Cargo crime in Malaysia was once the second highest in the Asia-Pacific region due to the increase of cargo from Singapore, the world’s busiest port, is routed overland through Malaysia. The US daily, New York Times has reported, quoting figures compiled by the Transported Asset Protection Association, said more than US$22.7 million (RM68.9 million) worth of goods was reported stolen from Malaysian sea ports, airports, warehouses and trucks from the year 2007 to 2010 (Gooch, 2011). The reluctance of companies in Malaysia to report losses mean that the total value of goods stolen here is likely to be higher than reported. While transporting goods through Asia-Pacific countries is generally safer than other parts of the world like the Americas, Africa and Europe, there is little question that cargo theft and supply chain threat have increased throughout Asia; the New York Times quoted (Gooch, 2011). Malaysia, which lies along a number of important trading routes, is a particular concern. Malaysia is increasingly becoming a key thoroughfare, as more companies ship their cargoes to and from neighbouring Singapore, which is connected with much of the rest of Southeast Asia through Malaysia road. This has led companies to take greater security measures by employing armed escort, using electronic seals and installing GPS systems onboard their trucks to prevent hijacking and other cargo crimes. Statistics in Table 1.1 below is related to cargo crime in Malaysia. The cases are classified by various types of cargo crime such as hijacking, warehouse robbery, warehouse break-in and theft of laden truck. Attached below are some of the effects or consequences of cargo crime which may impact the transportation and logistics industries in Malaysia:
I. For business operating on “just-in-time (JIT)” concept, the loss of cargoes may threaten viability, particularly if insurance coverage is inadequate or compensation payments are contested.
II. Companies can be exposed to litigation, liability suits or other impacts on their brand name through crime related incidents – stolen cargoes can be expired or ineffective due to bad storage which exposes the company to dissatisfied customers who bought the goods or materials.
III. Stolen cargoes reduce profits exponentially by losses in sales opportunities of the distributors. The new ‘competitors’ (criminals) are selling the cargoes at lower prices or minimum ‘cost’ (stolen cargoes) where the genuine distributors will never be able to compete.
IV. Furthermore, the illegal sale of stolen cargoes undercuts prices in legitimate businesses.
To better understand crime displacement, a research that is directed to its effects should be initiated instead of relying on the primary outcomes of crime prevention initiatives. Such research would be concerned with a main program that provides a setting for better understanding of crime displacement. Such research would also allow its researchers to focus on methodological problems associated with the measurement of crime displacement, in particular those that are related to the potential effects to be dispersed across area, time, and offense type (Barr & Pease, 1990). Crime incidents are neither uniformly distributed over area nor randomly distributed. Numerous researchers have identified various sociological, temporal and behavioural characteristics of offenders and crime locations that confirm the non-random nature of crime clustering (Chainey & Ratcliffe, 2005).
Building on both routine activities theory (Cohen & Felson 1979; Felson, 1998) and rational choice perspective (Cornish & Clarke 1986, 1987; Clarke & Felson 1993), Brantingham and Brantingham (1993a) presented the idea that crimes occur when criminally motivated individuals come into contact with suitable victims or targets as they travel between places or through areas that are known to them and wherein they are comfortable. Brantingham and Brantingham (1993a) commented that within cities, criminal behaviour is highly patterned and frequently localized. Based on the design characteristics of urban areas and their demographic and socioeconomic groups cluster therein, certain areas will experience disproportionate amounts of particular types of crime (Brantingham & Brantingham, 1993b). This idea, combined with place-specific attempts by crime prevention practitioners to reduce crime, is central to the displacement of crime. The central tenet of crime displacement is that criminally motivated offenders, when prevented from committing crime at a particular location or in a particular way, will not be dissuaded from criminality but will simply be displaced to commit crime in some other area. Repetto (1974) identified five forms of displacement as the result of blocked criminal opportunities. Barr and Pease (1990) took a more theoretical approach in considering crime displacement and concluded that displacement of crime is simply a reorganization or redistribution of the area and time in which a potential offender comes in contact with a potential victim. Most studies of crime displacement tend to test for spatial displacement (Hesseling, 1994). However, in a rare non-spatial example, Yang (2008) focused on economic risks and loss resulting from changes in Philippines Custom policy, identifying predominantly method displacement, where changes and increases in enforcement of Custom policy caused adaptations in methods of evasion of payments duties.
Crime displacement may eliminate the effectiveness of crime reduction operations by pushing crime to nearby areas or other crime types. As Clarke (1995) noted that the uncritical acceptance of crime displacement may also mean that increases in crime, which might have occurred anyway, have sometimes been wrongly attributed to displacement. Where crime displacement does occur, it is usually the result of situations that force criminal to access nearby opportunities not within the confines of the operation. This idea was echoed by Eck (1993) who concluded that prevention and crackdown efforts focused on unique situations will have less displacement than prevention or crackdown efforts focused on general situations. Cornish and Clarke (1987) conceptualized crime displacement from the perspective of rational choice theory. From their assessment of the choices made by criminals in the decision to commit crimes and their choice of targets, it is believed that crime displacement could best be explained and understood by concentrating on the criminal’s personal decisions and choices made in committing crime. The decisions, opportunities, costs, and benefits associated with particular offenses, in Cornish and Clarke (1987) view, work to establish the confines of displacement within different categories of offense. If this is the case, then it becomes less plausible to justify a generalized approach to crime displacement and requires practitioners and researchers to be more open to the possibility that crime displacement might or might not occur with different spatiotemporal (and other displacement typology) characteristics for different crime types and situations.
Hijacking of trucks with cargoes is a great concern as well as a burden to Malaysia economy and the logistics industries. It will also impact the Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) into Malaysia as high cargo crime rate will cause the investors to move away from Malaysia. It is very important that industry players such as Malaysia Police Force, security professional and logistics industries working together to develop a cooperative approach to the problem faced. Success can only be achieved if all the players combine their effort and cooperate. In order to achieve the cooperative approach; it is utmost important that criminological analysis of the phenomenon such as crime perpetrator, victims, justice system, the development of prevention and the theories explaining the phenomenon be made. Despite the highly scientific relevance, it appears that too little research is being conducted in Malaysia to identify factors related to cargo crime within the supply chain security in Malaysia. We need to have a better understanding as to why there is no absolute reduction in crime despite numerous preventive measures taken by the authority to prevent cargo crime.The developing interest in crime prevention began slowly in the 1970s, gained significant momentum during the 1980s and is now becoming an important subject in criminology. Regardless of how they are designed to function; crime prevention tactics seem particularly vulnerable to having their effectiveness reduced by the occurrence of crime displacement. When criminals are prevented from committing one crime, they shift their manner of committing the crime in some way that they may replace the blocked opportunity with another unlawful act and crime, which is commonly said to be displaced (Barr & Pease, 1990). There are a number of different ways in which offending patterns may shift to accommodate the introduction of preventive strategies, but with all types of displacement, the end result is the same. Crime is not ultimately prevented at all, but simply altered into different form of displacement. Because no overall reduction is achieved, crime displacement would seem to eliminate completely any benefits that the prevention of crime may bring.
The landscape and environment of supply chain in Malaysia has been quietly transforming over the years. For a long time, logistics and transportation industries was seen as something ordinary as we think about old lorry or trucks, low wages, intensity of labour and the loading and unloading of cargo manually managed by manual labourers. Transportation and logistics management is related to supply chain management in order to meet the demand of customer requirements and a mandatory large network distribution for cargoes. New consumer competitive requirements and technological advancement have changed the dynamics of what was once considered a brick-and-mortar- business; phasing out those who stay and stuck in a rut, while rewarding those who diversify and adapt to new ways in managing supply chain management. In today’s economy, every business organization is working continuously finding solutions on reducing its bottom line in order to get its profits up; as top line growth is very critical to move their business forward and remain competitive in doing business. In today’s supply chain and logistics business, one area that can help organizations profitability which is often overlooked or neglected is the prevention of cargo crime and threat. The need for cargo security is very critical to help the logistics industry in combating the continuing increases in cargo crime. Cargo crime is not isolated event by itself but security management and control measures have to be driven across the supply chain, cross borders and integrate an ongoing awareness in every single point of interaction with the cargoes. Therefore, the security of the supply chain can only be as secured as the security of all the steps and processes that have been taken before; that is why it is important to apply it across the whole supply chain. The term, cargo crime or theft represents any stealing of cargoes from premises or hijacking of cargoes from trucks, rail cars or ships from the point of origin to their destination. It is considered cargo crime if it is stolen at any point between its origin, its destination and anywhere in-between. Many companies do not report such crimes for several reasons as they often feel it might damage their reputation, increase their insurance premium the following year, or otherwise become an embarrassment to their organization.
Research on cargo crime in relation to crime displacement theory has been conducted in countries like United States of America (FIA, 2001), Holland (Hesseling, 1994), Australia (Claire, 2001), Sweden (Urciouli, 2010) and European Union (Europol, 2009). There is, however, very few researches related to cargo crimes that have been conducted in Malaysia. It is very important to conduct such research in Malaysia in order for the industries players and government agencies to introduce preventive measures as Malaysia is facing the same threat related to cargo security. The cargo crimes or security incidents considered in this research are those occurring within the supply chain in Malaysia where products, finished goods, components or raw materials are temporarily stored or moved between companies or locations that are part of the supply chains network.
1.1.1 Scientific Research in Criminal Justice
With an appropriate research methodology, criminology and criminal justice may draw upon many fields; both academic and applied, as interdisciplinary disciplines. As compared to other applications of scientific researches, criminal justice system is often viewed as academic intimidation, providing unnecessary clarification on what seems to be straightforward and easily understood by anyone (Hagan, 2003). It is often debated among security practitioners on whether criminal justice is a science. Unlike physical scientists, criminal justice researchers find their subject matter a topic of popular discussion where a layman’s experiences are considered well enough as a guide to the researcher. So far there are not many researchers in Malaysia who are involved in criminal justice research. In this research, a theory in criminal justice is applied as it represents an attempt to develop plausible explanations of the reality, of cargo crime. The theory applied attempts to classify and organize events; to explain the cause of events; to predict the direction of future events and to understand why and how these events occurred (Turner, 1997). Most of the scientific research is based upon a few critical assumptions. These assumptions are always related to prediction, predictability and regularity of any relation between two or more variables (Champion, 2006). In criminology and criminal justice, many of the variables studied, attitudes, ideas and opinions, are less tangible than pure science. Therefore, the presence or absence of those social and psychological variables must be inferred largely from other indirect indicators.
1.1.2 Cargo Crime Statistics in Malaysia
Cargo crime in Malaysia was once the second highest in the Asia-Pacific region due to the increase of cargo from Singapore, the world’s busiest port, is routed overland through Malaysia. The US daily, New York Times has reported, quoting figures compiled by the Transported Asset Protection Association reported that more than US$22.7 million worth of cargoes in Malaysia were reported missing or stolen from sea ports, airports, warehouses and trucks from the year 2007 to 2010 (Gooch, 2011). The reluctance of companies in Malaysia to report losses mean that the total value of goods stolen here is likely to be higher than reported. While transporting goods through Asia-Pacific countries is generally safer than other parts of the world like the Americas, Africa and Europe, there is little question that cargo theft and supply chain threat have increased throughout Asia (Gooch, 2011). It is a major concern as Malaysia is located within the international trading routes. Malaysia is increasingly becoming a key thoroughfare, as more companies ship their cargoes to and from neighbouring Singapore. It is more important as Singapore is connected with much of the rest of Southeast Asia through Malaysia road. This has led companies to take greater security measures by employing armed escort, using electronic seals and installing GPS systems onboard their trucks to prevent hijacking and other cargo crimes. Statistics in Table 1.1 below is related to cargo crime in Malaysia. The cases are classified by various types of cargo crime such as hijacking, warehouse robbery, warehouse break-in and theft of laden truck.
Table 1.1: Malaysia Cargo Crime Statistics by Type of Crime
Year 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Oct
Hijack 64 95 162 223 174 93 35 42 28 30 36 39 10
Warehouse Robbery 96 58 50 69 59 65 18 11 16 16 15 19 11
Warehouse Break-in 200 12 4 32 2 5 1 1 3 4 1 0 0
Theft of Laden Truck 30 17 11 33 20 19 9 7 10 11 12 17 6
Total cases 390 182 227 357 255 182 63 61 57 61 64 75 27
Source: Retrieved from reliable source.
Malaysia cargo crime statistics is classified according to the states in Malaysia as shown in Table 1.2 that illustrates the breakdown of the cargo crime cases. Most cargo crimes happened in the west coast of peninsular Malaysia. It may be due to the fact that most business entities, manufacturing facilities, sea ports, airports and good road networks are located in west coast of peninsular Malaysia.
Table 1.2: Cargo Crime Statistics by States of Malaysia
State / Year 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Selangor 106 97 83 22 26 5
Johor 26 68 31 12 12 4
Perak 28 22 15 10 9 4
Negeri Sembilan 9 18 16 9 2 4
Melaka 18 13 17 5 1 1
Penang 6 8 11 1 1 0
Kuala Lumpur 8 5 3 2 3 0
Kedah 7 10 4 0 1 0
Pahang 14 2 1 3 4 2
Sarawak 0 1 1 1 0 0
Sabah 0 0 0 0 0 0
Terengganu 0 1 0 0 1 1
Kelantan 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total 357 245 182 65 60 21
Source: Retrieved from reliable source.
Although the trend of cargo crime is on the decline in recent years, the economic impact is still massive and the cost of cargo thefts runs into millions. Generally the trend of cargo crime has been decreasing yearly and at the moment, it is not certain why it is decreasing. Thus, this research will focus on the possible crime displacement and other application of crime displacement theory that have an impact on cargo crimes in Malaysia.
1.1.3 The effects of cargo theft
Attached below are some of the effects or consequences of cargo crime which may impact the transportation and logistics industries in Malaysia:
I. For business operating on “just-in-time (JIT)” concept, the loss of cargoes may threaten viability, particularly if insurance coverage is inadequate or compensation payments are contested.
II. Companies can be exposed to litigation, liability suits or other impacts on their brand name through crime related incidents – stolen cargoes can be expired or ineffective due to bad storage which exposes the company to dissatisfied customers who bought the goods or materials.
III. Stolen cargoes reduce profits exponentially by losses in sales opportunities of the distributors. The new ‘competitors’ (criminals) are selling the cargoes at lower prices or minimum ‘cost’ (stolen cargoes) where the genuine distributors will never be able to compete.
IV. Furthermore, the illegal sale of stolen cargoes undercuts prices in legitimate businesses.
1.1.4 The barriers to cargo security
Lack of security measures may be caused by great challenges within the business communities as security tends to be their last resources in budget or investment. On top of that there are many barriers in handling cargo crime in Malaysia. The following are some of the barriers in enforcing or implementation of a good security control measures in the cargo crime arena.
• The lack of effective cargo crime reporting systems
• The weakness of current cargo crime laws and prosecution
• The lack of knowledge on cargo crime
• Inadequate support for cargo crime task forces either from authority or businesses
• The need to improve local law enforcement expertise on cargo crime
• The need for more effective cargo security technologies and preventive measures
• Cargo security standards are lacking
1.2 Problem Statement
To better understand crime displacement, a research that is directed to its effects should be initiated instead of relying on the primary outcomes of crime prevention initiatives. Such research would be concerned with a main program that provides a setting for better understanding of crime displacement. Such research would also allow its researchers to focus on methodological problems associated with the measurement of crime displacement, in particular those effects can be scattered over different areas, timing and different types of offenses (Barr & Pease, 1990). The crime incidents are not uniformly distributed over area and randomly distributed. Chainey and Ratcliffe (2005) reiterated that numerous researchers have identified various sociological, temporal and behavioural characteristics of offenders and crime locations that confirm the non-random nature of crime clustering.
Building on both routine activities theory by Cohen and Felson (1979); Felson (1998) and rational choice perspective by Cornish and Clarke (1986 & 1987); Clarke and Felson (1993); Brantingham and Brantingham (1993a) presented the idea that crimes occur when criminally motivated individuals come into contact with suitable victims or targets as they travel between places or through areas that are known to them and wherein they are comfortable. Brantingham and Brantingham (1993a) commented that within cities, criminal behaviour is highly patterned and frequently localized. Based on the design characteristics of urban areas and their demographic and socioeconomic groups cluster therein, certain areas will experience disproportionate amounts of particular types of crime (Brantingham & Brantingham, 1993b). The opinion in combination with the area specific efforts by crime prevention practitioners to reduce crime is closely related to the displacement of crime. The central tenet of crime displacement is that criminally motivated offenders, when prevented from committing crime at a particular location or in a particular way, will not be dissuaded from criminality but will simply be displaced to commit crime in some other area. Repetto (1974) identified five forms of displacement as the result of blocked criminal opportunities. Barr and Pease (1990) took a more theoretical approach in considering crime displacement and concluded that displacement of crime is simply a reorganization or redistribution of the area and time in which a potential offender comes in contact with a potential victim. Most studies of crime displacement tend to test for spatial displacement (Hesseling, 1994). However, in a rare non-spatial example, Yang (2008) focused on economic risks and loss resulting from changes in Philippines Custom policy, identifying predominantly method displacement, where changes and increases in enforcement of Custom policy caused adaptations in methods of evasion of payments duties.
Crime displacement may eliminate the effectiveness of crime reduction operations by pushing crime to nearby areas or other crime types. As Clarke (1995) noted that the uncritical acceptance of crime displacement may also mean that increases in crime, which might have occurred anyway, have sometimes been wrongly attributed to displacement. Where crime displacement does occur, it is usually the result of situations that force criminal to access nearby opportunities not within the confines of the operation. This idea was echoed by Eck (1993) who concluded that prevention and crackdown efforts focused on unique situations will have less displacement than prevention or crackdown efforts focused on general situations. Cornish and Clarke (1987) conceptualized crime displacement from the perspective of rational choice theory. From their assessment of the choices made by criminals in the decision to commit crimes and their choice of targets, it is believed that crime displacement could best be explained and understood by concentrating on the criminal’s personal decisions and choices made in committing crime. Cornish and Clark (1987) viewed the association of decisions, crime opportunity, implementation costs and also the benefits related to crime offenses to establish the confine of crime displacement within types of offenses. If this is the situation, then it becomes less persuasive to justify a generalized approach to crime displacement and requires practitioners and researchers to be more open to the possibility that crime displacement might or might not occur with different spatiotemporal (and other displacement typology) characteristics for different crime types and situations.
Hijacking of trucks with cargoes is a great concern as well as a burden to Malaysia economy and the logistics industries. It will also impact the Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) into Malaysia as high cargo crime rate will cause the investors to move away from Malaysia. It is very important that industry players such as Malaysia Police Force, security professional and logistics industries working together to develop a cooperative approach in order to minimize the challenging the problem encountered. It can only be successful if all the party involved combined their effort and be cooperative to overcome the challenges. In order to achieve the cooperative approach; it is utmost important that criminological analysis of the phenomenon such as crime perpetrator, crime victims, judiciary and justice system, the development of crime prevention and crime theories explaining the phenomenon be made. Despite the highly scientific relevance, it appears that very few research being conducted in Malaysia to identify factors related to cargo crime within the supply chain security in Malaysia. We need to have a better understanding as to why there is no absolute reduction in crime despite numerous preventive measures taken by the authority to prevent cargo crime.
The source of risk for cargo crime within the supply chain comes from theft opportunities that are available. The criminal has flexibility relative to time, place, method and the type of crime committed. Hesseling (1994) reiterated that criminals are normally limited in their movement, adaptability and flexibility to that of a particular crime, place, time and method. These opportunities are highly specific and concentrated on time and location. This is the result of required scheduling and fixed assets of normal activities within the supply chain network. This gives criminals the opportunity to really attack at the weakest point within the supply chain e.g. certain area of the Malaysia roadway or even certain trucking companies. The risk or threat of cargo crime can be reduced by initiating resilient countermeasures focusing on reducing theft opportunities. The theory of crime displacement states that within the potential criminals’ capability, the criminals will change their criminal pattern in response to countermeasures implemented by the authorities or security professionals. Figure 1.2 clearly shows that there has been a change in cargo crime pattern. A first glance indicates a change in criminal pattern and more research need to be conducted to understand the changes. Figure 1.3 revealed the total number of people detained by the Police under Malaysia crime preventive laws i.e. Emergency (Public Order and Prevention of Crime) Ordinance (EO) 1969. During this period, the problem of attacks against trucks or cargoes received more attention than before. The Police effort to address the hijacking cases where it rampantly happened within the supply chain network has actually changed the cargo theft pattern instead of absolute reduction. The crime displacement effect may be one likely explanation for this development. This fulfils Hesseling’s (1994) conclusion that crime displacement is possible, but not inevitable consequence of crime prevention.
In 2009, a total of 716 suspected criminals were arrested and have been detained under Section 4 (1) of Emergency (Public Order and Prevention of Crime) Ordinance (EO) 1969 (Shaila Kosky & Shahanaaz Habib, 2011) as shown in Table 1.3. Another 220 of them were arrested under Section 4A (1) of the Act and were banished from their residence. In 2010, 768 of them were arrested under Section 4(1) and 385 of them are detained under Section 4A (1). Those arrested are suspected to be involved in cargo crimes, theft of vehicles and various major crimes involving property. The numbers of hijacking cases reduced drastically since 2009 and this correlates with the actions taken by the Police arresting suspects and detaining them. Detainees under Section 4(1) are held in one of the three Emergency Ordinance detention centre at Simpang Renggam, Machang or Muar in Malaysia. Besides detention, Police also uses Section 4A (1) of the Emergency Ordinance; which provides banishment of suspects to other states or districts and restricts their residence for two years. The authority will also impose other conditions like reporting to the Police on a daily or weekly basis. The Police have no other better choice but were forced to use the Emergency Ordinance in cases where Police were certain that the suspected criminal had committed the crime but there were insufficient evidence for conviction in court. Sometimes the Police were unable to prosecute suspected criminals in court as the witnesses were too afraid to come forward and testify. The victims are too afraid of the criminals as these organized criminals may harm them and their family members if the case is being brought to court. On 15th September 2011 this crime preventive law has been repealed by the government and all the detainees detained under this law were released unconditionally. The numbers of cargo crime may increase again in near future as the criminals released may continue to operate again.
Table 1.3: Suspects arrested under Emergency (Public Order and Prevention of Crime) Ordinance
Number of Cases Detention orders under Section 4(1) EO Detention orders under Section 4A(1) EO
Contingent/
State 2009 2010 % 2009 2010 % 2011* 2009 2010 % 2011*
Perlis 10 27 170 4 24 500 8 7 2 -71 2
Kedah 62 83 34 25 60 140 58 10 31 210 2
Penang 62 77 24 46 50 9 45 13 13 0 3
Perak 94 75 -20 58 49 -16 43 31 18 -42 6
Selangor 351 331 -6 291 238 -18 275 65 125 92 43
K/Lumpur 52 88 69 44 58 32 50 5 28 460 1
N/Sembilan 16 40 150 18 8 56 12 6 16 167 1
Malacca 9 89 889 8 25 213 27 2 25 1150 4
Johor 151 140 -7 125 80 -36 86 31 50 61 13
Pahang 103 37 -64 38 37 -3 18 33 8 -76 1
Terengganu 7 14 100 0 15 0 14 0 0 0 0
Kelantan 1 8 700 0 4 0 6 1 1 0 2
Sabah 6 14 133 3 1 -67 2 2 0 -100 0
Sarawak 47 69 47 43 52 21 56 7 12 71 5
Bukit Aman 27 97 259 8 52 170 22 7 54 671 3
Commercial Crime 11 27 145 5 15 200 NA 0 2 0 NA
Total 1009 1216 – 716 768 722 220 385 86
Note: Suspects arrested under Emergency (Public Order and Prevention of Crime) Ordinance 1969*Jan 1 – August 22, 2011 (the total number of cases for 2011 was not available)
Source: Sunday Star, September 11, 2011 (Bukit Aman Police)
The developing interest in crime prevention started slowly in the 70s. It has gained significant momentum in the 80s and is now becoming an important subject in criminology. Regardless of how they are designed to function; crime prevention tactics seem particularly vulnerable to having their effectiveness reduced by the occurrence of crime displacement. When criminals are prevented from committing one crime, they shift their manner of committing the crime in some way that they may replace the blocked opportunity with another unlawful act and crime, which is commonly said to be displaced (Barr & Pease, 1990). The offending patterns may shift in different ways to accommodate the introduction of preventive strategies, but with all types of displacement, the end result is the same. Crime is not ultimately prevented at all, but simply altered into different form of displacement. Because no overall reduction is achieved, crime displacement would seem to eliminate totally in any benefits that the prevention of crime may bring.
1.3 Research Questions
This research examines crime displacement in relation to cargo crime within the supply chain in Malaysia. The following are the research questions that will help to provide the focus and direction during the research:
1. What are the factors that contribute to cargo crime?
2. What are the initiatives taken by the authority to reduce cargo crime that has changed in cargo crime pattern alteration instead of absolute reduction?
3. What is the level of security control measures implemented by transportation operators to protect and minimize cargo crime?
4. What is the level of security control measures implemented at rest area along the highway and British Standard BS 5489 car park lighting requirements?
1.4 Research Objectives
The following are the objectives of this research as follows:
1. To explain the problem or issue of cargo crime using the crime displacement theory.
2. To explore the factors that contributes to cargo crime within the supply chain in Peninsular Malaysia.
3. To identify the factors that contribute to cargo crime within the supply chain in Peninsular Malaysia
4. To analyze the factors that contribute to cargo crime within the supply chain in Peninsular Malaysia
5. To examine the level of security control measures implemented by transportation operators.
1.5 Scope of Research
Cargo crimes or security incidents considered in this research are those taking place within the supply chain in peninsular Malaysia, where finished goods, products, components or raw materials are temporarily stored or moved between companies that are part of supply chains. Cargo crime arises from different theft opportunities that will always be present within the supply chain. The theory of crime displacement will provide an insight as to why there is theft or crime pattern alteration instead of absolute reduction. There are many modes of transportation for cargoes in Malaysia; either by road, rail, air or ship. This research will focus on the following:
1. Cargo crime on the road. This type of crime is defined as any theft of cargo committed during its road transportation but excluding internal petty theft. This involves hijacking cases occasionally where force, violence or threats are used against drivers and the vehicle is stolen with its load.
2. Cargo theft by robbery or hijacking during the transportation.
3. Other type of theft includes theft of laden goods where an unattended vehicle and/or trailer is stolen with the load or thefts of load from stationary vehicles by slashing the curtain of the truck or from delivery vehicles left unlocked or unattended.
4. This research will focus on both trunk roads and highways throughout peninsular Malaysia.
1.6 Limitations of Research
Due to the limitation of resources and time factor, this research will not be covering the following areas:
1. Cargo crime at harbour and airport or where the places are within the control of government agencies or business entities;
2. Cargo crime within warehouses or cargo storage premises;
3. The change in criminals’ motivation will not be addressed in this research unless the change is directly dependent on different features in transport security; and
4. Theories that offer different explanations and viewpoints regarding the driving force and motivation behind criminal behaviour. There are many different theories that offer different explanations and viewpoints regarding the driving force and motivation behind criminal behaviour.
1.7 Ethical Issues
Upholding individuals’ rights to confidentiality and privacy is a central tenet of every psychologist’s work. There are also many privacy issues are quirk to the research population quoted by Susan Folkman (2000). This is due to the research participants have the freedom to choose how much information about them that they will reveal and under what circumstances. Therefore researchers should be careful when recruiting participants for a study (Sangeeta, 2003). For example, it is inappropriate to obtain contact information of members of a support group to solicit their participation in research. However, we could give our colleague a letter to those who facilitates the group that explains our research study and provides a way for individuals for their feedback.
Several ethical issues have been addressed while collecting data pertaining to this research. Confidentiality and anonymity issues are strictly adhered to. Data collected from various individuals and organizations are not disclosed to anyone within the industries. It is inappropriate to obtain contact information of members of a support group to solicit their participation in the research. Cover letters that explains the objectives of this research has been distributed and provide a way for individuals to contact the researcher, if they are interested. Respondents are made aware that they are receiving the survey questionnaire because of their involvement in transportation, freight management, logistics or haulage. Their name, the name of their companies, as well as their contact information will be kept strictly confidential and will not be disclosed to any third person or in any kinds of publications or media. As such, all respondents shall be given the following assurance before obtaining their informed and valid consent:
1. The researcher shall identify himself to the potential respondents.
2. The researcher shall explain the nature of the research and its importance to the industry.
3. The researcher shall also explain the methods of completing the survey, including the time required.
4. The researcher shall provide all other information demanded by the potential respondents whether it is before survey, during the survey and after the survey as well.
5. In the case of respondents selected via snowball sampling and their identities are known to the researcher, the researcher shall keep the data collected from them in a highly confidential manner and shall never use the said data in any ways not approved by the said respondents.
6. All data obtained are used in aggregate during the analysis of data, without making any specific reference to any of the said respondents.
7. The respondents are reminded that they are under no legal or moral duty to participate in the survey, and after having consented to take part, they shall retain the absolute right to withdraw at any time without completing the survey.
The researcher has submitted the application for a clearance from the Human Research Ethics Committee, Clinical Research Initiatives – Clinical & Heath Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia Health Campus before commencing data collection process of which the approval has been granted and approval documents are attached in this thesis. Every effort to protect the confidentiality of the information has been made by researcher during data collection and interview sessions.
Reppetto (1976) published crime displacement theory in Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency and put forward his theoretical underpinnings for the future analysis of crime displacement phenomenon and outlined five types of crime displacement as follows:
1. Temporal – Committing the intended crime at a different time
2. Tactical – Committing the intended crime in a different way
3. Target – Committing the intended crime type on a different target
4. Spatial – Committing the intended crime type to the same target in a different place
5. Functional – Committing a different type of crime
Ronald V. Clarke is one of the earliest criminology professors analyzing crime theory by defining crime which is being displaced as crime displacement theory. Clarke (1998) argued that crimes are displaced by removing opportunity for crime or by changing the situation of the crime and when this occurs it does not actually prevent crime but merely moves or shift the crime to another location. There are five main ways in which Clarke (1998) suggested that crime is being moved around:
• geographical displacement – crime can be moved from one location to another which can be identified
• temporal displacement – crime can be moved from one time to another
• target displacement – crime can be directed away from one target to another
• tactical displacement – one method of committing crime can be substituted for another
• crime type displacement – one kind of crime can be substituted for another
Clark (1998) suggested that crime can be reduced by the following: (1) opportunity-reducing measures by analyzing the specific crimes; (2) design the place which makes crime difficult to occur, (3) make the crime itself more difficult and risky for the offenders.
2.4.1 Understanding and discussion on crime displacement theory
The theory of crime displacement is related to rational choice theory and there are three assumptions regarding the potential criminal and the target (Lab, 2000). Lab argued that crime displacement assumes that crime is inelastic; the criminal is flexible in relation to time, place, method and type of crime as well as the existence of unlimited alternatives targets. Professional criminals are more inelastic while opportunist criminal are more elastic (Hesseling, 1994). In reality, criminals are normally limited in their mobility, adaptability and flexibility, relative to a particular crime, place, time, method and the number of targets limited in one way or another (Hesseling, 1994). The theory of crime displacement does not explain the reason of criminals committing a certain crime or why some crimes are more attractive to them than others. Furthermore, it does not explain the criminals’ perceptions and reactions to changes in opportunities (Hesseling, 1994). The key element in all crime is the role that opportunity plays. For example, if there is no opportunity then there will not be any crime (Felson & Clarke, 1998). Crime displacement can happen in different ways or methods. An often-stated opinion about crime displacement is that the theory, its practical usages, can induce a sense of disbelief towards crime prevention initiatives (Town, 2001). One problem with the crime displacement theory is that it is accepted just because it instinctively appeals to people’s common sense. Town (2001) illuminates this problem as:
– Criminals prevented or stopped in one location can find another.
– Common sense is a valuable commodity, but it has its limitations and changes with time.
– Total displacement and partial displacement are different and the usage of common sense is more attracted to the idea of total displacement.
The theory of crime displacement states that rational thinking criminals with crime mobility will alter their criminal behaviour in response to crime prevention efforts (Lab, 2000). The objective is to reduce crime opportunities which will lead to a change in all potential theft situations. Therefore, crime displacement is a valid theory.
Crime displacement is one probable explanation why the criminal pattern changes in a certain system. A practical and common belief about crime displacement is that if criminals have the ability, mobility and flexibility to exploit the weakest link in the chain, the criminal will try their best to commit the crime (Ekwall & Lumsden, 2007). It is the criminals’ ability to organize a successful theft, within the logistics network that could categorize that. The crime preventive measures are of great importance to force a change in the criminals’ decision process. A simple benefit from a crime can illustrates the target that the criminals want. A potential target (product) needs to provide a good combination of profit and easiness to sell the products. The cost side of the criminal decision process can be simplified with theft preventive measures implemented by the different stakeholders within the supply chain. Categorization of criminals is essential in considering the fundamental variables such as the ability of criminals to organize a successful theft, within the supply chain.
Crime displacement theory is related to situational crime prevention based on the theoretical premise of rational choice (Cornish & Clarke, 1986). An individual or criminal makes a decision as to whether or not to commit an offence based on a range of inputs. These include the effort involved, the potential payoff, the degrees’ of peer support for the action, the risk of apprehension and punishment, and individual needs. The theory does not state that a criminal will commit a crime for every opportunity they encounter. Rather, the potential criminal makes a calculated decision about the opportunity to commit a crime (Lab, 2000). A criminal acts according to the rational choice theory, seek to maximize its utility with regards to time and resources available (Bodman & Maultby, 1997). Situational crime prevention addresses the symptoms but not the cause of the crime. This can lead to an excessive trust in technology (Crawford, 1998). Both of these criticisms are valid for the usage of situational crime prevention to hinder cargo theft. Basically, this is achieved by applying the following four prevention principles; i) increased perceived efforts; ii) increased perceived risks; iii) reducing anticipated rewards and; iv) inducing guilt or shame (Clarke, 1992; Clarke & Homel, 1997). The different situational crime prevention principles are used to different degrees in the crime prevention measures within the supply chain.
A deeper understanding is required on the motives and modus operandi of the target groups of offenders which will provide a way of dealing with the limitations of the statistical search for crime displacement (Barr & Pease, 1990). It may not always be possible to interview the offenders, but in some cases insights on the motivation and methods can be provided by closer analysis of the patterns of offenders. In this sense, Clarke (1992) has shown significant variances in the case of automobiles where the risks for different forms of theft, reflect the motives of the offenders. Cornish and Clarke (1987) found that new cars are mostly at risk of being stripped in the United States during the mid-1980s. Many European models with good audio equipment and joyriding American made muscle cars as well as those higher-prices luxury vehicles for re-sale targeted. This could explain the motives of the offenders. Under the dispositional assumptions of traditional criminological theory, situational variables merely determine the time and place of offense. As such, offenders may target for smaller criminal rewards if the alternatives are not feasible. Some offenders are so driven by needs or desires that they have to maintain a certain level of offending regardless of the cost. For many, the elimination of easy opportunities for crime may actually encourage them to explore other criminal alternatives. On the other hand, since crime is the product of purposive and sometimes inventive minds, displacement to other categories of offense or other areas are expected.
There are many examples of crime displacement being reported. A property marking program in Ottawa, Canada may have displaced burglaries from the homes of participants to those of non-participants (Gabor, 1990). Evidence has begun to accumulate of the successful application of situational measures with few displacement costs in accordance with the development of crime displacement analyses. Crime displacement has been studied in specific geographical areas (example, shopping centres, parking lots, housing estates and neighbourhoods). Crime prevention efforts do not try to change the root causes of crime and the criminals who deflected simply shift to other targets or places, severely limiting the net reduction in crime rate. Many researchers in criminology viewed crime displacement as the result of the implementation of effective measures against crime (Gabor, 1990; Ekwall, 2009; Cook & Mac Donald, 2010; Klaus, 2011). Gabor (1990) defined crime displacement as a change in criminal behaviour, along with illegitimate means, which is designed to get away with either specific preventive measures or more general conditions unfavourable to the criminal’s usual mode of operating. For example, a burglar may move to a different housing area, used new tactics, and offend at a different time of the day. Only a few researchers acknowledged and suggested that given the extent to which different forms of displacement operate at the same time, it may be impossible to confirm empirically the existence or magnitude of displacement (Barr & Pease, 1992; Ekblom, 1989). Research on crime displacement tends to assume rational decision making from the criminals. Criminals are most likely to displace when other crime targets are familiar to them (Cornish & Clarke, 1986; Eck, 1993).
Crime displacement has been studied empirically in two different ways; by conducting ethnographic studies of criminals’ motives and criminals’ decision-making processes whether to commit the crime or likewise; and by evaluating the impact of programs to reduce crime. Most studies of crime displacement take the latter approach, evaluating the amount of displacement resulting from a crime prevention measure by examining crime rates in adjacent areas or for other offenses. If researchers observed an increase in crime rates, they typically assume that displacement has occurred and the result of the crime prevention measures being effectively implemented. There are possibilities of factors independent to the prevention measures contributed the increased crime rate such as changes in the offender population, the opportunities structure, or the overall trend of crime rates within the area. Only a few authors have stressed these other factors in their explanations of the displacement effects of crime prevention projects (Hakim & Rengert 1981; Barron, 1991). If these other factors are disregard by the researchers, the amount of crime being displaced may be overestimated. Crime displacement is highly complex and the amount of displacement may depend on whether criminals resort to any combination of alternative targets, times, places, methods, and offenses, and whether these alternatives are familiar to the criminals. In addition, researchers may mistakenly assume that a crime prevention effort may cause an increase in crime rates, when this causal relationship may in fact be spurious. Thus, crime displacement is difficult to predict and often impossible to measure but it is safe to assume that most preventive measures may potentially result in crime displacement. Crime displacement was not found in 22 studies but after reviewing 55 studies it was never 100 percent in the remaining studies (Gabor, 1990; Eck, 1993; Hesseling, 1994). Dingle (2005) in summarizing the crime displacement concluded that, if given a choice, criminals will choose the easiest method, and will choose to commit crimes that provide the least probability of getting caught.
It is very difficult to change peoples’ habit or routine in crime prevention. Cornish and Clarke (2003) developed situational crime prevention techniques which can be grouped into five categories such as:
i. Increasing the efforts,
ii. Increasing the risk,
iii. Reducing the rewards,
iv. Reducing the provocations, and
v. Removing the excuses
Increasing the efforts techniques can be carried out by hardening the targets such as implementation of access control points, screening of exits, and other tools and weapon used to decrease the crime. Reduction of risk by extending the guardianship such as neighbourhood watch, assisting natural surveillance, and strengthening formal surveillance can make crime more difficult to happen. When the opportunity for burglary is blocked, burglar moves to another neighbourhood, but either the frequency of burglary is less than before or the new neighbourhood is less vulnerable than before is uncertain (Clarke & Weisburd, 1994). Crime prevention efforts are supported by the argument that even if the displacement is mild; it spreads the burden of crime more equitable across the community or replaces more serious crime with a less serious one (Barr & Pease, 1990). Eck (1993) summarized 33 crime prevention interventions and displacement in those studies. In 3 of these studies evidence of much displacement was found; in 12 of them there were some displacement; and in 18 of them, there was no displacement (Eck, 1993).
Research on crime displacement began to be carried out in a more systematic manner during the 1990s. There was a significant step forward when research was conducted in Canada (Gabor, 1990) and the United States (Eck, 1993) specifically studies on crime displacement and found it to be much less of a problem than what have generally been thought of. As suggested by Eck (1993), crime displacement occurred where it was most likely to be similar targets or similar and adjacent areas. Although the findings were greatly positive, there was, not surprisingly, a variation between different crimes. Drug dealing, for example, had been found to be susceptible to crime displacement (Rengert, 1990; Sherman, 1990; Caulkins, 1992; Eck 1993), which echoed the views of Barr and Pease (1990) on crime displacement. In 1994, the Ministry of Justice in Holland has tasked Professor Rene B.P. Hesseling to conduct a research systematically by analyzing all the available literatures on crime prevention measures concentrating on crime displacement looking for its related evidences. This major task took him fourteen months by reviewing 55 published articles and research related to crime displacement. The summary of the research revealed that crime displacement is possible, but not an inevitable consequence of crime prevention (Hesseling, 1994). And, if crime displacement does occur, it will be limited in its size and scope. This conclusion is supported by other review studies on this topic (Clarke, 1999). It is believed that criminologists have generally shown little interest in crime displacement prevention. This lack of interest stems from what was regarded as two mistakes of modern criminology. The first mistake is the problem of explaining crime that has been confused with the problem of explaining criminals and the second mistake is the problem of controlling crime with that of dealing with criminals (Moss &Pease, 1999).
In 1999, evaluations were carried out by Building Research Establishment (BRE) (Pascoe, 1999), Gwent Police in South Wales (Brown, 1999) and Applied Criminology Group, University of Huddersfield (Armitage, 1999). The results of all three studies were very positive and the issue of crime displacement was discussed in depth. Although it is not specifically focused on crime displacement, the BRE reported that it has not displace crime to the neighbours and the report found no evidence of crime displacement from prevented burglary into other crime (Brown, 1999). As for crime displacement, the evidence from the broad based analysis suggested that there is a diffusion of benefits, as opposed to displacement of crime.
Crime displacement inevitably occurs with the implementation of policing efforts which are largely based on unfounded suppositions rather than empirical facts (Eck, 1993; Hesseling, 1994; Hill & Pease, 2001). Research also shows that crime displacement is unlikely in the aftermath of broader community development programs (Roman, Cahill, Coggeshall, Lagerson, & Courtney, 2005; McLennan & Whitworth, 2008) and more focused policing initiatives that centred on hot spots crime area (Braga, 1999; Weisburd, 2006; Braga, 2007). An evaluation of the Weed and Seed program in Miami, Florida, found that spatial diffusion of benefits occurred more commonly than spatial displacement (Roman, 2005).
Crime displacement inevitably occurs in the aftermath of problem-led policing efforts which are largely based on unsupported suppositions rather than empirical facts. Research has consistently found that crime displacement is the exception rather than the rule and that diffusion of benefits is just as likely and sometimes more likely to occur (Eck, 1993; Hesseling, 1994; Hill & Pease, 2001). In cases where some crime displacement occur they tend to be less than the gains achieved by the response and found that crime displacement and diffusion are equally likely to occur (Guerette & Bowers, 2008). An analysis of 13 studies, which allowed for the assessment of the prevention project’s overall outcomes while accounting for spatial displacement and diffusion effects, found that when spatial displacement did occur, it tended to be less than the response effect. In short, the responses were still beneficial on average (Guerette, Rob & Kate, 2009). Figure 2.11 presents some of the results from this analysis. Crime displacement tends be observed in 26 percent of the instances, where it is examined, and diffusion is observed 27 percent of the time. The research also suggests that temporal displacement is most common (occurring 36 percent of the time), followed by target (33 percent), offense (26 percent), spatial (23 percent) and tactical (22 percent). As for diffusion, spatial diffusion seems to be the most common (occurring 37 percent of the time) followed by target (24 percent), offense and temporal (each at 16 percent), and tactical (12 percent). Previous reviews of crime prevention evaluations also found that the extent of crime displacement is usually limited. One of the most comprehensive reviews of the extent of crime displacement conducted by Guerette and Bowers (2009) found that crime displacement and diffusion are equally likely to occur. An evaluation of the New Deal for Communities (NDC) program in the United Kingdom discovered that, among 383 buffer zones, spatial diffusion of benefits was observed in 23 percent of the zones, while spatial crime displacement was observed in only 2 percent of the zones. The remaining 75 percent showed no signs of crime displacement or diffusion (McLennan & Whitworth, 2008). Also, across the buffer zones offense diffusion was more common than offense displacement. A review of crime hot spots policing of the five studies that examined crime displacement and diffusion effects found that none of the review reported any substantial immediate spatial displacement of crime into areas surrounding the targeted locations. Four other studies found possible diffusion effects (Braga, 2007). Research conducted to identify the presence of crime displacement in a problem-oriented policing project was conducted in Lowell, Massachusetts and found no significant crime displacement to the areas immediately surrounding the targeted places (Braga & Bond, 2008). It should be noted, however, that there may be times when crime displacement is simply undetectable. Criminals may move to other jurisdictions or switch to other crimes from which no data can be obtained. Due of this, the research findings reported above may undercount the true extent of crime displacement effects. Criminal’s familiarity with locations also provides lower risks to them because they can identify entry and exit points more readily which allow them to approach and leave crime scenes in shorter time. Criminals’ spatial familiarity is primarily determined by the known places and the surrounding area that they frequent as part of their normal living routines. This provides minimal effort for criminals while allowing them to commit crimes easily in their zone. For target and tactical crime displacement, familiarity means criminals are more likely to select similar target and use the same tactics they have used in former crimes. The criminals will not engage on targets they are not familiar. Most criminals acquired skill sets from peer groups and other delinquent associations as well as through their direct and indirect experiences of committing crime (Cornish, 1994). The use of existing skill sets is much less likely in the absence of other available crime targets. Highly motivated criminals may expend the effort to acquire new skill sets, but the more common opportunistic criminal is less likely to do so. The presence of crime opportunities also determines when and where crime displacement may occur as stipulated in Figure 2.12. Crime displacement is more likely to happen where there are suitable crime targets. This is contingent upon the criminals’ motivation and familiarity with the crime targets and tactics required to carry out the crime. Responses that occur adjacent to areas that have unprotected crime targets are more likely to experience some level of crime displacement compared to those that do not.
An exclusive preoccupation with crime displacement is therefore an unhealthy condition. It is symptomatic of security practitioners, government agencies or academician who conceptualizes his/her work as one of reducing the quantity of cargo crime in the short-term. This is not to say that cargo crime cannot be reduced. It can be the focus to include both its short and long-term impact. In this respect; any research on crime displacement and diffusion of benefits needs to be combined with Barr and Pease (1992) term as crime placement. The trend of cargo crime whether they increase or decrease; can be redistributed to other crimes which is still impactful and harmful to society. Cargo crime placement can cause difficult issues of social justice. The excessive concentration of cargo crime in pockets of deprivation and amongst the most vulnerable members of society arguably exacerbates the social harm resulting from cargo crime whether it is material loss, personnel injury, or emotional impact. Crime displacement theory and other criminology theory have been addressed in depth in the literature review. For the practical cargo crime prevention initiatives within the supply chain, the total crime displacement idea seems useful, but in reality, it is more useful for the security professionals to understand and familiar about modus operandi and criminals’ motivations in order to introduce the right crime prevention measures or strategies. Where there is movement of cargo from one location to another, there is always an opportunity of having the cargo being stolen or hijacked during transportation. The theft or crime threat arises from different theft opportunities that will always be present within the supply chain. If this threat within the supply chain is not taken seriously; the risk will increase and in long-term the cost for the supply chain will increase due to cargo losses. These crime opportunities can be reduced by implementing crime prevention methodology. Appropriate counter measures can change the criminals’ decision process and that can be described as when the criminals continues to find the weakest point within his capability and ability to commit cargo crime. The common-sense about crime displacement theory that exists in the trucking within the supply chain needs to be modified. Due to total and partial displacement, there are different issues and the usage of common sense is needed to understand the idea of total crime displacement. For the practical crime prevention strategies within the supply chain, the total displacement idea seems to be ideal, but in reality, it is more important for the supply chain professionals, security professionals and government agencies to work together to take the holistic approach in managing crime within the supply chain in Malaysia.
The holistic approach is useful when security threat arises from the environment and a greater understanding of the cause is needed to reduce the total risk that arises within the supply chain. The risk of cargo threats differs between the supply chain network configurations according to the elements of crime. Different types of cargoes are shipped in different configurations depending on the demands of their respective supply chain’s requirements. The practical consequence of this is that the routine activities perspective is a valid theory for the threat which leads to potential criminals in their pursuit of the right (desirable) object. In doing so, they adjust their activities to the movement of their victim (transportation facilities and mode of transport). The crime opportunity depends on the cargo criminal’s ability to use the routines of the cargo movement in combination with the lack of security control measures at certain operation or location. Cargo, a multibillion dollar industry, will continue to threaten the supply chain security in Malaysia and around the world. It can occur during cargoes being stored or in transit whether by train, truck, air or ocean. Regardless of how a company chooses to store or ship their cargoes, it is still vulnerable to both the organized crime and opportunistic criminals. Therefore, protecting cargoes, both static and on the move should be a top priority for companies.
The outcomes of this research coincide with the research objectives by focusing on the independent secondary data on criminal attacks against trucking, information gathered from interview sessions, intelligence gathered and the analysis of crime displacement theory and supply chain risk management. This research also does not attempt to break the problem down into its simplest parts or uses a hard system approach to provide a wide, multi-level analysis. The risk of the threats may differ between the supply chain network configurations and the element of crime. Different types of cargoes are shipped in different configurations depending on the demands of their respective supply chain requirements and the transport movement are in general very predictable. The practical consequence of this is that crime displacement theory perspective is a valid theory for the threat which leads to the potential criminal. In their pursuit of the right (desirable) object they will adjust activities to the movement (routine) of the victim (transport elements like facilities and transportation modes). The theft opportunities are very dependent on the cargo criminal’s capability to utilize their criminal knowledge, cargo routines movement, in combination with the lack of security control measures at certain operations or locations. The economically driven demand for high value cargoes is subject to the supply and demand forces of the gray market. These driving forces, along with such opportunities as the unique combination of object, place, time, method, and weak security control measures will contribute to the increasing cases of cargo crime within the supply chain in Malaysia. The statistics in this research do not provide a full image of the problem with serious threat against supply chain in Malaysia but by combining several independent statistical sources with a theoretical framework of reference it has establish a good understanding on the patterns and trends of cargo crime in Malaysia. Certain transportation owners or logistics company may think that it is cheaper to prevent the problem than to have it around. This may be one reason why cargo crime continues to exist as a major problem today and it will continue to be a major supply chain security risk and threat in Malaysia.
As criminology becomes more refined in criminological perspective, it becomes more inclined to put our knowledge into action. It is important for Police, government agencies and security professional to use specific crime analyses or tools, and then develop tailored responses to reduce crime. Often these plans of action include the use of some type of crime prevention methodology to influence existing crime patterns. The issue of crime displacement, which for many years has been a central concern to the proponents of crime prevention, therefore occupies a position of great importance in criminology as well. Indeed, the argument that any effort to solve crime problems in one place will simply divert criminal to other locations; is occasionally used by some criminologist as an argument against the implementation of place or crime type orientation in solving crime. Whenever preventive efforts are focused upon specific geographic locations, crime displacement is often a common predicted result. Yet the problem-solving initiatives and “hot-spot” analyses that are being put into practice in many cities often resulted in proactive interventions designed to alter the nature of crime in small, specific locations (Buerger, 1992). If crime displacement is indeed a common outcome of these efforts, understanding the costs and benefits that result from its occurrence is critical to determine the utility of place-oriented for crime prevention.
The cargo criminals are mostly internationally or nationally linked and they are able to bribe insiders to provide them with valuable information related to the cargo movement and types of cargo which are profitable to them. New challenges emerge for the protection and security of the cargo transportation infrastructure which includes accelerating and increase rate of changes in the transportation sector. The rises of sophisticated theft of cargo within the supply chain make it more challenging for the industry to protect the cargo. The new dimensions of secured global transportation are causing major changes in the human resources, security systems and equipments. E-commerce is accelerating changes by reducing order time and shortening of deliveries time. Speed, volume and just-in-time delivery requirements by the customers drive the new strategy of supply chain security. The cargo transportation industry has focussed on information technology to improve services and systems. Security practitioners and security managers therefore must acquire new skills to cope with the rapid changes within the industry. Security professionals need to understand how to adapt to the changes and optimizing the security department’s role in supply chain management and contributing to corporate financial benefits. A new type of criminal is emerging within the supply chain as the “fraudster” who uses the internet and high technology to duplicate documents to near perfect official documents. Despite these challenges, new security programs are gaining slow introduction. Access control seems a logical option, yet implementation can be challenging as the general nature of cargo is to be mobile. It is extremely difficult to protect and secure a moving target. While improving and streamlining systems, security professional must think smarter and integrate existing proven technologies into the supply chain security program.
Despite increased concern about air, truck, rail, maritime and intermodal security, shippers are not applying new program and resources in an effective, coordinated way and this has to change. To be successful in protecting the cargo, supply chain security must address the fact that professional criminals are increasing transportation activities and are especially aggressive in cultivating black markets for stolen cargos in region experiencing economic, social and political difficulties. Additionally, law enforcement agencies are hard-pressed to disrupt cargo theft rings and syndicates are becoming more adept at tracking and seizing cargo on the road and infiltrating logistics and supply chain management systems.
This research topic or area needs more attention from both academia’s’ as well as from the business organization itself. The authorities (Police) in Malaysia need to increase their attention on cargo crime due to the existence of different supply chain security threats. In order to have better understanding and prevention of cargo crime in Malaysia, cargo criminals must be included in the analysis to determine whether criminals will displace to other location or committing other types of crime when Police implements deterrent measures and trucking companies enhanced their security control measures. Malaysia authority needs to be involved because civilian or security practitioners do not have access to the criminals for them to participate in the research. If it is achievable then this may lead to new criminology theory and knowledge about cargo crime behaviour and would continue to collaborate with theories from other scientific fields. The research has concluded that crime displacement theory is applicable and relevant to cargo crime within the supply chain in Malaysia.