Research and analysis

Anti-social behaviour: impacts on individuals and local communities

Published 27 March 2023

Applies to England and Wales

Executive summary

Background and context

Despite often being described as ‘low-level crime’, existing evidence suggests anti-social behaviour (ASB) can result in a range of negative emotional, behavioural, social, health and financial impacts. These include negative mental health effects, avoidance behaviours and decreased economic productivity. While existing evidence explores what the impacts of ASB are, the Home Office commissioned Ipsos to conduct mixed methods research to better understand the impacts on victims and their wider community. Specifically, to:

• improve current understanding of the individual impacts of ASB on people who have experienced or witnessed it, including quantifying these impacts
• explore the wider impacts of ASB beyond the individual, such as impacts on the community and overall trust in institutions, including quantifying these impacts
• identify differences between ASB types and how this affects the level of impact on the individual and the wider community

This research can support intervention design, targeting support towards those individuals with characteristics linked to more severe impacts. Moreover, it can help to support future research, such as possible future work looking into the scale and costs of the impacts of ASB.

Key findings

Impacts of ASB

Demographics and personal circumstances were associated with different types of ASB that were likely to be experienced or witnessed. Those living in the most deprived areas were more likely to have experienced or witnessed ASB in the last 12 months compared to those in less deprived areas. Those with long-term physical or mental health conditions were more likely to have experienced or witnessed ASB in the last 12 months compared to those without the same conditions. As experiences of ASB were distributed disproportionately, impacts are also likely to be distributed disproportionately. Therefore, interventions could be more effectively targeted to support those groups disproportionately impacted.

ASB had impacted nearly all participants’ quality of life to some degree. This impact was greater when:

• ASB was personally experienced compared to witnessed^{[footnote 1]}
• the ASB incidents were more frequent
• participants had certain personal or situational circumstances that increased their likelihood of experiencing ASB impacts; these included individuals with mental or physical health conditions, those living in more deprived areas and younger people, among others

This study helped to quantify the individual impacts of ASB. Emotional impacts were found among nearly all participants, with annoyance (for 56% of participants) and anger (for 42%) being the most widespread impacts across ASB types. Fear, loss of confidence, difficulty sleeping and anxiety were also common emotional impacts. While they were less commonly experienced (each by around a quarter of participants) , they were described as being more severe and longer lasting.

Many individuals also reported behavioural impacts as a result of ASB, with avoidance behaviours being the most regularly referenced. Around a third (36%) had avoided certain places, and around a quarter (24%) went out less often. Just under a fifth (17%) felt the need to change their travel habits as a result of experiencing or witnessing ASB.

Individual emotional and behavioural impacts were generally similar across types of ASB, however, there were certain types of ASB where different impacts manifested more than others. For example, those who experienced or witnessed people being intimidated/harassed were the most likely to report fear and loss of confidence, whereas those who experienced or witnessed youths/teenagers/groups hanging around were most likely to have reported avoiding certain places.

ASB also impacted wider communities^{[footnote 2]}, both positively and negatively. Participants recognised that while ASB in general could reduce trust and a sense of community by making people avoid interaction, it could also bring people together by having a common cause.

Impacts did not tend to happen in isolation. Instead, they were highly linked between individual emotional and behavioural effects as well as interpersonal, network and community-wide dimensions. Often one impact served as a catalyst for others and created a knock-on effect. For example, a loss of confidence could lead to avoidance behaviours and then a decline in a sense of community. Therefore, ASB interventions targeted at an individual level will also likely be effective in easing community and wider-area impacts.

Demographics were a key factor in influencing the scale of impacts experienced by the individual. Those more exposed to ASB, those who live in more deprived areas or who have a mental or physical health condition were more likely to experience significant impacts. Moreover, younger people, those living in London or Cardiff, people from white ethnic backgrounds and people with higher incomes were more likely to experience a significant impact from ASB. Other factors, such as being pregnant or having children, also played a role in the severity of ASB impacts experienced.

The role of reporting and support

Whether an individual reported the incident, received support or was satisfied with the outcome also influenced – both positively and negatively – the degree of impact felt. Where experiences were negative, participants reported feeling annoyance, hopelessness and a loss of trust in reporting agencies. Similarly, participants felt the impacts they experienced worsened when they were not provided with support that they thought to be appropriate. There were very few differences between ASB types when it came to perceptions of reporting and support.

Those reporting ASB commonly had to gather additional evidence of the ASB taking place before agencies and organisations would take action. This was thought to be burdensome for victims/witnesses, and their avoidance behaviours generally continued while this process was happening. Those reporting incidents were also fearful of repercussions from perpetrators.

Agencies, organisations and those who experienced or witnessed ASB highlighted several ways in which the reporting process and support offered could reduce the negative impacts of ASB. This included timely responses and communication to make sure people feel listened to, options for anonymous reporting, support being delivered through different mediums, involving the community in the resolution process and a more connected formal support system.

1. Introduction

1.1 Background

Despite often being described as ‘low-level crime’^{[footnote 3]}, existing evidence suggests that ASB can result in a range of negative emotional, behavioural, social, health and financial impacts. ASB has been linked to personal harm including avoidance behaviours, changed routines and an impact on quality of life^{[footnote 4]}. Other implications of ASB include negative mental health, such as living in fear and increased stress and anxiety, leading to experiences of panic attacks and depression. Furthermore, there is evidence to suggest that ASB is associated with negative impacts on the economy. These impacts relate to economic productivity, house prices, the success of local businesses and the prevalence of other crime types^{[footnote 5]}.

ASB covers a wide range of activities. There are several ways in which the different types of ASB can be categorised and managed, including the police’s National Standard for Incident Recording (NSIR)^{[footnote 6]} counting rules and the Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW)^{[footnote 7]} ASB breakdown. In this study, the CSEW categories are used and adapted slightly (the full ASB category list can be found in Annex A). This provides a more detailed breakdown of ASB types than the 3 categories included in the NSIR. Within this wide range, the impact between one ASB type over another can differ considerably.

There are limitations to the existing evidence base. While existing evidence explores what the impacts of ASB are, there is minimal evidence about how impacts vary across different types of ASB and how impacts interact with different demographics and characteristics. As well as this, available evidence tends to draw on limited sample sizes and is often outdated. These gaps limit the utility and prioritisation of interventions and victim support. By using a mixed methods approach and providing a comprehensive sample size, this research can go some way in filling these gaps and can support intervention design, targeting interventions at those with the most ‘at risk’ characteristics and prioritising types of ASB most likely to cause severe impacts. Moreover, it can help to support future research, such as possible future work into the scale and costs of ASB.

1.2 Research objectives

The Home Office commissioned Ipsos to conduct research to better understand the impacts of ASB on victims and their wider community. Specifically, this research sought to:

• improve current understanding of the individual impacts of ASB on people who have experienced or witnessed it, including quantifying these impacts
• explore the wider impacts of ASB beyond the individual, such as impacts on the community and overall trust in institutions, including quantifying these impacts
• identify differences between ASB types and how this affects the level of impact on the individual and the wider community

1.3 Methodology

1.3.1 Summary of the fieldwork design

To achieve these research aims and objectives, this study used a mixed methods approach, including:

• qualitative focus groups with victims and witnesses of ASB
• in-depth interviews with victims as well as agencies and organisations who respond to ASB
• a quantitative survey with the general public

This report focuses on findings from across the methodologies. An outline of what each of the research methodologies sought to achieve is summarised in Table 1.

Table 1: Summary of what each strand of quantitative and qualitative research aimed to achieve

Agencies’ and organisations’ interviews	Victim interviews, focus groups and national survey
Understand the impacts of ASB on both an individual and wider level from agencies’ and organisations’ perspectives	Improve current understanding of the individual impacts of ASB on people who have experienced or witnessed it
	Explore the wider impacts of ASB beyond the individual (for example, on communities) and to assess overall trust in institutions
	Identify differences between ASB types and how this affects the level of impact on the individual and the wider community

1.3.2 Qualitative approach

All qualitative research was conducted between March and April 2022 and focused on 5 areas of interest, identified through analysis of police recorded incident data: Liverpool, Leicester, Newcastle upon Tyne, Cardiff and Westminster^{[footnote 8]}.

The qualitative research was made up of 3 methods, including:

• focus groups with victims/witnesses
• in-depth interviews with victims/witnesses
• interviews with agencies and organisations

As with all qualitative research, the findings below may not be applicable to the general population. The high levels of prevalence of ASB and the diverse nature in which it is experienced means that, inevitably, not all impacts will be captured.

Ten focus groups across the 5 case study areas were conducted with victims/witnesses of ASB. Each focus group lasted 2 hours and was made up of 6 participants (60 participants in total). The focus groups provided active discussion between participants to:

• understand where experiences were similar or varied
• enable deliberation over the severity of various types of ASB
• discuss the impacts ASB had on them and those around them

To enable participants to discuss their experiences in this forum without high levels of distress, those who said they were impacted ‘a great deal’ when screened ahead of participating were offered an individual in-depth interview instead.

In-depth interviews with victims/witnesses were used to gain a deeper understanding of the impacts of ASB. A total of 50 one-hour interviews were conducted with victims from each of the 5 case study areas. Interviews focused on the impacts of ASB on them, those around them and their community, and how, if at all, trust in institutions has been affected.

In-depth interviews with agencies and organisations were conducted to better understand their thoughts of the impacts on ASB on individuals and their wider networks. Interview participants included representatives from local police forces, local authorities and housing associations. Thirty-five hour-long interviews were conducted with local agencies and organisations, and 5 hour-long interviews were conducted with national agencies and organisations.

Sample tables and discussion guides for each of the above approaches can be found in Annex B and Data collection materials (section 1), respectively.

1.3.3 Quantitative approach

The quantitative survey was conducted via Ipsos’ online panel, ‘iSay’, between 13 and 23 March 2022. The survey collected responses from 2,500 participants living in England and Wales who had either personally experienced or witnessed ASB in the previous 12 months. These participants were asked to select the types of ASB they had experienced/witnessed from a set list of 13 ASB types (the full category list can be found in Annex A ). These were adapted, in collaboration with the Home Office from the CSEW, to provide a more detailed breakdown of types and for consistency as much as possible with other existing datasets. Sample information can be found in Annex B .

For national representativeness, overall survey data^{[footnote 9]} was weighted to nationally representative proportions based on age, gender, region and Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) score^{[footnote 10]}.

Participants were asked about their overall experiences of ASB in their local area, as well as the detailed emotional and behavioural impacts from the specific incidents they had experienced/witnessed. The full survey questionnaire can be found in Data collection materials (section 2).

Statistical analysis was conducted to understand whether one overarching demographic factor was creating differences in perceptions, experiences and impacts. No single demographic factor was found to do this; instead, multiple factors played a role.

Unless otherwise specified, throughout this report, all statistical comparisons between stated figures are significant at the 95% confidence level. Where sample sizes are below n=50, these will be highlighted and should be interpreted with caution.

1.4 Report structure

Section 2: Understanding whom ASB impacts

This provides an overview of the perceptions and experiences of ASB, including whether people perceived ASB as a crime. It also outlines the types of ASB participants have witnessed or experienced in the past 12 months to understand how impacts may be distributed.

Section 3: Understanding the impact of ASB on individuals

This explores the impact of ASB at an individual level, including considering the quality of life, emotional impacts, behavioural impacts, and instances where there is no impact on the individual.

Section 4: Wider impacts beyond the individual

This looks at the broader level of impact of ASB, including the impact on the personal network of victims, the impact at a community level and the structural impacts of it.

Section 5: Personal factors influencing ASB impacts

This explores in depth the factors that influence the impact of ASB. The factors considered range from personal characteristics such as age, gender and ethnicity, to broader factors such as region, levels of income and health.

Section 6: The impact of the response to reporting ASB

This looks at the role incident reporting to agencies and support has on the experience of the impacts of ASB, both negative and positive.

Section 7: Conclusions

This explores the insights that can be drawn from the research to inform policy and interventions.

Both qualitative and quantitative findings have been used throughout the report and are identified where used. Quotes from participants have been used to illustrate findings throughout the report. Quotes are attributed based on how participants define themselves and their experiences^{[footnote 11]}.

2. Understanding whom ASB impacts

This Section explores how the perception and experience of ASB vary among different demographic groups. It, therefore, allows for a better understanding of how the impacts of ASB tend to be distributed among different groups of people and how this can ultimately influence the level of impact ASB has on an individual and their wider network. It concludes that there is a need to tailor interventions for relevant demographic factors to account for the varying impacts and type of support required.

Key findings:

1. There were several factors that influenced perceptions and experiences of ASB. Those that contributed to negative perceptions included the extent to which ASB was considered a problem in the local community, the level of deprivation in the local area and health-related factors. This suggests that interventions to support those experiencing/witnessing ASB should target these core groups and account for their needs.

2. Across most types of ASB, men were more likely than women to have personally experienced ASB. Women were more likely to have witnessed ASB.

3. There was recognition that what is classed as an ASB incident is subjective depending on the incident and the individual experiencing/witnessing it. The highest earners (£45K and above annual income) were more likely than those with a lower income to view ASB incidents as a crime. There was more acceptance of ASB among the youngest age group (those aged 18 to 34) who were more likely to view incidents they experienced/witnessed as ‘normal’ behaviour.

4. The extent to which ASB was seen as a problem at a local level differed greatly by demographics such as age, gender, region and personal circumstances. While the youngest (those aged 18 to 34) were more likely to interpret incidents as ‘normal’ behaviour, they were also more likely than those aged 35 and above to feel that ASB is a ‘very/fairly big’ problem in their local area. This suggests that they have a consistently high exposure to incidents.

2.1 Differences in perceptions of ASB

2.1.1 Defining ASB

Across the qualitative research, agencies, organisations and individuals who have experienced or witnessed ASB were asked how they would define ASB and then shown the Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014 definition^{[footnote 12]}. The views of agencies, organisations and members of the public typically aligned with the definition, describing ASB as behaviour that disrupted standards of living, or that caused distress or nuisance to others.

However, the nuances of how this definition was interpreted varied. Both agencies/organisations and victims/witnesses recognised that the causes and meaning of nuisance or distress could be subjective depending on the individual experiencing or witnessing it.

‘I think different officers [housing officers, Community Safety Partnership officers] would define ASB in different ways.’ Stakeholder, local authority, Leicester

‘It’s a difficult one because everyone has their own interpretation.’ Witnessed and experienced ASB, male, 24, Newcastle upon Tyne

Moreover, qualitative participants perceived different types of ASB to sit on a scale of severity. This was also reflected in the survey findings, where participants had inconsistent views on which types of behaviour would be considered ‘normal’, anti-social or a crime Figure 2.1. While some behaviours had greater consensus, all 13 types of behaviour were viewed as ‘a crime’, ‘anti-social but not a crime’ or ‘normal behaviour’ to varying degrees.

Survey participants were more likely to perceive people using/evidence of drugs (71%) and vandalism (65%) as a crime. On the other hand, ASB related to the community was more commonly perceived as anti-social but not a crime, such as loud music/noise (75%), inconsiderate behaviour (73%), youths/teenagers/groups hanging around (68%) and drunken behaviour (67%). The boundary at which ASB becomes a crime was less clear for sexual ASB^{[footnote 13]}. Two-in-five of those who had experienced/witnessed sexual ASB (44%) believed this type of behaviour to be a crime, and a similar proportion (47%) believed it to be anti-social but not a crime.

The variety in how the types of ASB are perceived is likely to influence the ways in which those who witness or experience each type respond. For example, those who experience or witness types that are more commonly perceived as a crime may be more likely to report it to the police. This should be considered when measuring the prevalence of ASB types. The variety of perceptions is also likely to influence the type of impact felt by participants, with those considered a crime likely to have deeper, longer-term impacts.

Figure 2.1: Perceptions of different types of ASB as a crime, anti-social but not a crime or ‘normal’ behaviour (%)

Note:

1. Base size: All who have witnessed/experienced type of ASB in last 12 months and answered the question: people using/evidence of drugs (523), vandalism (516), sexual ASB (116), vehicle-related ASB (585), people being intimidated/harassed (464), environmental ASB (432), problems with out-of-control dogs (195), aggressive begging (321), nuisance neighbours (477), drunken behaviour (505), inconsiderate behaviour (673), youths/teenagers/groups hanging around (712), loud music/noise (534).

2.1.2 Demographic differences when defining ASB

The survey highlighted demographic factors, including income and age, that influenced perceptions of what should be defined as ‘normal’ behaviour, ASB or a crime.

Those in the highest annual income bracket (£45K and above) were more likely to view the incidents they experienced or witnessed as a crime, while those with a lower income were more likely to view the incidents they witnessed as anti-social but not a crime, or ‘normal’ behaviour.

Age also emerged as a factor that influenced perceptions of ASB. The survey results showed that ASB was more normalised among the youngest age group (those aged 18 to 34) than it was for those in the older age groups. These respondents were more likely to view incidents they had experienced and/or witnessed related to youths/teenagers/groups hanging around, drunken behaviour, vandalism, inconsiderate behaviour, people using/evidence of drugs and environmental ASB as ‘normal’ behaviour compared to those who were in the older age groups. Across all the same incidents, those aged 35 and over viewed these as either anti-social but not a crime, or a crime rather than as ‘normal’ behaviour. The qualitative research aligned with this, with older participants tending to associate ASB with younger people being inconsiderate and smoking, drinking and fighting.

This suggests that income and age are likely to influence the extent to which an impact is felt from different types of ASB. This may also influence the likelihood of reporting the incident.

2.1.3 Demographic differences in perceptions of ASB as a local problem

Survey results showed mixed perceptions of the extent to which ASB was considered a problem within the participant’s local area. As seen in Figure 2.2, almost half (47%) indicated that they perceived ASB to be a ‘very’ or ‘fairly’ big problem in their local area, while 50% of respondents viewed ASB as ‘not a very big problem’ or ‘not a problem at all’ in their local area^{[footnote 14]}. Despite this mixed picture, there was a greater consensus among respondents that levels of ASB had increased. More than half (59%) indicated that they thought ASB had gone up ‘a lot’ or ‘a little’ over the last few years in their local area, with only 8% thinking it had gone down ‘a lot’ or ‘a little’.

Figure 2.2: Levels of perception of ASB as a problem in the local area (%)

Notes:

1. Base size for Q1 and Q2: All (2,500).
2. Base size for Q3: Those who said ASB in their area has gone up or down in the last few years (1,667).

Perceptions of the extent to which ASB was considered to be a problem in local areas varied based on certain demographics and characteristics. These demographics may influence the extent to which an impact from ASB is felt as well as the likelihood of reporting the incident.

Age was key in determining views, with the youngest age group (those aged 18 to 34) being more likely to feel that ASB is a ‘very big’ or ‘fairly big’ problem in their local area (57%) than those aged 35 to 54 (50%) and those aged 55 and over (34%). This was despite the 18 to 34 age group being more likely to interpret ASB as ‘normal’ behaviour across a number of ASB types, as described above. Participants across the qualitative research with members of the public suggested that this could be a result of younger people being more exposed to ASB, making them more aware of instances. However, in contrast to this, those aged 18 to 34 were least likely to believe ASB had gone up ‘a little’ or ‘a lot’ in the last few years (53%) compared to those aged 35 to 54 (63%) and those aged 55 and over (60%). This suggests that exposure has been consistently high among this younger age group.

Perceptions also varied by gender, with more men (50%) indicating that ASB was a ‘very big’ or ‘fairly big’ problem in their local area compared to women (44%). Men were also more likely to believe that the level of ASB had gone up ‘a lot’ (25%) in their local area over the past few years than women (18%). This could be connected to the fact that more men reported personally experiencing ASB in the survey.

The quantitative survey showed that region also influenced perceptions of how much of a problem ASB was. At a regional level, participants who lived in London were most likely to consider ASB to be a ‘very big’ or ‘fairly big’ problem (63%), followed by participants in Wales and the North East of England (both at 53%).

Perceptions also varied based on the level of deprivation (based on IMD)^{[footnote 15]}. Figure 2.3 shows that the more deprived an area is classified to be, the more likely ASB is thought to be a problem locally. Qualitative interviews with agencies and organisations that worked in areas of higher deprivation suggested that this could be connected to wider socio-economic issues experienced in these areas. These include reduced access to services like youth clubs, higher levels of unemployment and substance abuse issues. This highlights the importance of viewing and responding to perpetrators and victims in the context of their own experiences.

‘There’s an absolute recognition that people who are perpetrating ASB are probably perpetrators because they’ve had adverse childhood experience, that they’ve been through some sort of trauma, that they’ve got mental health, drug, and alcohol issues.’ National stakeholder

‘Anti-social behaviour is almost always a product of the environment and the, kind of, socio-economic background, but also it comes from boredom. People do not take part in anti-social behaviour when they’ve got better things to do.’ Witnessed ASB, female, 31, Newcastle upon Tyne

Figure 2.3: Extent to which people think ASB is a problem in their local area by the level of deprivation (%)^{[footnote 16]}

Note:

1. Base size: All (2,500).

Personal circumstances, including social grades, housing circumstances and mental and physical health, also influenced perceptions of the extent to which ASB was a problem at a local level. Those classified as C2DE were more likely to believe ASB to be a ‘very big’ or ‘fairly big’ problem (56%) than those who are ABC1 (45%)^{[footnote 17]}. Similarly, those who resided in a flat were more likely to believe ASB is a ‘very big’ or ‘fairly big’ problem (59%) compared to those who lived in a house (44%). This could be a result of living in closer proximity to others, and therefore a greater potential to be living in closer proximity to instances of ASB.

In terms of mental and physical health, more than a quarter (28%) of participants who had a long-term physical or mental health condition believed that the level of ASB had gone up ‘a lot’ over the past few years. This is compared to 18% of those who did not have the same conditions. Additionally, participants who had a long-term physical or mental health condition were more likely (51%) to believe their area had a ‘very big’ or ‘fairly big’ problem with ASB compared to those who did not suffer from the same conditions (45%). This indicates that vulnerabilities should continue to be a key consideration when responding to and supporting victims of ASB, particularly when related to mental and physical health.

2.1.4 Perceptions of the impact of coronavirus (COVID-19)

As shown in figure 2.2, two thirds (67%) of survey respondents thought that the COVID-19 pandemic had played a role in the levels of ASB changing in their local area, and as a result, influenced the impact felt. In total, 56% of respondents thought it played a role in ASB going up ‘a lot’ or ‘a little’, while 11% thought it played a role in ASB going down either ‘a little’ or ‘a lot’. Qualitative interviews with individuals who had witnessed/experienced ASB suggested that the perceived increase was a result of an increased amount of time spent at home, meaning perpetrators had more time to commit ASB or that victims were more aware of incidents occurring around their homes. The perceived increase in ASB during the COVID-19 pandemic suggests that the impacts felt may also have increased.

Similar to other perceptions of ASB, opinions on the role of COVID-19 varied based on different factors. The survey showed that those living in a flat were more likely to believe that COVID-19 had caused an increase in ASB (63%) than those living in a house (55%). The qualitative research suggested that this was a result of being at home more and that those in a flat were in closer proximity to their neighbours than those in a house. Those in the highest annual income bracket of £45K and above (66%) also perceived ASB to have increased as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic more than those earning £15,000 to £44,999 (51%) and those earning up to £14,999 (50%).

2.2 Differences in experiencing/witnessing ASB

2.2.1 Demographic differences in ASB experienced/witnessed

Participants involved in the research experienced and witnessed a broad range of ASB types, as can be seen in Figure 2.4. Youths/teenagers/groups hanging around was the most prevalent, with two in five (41%) survey participants having personally experienced or witnessed this type of ASB, followed by inconsiderate behaviour at 38% and vehicle-related ASB at 35%.

Figure 2.4: Types of ASB personally experienced or witnessed in the last 12 months in the local area

Note:

1. Base size: All (2,500).

Several factors influenced perceptions and experiences of ASB, and therefore, the distribution of impacts. These included the extent to which ASB was considered a problem in the local area, and demographic factors including age, gender, level of deprivation in the local area and health-related factors.

The survey data highlighted a connection between participants’ perceptions of ASB as a problem in their local area and their experiences. While the mean number of types of incidents experienced or witnessed in the last 12 months in the local area was 3.7, this rose to 4.3 for those who believed ASB to be a ‘very big’ or ‘fairly big’ problem in their local area. This demonstrates a link between perceptions of ASB in the local area and personal experience.

Men (compared to women), those aged 18 to 34 (compared to those aged 35 and above), and people residing in the most deprived areas (compared to the least deprived) were significantly more likely to have personally experienced or witnessed ASB in the last 12 months according to the survey results. The less deprived the area, the less likely people were to have personally experienced or witnessed an ASB incident.

Those who had a long-term physical or mental health condition were also more likely to have personally experienced or witnessed ASB than those without the same conditions.

As a result of more commonly experiencing or witnessing ASB incidents, these groups are likely to disproportionately feel the impacts of ASB. This suggests that interventions to support those experiencing or witnessing ASB should target these core groups and account for their needs.

2.2.2 Witnessing compared to experiencing ASB

There was some variation as to which ASB types were more likely to be experienced or witnessed, as seen in Figure 2.5. In some cases, experiencing was more common than witnessing. Of those who had experienced/witnessed nuisance neighbours, 60% had personally experienced this rather than witnessed it. There were also higher proportions of experience with loud music/noise (57%), aggressive begging (56%), problems with out-of-control dogs (56%) and sexual ASB (56%). In other cases, witnessing was more common than experiencing. There were proportionally more people that had witnessed people using/evidence of drugs (69%), vandalism (62%), drunken behaviour (61%) and environmental ASB (61%), than people that had experienced these.

It is worth noting that some types of ASB were more commonly witnessed rather than experienced based on their very nature. For instance, people using/evidence of drugs and drunken behaviour are not behaviours that can inherently be targeted towards an individual and are, therefore, more likely to be witnessed rather than directly experienced by an individual. The trends discussed above reflect these expected splits. Attribution to whether an incident of ASB was experienced or witnessed was done by participants, meaning it is subjective.

Figure 2.5: Proportion of those who experienced compared to witnessed ASB, by type (%)

Note:

1. Base size: All who have witnessed/experienced type of ASB in last 12 months and answered the question: nuisance neighbours (477), loud music/noise (534), aggressive begging (321), problems with out-of-control dogs (195), sexual ASB (116), people being intimidated/harassed (464), inconsiderate behaviour (673), vehicle-related ASB (585), youths/teenagers/groups hanging around (712), environmental ASB (432), drunken behaviour (505), vandalism (516), people using/evidence of drugs (523).

The survey found that personally experiencing ASB had a greater impact on individuals than those who were witnesses to it. The 4 most impactful types of ASB (sexual ASB, nuisance neighbours, problems with out-of-control dogs and loud music/noise, see sub-section 3.1.1) were all more commonly experienced rather than witnessed. Qualitative research suggested that experiencing ASB was more impactful because the incident felt targeted at them as an individual rather than it being an action that they had happened upon by chance. As such, it resonated with them more emotionally.

Survey results showed that some types of ASB were more likely to be personally experienced or witnessed by certain demographics. Across most types, men were more likely than women to have personally experienced ASB^{[footnote 18]}. This was significantly so for drunken behaviour (38% for men compared to 29% for women), people using/evidence of drugs (30% for men compared to 22% for women) and environmental ASB (42% for men compared to 26% for women).

The support requirements for those who have experienced compared to witnessed ASB may vary, and therefore this should be considered when targeting support-based interventions.

2.2.3 Demographic/circumstantial differences in frequency of ASB experienced/witnessed

As illustrated by Figure 2.6, the quantitative survey showed nuisance neighbours (42%), environmental ASB (39%), people using/evidence of drugs (39%), aggressive begging and sexual ASB (both 38%) to be the types of ASB that were likely to happen most frequently (once a week or more often). In contrast, people being intimidated/harassed (55%) and vandalism (53%) were likely to occur less frequently (less often than once or twice a month).

Figure 2.6: Frequency with which different types of ASB are experienced/witnessed (%)

Notes:

1. Base size: All who have witnessed/experienced type of ASB in last 12 months and answered the question: nuisance neighbours (477), environmental ASB (432), people using/evidence of drugs (523), aggressive begging (321), sexual ASB (116), loud music/noise (534), problems with out-of-control dogs (195), vehicle-related ASB (585), youths/teenagers/groups hanging around (712), inconsiderate behaviour (673), drunken behaviour (505), vandalism (516), people being intimidated/harassed (464).
2. Nets: Once a week or more = every day/almost every day; at least once a week. Once or twice a month = at least once a fortnight; at least once a month. Less often = a few times in the last 12 months; once in the last 12 months.

The data indicated several demographic factors that contributed to the frequency with which ASB types were experienced or witnessed. For example, across the different types of ASB, the general trend was that men were more likely than women to personally experience or witness an ASB incident ‘once a week or more often’. This was significantly so for vandalism (25% for men, compared to 14% for women), inconsiderate behaviour (31% for men, compared to 24% for women), people being intimidated/harassed (25% for men, compared to 14% for women), aggressive begging (44% for men, compared to 31% for women) and sexual ASB (49% for men, compared to 23% for women).

Age also interacted with the reported frequency of experiencing or witnessing ASB. Those in the oldest age group (aged 55 and above) were significantly more likely to have experienced/witnessed ASB ‘less often than once or twice a month,’ across most ASB types, apart from nuisance neighbours, environmental and sexual ASB, when compared to those aged 18 to 34.

Across most ASB types aside from environmental ASB, aggressive begging and sexual ASB, those who believed ASB to be a ‘very big’ or ‘fairly big’ problem in their local area were significantly more likely to have experienced/witnessed ASB at least once a week than those who believed ASB to be less of a problem or not a problem at all locally. Across these same ASB types, there was a link between impact on quality of life and ASB frequency. Those experiencing the most significant effect were more likely to have experienced/witnessed ASB at least once a week than those who had seen ‘little effect’. As such, those experiencing/witnessing ASB the most often are more likely to require community-based support to help tackle ASB within their local areas as well as additional targeted ongoing support from future interventions.

3. Understanding the impact of ASB on individuals

This Section explores the impact that different types of ASB can have on those who experience or witness it. The survey covered a range of impacts that can affect an individual’s quality of life, including emotional and behavioural impacts. These impacts were also explored at length in the interviews with the public, which provided detailed examples and nuance. Findings also highlight the connection that often exists between the range of ASB impacts experienced by victims.

Key findings:

1. ASB had negatively impacted nearly all participants’ quality of life to some degree. This impact was greater when ASB was personally experienced compared to witnessed, when the ASB incidents were more frequent, or when victims had certain personal or situational circumstances that increased their likelihood of experiencing ASB impacts.
2. The types of ASB that were most likely to have a significant impact on participants’ quality of life were sexual ASB, nuisance neighbours, problems with out-of-control dogs and loud music/noise.
3. Findings from the quantitative survey suggested that those who experienced or witnessed sexual ASB experienced very profound impacts. Across all types of ASB, sexual ASB was associated with the highest proportion of participants who felt the quality of their lives had been significantly impacted. However, while speculative, the findings from the qualitative research suggest that this could be because of the misinterpretation of sexual ASB as sexual harassment, which could result in more severe impacts.

4. Annoyance and anger were the most common emotional impacts experienced across most types of ASB. Fear and loss of confidence were also common. More serious psychological effects, such as anxiety/panic attacks and depression, were experienced by around one in five of those who had experienced or witnessed ASB in the past year.

5. The most common behavioural impact across types of ASB was avoidance, which included avoiding certain places or situations, going out less often and changing travel plans. Just over half of participants reported avoidance behaviours as a result of ASB.

6. There were several different ways that people who experienced/witnessed ASB had been impacted financially. These included the loss of employment/change of jobs, investment in security measures and investment in repairing damage caused by ASB.

3.1 Quality of life

3.1.1 Impact on quality of life

Almost all survey participants (92%) reported their quality of life being negatively impacted by ASB in some way^{[footnote 19]}. However, the level of impact was not universal among these participants. As demonstrated in Figure 3.1, 36% said that the ASB incidents they encountered had ‘little effect’ on their quality of life, while 35% said it had ‘some effect’ and 21% reported it to have a ‘significant effect’ on their quality of life.

Figure 3.1: Degree of ASB impact on survey participants’ quality of life, across all types of ASB experienced/witnessed

Note:

1. Base size: All (2,500).

When looking at the impact of ASB on individuals’ quality of life by type of ASB, there are several types which appear to have had a greater effect. For instance, Figure 3.2 illustrates that those who experienced or witnessed sexual ASB^{[footnote 20]}, nuisance neighbours, problems with out-of-control dogs and loud music/noise were more likely to report a significant effect^{[footnote 21]} on their quality of life compared to other types of ASB.

Figure 3.2: The impact of ASB on survey participants’ quality of life, per type of ASB (%)

Note:

1. Base size: All who have witnessed/experienced type of ASB in last 12 months and answered the question: sexual ASB (116), nuisance neighbours (477), problems with out-of-control dogs (195), loud music/noise (534), people being intimidated/harassed (464), aggressive begging (321), vandalism (516), inconsiderate behaviour (673), environmental ASB (432), vehicle-related ASB (585), drunken behaviour (505), people using/evidence of drugs (523), youths/teenagers/groups hanging around (712).

Several factors influenced the extent to which quality of life was impacted. These included whether the ASB was experienced compared to witnessed, and the frequency. As such, these factors should be considered when designing and implementing support interventions for victims of ASB.

Figure 3.3 depicts the individuals who claimed that ASB had a significant impact on their life, broken down by whether they had experienced or witnessed the type of ASB. Those who had personally experienced ASB were the most likely to have felt a greater negative impact, compared to those who had only witnessed or those who had either witnessed or personally experienced it. For example, out of those who experienced vandalism, the majority (68%) had felt a significant effect, whereas a much smaller proportion of those who had witnessed only (5%) felt a significant effect.

The total of percentages for each type of ASB do not equal 100% as bases for each type of ASB include participants who had only personally experienced or witnessed that type of ASB in addition to participants who had either personally experienced or witnessed that type of ASB (which may include participants who have both personally experienced and witnessed that type of ASB).

Figure 3.3: Type of encounter (experienced/witnessed) among survey participants who felt a significant impact on their quality of life from ASB, per type of ASB (%)^{[footnote 22]}

Notes:

1. Percentages are marked with an asterisk where the base size is below 50. Given the sample size these figures are based on, these findings should be interpreted with caution.

2. Base size: All answering about type of ASB who experienced significant impact. Sexual ASB: experienced (34), witnessed (3), experienced/witnessed (21); vandalism: experienced (62), witnessed (10), experienced/witnessed (44); nuisance neighbours: experienced (76), witnessed (16), experienced/witnessed (85); people using/evidence of drugs: experienced (40), witnessed (13), experienced/witnessed (39); problems with out-of-control dogs: experienced (36), witnessed (6), experienced/witnessed (20); drunken behaviour: experienced (51), witnessed (13), experienced/witnessed (26); loud music/noise: experienced (73), witnessed (12), experienced/witnessed (72); aggressive begging: experienced (40), witnessed (12), experienced/witnessed (37); people being intimidated/harassed: experienced (54), witnessed (11), experienced/witnessed (65); environmental ASB: experienced (36), witnessed (9), experienced/witnessed (43); inconsiderate behaviour: experienced (58), witnessed (21), experienced/witnessed (54); vehicle-related ASB: experienced (41), witnessed (19), experienced/witnessed (46); youths/teenagers/groups hanging around: experienced (38), witnessed (8), experienced/witnessed (51).

The frequency of ASB incidents also played a role in the severity of the impact on the quality of one’s life, with some types of ASB fitting this trend more than others. For instance, experiencing or witnessing nuisance neighbours typically occurs frequently, with 42% of those who experienced/witnessed this type of ASB stating that it happened once a week or more. This weekly experience with nuisance neighbours translated into a more severe effect on the quality of life, with 68% reporting a significant effect. Figure 3.4 depicts the breakdown of ASB frequency among survey participants who reported a significant impact from ASB. A smaller proportion of those who had experienced a significant impact had experienced the incidents less often, suggesting that higher frequency leads to a higher impact from ASB.

Figure 3.4: Frequency of ASB incidents among survey participants who felt a significant impact from ASB, per ASB type (%)^{[footnote 23]}

Notes:

1. Percentages are marked with an asterisk where the base size is below 50. Given the sample size, these figures are based on, these findings should be interpreted with caution. 2.Base size: All who have witnessed/experienced type of ASB in last 12 months and who felt a significant impact from ASB: People using/evidence of drugs (92), aggressive begging (89), nuisance neighbours (177), environmental ASB (88), drunken behaviour (90), sexual ASB (58), problems with out-of-control dogs (63), loud music/noise (157), youths/teenagers/groups hanging around (97), inconsiderate behaviour (133), vehicle-related ASB (107), vandalism (116), people being intimidated/harassed (130).

These findings were also reflected in the qualitative interviews with individuals who had experienced types of ASB occurring frequently. Participants perceived ASB experienced frequently in the home (such as nuisance neighbours) to be particularly debilitating for one’s quality of life as well as their mental health as they felt there was no escape. This view was echoed by agencies and organisations who also perceived that not being able to escape the situation had a significant impact on individuals.

‘Again, it’s more the persistent anti-social behaviour where that’s a problem. We have a lot of people with anxiety and depression. So yes, it can have such a negative impact on somebody’s life and again, more so when it’s somebody who’s living in it and can’t leave. So, if it’s a neighbour dispute or if it’s something , it tends to be a lot more severe.’ Stakeholder, local authority, Leicester

3.1.2 Sexual ASB

Findings from the quantitative survey suggested that those who experienced or witnessed sexual ASB experience very profound impacts. Across all types of ASB, sexual ASB had the highest proportion of participants who felt their quality of life had been significantly impacted (47%)^{[footnote 24]}. Additionally, those who experienced or witnessed sexual ASB had the third highest^{[footnote 25]} number of emotional impacts per person (3.4 impacts on average per person) and the highest number of behavioural impacts per person (2.8 impacts) compared with all other types of ASB. To explore why the effects are so severe for sexual ASB, this sub-section considers what participants understood sexual ASB to be.

The definition of sexual ASB used in the research encompasses several different behaviours, including prostitution or: ranging from prostitution and evidence of prostitution, to finding used condoms and people committing inappropriate or indecent sexual acts in public. While this definition does not explicitly cover sexual harassment, it appears that many participants understood it as such. For example, when speaking about sexual ASB in the qualitative interviews, many reported inappropriate sexual comments or catcalling in the streets. In fact, most participants who mentioned sexual ASB appeared to confuse it with sexual harassment, specifically towards females.

‘Yes, like I said, I don’t know, it would be if they were surrounding you and intimidating you, them thinking it was funny, but it could have a real [impact], especially on an older person, perhaps. Or like what happened to my friend’s daughter, when she was sexually harassed. That is quite a big thing, isn’t it, especially if you’re 18.’ Witnessed ASB, male, 55, Leicester

‘I was jogging round the park and there was this young female in front of me and these 3 young boys, I’d say about 15, 16, just hurled, they said the most repulsive, derogative, horrible words to her.’ Witnessed and experienced ASB, male, 65, Westminster

Furthermore, as referenced in sub-section 2.1.1, there were mixed feelings on whether sexual ASB should be classified as a crime. Nearly half (47%) found it to be anti-social, but not a crime and 44% deemed it to be a crime. The qualitative interviews highlighted that those who thought it should be a crime brought up the same themes of sexual harassment and male aggression, and more severe, longer-term impacts were discussed.

‘Sexual anti-social behaviour should be classed as crime, rather than ASB… Well, I think sexual anti-social behaviour sounds terrible, and it feels to me worse, and to be honest, it’s usually one way, isn’t it, as well? You know, it’s men against women.’ Witnessed ASB, male, 55, Leicester

These interpretations of sexual ASB provide greater context for the quantitative results, which suggest that those who experienced/witnessed sexual ASB experience very severe impacts from it. The findings from the qualitative research suggest that this could in some part be due to the misinterpretation of sexual ASB as sexual harassment, which could result in greater impacts. In future research designs, references to sexual ASB could be amended to reduce participant confusion by adding a caveat to the end of the definition, indicating that sexual ASB does not include sexual harassment or catcalling.

3.2 Emotional impacts

3.2.1 Overview of emotional impacts

Emotional impacts were experienced almost unanimously by people who had witnessed/experienced ASB. As demonstrated in Figure 3.5, more than 9 in 10 (93%) of people experienced at least one emotional impact. During the qualitative interviews, participants also described feeling multiple emotional reactions simultaneously, indicating that these emotions were not mutually exclusive.

Figure 3.5: Emotional impacts from ASB, across all types of ASB^{[footnote 26]}

Note:

1. Base size: All (2,500).

The most common emotional impacts were annoyance (with 56% of participants experiencing this as a consequence of ASB) and anger (42%). Fear and loss of confidence were also common, with a quarter of participants stating they had felt these emotions due to ASB experienced or witnessed in the last year (25% and 24%, respectively).

Qualitative research demonstrated that many of the emotional reactions had a corresponding behavioural impact or action (behavioural impacts are discussed in more detail in sub-section 3.3). For instance, in qualitative interviews, fear and loss of confidence were often linked to behavioural actions such as avoidance, as participants changed their routines to make sure they did not need to go to certain places where they were afraid of encountering ASB.

‘And, also, when I go for a run now, I’ll go along the road rather than down through the [location removed] just in case there are any gangs down there.’ Witnessed ASB, female, 42, Newcastle upon Tyne

Less commonly reported emotional impacts included difficulty sleeping (22%), anxiety/panic attacks (19%), shock (18%), depression (15%), embarrassment/shame (13%), loneliness/isolation (10%) and crying (9%). While less commonly experienced, these impacts are likely to manifest themselves with more depth psychologically and were described in the qualitative interviews as being more distressing than many of the more commonly experienced emotional impacts.

Across both the survey and interview findings, it was apparent that the emotional impacts were more prevalent in relation to certain types of ASB. The following sub-sections explore the range of emotional impacts that survey and interview participants reported experiencing in relation to the different types of ASB.

3.2.2 Annoyance and anger

Annoyance and anger were the most common emotional impacts experienced for most types of ASB. Across all types, 56% and 42% of participants said they experienced these impacts, respectively. These 2 emotional impacts tended to be merged by participants in the qualitative interviews, although anger was seen as slightly more severe whereas annoyance was more of a mild frustration.

Annoyance was particularly high for nuisance neighbours (66%), inconsiderate behaviour (61%) and environmental ASB (60%). This annoyance was also linked with feeling immediate frustration with the situation.

‘I was very frustrated when I roll over dog poo with a pushchair. That’s really, really horrible.’ Witnessed ASB, female, 27, Leicester

Participants explained their annoyance, stating that it tended to be a result of perpetrators acting selfishly or with a disregard for others.

‘I think you can tell in my voice. It just raises my blood pressure a little bit… because they’re putting what they think is their views above everybody else’s.’ Witnessed ASB, male, 55, Leicester

Anger was also particularly high among many of the same types of ASB. For instance, of those who experienced or witnessed nuisance neighbours, 48% reported feeling angry, which was significantly higher than for all other types. Additionally, anger was also the most common emotional impact for people who witnessed or experienced being intimidated/harassed (42%), inconsiderate behaviour (42%), vehicle-related ASB (42%), environmental ASB (41%), problems with out-of-control dogs (38%) and vandalism (38%).

One individual who witnessed a dog being killed by another out-of-control dog explained how the incident induced anger at the fact that other dog owners did not seem to care or feel responsible for their actions.

‘Yes, it made me extremely upset for the dogs, and for the lady, that we witnessed her lose her dog. It made me very angry that there are owners out there that just don’t care enough about their dogs, and other people’s dogs.’ Witnessed ASB, female, 33, Leicester

3.2.3 Fear, loss of confidence, anxiety and depression

Other common emotional impacts were fear, loss of confidence, anxiety and depression, which tended to be interlinked. Fear often caused individuals to lose confidence or develop anxiety, which led them to be more isolated (see sub-section 3.2.6) and depressed.

Fear and loss of confidence were each experienced by about a quarter of participants who experienced/witnessed ASB in the past year (25% and 24%, respectively). Feelings of fear and loss of confidence were often linked with corresponding avoidance behaviours – with participants explaining that these feelings caused them to avoid certain places or situations, go out less often and change travel habits.

Fear was a widespread emotional reaction, particularly for people being intimidated/harassed (35%), problems with out-of-control dogs (32%) and sexual ASB (26%). For example, one individual experienced being intimidated/harassed on multiple occasions and also having a brick thrown through her window. This caused her to feel extremely scared and afraid of being at home.

‘I was shaken for ages afterwards. I felt really shaken up, you know, very shaken for a while after.’ Experienced ASB, female, 62, Cardiff

Another example came from an individual who had witnessed out-of-control dogs, and an incident where a dog attacked and injured another dog, which made her fearful of walking her dog.

‘So, that scared me, and it was on my mind all the time. What if that had been my old boy? They’d have killed him; they’d have definitely killed him without a doubt. So, it made me wary of walking there.’ Witnessed ASB, female, 59, Cardiff

Fear also manifested when there was a concern about backlash or potential dangers from perpetrators. In qualitative interviews, victims discussed that fear of retaliation from the perpetrator had deterred them from reporting and involving the police (see sub-section 6.1 for further detail). This fear also led to avoidance behaviours, such as making the individual afraid to leave the house as they worried about perpetrators confronting them.

‘I think the worst thing in that situation is if the culprits ever find out that you’re the person who’s actually spoken to the police or whatever because then they make your life hell, do you know what I mean? They end up doing whatever, and then you’re afraid to go out, you know, because you think, God, they’re usually in groups anyway, so you might go out and not come back home. A form of bullying, isn’t it?’ Experienced ASB, female, 62, Cardiff

Loss of confidence was most likely to be reported among those who experienced/witnessed people being intimidated/harassed (31%), youths/teenagers/groups hanging around (26%) and sexual ASB (25%).

For those who encountered youths/teenagers/groups hanging around, many felt unsafe and intimidated by their presence. This resulted in a lack of confidence in returning to the areas where it occurred and into their local areas/neighbourhoods. As a result, victims spoke of changing travel routes and taking additional precautions, such as not going out alone. Further information on behavioural impacts can be found in sub-section 3.3.

‘I do get nervous when I see loads of gangs outside walking the streets. You don’t know what they’re going to do, so I guess the impact is it is a bit nervous, but I am looking to move, because I’ve been there nearly 2 years now. I do want to move.’ Witnessed ASB, female, 26, Cardiff

‘You get that, sort of, lingering anxiety. You’re checking over your shoulder and looking around as you are leaving your home or as you go about your day. For a while, I’ve felt, the best thing to do is leave the neighbourhood as quickly as possible. I just felt that I wasn’t able to lead a safe neighbourhood life and was aware that was a really sorry affair to have to have this in mind.’ Experienced ASB, male, 55, Westminster

Furthermore, one participant spoke about experiencing intimidation or harassment due to their race or the way they look, causing them to lose confidence to go to places they normally visited. The experience and resulting impact reflected that of a hate crime^{[footnote 27]}, which sees many overlaps with this type of ASB. This reflects a broader issue in how victims/witnesses and agencies/organisations distinguish ASB from other forms of crime, such as hate crime.

‘It affected me immensely because I didn’t expect in the 21st century when I’m going out to be racially or verbally abused because of the way I look. The way I dress, who I hang out with, my religion whatever this, that and the other. It seems to be more violence rather than just shouting across the street and I’ve had to change the places that sometimes I used to go to but I don’t go anymore. In the winter especially I might decide not to go out that night because I don’t feel comfortable.’ Experienced ASB, male, 42, Liverpool

Anxiety typically materialised as feelings of nervousness, vulnerability, distress and paranoia, which were perceived by qualitative participants to be severe and long-term emotional impacts. Anxiety/panic attacks were highest for those who had experienced/witnessed people being intimidated/harassed (23%), sexual ASB (22%) and nuisance neighbours (20%), but were also generally prevalent across other types.

Participants also felt anxiety after experiencing/witnessing aggressive begging (15%). Similarly, feelings of anxiety were also induced after experiencing or witnessing vandalism (10%). Qualitative participants highlighted how feelings of paranoia and of possibly being followed caused them to feel distressed.

‘I felt like I had anxiety, it was very distressing. When I walked back onto the road and I was walking really, really fast, trying to get into my car. I didn’t even go to the shop, I thought, “No, I’m not going to go into the shop, just in case [the man begging] is following me”.” Experienced ASB, female, 50, Leicester

‘It just made me anxious, and you know, like, I’m constantly looking out the window. You know? My wife even says, “What are you doing?” I say, “I’m just looking, I’m just looking”, and you know I’ll go outside and just make sure everything’s alright. So, I’m just paranoid constantly, do you know what I mean?’ Witnessed and experienced ASB, male, 45, Leicester

Several participants thought ASB had been a catalyst for their mental health worsening. One participant already had anxiety and explained how experiencing intimidation/harassment made him feel much more vulnerable and generally less resilient.

‘Just because I’m prone to anxiety, it ramped up the anxiety and then, maybe, made me feel less resilient in the coming months. You can’t measure these things, necessarily, there are no concrete links but as, somebody who is, sort of, sensitive to that kind of thing then it’s not a welcome factor in your life.’ Experienced ASB, male, 55, Westminster

Depression was often linked to fear/anxiety and loss of confidence as well. Participants reported that anxiety or fear of a potential experience of ASB caused people to lose confidence and stay inside more, which ultimately caused them to feel more depressed. As with anxiety, this was considered to be a deeper psychological impact that left a lasting impression on the quality of life of those it affected.

The types of ASB most likely to cause depression were some of the same types as those associated with the highest number of effects overall. Depression was a frequently reported impact of sexual ASB (27%), nuisance neighbours (19%), people being intimidated/harassed (18%) and out-of-control dogs (18%).

Those who felt depressed after experiencing or witnessing ASB described their emotional state as feeling discouraged, drained and dispirited.

‘I don’t want to go anywhere. I feel like I just want to stay in, while I’m constantly looking out the window. It makes me anxious. I just don’t want to do anything. I’d rather stay in. Even my mum comes up to see me twice a week. It does make me depressed, because I don’t go out, you know, very often anyway, but I just really feel like I don’t want to go out anymore.’ Experienced ASB, female, 56, Cardiff

3.2.4 Difficulty sleeping

Around one in five participants experienced difficulty sleeping (22%). This was a frequently reported impact of loud music/noise and nuisance neighbours, with 42% and 34% of those who had experienced/witnessed these types of ASB reporting this effect, respectively.

‘I lose sleep over it, basically. If I haven’t got into a proper sleep, you know, when they drop something, it can wake me up. And then, once I’m awake, I’m awake and I’m not going back to sleep for maybe an hour or two.’ – Experienced ASB, female, 41, Westminster

Lack of sleep can have an impact on one’s work or studies by causing a lack of productivity. Participants described how they did not function well at work after a bad night’s sleep. Further insight on the impact on employment and education can be found in sub-section 3.3.4.

‘If I don’t get a good night’s sleep it’s not great. I could be functioning better at work, whatever I’m doing, so it does have that impact on my life there.’ Experienced ASB, female, 34, Westminster

3.2.5 Embarrassment/shame

Embarrassment or shame were less commonly experienced emotional impacts. However, these emotional impacts were relatively higher for those who encountered sexual ASB (28%), aggressive begging (16%), people being intimidated/harassed and drunken behaviour (both 14%).

Some qualitative participants felt a sense of shame or embarrassment about their neighbourhood or local area, rather than personally. They reported being ashamed to invite friends or family over in case they encountered ASB and not feeling proud of living in their local area.

3.2.6 Loneliness/isolation

One in ten people (10%) reported feeling loneliness/isolation after experiencing/witnessing ASB, making it one of the less common emotional impacts. It was most typically felt for those who witnessed/experienced sexual ASB (16%), nuisance neighbours (14%) and being intimidated/harassed (11%).

Despite this being a less common impact, qualitative participants who experienced this emotional impact highlighted that the effects were severe; they also described feeling as though they did not belong, in some cases leading them to want to leave the area.

‘ASB makes you feel unwelcome, like you’re not wanted or loved, you don’t feel you belong there. You’re left with so many questions in your head when you don’t know who is doing it or why – it does affect your emotional wellbeing. You don’t feel safe there all the time and you don’t know what is going to happen next. I’ve felt like this for the 3 years I’ve lived here, and I’ve been planning on leaving for the past year.’ Witnessed and experienced ASB, male, 46, Liverpool

This highlights how the impacts of ASB are interconnected. In this case, feeling unsafe led to avoidance behaviours, which caused feelings of loneliness and isolation. In turn, the community can become more insular, decreasing the level of local community cohesion. Community impacts of ASB are discussed further in sub-section 4.2.

3.2.7 Other emotional impacts

Other emotional impacts on individuals included shock, which was experienced by 18% of those who had experienced or witnessed ASB in the past year. Shock was most likely felt for being intimidated/harassed (28%), sexual ASB (25%) and out-of-control dogs (21%). Shock was more often an initial reaction to the incident, which dissipated with time or repeat encounters with the ASB, as the incidents became more normalised for the victim. Given the short-lived nature of this impact, qualitative participants did not discuss it in detail.

Crying/tears was also reported by 9% of those who experienced/witnessed ASB in the last 12 months and was slightly more typical for participants who experienced or witnessed people being intimidated/harassed (15%), nuisance neighbours (13%) and out-of-control dogs (13%). The qualitative interviews highlighted how this materialised as a side effect of other emotional reactions such as shock, anxiety/panic attacks, fear and depression.

There were a small number of other emotional impacts that were not explored in the quantitative survey but were discussed qualitatively. One of those was a feeling of powerlessness or exhaustion. This tended to materialise when there was no resolution after ASB incidents had been reported and was also seen as a reason for not reporting incidents altogether. Participants expressed their helplessness after learning that nothing could be done about the ASB in their area. More often, the lack of resolution and response from the authorities to whom it had been reported could increase the feelings of powerlessness participants felt since they were dismayed with the lack of repercussions. Further information on this can be found in Section 6.

3.2.8 Physical health problems

A small number of participants (8%) reported developing physical health problems due to the ASB they had experienced. Insights from the qualitative research with victims and agencies indicated that this was commonly tied to emotional impacts such as anxiety provoked by experiencing or witnessing ASB. Participants and frontline agencies/organisations highlighted that experiencing or witnessing ASB tended to have a triggering and cascading effect on some victims’ mental health and subsequently physical health. For example, stress-related issues could result in heart conditions or concerns.

Physical health problems were most likely to develop from sexual ASB (19%), nuisance neighbours (11%), people being intimidated/harassed and problems with out-of-control dogs (both 10%). Interviews with victims and agencies revealed physical health problems including a loss of sleep and heart issues as a result of increased levels of stress. As an example, one frontline stakeholder spoke of how ASB could increase stress levels and ultimately impact physical health.

‘I think mental health takes a huge hit… a lot of people are constantly victimised as a result of anti-social behaviour… then [that] has a negative impact on their wellbeing. Their mental wellbeing, and physical wellbeing, actually, I know one of the victims has suffered quite heavily with heart problems over stress.’ Stakeholder, local authority, Leicester

While less common, those who did experience physical health problems tended to do so for a longer period of time. This was particularly the case for people who were dealing with nuisance neighbours – with 65% of people who felt this impact saying that it had impacted them either for more than a few weeks or that it was still happening^{[footnote 28]}. This was a similar case for people being intimidated/harassed (56%).

3.3 Behavioural impacts

3.3.1 Overview of behavioural impacts

Two-thirds (66%) of those who experienced or witnessed ASB in the past 12 months had changed their behaviour or experienced behavioural changes as a result of the incident(s). As demonstrated in Figure 3.6, the most prevalent behavioural impact was avoidance, with 51% of all participants stating that they had experienced at least one of the avoidance behaviours listed^{[footnote 29]}. Qualitative research demonstrated that this tended to manifest in actions such as people avoiding specific neighbourhoods or areas late at night, taking the long way home, or taking taxis instead of walking.

Figure 3.6: Survey participants’ behavioural impacts from ASB, across all types of ASB

Note:

1. Base size: All (2,500).

Taking actions to improve one’s safety following experiencing/witnessing ASB incidents was also a commonly reported impact. Nearly one in five (18%) stated that the ASB caused them to take extra security precautions such as installing alarms or investing in CCTV cameras.

Impacts on either work or studies were experienced by 17% of individuals who had experienced or witnessed ASB in the past 12 months. This was a total figure combined from several individual impacts, including being less productive (9%), needing to take time off (6%), losing or changing jobs (4%) or leaving the workforce altogether because of ASB (5%).

Across all elements of the research, it was apparent that the behavioural impacts were more prevalent in relation to certain types of ASB. The following sub-sections explore the range of behavioural impacts that survey and interview participants reported experiencing in relation to the different types of ASB.

3.3.2 Avoidance

The most common behavioural impact across types of ASB was avoidance. Just over half (51%) of survey participants reported avoidance behaviours as a result of ASB, which include avoiding certain places or situations (36%), going out less often (24%) and changing travel plans (17%).

Avoiding certain places or situations was the most common behavioural reaction across all types of ASB. It was highest in response to youths/teenagers/groups hanging around, with 37% expressing that experiencing/witnessing this type of ASB led to this behaviour. This was followed by drunken behaviour (35%), people being intimidated or harassed (34%), problems with out-of-control dogs (33%), people using/evidence of drugs (31%) and sexual ASB (29%). Around a quarter of those who experienced/witnessed aggressive begging and inconsiderate behaviour also expressed that they have since avoided places or situations (26% and 25%, respectively).

The interviews with victims/witnesses highlighted that this was often linked to the emotional impacts of feeling afraid, a lack of confidence, or anxiety (see sub-section 3.2). Many participants reported feeling fearful of facing the perpetrators or were worried that it would be dangerous or unsafe to be in close proximity to where an incident occurred.

It was also suggested that avoidance behaviours looked very similar regardless of which type of ASB was experienced or witnessed. Many victims reported avoiding certain areas of their town as they commuted home, or avoiding walking or exercising in certain areas (for example, particular parks, neighbourhoods or streets) where they felt incidents were likely to occur. Avoiding certain areas also involved changing travel plans, such as driving to avoid walking down a street where ASB had previously occurred. Many did not permit their children to play in certain areas or would not let them play unattended. This was rooted in fear and informed by their own experiences, experiences of those in their personal network or from their own perceptions of areas that were susceptible to being used for ASB.

Participants also noted the greater impact that ASB had on their social lives. Participants sometimes avoided socialising in their immediate communities and discussed how it felt like there was a reduced sense of community as a result. This highlights the interconnectedness between an individual’s own emotional responses, the behaviours and actions they take as a result, and the knock-on effects this can have on the community and wider area. Participants also thought that ASB in their communities was being perpetrated by people who recently moved to their area or people that they did not know, suggesting that those known in the community were less likely to be perpetrators.

‘When there were really, really big groups of them, I would actively avoid walking out of my cul-de-sac and down there. Even though that’s right outside my little, kind of, cul-de-sac, I never feel completely safe. So, I don’t tend to socialise in my immediate community.’ Witnessed ASB, female, 31, Newcastle upon Tyne

Going out less often was most relevant for those who had experienced or witnessed people being intimidated/harassed (27%), sexual ASB and problems with out-of-control dogs (both 24%), but was expressed across a range of ASB types, especially by those who typically encountered the ASB close to home.

Many victims either did not want to leave home due to depression or anxiety, or due to safety concerns. This was intensified when it was after dark, or if they had typically faced evidence of ASB upon leaving their homes, such as people using drugs or evidence of drugs.

‘I find in the evenings, I’m a bit reluctant to walk down, because there’s people taking drugs, there’s the laughing gases, the little pellets all on the floor. Beer cans. And even in the parks, it is quite bad. So, I think when it gets dark, I’m a bit reluctant to leave the house now.’ Witnessed and experienced ASB, male, Leicester, focus group

Changing travel plans was slightly less common but was still experienced by nearly one-fifth of participants surveyed (17%). It was seen across all types of ASB but was highest among the same 3 types as for going out less often (sexual ASB at 25%, problems with out-of-control dogs at 24% and people being intimidated/harassed at 22%).

Participants explained how ASB encounters caused them to exercise more caution than they previously would have. For instance, many took taxis home, drove instead of walking or did not travel alone. One qualitative participant who regularly encountered people using/evidence of drugs near her housing estate would make sure that she got dropped off directly outside her home to avoid coming into contact with this form of ASB.

‘I’ve got to make sure I get a cab back home because the cab’s going to drop me at my door.’ Experienced ASB, female, 41, Westminster

In another example, a participant feared going out on their own after experiencing ASB, especially where the event might occur again. As a result, they would change their travel plans to make sure they would not go by themselves.

‘Mentally it did affect me, because I don’t like going out on my own, especially to the post office and stuff.’ Experienced ASB, female, 50, Leicester

3.3.3 Taking extra security precautions

Another behaviour change carried out by 18% of participants was taking extra security precautions for their homes or routines. The proportion of participants who took these sorts of actions was highest for people who had personally experienced or witnessed sexual ASB (21%) and others being intimidated/harassed (16%). Further to this, 15% of those who experienced/witnessed youths/teenagers/groups hanging around, people using/evidence of drugs, nuisance neighbours or problems with out-of-control dogs took extra security precautions due to the incidents.

Qualitative interviews highlighted that, in practice, this involved taking precautions such as investing in CCTV or other security devices, installing alarms, as well as choosing to live somewhere with greater security measures (such as in a flat that had a porter on duty at all hours). Others made sure to leave lights or the television on to make it appear that they were home. The rationale for these actions was often to deter potential perpetrators or for personal safety.

‘So, I think I have to watch out for my own safety, and that’s why… I prefer living in a manned apartment. Like, 24/7 manned apartment with a porter, and I would not feel comfortable living, say, in a house on my own.’ Witnessed and experienced ASB, female, 52, Westminster

These behavioural impacts were the most likely to incur an immediate financial burden or effect on individuals, due to the investments they had to make to improve their personal or property security. Participants pointed out that these costs built up, posing a financial burden.

‘When I first moved here there had been car thefts in streets… that sort of encouraged us to spend money in getting a garage… We went and bought dog signs saying, “Warning of dogs.”… We had bikes stolen, so we’ve had to invest in sheds now to keep them in and invest in locks.’ Experienced ASB, male, 22, Newcastle upon Tyne

3.3.4 Impact on employment or education

Overall, 17% experienced an impact on their employment or education as a result of ASB. This was made up of a combination of different impacts, including being less productive (9%), taking time off (6%), leaving the workforce early (5%) and a loss/change of jobs (4%).

Being less productive when working or studying was related to difficulty sleeping and was a foreseeable impact from experiencing or witnessing nuisance neighbours (14% reporting this effect) and loud music/noise (11%). Several participants noted the disruption from nuisance neighbours specifically, explaining how it caused tiredness at work.

‘[It] affects me because she obviously makes me sleep deprived and then I’m just annoyed for the whole day and I’m up at 6 in the morning for work and stuff and then it stresses me out… I’m tired in work, I don’t want to go to work and stuff like that.’ Witnessed ASB, female, 24, Liverpool

The proportion of participants who took time off from their work or studies (6%) or lost employment or changed jobs (4%) as a result of ASB was much smaller compared to other behavioural impacts experienced. However, the impact was perceived to be substantial. Qualitative evidence demonstrated how working on streets where ASB was a regular occurrence was a motivator to change jobs. Aggressive begging was found to have a key impact on loss of employment or changing jobs, with 12% of those experiencing or witnessing it stating this had happened to them after.

‘When I was closing the store, I had quite a few people coming up to me asking for money… I had to have 2 associates with me when I close the store because I need security around me.’ Experienced ASB, female, 24, Liverpool

3.3.5 Moving home (within area or to a new area)

Around one in ten participants who had experienced ASB in the past year had moved home as a result of the ASB they experienced. This was made up of those moving to a new area (6%) and moving within the same area (5%).

Moving within the same area was a slightly more common impact as a result of sexual ASB (14%) and aggressive begging (8%) than for other types of ASB. This was similar to moving to a new area, where sexual ASB (17%), problems with out-of-control dogs (11%), aggressive begging, nuisance neighbours and environmental ASB (8% each) were the most common types to have this impact.

Some qualitative participants who had experienced nuisance neighbours considered moving house, although had not gone through with it yet. They tended to highlight practical reasons behind the delay in their move, such as owning their home or waiting for the availability of other housing association accommodations. Other participants referenced how they may be inclined to move if they were in different stages of life, notably that they would move when they got older to avoid the stresses of experiencing or witnessing ASB. To a lesser extent, matters of principle had stopped some from moving. These participants thought that they should not be pushed to the extent of leaving their homes.

‘As you get older, you know, your needs and objectives change and for me, yes, in the future that’s something that I would consider.’ Witnessed ASB, male, 36, Leicester

3.3.6 Longevity of individual behavioural and physical impacts^{[footnote 30]}

The duration of the impacts from ASB was related to the frequency of the ASB experienced or witnessed. This was evidenced both quantitatively and qualitatively.

As mentioned in sub-section 2.2.3, the types of ASB that were most likely to be experienced/witnessed at least on a weekly basis included nuisance neighbours (42% experiencing/witnessing this ASB at least once a week), environmental ASB (39%), people using/evidence of drugs (39%) and aggressive begging (38%). These types of ASB all had long-lasting impacts (especially for avoidance behaviours) where a high proportion of those experiencing these types of ASB was still avoiding certain places or social situations. For example, 47% of those experiencing or witnessing nuisance neighbours, 42% of those experiencing or witnessing people using/evidence of drugs and aggressive begging, and 36% of those experiencing or witnessing environmental ASB were still avoiding places or social situations.

Avoidance (avoiding certain places or situations), going out less often, changing travel plans and taking extra security precautions were the behaviours that tended to remain the longest and were the most common overall.

Avoiding certain places or situations had a long-lasting behavioural impact on inconsiderate behaviour (with four out of five (80%) reporting avoiding certain places for more than a few weeks or that they are still doing it following the incident), as well as people being intimidated/harassed (78%) and problems with out-of-control dogs (77%).

Going out less often was also a behaviour that lasted for longer than a few weeks or was still ongoing for about three quarters (76%) of those who experienced/witnessed inconsiderate behaviour, as well as drunken behaviour (74%) and people being intimidated/harassed (72%).

The duration of the impacts seemed to have a connection with the length of the reporting process (if pursued with agencies or organisations). Often, this process was extremely lengthy, requiring individuals to relive their experiences, which took a considerable amount of time and energy. More information on this can be found in Section 6.

3.4 No individual impacts

Only 6% of survey respondents said that ASB had no impact on their quality of life. Furthermore, only 7% stated that they felt no emotional impacts. However, a larger group, one third (33%) reported no behavioural impacts as a result of the ASB incident(s).

The same factors that affected the severity of impacts also played a role in whether the individual experienced impacts from the ASB at all. Factors included whether the individual experienced or witnessed ASB, as well as the frequency at which they witnessed or experienced it. For instance, one participant explained that since he only witnessed the ASB, and as it did not affect him directly, it did not have an impact on him.

‘Not really. The case where the person spat on my colleague, that obviously got [me] a bit angry as you rightly would, someone doing that, but apart from that, it’s just day to day really. Isn’t it? The couple that were being abused, I mean that wasn’t nice to see but I don’t think it affected me mentally or physically or anything like that. No is the honest answer. Nothing really affected me.’ Witnessed ASB, male, 38, Westminster

Often, when participants claimed that the ASB had no impact on them, they perceived themselves to simply be less vulnerable to the impacts of ASB than others in different circumstances might be. They, therefore, did not believe it had any noticeable effect on them. Similarly, other participants tended to normalise the ASB, noting that it is ‘just something that happens’ or rationalising that they used to participate in similar activities when they were younger.

‘I didn’t particularly consider myself vulnerable. I’m also from quite a working-class background. When I was a teenager, I too drank in fields. I’m from a similar background, so I’ve never really felt massively intimidated.’ Witnessed ASB, female, 31, Newcastle upon Tyne

Some individuals did not even realise that ASB had impacted them until discussing it at length in the interview when participating in this research, suggesting that the impact was minor. As such, they had not sought or received support.

4. Wider impacts beyond the individual

This Section explores the impacts of ASB that go beyond the individuals who have experienced or witnessed it, including their personal networks, their communities and more broadly their perceptions of institutions.

Key findings:

1. ASB caused both emotional and behavioural impacts on victims’ personal networks. These impacts were broadly in line with those seen on an individual level. Family and friends of victims felt worried, anxious and fearful. Behavioural impacts were commonly reported as avoiding certain areas and changing plans.
2. At a community level, ASB was most commonly found to weaken the sense of community through making people anxious to interact. However, in some cases, ASB also brought communities together by giving them something to rally around.
3. ASB also had wider impacts. Participants highlighted a loss of trust in institutions such as the police and local authorities, a sense of decline in the reputation of their area and feeling a negative impact on notions of morality and society.
4. The impacts from ASB were highly intertwined across individual emotional and behavioural effects as well as personal networks and community-wide dimensions. Often, one impact served as a catalyst to others and created a knock-on effect.

4.1 Impacts of ASB on personal networks

4.1.1 Overview of impacts on personal networks

The impacts of ASB extend beyond the individual who personally experienced or witnessed the incident, also impacting their personal network, including their families, friends and neighbours. The emotional responses felt by family and friends were similar to those felt by the individual themselves.

From a behavioural perspective, avoidance was also reported. In the qualitative research, many participants described how friends and family members did not want to visit their homes or neighbourhoods where they may encounter ASB, or often chose alternative travel routes or methods to avoid feeling unsafe. These impacts, as related to different types of ASB, will be explored in the following sub-sections.

4.1.2 Emotional impacts on personal networks

In terms of emotional impacts on the individuals’ networks, many participants detailed how they were worried their loved ones would be affected.

Qualitative interviews found that a victim’s family and friends tended to experience worry and anxiety about the victim’s wellbeing due to the ongoing nature of ASB. Family members and friends more commonly expressed worry or anxiety about those who were vulnerable, such as older relations or those who had physical health problems. For example, one participant worried about her elderly parents’ safety due to a high number of youths/teenagers/groups hanging around and people doing drugs in the park that they walk in.

‘My Mum’s in a wheelchair at the moment, and Dad would often push Mum… but I’m not happy with it. I’ve heard of elderly people getting quite a lot of abuse. I really worry about my Mum and Dad who are in their late 70s. I don’t want people calling them names.’ Witnessed ASB, female, 42, Newcastle upon Tyne

Some qualitative participants felt fearful for their relations or friends, as well as themselves. This was commonly experienced when they had experienced or witnessed an ASB incident in the area their relation or friend lived in, making them fearful to spend time in the area.

4.1.3 Behavioural impacts on personal networks

Some relatives and friends of victims exhibited avoidance behaviours due to the risk of heightened ASB in the area.

Victims were more cautious about inviting friends or family over to their homes because of the risk of their personal networks experiencing or witnessing ASB. Moreover, participants thought this was mirrored by networks’ themselves, with some suggesting that friends and family did not want to come to their homes or neighbourhood. Instead, friends and family would avoid the area completely so as not to be put at risk of encountering ASB. Similarly, others said that family members, friends or colleagues were more cautious when visiting, choosing to change travel plans to take the journey during daylight hours or opting to take a taxi instead of public transport or walking.

‘So, even my Mum gets wary of coming up to my house sometimes. My other family hardly come up because they know how rough the street is.’ Witnessed and experienced ASB, female, 26, Newcastle

It had a particular impact on elderly relatives or friends visiting, who were also perceived by participants to have a lesser willingness or ability to deal with the impacts. These personal networks would rather avoid visiting than encounter the ASB.

‘My grandparents just stopped coming here years ago because he [a neighbour] said quite horrible things to my grandparents after they parked outside our property… But he unfortunately went for my grandad physically. And my nan was in the car at the time, and they never bothered to come to this area after that.’ Experienced ASB, female, 24, Cardiff

Younger generations and children were also affected. The fear held by some parents or carers was translated into avoidance impacts on children. For example, some children were stopped from playing outside or in designated play areas due to parents’ concerns about the risk of encountering ASB.

In extreme cases, physical assault on friends/family members occurred when trying to confront or stop incidents of ASB from happening. For example, a case was highlighted where a participant’s son tried to challenge 3 youths/teenagers who were behaving anti-socially towards him and they responded by causing him severe physical harm.

‘To touch on the point of do you challenge these teenagers? Well, in my own experiences – don’t because, I’d say, just over 12 months ago, my son, who was 22 at the time, was provoked by three 11-year-olds. And he said something to them, and their response was to turn around and stick a knife in him.’ Experienced ASB, female, 66, Cardiff

The survey also highlighted that ASB could result in victims or witnesses arguing with family members or friends. This was experienced by one in ten of those who experienced or witnessed ASB in the past year. Although this was a less common impact, it was slightly more prevalent for sexual ASB (with 18% who experienced this type of ASB reporting this impact) and nuisance neighbours (with 13%). Qualitative interviews highlighted that lack of sleep resulting from nuisance neighbours tended to be a major trigger for this behavioural impact.

‘I live with my partner so, yes, we did have a couple of rows because I was, like, tired and I was being aggressive because I just needed my sleep and I’m terrible if I don’t get my sleep, I can’t function.’ Witnessed ASB, female, 57, Newcastle upon Tyne

4.2 Impacts of ASB on communities

4.2.1 Overview of impacts on the community

Many of the impacts of ASB on individuals build up over time. Where impacts were felt by multiple individuals, it contributed to a reduction in the feeling of community.

Participants were asked to think about how ASB impacted their local area. In the quantitative survey, ‘local area’ was described as being within 15 minutes’ walking distance from where they lived. Qualitatively, this was left open to interpretation, but participants tended to focus on the area within walking distance of their homes.

More than a quarter of survey participants (27%) stated that ASB caused a decline in their levels of trust in others/their community. Qualitative interviews also reflected this. Participants perceived their communities to lack cohesion and suggested that the reputation of their local area had declined due to ASB.

In contrast, others thought their community had been brought together due to ASB incidents, with many examples given of how individuals in a community had come together to combat ASB. As demonstrated in the qualitative victim interviews, this community cohesion was perceived as sharing a common goal (such as stopping the ASB), keeping each other safe and communicating with one another about what was happening in the community.

The idea of ASB and crime in the local area becoming normalised was discussed. Both agencies/organisations and victims observed a self-perpetuating cycle where observers of an incident believed it to be accepted, and therefore observers were more likely to replicate the behaviours.

4.2.2 Negative community impacts

For some victims, ASB had immediate emotional implications related to their community, such as annoyance and anger^{[footnote 31]} towards others in their community. More than half of the participants (58%) felt either of these emotions extremely or very strongly across ASB types. This was felt more strongly for those witnessing or experiencing nuisance neighbours (79%) and loud music/noise (74%).

The quantitative research found that a quarter (27%) of those who experienced/witnessed ASB reported that it made them feel a loss of trust in others/in the community. This was most commonly felt by participants who experienced or witnessed being intimidated/harassed, problems with out-of-control dogs and sexual ASB, each at 29%. Environmental ASB and nuisance neighbours also contributed to these feelings, both at 28%.

Qualitative participants reinforced how ASB resulted in a loss of trust in the community, describing how they perceived ASB as a cause of community breakdown. This was described in various ways by participants. Several discussed the decline of community engagement due to the presence of ASB. For instance, some said that the community stopped behaving like a community because people did not leave their homes as much and thus did not communicate with their neighbours.

‘I think it stops people behaving like a community. I think people retreat to their own house a lot, there isn’t an awful lot of community feel. People don’t want to be out when there’s fireworks going off, people don’t want be out when they’re in danger of bumping into crowds of people.’ Witnessed ASB, female, 59, Cardiff

Agencies and organisations described fear as being the main factor for the lack of communication and community breakdown for some participants. They reported that victims were afraid to engage with others in their community to discuss ASB as they were fearful that this might get back to the perpetrators and result in repercussions.

‘The community’s more scared. People won’t go out. People will not report things because they’re too frightened to and it’ll get worse and worse.’ Stakeholder, local authority, Cardiff

Most qualitative participants desired a community with a friendly and engaging environment but were not sure that it could exist in their own community. Feelings were that other people did not interact or integrate as a result of ASB. In some cases, fear and mistrust of others also disrupted community cohesion.

Fear of repercussions from confronting or reporting ASB also led to social apathy, which was also perceived to hinder community cohesion. Qualitative participants discussed how others in the community seemed apathetic towards the ASB that was going on in their community, with no one willing to do something about it.

‘People go about their business, they don’t say hello to people, they put their heads down, they go home, lock their doors and that, they don’t integrate like they used to, and I think it’s become like that as well with people think, “Oh, it’s not my problem, let somebody else report it”.’ Witnessed ASB, female, Liverpool, focus group

Related to social apathy, there was a tendency for members of the community to normalise ASB. This was often related to feelings of hopelessness, whereby participants felt as though nothing would be done to improve ASB in their community, so they felt they had to accept it. Some described the normalisation as a reinforcement cycle in that when individuals saw others commit acts of ASB and get away with it, they assumed they could too. Others described the normalisation as complacency among communities whereby people stopped caring and therefore perpetrators of ASB took advantage.

‘If people see people committing those anti-social acts, then they can normalise it. They think, “I can do that, so I’m going to do that on my street, maybe I can copy that” and it quickly progresses to other areas.’ Witnessed ASB, male, 29, Westminster

One stakeholder mentioned the concept of the ‘Broken Window Theory’^{[footnote 32]} in relation to this tendency for communities to normalise ASB. Broken Window Theory was an academic concept devised in 1982 that proposed broken windows as a metaphor for disorder in communities. The theory suggests that disorder and incivility within a community are likely to lead to further disorder and incivility, as it becomes normalised and deemed socially acceptable behaviour.

‘I think it’s the ‘Broken Window effect’. I think that has come into it. It’s been recognised in research papers in the past. But, yes, it’s possibly living with it, accepting the behaviour, they’ve become acclimatised to it.’ Stakeholder, police, Cardiff

As described above, the normalisation of ASB can send communities into a negative cycle of not reporting it, and becoming increasingly indifferent.

4.2.3 Positive community impacts

The qualitative research also demonstrated that ASB could have a positive impact on some communities in that it can bring people together. Multiple participants noted these positive effects in relation to people coming together either to try to stop the ASB in their community, share information and look out for one another’s safety, or to commiserate and support each other.

There were several examples regarding coming together to stop ASB. For instance, one community came together to file a collective complaint about a local shop that was selling alcohol to underage children, with one neighbour leading the group.

‘She’s the one that goes round and, like, keeps abreast of all the information and tells us what’s happening so that we can take the appropriate steps. I think without that one woman, kind of, leading the charge, we’d be in a much more reactive position with all that kind of stuff and we’d probably be victim a lot more to anti-social behaviour.’ Witnessed ASB, female, 31, Newcastle

For sharing information or keeping one another safe, participants mentioned using the ‘NextDoor’ Neighbour app, which allows people in a local area to announce if there is any ASB occurring. Others mentioned discussing ASB and sympathising with neighbours via Facebook groups.

4.3 Wider impacts of ASB

Wider impacts, including impacts beyond the immediate community, were also found. The main impacts highlighted were loss of trust in institutions, reputational decline and a decline in morality within the area.

Over a quarter (27%) of survey participants reported feeling a loss of trust in institutions due to the incident(s) they experienced/witnessed. This was highest in relation to more systemic issues such as people using/evidence of drugs (29%), sexual ASB (22%) and aggressive begging (21%), as well as more confrontational situations such as nuisance neighbours (25%) and people being intimidated/harassed (23%). Qualitative participants suggested that societal institutions could have done more to prevent ASB caused by systemic issues occurring. Moreover, they thought that institutions could have done more in the reporting and resolution process to combat their negative experiences of confrontational situations. Furthermore, loss of trust in institutions was the most severely felt emotional reaction for those who experienced/witnessed vandalism (76%), environmental ASB (76%) and youths/teenagers/groups hanging around (69%).

Qualitative participants highlighted that this was also intensified in cases where a lack of action from the authorities resulted in even less trust. In other words, a negative response to reporting ASB could worsen impacts and reduce the trust in institutions. These effects are briefly described below and further elaborated on in Section 6.

People’s trust in the police was diminished by incidents such as police failing to arrive when called or arriving too late so that the perpetrator had already fled. Additionally, there was a perception among many participants that the police were not interested in ASB or that they were preoccupied with alternative duties.

‘My faith in police isn’t very good. I’ve only ever used them for anti-social behaviour stuff. I had an incident with one of our properties recently, they were growing cannabis in the property, so I rang the police about it and they didn’t even come out and check it.’ Witnessed ASB, male, 62, Cardiff

Across ASB types, participants also reported a loss of trust in the local authority due to a lack of proactive action on ASB issues.

‘Yes, it probably has given me, you know, less of trust with the council just because of, again, you know, my experiences with the nuisance neighbours, and okay, yes, I’ve not reported the street drinking etc., but yes. I’m thinking if it still continues then something’s not really done about it.’ Witnessed ASB, male, 36, Leicester

Others reported that their area had suffered from reputational decline, explaining that ASB had caused communities to ‘go downhill’. Qualitative participants described their local area as having a bad reputation. In some cases, they avoided telling others where they lived to avoid judgement .

‘I think socially as well, when you tell someone where you live, they’re a little bit, like, “Oh, really?” People don’t really like the area or have high hopes for the area anyway, socially.’ Witnessed ASB, female, 27, Leicester

Furthermore, the reputation of an area impacts housing prices. Some participants felt that the ASB in their area had contributed to house prices falling.

Lastly, some participants reflected on the effect that ASB had on overall morality and social development, noting that the presence of ASB in an area sets a bad example for children. Specifically, one participant who worked with children, said that from her experience, ASB solidified a lack of social awareness among youth.

‘Unless the changes [are] made, you can read as much as you like about being a good person, but actions speak louder than words, and people are getting away with things because they’re a bully, or because they’re being anti-social and they don’t think the rules apply to them.’ Witnessed ASB, female, 42, Newcastle upon Tyne

4.4 The interconnectedness of ASB impacts

The impacts of ASB on individuals, their personal networks or communities, and wider areas were not seen to be mutually exclusive. Individual emotional impacts tended to have knock-on effects on behavioural impacts, impacts on friends, families, or communities/the wider area, as well as contributing to the wider impacts of ASB. Themes derived from victim interviews have been used to illustrate this interconnectedness. These are not intended to be an illustration of the exact knock-on pattern each impact will have but act as examples of the chain of impacts that participants have experienced.

Figure 4.1 demonstrates how fear and loss of confidence from ASB could result in people avoiding places or situations more over time, causing a perceived degradation in community cohesion since there is less community interaction. Ultimately, this was perceived to lead to reputational decline and the area being known as a place that does not have a strong sense of community.

Figure 4.1: Example one of the interconnectedness of ASB impacts

In another example (Figure 4.2), difficulty sleeping (due to noise-related ASB) was said to result in arguments with family or compel people to move homes away from the community, leading to a high number of residents leaving. Eventually, with enough people leaving the area, this was perceived to lead to a drop in property prices.

Figure 4.2: Example 2 of the interconnectedness of ASB impacts

Lastly, as shown in Figure 4.3, ASB could cause a decline in levels of trust in others and foster an environment of mistrust where people go out less often and engage in their communities less. This lack of trust could translate into social apathy – caring less about others and assuming that ASB is ‘just something that happens’ in the area. This normalisation of ASB was ultimately perceived to lead to what some participants described as moral decline, meaning a lesser overall sense of morality in the area.

Figure 4.3: Example 3 of the interconnectedness of ASB impacts

This demonstrates that impacts were not likely to happen in isolation. Instead, they were highly intertwined across individual emotional and behavioural effects as well as interpersonal, network and community-wide dimensions. Often one impact served as a catalyst for others and created a knock-on effect. Thus, ASB interventions targeted at an individual level will also likely be effective in easing community and wider area impacts, and vice versa. This should be considered when trying to understand and measure the effectiveness of future interventions.

5. Personal factors influencing ASB impacts

Personal, situational and demographic factors had a role in determining which impacts were felt more severely and by whom. These included age, gender, region/geographic area, income level/deprivation, pre-existing mental or physical health conditions as well as being pregnant/having children. Understanding which groups experience a more substantial impact allows interventions to be more effectively targeted. This Section explores how each of these factors influences the impact felt by victims/witnesses of ASB as well as highlighting where this may be driven by the types of ASB experienced.

Key findings:

1. Demographics were a key factor in the scale of impacts experienced by the individual. Based on the national survey, those that were more likely to experience a significant negative impact from ASB included younger people (those aged 18 to 34), men, those living in London or Wales, people from white ethnic backgrounds, people with higher incomes and those who lived in more deprived areas.
2. Personal and circumstantial factors also played a role in the severity of ASB impacts. Those who had pre-existing mental or physical health conditions, those who were pregnant and those who had children all experienced greater ASB impacts.
3. There was a perception among many qualitative participants that the elderly faced more severe consequences of ASB. However, survey data demonstrated that younger people (those aged 18 to 34) were more likely to feel a significant negative impact from ASB compared with other age groups overall. This was likely driven by the types of ASB they more commonly experienced (aggressive begging and sexual ASB).
4. A paradox was observed in more deprived areas. While ASB tended to be more prevalent, fewer incidents were reported to the relevant agencies and organisations. More affluent communities were perceived to be less tolerant of ASB, whereas more deprived communities tended to accept a higher level of ASB.

5.1 Age

There was a perception among many qualitative participants that the elderly faced more severe consequences of ASB. However, survey data demonstrated that younger people (those aged 18 to 34) were more likely to feel a significant negative impact from ASB compared with other age groups overall. Nearly 3 in 10 (29%) participants in this age group reported feeling a significant negative impact on their quality of life from ASB, whereas 22% of those aged 35 to 54 and 10% of those who were aged 55 and over indicated the same.

The younger age group (those aged 18 to 34) were significantly more likely to encounter aggressive begging (25% compared with 21% overall) and sexual ASB (15% compared with 9% overall). As sexual ASB has some of the greatest impacts overall, this type of ASB being more likely to be experienced by a younger age group could offer some explanation as to why the younger age group experienced more significant negative impacts.

Despite these results from the quantitative survey, qualitative interviews with victims showed that there were still perceptions of a heightened effect of ASB on the elderly. This perception both came from elderly people themselves as well as family members. One participant described how ASB impacted him more as he got older.

‘Well, it is fear, it is fear. When you get in your 70s, it doesn’t matter how fit you think you are, you’re no match for, you know, a budding 15-year-old, even, who thinks he’s a Mike Tyson or somebody. You might think you can handle that but trust me.’ Witnessed and experienced ASB, male, 70, Leicester

This could be related to the perception of older people being more vulnerable, perhaps due to physical or mental health reasons. Participants noted that they thought this made them a particular target for all types of ASB.

‘I would say in terms of most affected probably, sort of, from an age point of view, I’ll guess 40, 45 and above. I think more so towards the elderly. I think, you know, those that are more vulnerable I guess partly are more likely to be targeted.’ – Witnessed ASB, male, 36, Leicester

5.2 Gender

In terms of gender, men (25%) were significantly more likely to report significant impacts from ASB compared to women (15%)^{[footnote 33]}. This can be somewhat explained by the types of ASB they experience. Men were more likely than women to experience and witness people being intimidated/harassed^{[footnote 34]} and were also more likely to encounter problems with out-of-control dogs^{[footnote 35]}. These types of ASB had some of the greatest impacts on quality of life overall.

5.3 Ethnicity

People from white ethnic backgrounds were generally more likely compared to the total (at 21%^{[footnote 36]}) to report a significant impact from ASB than other ethnic groups. However, this comparison should be treated with caution as base sizes among other ethnic groups are low.

While people from white ethnic backgrounds reported the most impact from ASB, other ethnic groups reported having experienced or witnessed more types of ASB. For instance, people from black ethnic backgrounds had experienced or witnessed a significantly higher number of different types of ASB (an average of 4.8 types of ASB per person) than people from white ethnic backgrounds (an average of 3.7 types of ASB per person). People from black ethnic backgrounds were also more likely to have experienced or witnessed loud music/noise (44% compared with 31% overall), aggressive begging (41% compared with 21% overall), problems with out-of-control dogs (29% compared with 14% overall) and sexual ASB (22% compared with 9% overall).

There was a perception from participants who were from black, Asian or minority ethnic backgrounds that they were more likely to be targets of ASB (as well as being targeted for crimes such as racism and hate crimes which were perceived to have similarities with ASB). This could offer an explanation as to why those from black ethnic backgrounds experienced more types of ASB. Due to sample limitations, there was limited data from both the quantitative and qualitative research on how other ethnic groups may have been impacted by ASB.

‘People always pick an easy target, don’t they, someone who’s a bit different, someone who wouldn’t fight back, so the types of people we tend to deal with persistent ASB are vulnerable people, it might be people with mental health problems, might be people with different ethnic backgrounds to the norm in the area. And that obviously overlaps massively with hate crime.’ Stakeholder, police, Liverpool

5.4 Region/geographic area

The survey demonstrated that a range of regional/geographic characteristics influenced the level of impact experienced as a result of ASB. Participants from London and Wales were statistically more likely to experience substantial impacts on their quality of life than those in other regions.

London residents experienced greater ASB impacts than those living in other regions across England. Of survey respondents who lived in London, 29% felt a significant impact on their quality of life from ASB (compared with 21% overall). Qualitative interviews suggested that this could be a result of higher population density, with closer proximity to neighbours, making incidents of ASB more difficult to avoid.

The survey showed that those living in Wales were also more likely than average to experience a significant impact on quality of life, with 32% of those who experienced or witnessed ASB in the past year stating that it had a significant effect. Qualitative participants suggested that reduced transport links and a lack of support services in Wales’ rural areas could play a role.

5.5 Level of income/deprivation

As highlighted in sub-section 2.2.1 of this report, the level of deprivation or income in a specific area appeared to influence the degree to which ASB was prevalent there. Those residing in the most deprived areas (based on IMD)^{[footnote 37]} were more likely to have personally experienced or witnessed ASB in the last 12 months according to the survey results. People in these same areas were also more likely to have experienced a significant impact from ASB on their quality of life compared to those who lived in the least deprived areas^{[footnote 38]} – with 23% experiencing a significant impact in both IMD areas 1 and 2 compared with 16% in IMD area 5. Several agencies and organisations offered various explanations for this. Some mentioned that deprived areas tended to have a lot more issues within the community that triggered ASB, usually emerging from particular properties.

‘We do get quite a lot of community impact-based issues, especially, I would say, mainly around a specific property, so if we’ve got a property that there are high levels of anti-social behaviour and crime, then we can see that community-wide impact.”’ Stakeholder, local authority, Leicester

Other agencies and organisations pointed to the lack of financial or time resources that individuals had to leave the area. Organisations within these areas were also perceived to have fewer resources to fight the ASB. Those in more affluent communities were perceived to have more readily accessible resources.

‘But in less affluent areas I think that some, not all the time, it’s not like a standard but I think sometimes they haven’t got an out. They can’t necessarily easily move, if they can’t necessarily get anywhere, they haven’t necessarily got the family support and I think that does make a big difference.’ Stakeholder, local authority, Leicester

Agencies and organisations discussed a paradox that exists in more deprived areas; while ASB tends to be more prevalent, fewer incidents are reported to the relevant agencies and organisations. There was a perception from qualitative participants that more affluent communities were less tolerant of ASB, whereas more deprived communities tended to accept a higher level of ASB. This also translated into reporting to the police or other organisations, with the degree of affluence or deprivation in a neighbourhood or community influencing whether the ASB was likely to be reported or not. Qualitative participants also observed a tendency for wealthier areas to report less severe incidents of ASB, compared with more deprived areas where much more severe ASB is tolerated. Therefore, when conducting future evaluation work, it should be considered that instances of ASB in more deprived areas may be underreported, which should be recognised when interpreting findings.

‘I think that in some parts of the city, we’ll get persistent complaints about parking, for example, and it will be a massive issue to them in their £1 million houses. Then in other parts of the city that are completely the opposite way, we’ll know that there are drug dealers operating out of a flat but nobody’s coming forward. So, people who are financially disadvantaged don’t come forward as often as those that aren’t.’ Stakeholder, local authority, Leicester

‘Posher estates tolerate less anti-social behaviour so you probably see crime will be far lower and things like that. Because if even something so small, like, if I park outside someone’s house, they might ring some sort of police or council and then my car gets a fine, so you instantly know not to do that again.’ Witnessed and experienced ASB, male, 24, Newcastle upon Tyne

5.6 Physical/mental health conditions

Those with a pre-existing physical or mental health condition were significantly more likely to experience a significant impact from ASB compared with overall (24% compared with 21% overall). Additionally, those who said that this condition causes them to have a reduced ability to conduct their daily lives were significantly more likely to have experienced a significant impact from ASB on their quality of life (26% of those who had a condition that reduced their ability compared to 21% overall). These existing vulnerabilities appeared to increase these individuals’ risk of experiencing more severe ASB impacts.

‘We have a lot of people that start as low risk but soon become high risk because of their vulnerabilities, because of their mental health because everything is impacted by that and such behaviour.’ Stakeholder, local authority, Leicester

Qualitative participants with mental health conditions said that ASB could act as a trigger for the escalation of their mental health conditions. This was further intensified when physical health conditions were also present. For example, physical health conditions that made participants less mobile reduced their ability to respond to ASB happening around their homes. This included reducing their ability to report ASB to relevant agencies while it is occurring, taking part in monitoring and investigation, and in some instances trying to stop incidents while they were occurring.

5.7 Pregnancy/children

Having children or being pregnant tended to make participants feel more vulnerable to ASB impacts, both individually and for their children. One participant who was pregnant described her experience with being intimidated/harassed while pregnant as having a negative impact on her privacy.

‘I was pregnant around the time as well, so I just felt like it was very intrusive. I felt, like I said, not just from the gentleman actually verbally assaulting me but just someone going through my garbage and just, I don’t know, I just felt it was a very intrusive situation to be in.’ Experienced ASB, female, 37, Westminster

6. The impact of the response to reporting ASB

This Section explores the role of reporting experiences on the impacts of ASB, outlining the negative impacts that can emerge when a reporting experience does not happen as expected. It also highlights how the negative impacts of ASB could be reduced by experiencing a positive reporting process

Key findings:

1. Whether an individual reported an incident (and had an outcome) and whether they received support (and their satisfaction with it) influenced the degree of impacts felt. A poor experience or outcome from reporting or accessing support services increased negative impacts, whereas a positive experience or outcome helped to ease the impacts of the ASB.
2. Victims highlighted increased fear of repercussions from the perpetrator, feeling annoyance and hopelessness, a loss of trust in reporting agencies, the additional burden of monitoring and continuation of their avoidance behaviours as having a negative impact.
3. Agencies and victims interviewed also highlighted several ways in which the reporting process and support can help reduce the negative impacts of ASB. This includes timely responses and communication to make sure people feel listened to, options for anonymous reporting, support being delivered in different mediums, involving the community in the resolution process, and a more connected support system.

Among other factors, the impact of ASB influenced the likelihood of victims reporting an incident or accessing support. However, the experience and outcome of reporting and receiving support also played a role in the impact that ASB had on victims. In this context, ‘support’ includes communication and engagement from a formal support avenue, between reporting an incident to its resolution. This includes any reporting agency (for example, the local authority, police or housing provider). Emotional support and advice may also be provided to the individual by other teams within the reporting agency, or by external organisations. For example, the ASB or neighbourhood team within a local authority may provide communication and updates on an individual’s case but could also refer the individual to internal or external victim support, mental health or counselling services.

6.1 Role of the reporting experience on the impact of ASB

The severity of the ASB experienced was a common factor in reporting – those who experienced ASB types with the biggest impacts on quality of life more commonly reported it. However, qualitative interviews demonstrated that the experience of the reporting process itself also played a role in lessening or increasing the impact ASB had on those who experienced or witnessed it.

Qualitative interviews highlighted that a prominent negative impact relating to reporting ASB was an increased fear of repercussions from the perpetrator. Those who had reported ASB were worried about potential repercussions following reporting, should the perpetrators find out. Some reported intensified emotional impacts as a result of this, such as anxiety. Not being able to report ASB anonymously in many instances contributed to this fear and was a frequently mentioned barrier to reporting.

Additionally, if a report of ASB was not perceived to have been handled well, this could also increase the negative impacts of the ASB itself. These impacts are discussed in the following sub-sections.

6.1.1 Annoyance and hopelessness

Negative experiences of reporting such as a lack of, or slow, response, and a perceived lack of support offered, left some participants feeling annoyed and frustrated that nothing was being done about their situation. This was especially the case when repeated ASB had been reported on more than one occasion. These participants reflected on their experiences of reporting as being a waste of their own time. This had, in turn, discouraged further reporting. Where there was a negative outcome in their report, participants had similar feelings.

Participants also described frustration at being referred between agencies and that this left them feeling unsure about whom to turn to for support.

‘And when you get anti-social behaviour, you tend to think, “Right, I’m going to report it to the police”, you ring the police, the police then tell you, “It’s not our problem, you’ve got to contact the council.” You ring the council and they turn round and say, “Well it’s a police matter, nothing to do with us.” So we’re left in between, thinking, “Where do we turn to?”… it does leave us with a feeling of being dumped to one side.’ Experienced ASB, Leicester, focus group

6.1.2 Loss of trust in reporting agencies

A negative reporting experience also contributed to a lack or loss of trust in local agencies. Frustration and a lack of faith in the police and council in particular were cited by participants who were unhappy with the response to their report of ASB. While this was often directed at the reporting agency as a whole (for example, the police), some participants were more nuanced in their views. For example, it was acknowledged that ASB may not always be a police matter and one participant said they had lost faith in the police in handling neighbourhood matters, although not crime more generally.

‘… disappointment in the police for not carrying this through because I know there has been numerous reports on them… It’s been happening for years, and the police have never done anything.’ Witnessed ASB, female, 37, Cardiff

6.1.3 Additional burden of monitoring

The requirements of the person reporting ASB were said to be burdensome and were perceived by some to have a detrimental effect on the individual. For example, keeping diaries and using noise-monitoring equipment for a period of 3 months was mentioned by a number of participants as being challenging and time-consuming.

‘You kind of feel like it is consuming you. When you think, I’ve got a life outside of this. I’ve got other things I need to do. I haven’t got time just to, “What time is it, two o’clock or three o’clock in a morning.” to get up get a pen, get a paper and write everything down.’ Experienced ASB, female, 57, Newcastle upon Tyne

6.1.4 Continuation of avoidance behaviours

More than a third (36%) of survey participants who had experienced/witnessed ASB had avoided certain places as a result. In some cases, participants said that reporting ASB that had not, in their view, resulted in a successful outcome had meant they had to continue with these avoidance behaviours (for example, avoiding a particular park).

6.2 Reducing negative impacts through reporting and support processes

This sub-section explores what ‘good’ support looks like and considers how a positive experience of reporting or support could reduce the impacts experienced. It considers input from agencies and organisations interviewed for this research as well as participants from qualitative interviews who reported positive experiences of the reporting process. Participants were prompted to discuss methods of improving the reporting and support process.

6.2.1 Timely response and communication to make sure victims feel listened to

Participants who had reported ASB stated that they wanted to feel listened to and that effective communication about the case would offer some reassurance that it was being taken seriously and something would be done. Those who had positive experiences of reporting and accessing support described feeling listened to by the relevant agencies, which in some cases reduced emotional impacts such as feeling anxious.

‘I was heavily pregnant, and I had… that brute actually verbally attacking me and assaulting me. So, after that I was quite emotional… maybe after I reported it, maybe then somebody calls afterwards just to check in and make sure, “Actually, are you okay?”’ Experienced ASB, female, 37, Westminster

6.2.2 Option of anonymous reporting

Fear of repercussions was a key concern for people reporting ASB and had deterred some from reporting it. Some described wanting to report ASB but not wanting to give their personal details, and many said that allowing anonymous reporting would be a key improvement to the reporting process. Participants came up with some ideas around how this could be done, for example through an anonymous reporting app. Having the option to report in this way could reduce emotional impacts such as feeling fearful.

‘Just reporting it anonymously on the phone. For people to take it seriously whether you go to the council or whether you go to the police. An organisation that I can go to for help or report something… and just say to them, “Look this has happened to me.”’ Experienced ASB, female, 50, Leicester

6.2.3 Delivered through an appropriate medium for the individual

Linked to the above, many participants favoured the phone as the preferred medium for support to be delivered to make sure they had full anonymity from the perpetrator (or via Zoom, for some). There was a fear of identification by the perpetrator if support was offered in person at the person’s home, for example. However, this varied, and participants also spoke about the value of face-to-face support, which felt more personal. The importance of local support was also frequently mentioned, as participants thought they would benefit from someone who understands the local community and the specific issues individuals may be facing.

‘Give people a choice. Even with myself, as a counsellor, because I was doing some online counselling, I just noticed the difference the counselling experience itself impacts on actually their emotional wellbeing, just being present in a room and having that kind of emotional transference as well… seeing people’s behaviour patterns and eye contact and just experiencing this journey together I think is very, very important as well.’ Experienced ASB, female, 37, Westminster

6.2.4 Involving the community

As discussed, the impact of ASB on communities could be both positive and negative. In some cases, it brought the community closer together. The COVID-19 pandemic was described as having played a role in this, with apps such as ‘NextDoor’ gaining popularity and providing people with avenues to engage with their neighbours and communities in ways they had not always previously. There was also a common view that the community itself had a role to play in tackling ASB, and some participants talked about using apps and other sharing platforms to inform others about potential ASB risks. Many participants spoke positively about the value of peer and community support and wanted the opportunity for people who had experienced ASB locally to meet, for example through coffee mornings.

6.2.5 Mediation

This was also mentioned as a way for the community to help resolve ASB, which could be facilitated to build a better understanding of each other’s perspectives. Raising awareness of the impact of ASB on people within the community was also mentioned as a way to help perpetrators understand the impact of their own actions. Agencies and organisations described how some councils frequently used restorative justice in an ASB context, but this was not something that was consistently mentioned by agencies and organisations across all local case study areas.

6.2.6 Counselling

A lesser experienced form of support was counselling. Those who had experienced counselling reported positive experiences, citing organisations such as Victim Support. However, as outlined above, there was a sense from some that counselling was less helpful when it would not have any influence on how the case was handled. One participant suggested that, with consent, information shared through counselling sessions could be linked to the handling of the case of ASB. This would avoid victims having to share details directly with the police, in what was perceived to be a less comfortable environment.

6.2.7 Joined-up support

From a participant perspective, support was more effective where a joined-up approach was taken between agencies, for example, housing providers communicating with police, where necessary. This would avoid victims being signposted between services, saving time and emotional energy. From an agency’s and organisation’s perspective, a more holistic multi-agency approach was also perceived to be more effective, considering both the victim and the perpetrator. They highlighted how trying to tackle ASB without considering the reasons behind the incident itself would result in a limited approach.

‘Don’t think about investment in ASB in isolation, don’t think about investment in safer streets and violence against women and girls in isolation, don’t think about the response to homeless communities in isolation, because they’re all being thought about. Don’t think about drug treatment and mental health support in isolation because it very often is the same places with the same cohorts of individuals.’ Stakeholder, police, Cardiff

7. Conclusions

7.1 The range and extent of ASB impacts

While ASB is often considered a ‘low-level crime’, there was some evidence prior to this research that indicated that ASB had profound impacts on individuals who experienced or witnessed it. This study has further developed the evidence base of ASB impacts by quantifying impacts, exploring differences between types of ASB and comparing the experiences of different demographic groups. This has reinforced that the impacts of ASB on individuals’ quality of life are very real and widespread. Insights from the research demonstrated the range of impacts ASB can have on an individual’s personal life, including emotional and behavioural impacts. Impacts on personal networks and community were also found.

7.1.1 Key findings

Emotional impacts were widespread and varied by and within each ASB type, with 93% of participants experiencing at least one, such as anger or loss of confidence. Annoyance was the most common emotional impact experienced, at 56%.

Behavioural impacts were also common, with 66% changing their behaviour or experiencing behavioural changes in at least one way. Avoidance behaviours, such as avoiding certain places, were most common and were found across ASB types.

There were also impacts on personal networks, communities, and institutions, for example more than a quarter of survey participants (27%) stated that their experience of ASB caused a decline in their levels of trust in others/their community. While ASB had negative community impacts, there were ways in which working together to tackle ASB could offset these impacts and, in some cases, unite people. For example, sharing information via social media apps to overcome this common goal united people.

Impacts were perceived to be interlinked. For example, emotional impacts could lead to behavioural changes, whether actively or involuntary taken, which then had knock-on effects on individuals’ interactions with their personal networks and more widely, the community.

7.1.2 Implications for policy and evaluation

Concrete insights, such as the above, help to build a case for the value of tackling ASB in England and Wales. With nearly all survey participants who had experienced or witnessed ASB having been impacted by it in some way, there is a clear need for policies which help to minimise these impacts. Considerations for future policy design are outlined below.

Support offered to those who have suffered from the emotional impacts of ASB needs to be flexible, recognising the range of emotional impacts experienced. A one-size-fits-all approach to support is unlikely to adequately address the different types of emotional impacts and varying depths of impacts. For example, support for an individual experiencing feelings of anger is unlikely to be appropriate for someone suffering from panic attacks.

Interventions to offset the need for avoidance behaviours should be a priority. These behaviours were found regardless of ASB type.

Communities should have input into community-level support interventions. Communities are aware of the types of ASB that occur within their area and have often already proactively come up with their own strategies to offset ASB and its impacts.

The quantitative data produced from this research could be used to baseline the impact of future interventions on the prevalence of different impacts of ASB.

7.2 Factors influencing the likelihood of experiencing ASB impacts

7.2.1 Key findings

While 92% of participants experienced some type of negative impact on quality of life from an ASB incident, the severity of impact varied. This severity was influenced by a number of factors.

Certain types of ASB were shown to negatively impact participants more than others. For instance, those who experienced or witnessed sexual ASB^{[footnote 39]}, nuisance neighbours, problems with out-of-control dogs, or loud music/noise were more likely to have reported significant impacts whereas those who experienced/witnessed vandalism or people using/evidence of drugs were more likely to report little impact.

There were more severe impacts felt where an incident was experienced rather than witnessed. The 3 most impactful types of ASB mentioned above were all more commonly experienced rather than witnessed.

More frequent incidents of ASB had a greater impact. They tended to be found in circumstances in which it was difficult to leave, including in the home. For example, incidents of nuisance neighbours tended to happen regularly.

The vulnerability or demographic characteristics of the individual influenced the extent of the impact. Men, younger people, those living in deprived areas and those living with a mental or physical health condition were all more impacted.

7.2.2 Implications for policy and evaluation

Insights from this research, particularly surrounding the breakdown of types of ASB, could aid the design and targeting of effective ASB interventions. For example, this could include:

• designing support tailored specifically for the more impactful types of ASB (for example, those who personally experience nuisance neighbours or being intimidated/harassed) and those likely to happen more frequently (including more ongoing provision for individuals experiencing these types of ASB)
• targeting resources towards the types of ASB that were found to be more likely to be experienced rather than witnessed^{[footnote 40]}
• prioritising interventions around the most affected individuals (for example, those vulnerable due to pre-existing mental or physical health conditions)

7.3 Minimising and addressing ASB impacts

This study can also contribute to improving the effectiveness of support interventions by providing crucial information about the elements of support services that influenced the level of impact on victims and witnesses, as well as participants’ opinions on what could be done to improve this support to decrease negative impacts from ASB.

7.3.1 Key findings

Participants made a variety of suggestions for the improvement of support services, such as:

• ensuring a timely response and making individuals feel heard
• providing options for anonymity
• being delivered through alternative mediums that are suitable for a range of victims and people who have experienced ASB
• involving the community, for instance through having a community-level support group
• ensuring that there is a multi-agency approach to support offered

7.3.2 Implications for policy and evaluation

The insights outlined in this report provide critical knowledge for local agencies and organisations tasked with mitigating and responding to ASB. From this information about the prevalence of ASB, specific impacts experienced by type of ASB and the demographics of individuals more likely to experience impacts, there is an opportunity to use this data to develop national guidance for local agencies to follow based on these key factors. For instance, this could include guidance on the types of impacts that victims might experience and how to respond to them. Alternatively, guidance could explain who is more likely to experience more severe impacts, and under what circumstances, to allocate resources accordingly.

Data from this study could be used as a baseline for future studies (for example, to determine whether certain types of ASB are becoming more prevalent over time) and data from the quantitative survey could be used to support evaluations of the effectiveness of different interventions (for example, by testing the extent that participants felt that ASB was impacting their quality of life before and after receiving support).

Annexes

Annex A: ASB types

The following types of ASB were asked about in the survey:

• youths/teenagers/groups hanging around
• drunken behaviour
• vandalism
• inconsiderate behaviour
• loud music/noise
• people using/evidence of drugs
• people being intimidated/harassed
• environmental ASB
• nuisance neighbours
• vehicle-related ASB
• aggressive begging
• sexual ASB
• problems with out-of-control dogs

Annex B: Sample demographic profiles

Quantitative sample

Table A1: Gender

Gender	Percentage of sample
Male	52%
Female	48%
Other	1%

Table A2: Age

Age range	Percentage of sample
18 to 24	13%
25 to 34	20%
35 to 44	18%
45 to 54	18%
55 to 64	15%
65 and above	17%

Table A3: IMD area

IMD area	Percentage of sample
1	21%
2	19%
3	18%
4	17%
5	15%
Other	9%

Table A4: Region

Region	Percentage of sample
North East	5%
North West	13%
Yorkshire and Humberside	9%
West Midlands	10%
East Midlands	7%
East Anglia	9%
South West	9%
South East	16%
Greater London	17%
Wales	5%

Table A5: Employment

Employment status	Percentage of sample
Employed	69%
Not employed	11%
Retired	17%
Student/pupil	3%

Table A6: Income

Income	Percentage of sample
Under £5,000	2%
£5,000 to £9,999	3%
£10,000 to £14,999	7%
£15,000 to £19,999	6%
£20,000 to £24,999	8%
£25,000 to £34,999	13%
£35,000 to £44,999	12%
£45,000 to £54,999	10%
£55,000 to £99,999	18%
£100,000 or more	11%
Prefer not to answer	10%

Table A7: Ethnicity

Ethnicity	Percentage of sample
White	88%
Asian	5%
Black	2%
Multiple/mixed	2%
Other/prefer not to say	3%

Table A8: Social grade

Social grade	Percentage of sample
A – Upper middle class	6%
B – Middle class	47%
C1 – Lower middle class	27%
C2 – Skilled working class	7%
D – Working class	8%
E – Lower level of subsistence	5%

Table A9: Accommodation type

Accommodation type	Percentage of sample
House/bungalow	77%
Flat	21%
Other	2%

Table A10: Household makeup

Household makeup	Percentage of sample
I live alone	18%
I live with family/friends	81%
Prefer not to say	1%

Table A11: Housing tenure

Housing tenure	Percentage of sample
Own	69%
Rent	27%
Other	4%

Table A12: Long-term physical or mental health conditions

Long-term physical or mental health conditions	Percentage of sample
Yes	35%
No	61%
Other	4%

Table A13: Reduced ability from long-term physical or mental health conditions (n=894)

Reduced ability from long-term physical or mental health conditions	Percentage of sample
Yes, a lot	38%
Yes, a little	46%
Not at all	15%
Prefer not to say	1%

Victim interview sample

Table A14: Victim interview sample

Characteristic	Response	Quotas (per case study area)	Quotas (all interviews)	Quota achieved
Experience of ASB	Victim or witness of ASB in previous 12 months	All	50	50
Victim or witness (any type)	Witness (or both)	Minimum (Min) 2	Min 10	37
Victim or witness (any type)	Victim (or both)	Min 2	Min 10	13
Extent to which ASB impacts their life currently	A great deal	Min 2	Min 10	15
Extent to which ASB impacts their life currently	A fair amount	Min 2	Min 10	15
Extent to which ASB impacts their life currently	Just a little	Min 2	Min 10	15
Extent to which ASB impacts their life currently	Not at all – only included if also consider experience to be a crime or anti-social behaviour	Maximum (Max) 1	Max 5	5
Type of ASB experienced	Personal threat	Min 2	Min 10	19
Type of ASB experienced	Community-nuisance	Min 2	Min 10	54
Type of ASB experienced	Environmental	Min 2	Min 10	23
Gender	Male	Min 4	Min 20	22
Gender	Female	Min 4	Min 20	28
Ethnicity	White British	Min 3	Min 15	34
Ethnicity	Other ethnicity	Min 3	Min 15	16
Age	18 to 34	Min 2	Min 10	14
Age	35 to 54	Min 2	Min 10	21
Age	55 and above	Min 2	Min 10	14
Working status	Working	Min 2	Min 10	40
Working status	Not working	Min 2	Min 10	11
If reported incident	Reported	Min 2	Min 10	29
If reported incident	Not reported	Min 2	Min 10	21
If accessed support	Accessed	Min 2	Min 10	10
If accessed support	Not accessed	Min 2	Min 10	40

Victim focus group sample

Table A15: Victim focus group sample

Characteristic	Response	Cardiff	Leicester	Westminster	Newcastle upon Tyne	Liverpool
Experience of ASB	Victim or witness of ASB in previous 12 months	12	11	12	12	12
Victim or witness (any type)	Witness (or both)	6	11	10	10	9
Victim or witness (any type)	Victim (or both)	6	3	7	2	5
Extent to which ASB impacts their life currently	A great deal	0	3	0	2	0
Extent to which ASB impacts their life currently	A fair amount	6	5	8	4	10
Extent to which ASB impacts their life currently	Just a little	6	3	4	3	2
Extent to which ASB impacts their life currently	Not at all	0	0	0	3	0
Type of ASB experienced	Personal threat	4	10	6	5	5
Type of ASB experienced	Community-nuisance	9	11	11	5	12
Type of ASB experienced	Environmental	10	8	3	2	2
Gender	Male	7	5	4	6	5
Gender	Female	5	6	8	6	7
Ethnicity	White British	5	4	7	10	8
Ethnicity	Other ethnicity	7	7	5	2	5
Age	18 to 34	1	2	2	3	5
Age	35 to 54	8	6	6	5	5
Age	55 and above	3	3	4	4	2
Working status	Working	10	8	9	9	8
Working status	Not working	2	3	3	3	4
If reported incident	Reported	7	6	9	8	7
If reported incident	Not reported	5	5	3	4	5
If accessed support	Accessed	9	1	0	0	1
If accessed support	Not accessed	3	10	12	12	11

Focus group dates

Table A16: Focus group dates

Location	Dates (2022)
Liverpool	14 March and 21 March
Cardiff	15 March and 16 March
Westminster	15 March and 17 March
Newcastle upon Tyne	22 March and 24 March
Leicester	24 March and 30 March

Agencies and organisations interview breakdown

Table A17: Agencies and organisations interview breakdown

Agency/organisation	Cardiff	Newcastle upon Tyne	Leicester	Liverpool	London[footnote 41]	Total
Police	2	4	0	3	1	10
Local authority	1	3	4	2	6	16
Housing	0	2	0	5	0	7
Other	0	2	0	0	0	2
Total	3	11	4	10	7	35

1. In the survey, ‘personally experienced’ referred to an incident that happened specifically to an individual or was an act that was targeted directly at them, whereas ‘witnessed’ meant an incident that an individual saw, but one that was not targeted at them directly. ↩

2. In the survey, ‘wider community or local area’ was described as the area within 15 minutes walking from where the person lived, whereas in the qualitative research this was left to the participant’s discretion/interpretation. ↩

3. Anti-social behaviour: Living a nightmare: https://victimscommissioner.org.uk/document/anti-social-behaviour-living-a-nightmare/ ↩

4. Exploring the effects of long-term anti-social behaviour victimisation: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0269758020961979 ↩

5. Defining and measuring anti-social behaviour: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/116655/dpr26.pdf ↩

6. National standard for incident recording: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-national-standard-for-incident-recording-nsir-counting-rules ↩

7. Crime Survey for England and Wales: https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/crimeandjustice/datasets/methodologynoteonthepossibleordereffectonresponsestoquestionsonantisocialbehaviourfromchangesinthecrimesurveyforenglandandwalesquestionnaireappendixtables ↩

8. Victim/witness fieldwork was conducted with individuals from Westminster, whereas agencies and organisations’ interviews were conducted with those in London more broadly due to the availability of relevant individuals. ↩

9. Including those who entered the survey and completed the screening questions but were ultimately screened out because they were not eligible to participate. ↩

10. The IMD score is a measure of relative deprivation based on 37 separate indicators. IMD classifies these areas into 5 areas based on relative disadvantage, with area 1 being the most deprived and area 5 being the least deprived. For more information, see https://understanding.herefordshire.gov.uk/inequalities/index-of-multiple-deprivation-imd/ ↩

11. Attributions of quotes from focus group participants do not include age information due to data recording practices. ↩

12. ‘Conduct that has caused, or is likely to cause, harassment, alarm or distress to any person; conduct capable of causing nuisance or annoyance to a person in relation to that person’s occupation of residential premises; or conduct capable of causing housing-related nuisance or annoyance to any person.’ https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2014/12/contents/enacted ↩

13. In the survey, sexual ASB was defined as ‘Sexual anti-social behaviour (for example prostitution or kerb-crawling or evidence of prostitution (such as cards in phone boxes, used condoms, people committing inappropriate or indecent sexual acts in public).’ ↩

14. 3% indicated ‘don’t know/prefer not to say’. ↩

15. See footnote 10. ↩

16. Participant IMD classified as ‘Other’ where they did not consent to share a postcode. ↩

17. Derived from the British National Readership Survey, social grade is a classification system based on the occupation of the Chief Income Earner of a household. Classifications are defined as: Social Grade ABC1: High managerial, administrative or professional, intermediate managerial, administrative or professional, supervisory, clerical and junior managerial, administrative or professional; Social Grade C2DE: Skilled manual workers, semi and unskilled manual workers, state pensioners, casual or lowest grade workers, unemployed with state benefits only. More information can be found at: https://www.ipsos.com/sites/default/files/publication/6800-03/MediaCT_thoughtpiece_Social_Grade_July09_V3_WEB.pdf ↩

18. Limited differences across other demographic groups were also present, for example some differences by age were identified. However, these were inconsistent and so have not been explored further in this report. ↩

19. Selected 2–10 on a scale where 1 = no effect and 10 = total effect. ↩

20. See footnote 13. ↩

21. Meaning a rating of 8–10 where 1 = no effect and 10 = total effect. ↩

22. Percentages are marked with an asterisk where the base size is below 50. Given the sample size these figures are based on, these findings should be interpreted with caution. ↩

23. Percentages are marked with an asterisk where the base size is below 50. Given the sample size these figures are based on, these findings should be interpreted with caution. ↩

24. Selected 8, 9 or 10 on a scale between 1 and 10 where 1 = no effect and 10 = total effect. ↩

25. Nuisance neighbours and people being intimidated/harassed had the highest number of emotional impacts, with a mean of 3.6 impacts each. ↩

26. Loss of trust in other people/my community and loss of trust in institutions are explored in Section 4. ↩

27. Hate crime as defined by the Crown Prosecution Service is ‘Any criminal offence which is perceived by the victim or any other person, to be motivated by hostility or prejudice, based on a person’s disability or perceived disability; race or perceived race; or religion or perceived religion; or sexual orientation or perceived sexual orientation or transgender identity or perceived transgender identity.’ ↩

28. Responded ‘I am still doing this’ to the question ‘How long after experiencing/witnessing the anti-social behaviour did you do this for?’ ↩

29. This figure is based on those who selected one or more of the 3 avoidance behaviours, including avoiding certain places or situations (with 36% experiencing this behaviour change), going out of the house less often (24%) or changing their travel plans (17%) after experiencing or witnessing ASB. ↩

30. Longevity of emotional impacts was not explored in this research. ↩

31. Annoyance and anger have been combined as they are closely aligned. ↩

32. https://www.britannica.com/topic/broken-windows-theory ↩

33. 21% of survey participants overall reported experiencing a significant impact from ASB. ↩

34. 29% of male survey participants had experienced/witnessed people being intimidated/harassed compared to 25% of female survey participants. ↩

35. 16% of male survey participants had experienced/witnessed problems with out-of-control dogs compared to 11% of female survey participants and 14% of survey participants overall. ↩

36. Note: we have not included percentages of other ethnic groups due to lower base sizes when compared to white ethnicity. Base sizes: White n=2,210, Asian n=134, Black n=51, Other n=12. ↩

37. Including those living in the 1-2 IMD areas. ↩

38. Including those living in IMD area 5. ↩

39. The findings from the qualitative research suggest that sexual ASB may be misinterpreted as sexual harassment, which could result in greater impacts. Findings should therefore be treated with caution. ↩

40. Attribution to whether an incident of ASB was experienced or witnessed was done by participants, meaning it is subjective. ↩

41. Stakeholder interviews were conducted with those in London more broadly due to availability of relevant individuals. ↩