Despite considerable progress in understanding the importance of neighbourhood factors in shaping crime and fear of crime, important gaps remain at both the neighbourhood and individual level regarding how these processes operate. To address these gaps, the current dissertation draws primarily on repeated cross- sectional survey data to examine how neighbourhood disadvantage and disorder are associated with crime and fear of crime across neighbourhoods and individuals.

The first two studies adopt an ecological perspective, focusing on how neighbourhood disadvantage and disorder relate to neighbourhood-level fear of crime. The two subsequent studies take a socio-ecological perspective, examining how neighbourhood disadvantage and disorder are associated with involvement in crime and fear of crime at the individual-level.

By using growth curve modelling in Study I and a mixed methods approach in Study II, the findings show that levels of fear of crime and disorder are, as expected, elevated in neighbourhoods with high disadvantage. Moreover, the findings reveal that neighbourhood fear of crime change over time and that this change appears to be associated with change in disorder. The results from study I further show that fear of crime had the highest increase in more affluent neighbourhoods.

Study II evaluated a crime prevention initiative in a disadvantaged neighbourhood over a ten-year period, with five years pre-implementation and five years post-implementation. The findings indicate that both fear of crime and disorder were reduced, as reported by residents and local experts working in the area.

Applying a multilevel approach in Study III, findings suggest that neighbourhood of residence appears to be more important for explaining individual level fear of crime than individual involvement in crime. The findings also point to a variation in how disorder is perceived among individuals: some report high levels of perceived disorder and fear of crime without any involvement in crime, whereas others report similarly high levels but also an involvement in crime.

Study IV shows that neighbourhood of residence has limited explanatory power in relation to individual variation in involvement in crime overall, however, neighbourhood effects appear to be stronger in relation to serious crime. Furthermore, findings also show that neighbourhood-level disadvantage explain a significant part of the small observed between-neighbourhood variation in involvement in crime. However, the small between-neighbourhood variation indicates that individual-level factors are more important for understanding variation in involvement in crime than neighbourhood-level factors. Overall, the findings suggest that the impact of neighbourhood factors differs across neighbourhood- and individual-level outcomes. This highlights the importance of clearly specifying the level of analysis to avoid incorrect inferences. Moreover, future studies should adopt theoretical and methodological approaches that recognize that fear of crime and perceived disorder are, in part, shaped by how people interpret and experience their surroundings.