorder. A rehabilitation programme in a correctional setting may reduce reoffending, which in turn prevents future victimisation.

Why this subject matters in South African criminology

South Africa’s crime context makes the subject highly practical. Students are expected to think about violent crime, property crime, gender-based violence, organised crime, corruption, youth offending, and public distrust in institutions. Any serious study of crime prevention in South Africa must therefore consider inequality, unemployment, social disorganisation, substance abuse, urban density, weak trust networks, and uneven access to services. Crime is not distributed randomly. It is shaped by social conditions, routine activities, opportunities, and the strength or weakness of guardianship.

A useful exam approach is to treat crime prevention in South Africa as operating across three broad levels:

Primary prevention – stopping crime before risk factors become entrenched, often through education, employment, family support, environmental design, and early childhood interventions.
Secondary prevention – intervening where risk is already visible, such as in high-crime areas, among at-risk youth, or around repeat victimisation.
Tertiary prevention – preventing reoffending and further harm after crime has already occurred, through rehabilitation, restorative justice, and reintegration.

These levels are often associated with public health thinking and are important in past papers because they help organise answers around timing and target group. If a question asks for “strategies to prevent crime,” a strong response usually moves from long-term structural interventions to immediate situational controls and finally to post-offence measures.

Core concepts often tested

A recurring exam feature is the need to distinguish between similar terms. The following distinctions are especially important:

Prevention: acting before crime occurs.
Reduction: lowering the amount, rate, or severity of crime.
Control: managing and regulating crime through formal and informal systems.
Suppression: short-term forceful action to limit criminal activity.
Deterrence: discouraging offending by raising the perceived costs of crime.
Displacement: shifting crime from one place, time, target, or method to another.
Diffusion of benefits: when a prevention measure reduces crime beyond the immediate target area or group.
Recidivism: reoffending after punishment or intervention.

These terms are not interchangeable. For example, a police blitz operation may suppress street robberies for a weekend, but if offenders simply move to another suburb, the intervention has not eliminated the underlying problem. It may still have limited value, but an academically sound answer must acknowledge both benefits and limits.

The logic of crime control policies

Crime control strategies typically rest on one or more assumptions about why crime happens. If crime is viewed as a rational choice, then the response focuses on increasing risk and reducing reward. If crime is viewed as a result of poverty, exclusion, and broken social bonds, then the response focuses on social development and community strengthening. If crime is viewed as an environmental opportunity problem, then the response focuses on target hardening, surveillance, access control, and design. If crime is viewed as learned behaviour, then the response focuses on family, schooling, peer groups, and rehabilitation.

Past-paper answers are stronger when they identify the logic behind a strategy. For instance:

Neighbourhood watch assumes that local guardianship can increase informal control and reduce opportunities.
CCTV systems assume that surveillance can deter offenders and assist detection.
Youth development programmes assume that early social investment can reduce risk factors.
Restorative justice assumes that accountability and reintegration can reduce reoffending better than punishment alone.

Common misunderstandings to avoid

Students often lose marks by writing general statements without precision. Several errors recur:

Treating crime prevention and law enforcement as identical.
Assuming harsher punishment automatically reduces crime.
Ignoring the possibility of displacement.
Describing prevention only as police work.
Failing to mention community, social, and environmental dimensions.
Overstating the success of a single intervention without evaluating context.

A good exam answer balances optimism with realism. It recognises that no single strategy works everywhere. Crime prevention is usually strongest when multiple layers of intervention operate together. For example, a public transport hub may benefit from better lighting, visible patrols, panic buttons, route planning, information sharing, and social support services for vulnerable users. If a past paper asks for a discussion of “integrated crime prevention,” the answer should show how these layers complement each other.

Exam-style synthesis

A concise but strong synthesis might read as follows: crime prevention, reduction, and control are interdependent responses to crime that operate through social, situational, environmental, and criminal justice mechanisms. Their effectiveness depends on the causes of offending, the type of crime, the setting, and the quality of implementation. In South Africa, where inequality and violence interact with weak social trust, effective strategies must combine prevention at the level of individuals and communities with stronger institutions, better urban management, and fair enforcement.

2. The Main Theories Behind Crime Prevention and Control

Past papers in CMY2602 often test theory because theory explains why a particular strategy should work. A student who can name a theory but cannot apply it will usually score only partial marks. The strongest answers connect theory to concrete crime problems, such as burglary, robbery, assault, vandalism, housebreaking, gender-based violence, and repeat offending. Theories also help explain why some interventions fail or create unintended effects.

Classical and rational choice approaches

The classical tradition sees offenders as rational actors who weigh costs and benefits before acting. In modern crime prevention, this becomes rational choice theory, which suggests that people are more likely to offend when the rewards are high and the risks are low. Prevention therefore focuses on increasing the perceived cost of offending and reducing the attractiveness of targets.

This theoretical family supports:

better lighting
visible patrols
access control
alarms
secure packaging
target hardening
rapid reporting systems

A burglary target with weak locks, poor lighting, and no visible occupancy offers a clearer opportunity than a home with strong barriers and active guardianship. Rational choice theory does not claim that offenders are always calculating in a perfect way; rather, it suggests that decisions are influenced by immediate opportunity and perceived risk.

The exam value of this theory lies in its practical clarity. If asked how to reduce housebreaking in a residential area, the student can explain that stronger locks, neighbourhood patrols, and surveillance increase effort and risk, making the offence less attractive. However, the answer should also mention that rational choice interventions may shift crime to softer targets if implemented unevenly.

Routine activity theory

Routine activity theory is one of the most important theories for crime prevention because it links crime to the convergence of three elements:

a motivated offender,
a suitable target,
the absence of a capable guardian.

Crime occurs when these three elements come together in time and space. This theory is especially useful for understanding everyday urban crime. A car theft may occur when a valuable target is left unattended in a poorly supervised parking area. A cellphone robbery may occur when pedestrians move through a low-visibility route without guardianship. A domestic assault may occur when vulnerability, isolation, and weak intervention overlap.

Routine activity theory is often tested because it directly informs prevention practice. It leads to measures such as:

increasing guardianship through patrols or community presence
reducing target suitability through secure behaviour
disrupting offender routines through enforcement and surveillance
designing environments to reduce isolated opportunities

A strong exam answer should also recognise a limitation: routine activity theory explains opportunity very well, but it does not fully explain why some people become motivated offenders in the first place. That is why it is often combined with other theories.

Social disorganisation and community theories

Social disorganisation theory explains crime through weakened social institutions and low community cohesion. When neighbourhoods experience poverty, residential instability, and weak informal control, residents may be less able to supervise youth, challenge disorder, or coordinate collective action. Crime then becomes more likely because social networks cannot easily produce shared norms and guardianship.

This theory is highly relevant in South Africa because many communities experience spatial inequality, service delivery problems, and high mobility. In such areas, prevention cannot rely solely on police presence. It must strengthen local institutions such as schools, faith groups, youth organisations, and community forums.

From a past-paper perspective, social disorganisation theory supports:

community development
youth engagement
informal social control
place-based intervention
neighbourhood capacity building

The theory’s weakness is that it can become too broad if not applied carefully. Not every disadvantaged area has the same crime pattern, and not every cohesive area is crime free. Still, the theory remains useful because it explains why crime prevention must engage social structure, not merely individual behaviour.

Strain, anomie, and inequality-based explanations

Strain theory argues that crime may result when individuals experience a gap between culturally valued goals and the legitimate means to achieve them. When people cannot access education, employment, status, or security through lawful routes, they may adapt through offending. In South Africa, the persistence of inequality gives this theory particular relevance. If a question asks why some young people are drawn into gangs, theft, or violent street economies, strain provides one possible explanation.

Exam answers should be careful not to reduce strain to poverty alone. Strain can also involve humiliation, blocked mobility, family stress, exclusion, and relative deprivation. Prevention under this theory includes:

job creation
education access
youth mentorship
social grants
drug treatment
community empowerment

A valuable analytical point is that strain theory explains motivation, but opportunity still matters. A frustrated person does not automatically become an offender unless there is access to a crime pathway. This is why strain and routine activity theories can work together in an answer.

Labelling theory and the cycle of criminal identity

Labelling theory focuses on the consequences of social reaction. When a person is repeatedly labelled as deviant or criminal, the label may become part of identity and create self-fulfilling prophecies. This can lead to exclusion from school, employment, family trust, and legitimate participation, which in turn may increase offending.

In crime prevention terms, this theory supports:

diversion programmes
restorative justice
reduced unnecessary criminalisation
support for reintegration
careful use of police discretion
anti-stigma interventions

Labelling theory is especially useful when discussing youth offending. A first-time offender who is treated as permanently dangerous may become more alienated than before. An exam response can score well by explaining that the aim of prevention is not only to stop harmful acts but also to avoid responses that intensify criminal careers.

Social learning and control theories

Social learning theory argues that offending is learned through interaction, imitation, reinforcement, and association with delinquent peers. If crime is rewarded in a peer group, it may be repeated and normalised. Prevention then involves changing peer environments, family structures, and social reinforcement patterns.

Social control theory asks why most people do not offend most of the time. Its answer is that strong bonds to family, school, work, and community restrain deviance. Weak attachment, low commitment, and broken belief in social rules can increase risk. Prevention under this framework focuses on strengthening bonds and belonging.

These theories are often useful in exam answers about juvenile crime, school violence, or gang involvement. They also help explain why interventions such as mentorship, after-school programmes, and parenting support can have crime-reducing effects.

Comparative summary table

Theory	Core idea	Typical prevention response	Strength	Limitation
Rational choice	Offenders weigh costs and benefits	Increase risk, effort, and uncertainty	Practical and direct	May ignore deeper causes
Routine activity	Crime needs offender, target, no guardian	Increase guardianship and reduce opportunity	Highly applicable to everyday crime	Does not fully explain motivation
Social disorganisation	Weak community structures increase crime	Build community capacity and informal control	Strong for place-based crime	Can be too broad
Strain	Blocked access to goals can motivate crime	Reduce inequality and expand opportunity	Explains social pressure	Does not fully explain target choice
Labelling	Social reactions can intensify offending	Diversion and reintegration	Important for youth justice	Less direct for some crimes
Social learning	Crime is learned in groups	Change peer and family influences	Explains gangs and delinquency	Needs good evidence of social transmission
Social control	Strong bonds restrain offending	Strengthen family, school, work, community ties	Simple and useful	May understate structural inequality

A strong CMY2602 answer does not pick only one theory. It compares them and shows that real-world prevention usually combines insights from several perspectives.

3. Strategies and Models of Crime Prevention, Reduction, and Control

Past papers frequently ask students to discuss or evaluate crime prevention strategies. This section is especially important because it provides the “application” side of the subject. A full exam answer should identify the strategy, explain how it works, and evaluate its strengths and weaknesses in context. The best answers also show that strategies are rarely isolated; they form part of wider systems.

Situational crime prevention

Situational crime prevention focuses on reducing opportunities for crime in specific settings. It works by increasing the effort needed to offend, increasing the risk of detection, reducing the rewards, reducing provocations, and removing excuses. This approach is closely linked to rational choice and routine activity theories.

Common techniques include:

improved lighting
CCTV
access control
secure locks and gates
alarm systems
guarding vulnerable spaces
signage and rule clarity
redesign of public areas
cashless payment systems in some contexts
property marking

The strength of situational prevention is that it can produce quick, visible improvements. For example, a taxi rank with better lighting, more structured entry and exit points, and visible security may reduce opportunistic theft and assault. A school with controlled access and clear supervision may reduce trespassing and violence. A retail store with anti-shoplifting devices may reduce theft.

The limitation is that it may not address why offenders are motivated. It can also cause displacement if crime shifts elsewhere. Still, displacement is not always total. Sometimes prevention creates diffusion of benefits, where surrounding areas also experience a reduction in crime because offenders perceive a broader risk.

Community-based prevention

Community-based prevention assumes that residents, local institutions, and informal networks can help regulate behaviour and strengthen social cohesion. It includes neighbourhood watches, community policing forums, local safety partnerships, youth groups, and faith-based interventions.

Its logic is that crime is less likely where communities are organised, communicate well, and cooperate with formal authorities. Community-based prevention often works best when people trust one another and when institutions respond respectfully. In a South African setting, this is particularly important because crime prevention can fail if communities feel ignored or exploited by policing structures.

Benefits include:

stronger local guardianship
improved trust and reporting
faster identification of risks
local problem-solving
more tailored interventions

Risks include:

vigilantism
exclusion of outsiders
bias and unfair targeting
poor coordination with police
fatigue and volunteer burnout

Past papers often reward students who can show both sides: community involvement is essential, but it must be lawful, inclusive, and connected to proper oversight.

Social crime prevention

Social crime prevention targets the underlying social conditions associated with crime. Instead of focusing only on the immediate opportunity, it tries to reduce risk factors such as poverty, family breakdown, school dropout, unemployment, substance abuse, and weak parenting.

This approach includes:

early childhood development
parenting programmes
school retention initiatives
vocational training
substance abuse treatment
youth diversion
mental health support
anti-violence programmes

Social prevention is usually slower to show results than situational prevention, but it can be more sustainable because it addresses root causes. For example, a youth support project in a high-risk township may not produce instant crime reductions, but over time it may lower school dropout and gang recruitment. Exam answers should note that social prevention requires sustained funding, coordinated institutions, and long-term political commitment.

Environmental design and CPTED

Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) is a widely used model that uses the built environment to influence behaviour. Its principles often include natural surveillance, territorial reinforcement, access control, maintenance, and image. A well-designed environment can make crime more visible, reduce concealment, and signal that a space is cared for.

Examples include:

clear sightlines in parks and walkways
well-maintained public spaces
controlled entrances in housing complexes
visible ownership markings
removal of hidden corners
public transport areas designed for oversight

CPTED is attractive in exams because it connects theory to real settings. A dark footpath used by learners after school may invite assault or robbery. If the path is reopened with lighting, trimmed vegetation, and community oversight, the risk may fall. However, environmental design alone cannot solve deeper problems such as violent relationships, addiction, or gang control.

Policing strategies

Policing remains central to crime control, but modern criminology expects students to distinguish between different styles of policing. Important concepts include:

Reactive policing: responding after a crime occurs.
Proactive policing: anticipating risk and intervening before crime escalates.
Community policing: building trust and shared problem-solving with residents.
Problem-oriented policing: analysing recurring problems and designing targeted solutions.
Hot spot policing: concentrating resources in high-crime areas.
Intelligence-led policing: using information and analysis to guide deployment.

A good exam answer should not treat “more police” as a complete solution. More officers can help, especially in hot spots or around major events, but effectiveness depends on legitimacy, training, deployment strategy, and community cooperation. Over-policing without fairness may deepen mistrust, while under-policing may allow crime to flourish.

Criminal justice and correctional interventions

Crime control also operates after arrest and conviction. Courts, diversion schemes, correctional supervision, parole, rehabilitation, and reintegration are all part of the prevention-reduction-control continuum.

Key correctional strategies include:

offender rehabilitation
education and skills development
anger management
substance abuse treatment
restorative justice conferencing
supervision in the community
post-release support

These measures matter because punishment alone often does not reduce future crime. If an offender leaves prison without work, support, or behaviour change, the risk of reoffending remains high. Exam answers should therefore argue that the criminal justice system is not only about incapacitation but also about reducing recidivism.

Comparative table of strategy types

Strategy type	Main focus	Examples	Best suited to
Situational prevention	Reduce opportunities	CCTV, lighting, locks, access control	Property crime, opportunistic crime
Community-based prevention	Strengthen informal control	Neighbourhood watches, safety forums	Localised urban crime, disorder
Social prevention	Address root causes	Youth development, parenting, jobs	Long-term reduction, youth crime
CPTED	Change physical space	Design, maintenance, visibility	Public places, housing, schools
Policing strategies	Enforcement and problem-solving	Hot spot policing, intelligence-led policing	Visible crime clusters
Correctional interventions	Reduce reoffending	Rehabilitation, diversion, parole support	Repeat offending, violent and non-violent offenders

The highest-quality CMY2602 answers usually show how these strategies can be combined. For instance, reducing violence in a transport node might require environmental design, patrols, community reporting, and youth outreach all at once.

4. South African Crime Prevention Practice, Institutions, and Policy Themes

Because CMY2602 is studied in a South African university context, past papers often expect students to connect theory to South African institutions and policy realities. This means you should not answer in a generic global way only. You must be able to discuss how crime prevention is organised through government structures, local partnerships, and national policy priorities.

The policy and institutional environment

Crime prevention in South Africa is shaped by cooperation between the South African Police Service (SAPS), community structures, local government, social development agencies, correctional services, schools, and civil society organisations. Each of these institutions contributes differently.

SAPS focuses on law enforcement, investigation, visible policing, and public order.
Local government influences lighting, zoning, urban management, and public space safety.
Social Development supports families, children, youth, and vulnerable communities.
Education systems contribute through school safety, attendance, and learner support.
Correctional Services contributes to rehabilitation and reintegration.
Civil society often provides victim support, prevention programmes, and advocacy.

In exam answers, it is useful to show that crime prevention is a multi-sectoral responsibility. Police alone cannot solve crime, because many risks arise before a crime reaches the criminal justice system. A poorly lit taxi rank, a neglected school environment, or a household affected by violence is already part of the prevention problem long before an arrest happens.

The importance of community policing

Community policing is a frequent exam topic because it captures the balance between formal policing and community participation. The idea is that effective policing should not only enforce the law but also build trust, share information, and solve local problems with residents. In principle, this can improve legitimacy and reporting, especially in communities with historical mistrust of state institutions.

A strong answer should identify the requirements for effective community policing:

clear communication between police and residents,
regular meetings and feedback structures,
respect for human rights,
responsiveness to complaints,
realistic expectations,
visible problem-solving rather than symbolic consultation.

The weakness of community policing is that it may become performative if structures exist only on paper. If residents attend meetings but no action follows, trust declines. Furthermore, community policing can fail if local power dynamics distort participation. Better-off residents may dominate agendas while poorer or more vulnerable groups are ignored. Good exam answers show awareness of these practical complications.

Violence prevention and the South African context

Violence prevention is central to the South African setting because violent crime has significant social and economic costs. Violence includes not only homicide and assault, but also intimate partner violence, sexual violence, gang violence, and robbery with violence. Prevention strategies therefore need to be broad and layered.

Relevant interventions include:

alcohol harm reduction
youth diversion
safe public transport
school safety programmes
domestic violence support
firearm control measures
trauma-informed services
community mediation

A particularly strong analytical point is that violence often has both immediate and structural causes. A fight in a tavern may be triggered by alcohol and provocation, but the broader pattern may be linked to poverty, masculinity norms, social stress, and lack of safe leisure spaces. This is why violence prevention must combine short-term control with long-term social action.

Gender-based violence and family violence

Although CMY2602 is not a specialised gender studies module, past questions may require students to think about gender-based violence as a crime prevention issue. Prevention here cannot be limited to policing after abuse has already occurred. It must include:

public education on rights and consent
safe reporting systems
victim support
protection orders
perpetrator accountability
school-based prevention
community norm change
economic support for vulnerable survivors

Family violence is a useful example of why informal environments matter. Homes are often assumed to be private, but they can be sites of repeated harm. The absence of guardianship, dependency on an abuser, and silence created by fear can make crime prevention difficult. A strong exam answer explains that prevention must therefore reach into intimate spaces through social support, legal protection, and accessible services.

Youth, schools, and developmental prevention

Youth crime is frequently discussed in South African criminology because adolescence is a high-risk period for experimentation, peer influence, and identity formation. School-based prevention matters because schools are among the few institutions with sustained contact with large numbers of young people.

Useful interventions include:

anti-bullying policies
school safety teams
counselling and psychosocial support
after-school activities
anti-substance-abuse education
learner mentorship
pathways back into education for dropouts

A high-quality exam answer should show that prevention is not simply about stopping “bad behaviour.” It is about creating legitimate pathways to belonging, achievement, and future opportunity. Where schools are unsafe or under-resourced, dropout and delinquency can feed each other. Therefore, school safety is both a prevention and a development issue.

Organised crime, corruption, and control

Crime prevention and control in South Africa also extend to organised crime and corruption. These are not always visible in the same way as street crime, but their consequences are severe. Corruption undermines public trust, weakens enforcement, and diverts resources away from prevention. Organised crime can exploit transport routes, ports, local economies, and financial systems.

Strategies here include:

intelligence sharing
financial investigation
anti-corruption measures
secure procurement
regulatory oversight
whistle-blower protection
inter-agency cooperation

The exam relevance is that control of organised crime requires more than visible patrols. It requires institutional integrity. If corruption is tolerated inside enforcement systems, preventive efforts elsewhere become less effective. Students should be ready to explain that crime control is only as strong as the institutions tasked with enforcing it.

Short case examples for exam use

Example 1: Residential burglary in a peri-urban area

A cluster of burglaries occurs in a neighbourhood with poor lighting, weak fence maintenance, and irregular police visibility. A situational response could include lighting improvements, access control, and neighbourhood watch coordination. A social response might include youth engagement and local employment programmes. A criminal justice response would involve improved investigation and response times. The best exam answer explains that a single measure is unlikely to work alone.

Example 2: School violence

Learner assaults at a secondary school may be driven by bullying, gang influence, weak supervision, and poor emotional support. Prevention would include school safety planning, counselling, parental involvement, and referral systems. Punishment alone may not address the conflict patterns that produce repeated incidents.

Example 3: Taxi rank robberies

A taxi rank that experiences repeated phone theft and assault may benefit from lighting, access management, visible stewards, CCTV, and better route supervision. If offenders move to nearby informal paths, the problem has been displaced rather than eliminated. This type of answer demonstrates both theory and evaluation.

5. Past Paper Themes, Exam Technique, and High-Scoring Answer Structures

Students often know the content but lose marks because they do not answer the question asked. Past-paper success in CMY2602 depends on identifying command words, structuring arguments, and balancing explanation with evaluation. This final section focuses on how exam questions are usually framed and how to respond in a way that matches the marking style commonly expected in university criminology papers.

Common command words and how to handle them

Different verbs require different answer styles:

Define: give a precise meaning, then briefly explain.
Describe: state what something is like or how it works.
Explain: show causes, reasons, or processes.
Discuss: present both sides and support with evidence or examples.
Compare: identify similarities and differences.
Critically analyse: evaluate strengths, weaknesses, assumptions, and implications.
Apply: connect theory to a real or hypothetical crime situation.
Evaluate: judge the value of a strategy or theory using reasons.

A common mistake is writing a descriptive answer when the question demands critical analysis. For example, if asked to critically discuss situational crime prevention, it is not enough to list alarms, cameras, and lights. The answer must also consider displacement, fairness, cost, and limitations.

How to structure a high-mark answer

A strong essay-style answer usually follows this pattern:

Introductory definition
- define the key terms in the question
- indicate the main argument
Theoretical explanation
- identify the main theory or framework
Core discussion
- explain the strategy, process, or concept
- use examples from South Africa where possible
Evaluation
- strengths
- weaknesses
- unintended consequences
- implementation barriers
Conclusion
- synthesise the answer without introducing new points

For a 10- or 15-mark question, this structure should be concise but balanced. For a longer essay, each part should be developed with examples and comparison.

Typical past-paper themes in CMY2602

Although exact question wording changes, the same topics often recur. Students should revise these themes carefully:

theories of crime prevention
situational crime prevention
social crime prevention
community policing
environmental design
public and private security
the role of the criminal justice system
youth offending prevention
violence prevention
repeat victimisation
crime and social development
evaluation of prevention strategies
integration of formal and informal control

These themes matter because they reflect the subject’s core concern: how to reduce crime in ways that are effective, legitimate, and sustainable.

Model answer logic for common questions

Question type 1: “Discuss the role of community policing in crime prevention.”

A good answer should:

define community policing
explain its goals
show how it builds trust and information sharing
mention local problem-solving and visibility
discuss limitations such as lack of resources or tokenism
conclude that it is necessary but not sufficient

Question type 2: “Critically evaluate situational crime prevention.”

A good answer should:

define situational prevention
explain how it reduces opportunity
give examples such as CCTV, lighting, and access control
discuss benefits like quick results
discuss limitations like displacement and cost
conclude that it works best as part of a broader strategy

Question type 3: “Explain the relationship between crime prevention and social development.”

A good answer should:

show that social conditions shape crime risk
explain poverty, inequality, school dropout, and unemployment
describe developmental interventions
show why prevention must be long-term
recognise that social development alone may not address immediate opportunities
conclude with the need for integrated strategies

How to use examples effectively

Examples should support the argument rather than replace it. The best examples are:

specific enough to be believable
directly linked to the concept
short enough to keep the focus on analysis

For instance, if discussing opportunity reduction, you might mention a shopping centre with controlled entrances and security. If discussing youth crime, you might mention after-school sport and mentoring. If discussing repeat victimisation, you might mention homes targeted repeatedly because of visible lack of security. Examples should clarify rather than distract.

Short-answer revision points

For fast revision before a test or exam, the following points are useful:

Crime prevention aims to stop crime before it starts.
Crime reduction lowers the amount or seriousness of crime.
Crime control manages crime through formal and informal systems.
Routine activity theory focuses on offender, target, and guardian.
Rational choice theory assumes offenders respond to risk and reward.
Social disorganisation theory links crime to weak community structures.
Strain theory links crime to blocked opportunities and pressure.
Labelling theory warns against harmful social reactions.
Situational prevention changes immediate opportunities.
Social prevention changes underlying conditions.
Community policing depends on trust and participation.
CPTED uses environmental design to reduce crime.
Rehabilitation seeks to reduce reoffending.
Displacement is a possible side effect of prevention.

A final exam-writing template

When a past paper question asks for a discussion or evaluation, a useful paragraph pattern is:

Claim: state the main point.
Explanation: explain why it is true.
Evidence or example: give a relevant illustration.
Evaluation: mention a limitation or counterpoint.
Link back: connect to the question.

For example: situational crime prevention can reduce burglary by increasing the effort required to enter a property. Better locks, lighting, and visible guardianship raise the risk for offenders and can deter opportunistic crime. In a South African residential area with repeated break-ins, these measures can provide relatively quick gains. However, if offenders shift to nearby homes, the intervention may only redistribute rather than eliminate the problem. This means situational measures work best when combined with social and community strategies.

Final revision summary

CMY2602 is ultimately about understanding crime as a social and practical problem that requires layered responses. The subject expects students to move beyond simple blame or punishment and to think in terms of opportunity, structure, guardianship, development, and legitimacy. The strongest past-paper answers show that crime prevention works best when theory and practice are linked, when communities are included without being idealised, and when enforcement is balanced with social support and institutional integrity. A student who can define the key concepts, compare theories, and apply them to South African crime patterns will be well prepared for both direct and analytical questions.