Understanding the impact of area-based interventions on area safety in deprived areas: realist evaluation of a neighbour nuisance intervention in Arnhem, the Netherlands

Table 3 Perceptions of formal and informal social control across districts over time

	Formal social control (%yes)^a				Informal social control (0 = low;10 = high)^b
Districts^c	2005	2007	2009	2011	2005	2007	2009	2011
Target district 1	22	36	57	52	5.4	4.5	5.0	5.0
Target district 2			63	65			5.6	5.8
Target district 3a			61	49			5.3	5.3
Target district 3b			59	58			5.2	5.3
Target district 3c			60	53			5.2	5.2
Target district 4			52	48			5.1	4.8
City average	21	25	50	50	5.9	5.7	5.8	5.8

^aPercentage agreeing with the item ‘municipality pays (a lot of) attention to liveability- and safety problems in my neighbourhood’. The question was rephrased from ‘a lot of attention’ in 2005/2007 to ‘attention’ in 2009/2011
^bMean score on the items ‘the people in this neighbourhood interact well’, ‘I feel at home with the people living in my neighbourhood’, ‘I live in a nice neighbourhood where there is a lot of solidarity’ and ‘the people in this neighbourhood barely know each other’
^cMCN was introduced in 2006 in target district 1, and in 2010 in target districts 2 to 4

ISSN: 1471-2458