At the outset it must be understood that human behaviour can seldom be adequately explained in categorical terms. Any classification of offenders is limited by the often multiple and heterogeneous factors typically operating in any one circumstance (Gold 1962). For example, arson committed as a means of crime concealment may invariably involve other elements operating in the mind of such an offender, such as animosity (Prins, Tennent & Trick 1985). Similarly, demographic profiles of the ‘typical’ arsonist can be misleading. Such profiles are often collected from samples of apprehended offenders.
As the clearance rate for arson is remarkably poor, bias is likely to exist in such samples (Chappell 1994). Nonetheless, a system of classification may serve as a guide for the range of factors possibly in operation. It is in this capacity that the present six motives have been proposed, based upon studies of arsonists conducted predominantly in the United States, the United Kingdom and Australia.
Typically, crimes committed due to feelings of anger, hatred or revenge are not unique or intrinsic to arson. However, such sentiments often find expression in fire-setting. Indeed, some motivational element of anger is believed to underpin a high proportion of all arson crimes (Rix 1994). Instead of an offender physically assaulting an individual with whom he or she has a grievance, the offender may attack the victim (or their property) and use fire as their weapon. Examples of fires motivated by such acrimonious sentiments are almost endless and can include feuds between neighbours, former friends and even spurned lovers. This motivational concept is often labelled as a “revenge” category; however, this title is somewhat misleading as it does not sufficiently describe all of the psychological factors potentially in action. The term revenge denotes a retaliatory relationship where there is some link between the victim and offender. There can be circumstances of arson precipitated by sentiments of anger or rage that do not necessarily involve a retaliatory link between the offender and the actual target. A foundational tenet of human psychology is the concept of displacement, where feelings such as anger find expression in unrelated objects (Blackburn 1993). An example of displacement with respect to arson may occur when a disagreement develops between an employee and a supervisor. The employee may refrain from directly attacking the supervisor to avoid repercussions but, as an outlet for his or her anger, may set fire to public space (such as nearby bus shelters). Consequently, the broader descriptor of animosity is adopted here to encompass the range of psychological mechanisms that are associated with this motivational drive.
A profit motive is a common reason for arson; it is where there offender derives some material gain or benefit from setting a fire (Kocsis & Irwin 1997). Thus, monetary needs and desires typically underpin profit motives. The ‘benefits’ inherently connected with profit motive arson typically originate either from a direct or indirect link with the offender. A distinguishing feature of direct profit motive is that the offender is also a pseudo-victim and holds some interest in the destroyed property. An example of arson motivated by direct profit is where an owner (or agent) burns an unsuccessful business premise to collect on insurance.
The benefits derived from a direct profit motive do not necessarily involve only fraudulent insurance claims. The destruction of a heritage-listed structure to avoid development restrictions (Brady 1982), or the destruction of a public house by its occupant in the hope of being relocated to better accommodation, are also examples of direct profit motives. With an indirect profit motive, some benefit through the destruction of property is achieved but the offender does not typically hold any interest in the destroyed property. An illustration of this scenario is where, for example, two rival businesses exist. The owner of one business may set out to destroy a competing business and through its destruction achieve a benefit in the form of reduced competition. Indirect profit motives are not necessarily confined to scenarios involving rivalry. Other examples may include: A fire lit by an on-call firefighter who is paid only when responding to a fire; or a caretaker who lights a fire at work to incur overtime pay in cleaning up after it.
A motive of vandalism is the malicious and wanton destruction of property (Kocsis & Irwin, 1997) and, as with the animosity category, is not in any way intrinsic to arson. It is, rather, a phenomenon common to juvenile delinquency that sometimes manifests itself in firesetting behaviour. An example might involve a group of juveniles who instead of spraying graffiti on a bus stop enclosure, attempt to burn it instead. Fires instigated by motives of vandalism are possibly the hardest to comprehend given their seemingly purposeless nature. Unlike many other motives, there is typically no coherent reason for why these fires are started beyond an apparent disregard for the rights of others, a mischievous mindset, possible peer group pressure, boredom or a mixture of all of these factors.
Fire vandalism is an antisocial disruptive behaviour that is more likely to occur in areas of social deprivation, and is carried out by older adolescents. Wood (2000) found that 89% of detected fire-vandals were aged 6-15 years, the average age being 12 years. Nearly three quarters of Wood’s sample acted in partnership with other young people. The most likely targets are vehicles, uninhabited property, residential buildings, schools, factories and shops. Swaffer (1993) defined this group as delinquent, typically anti-social, individuals for whom firesetting is not the only problem behaviour exhibited. This type of firesetting activity is often committed by groups of young people where the choice of target is opportunistic. Criminological explanations for these acts of vandalism have shifted from psychological reasons such as aggression and frustration to more sociological reasons such as lack of employment, lack of motivating schooling, and insufficient provisions for young people to express their developmental requirements in legitimate ways (Home Office, 1988).
This type of arson is usually unplanned arising from opportunity, bravado and social peer pressure. Although individuals in this category are less likely than other types of arsonists to be psychologically disturbed, there is a risk that a firesetting vandal may progress towards serial arson, setting increasingly severe fires, indicating some fascination with fire itself.
In areas of social deprivation fire setting may used as a deviant display in an attempt to push against the limits of tolerance within a community. As the number of arson attacks increase in one area there is the possibility that this sort of behaviour will become tolerated, accepted and normalised. Individuals who commit this offence are often not aware of the consequences of fire itself. This is coupled with the knowledge that they are unlikely to be apprehended. These personal and social factors combine to make vandalism a major source of arson in this country.
The motive of crime concealment is, as the name implies, perpetrated with the intent of concealing or, more specifically, destroying evidence pertaining to the commission of another crime (Rix 1994). This motive is somewhat unique because arson here is a secondary outcome to a primary goal. One example could be the destruction of a stolen vehicle by a thief to destroy fingerprints and DNA evidence. In this case the primary goal of the offender is theft, not arson. The need to commit arson is only a means by which the offender hopes to conceal or destroy evidence of the original crime.
Arson can also be committed in pursuit of a political goal (Scott 1974). Once again, arson motivated by political considerations provides an example of fire being used as a conduit to express some other sentiment. In this context, fire is used to signify extreme and violent protest. There are numerous examples of arson motivated by political objectives and they include: Acts of terrorism, such as the firebombing of an abortion clinic by religious extremists (Pike 1972), Racial discrimination of a family who have moved to a new town; or Civil disturbance due to social and/or racial tensions (Georges 1975).
Public perceptions of arsonists are sometimes synonymous with individuals suffering from a mental disorder (Kapardis, Rawson & Antonopoulos 1983). Such perceptions seem to be reinforced by the poor understanding and overgeneralization of psychological disorders such as pyromania (Geller, McDermeit & Brown 1997). As discussed earlier, there are numerous reasons to explain the possible motives behind arson, none of which are specifically related or necessarily precipitated by mental disorder. Indeed, it is quite difficult to establish the actual frequency of mental disorder within individuals who commit arson. Some studies have found the frequency to be as low as 10 per cent (United States Department of Justice 1982) while others claim it is over 60 per cent (Taylor & Gunn 1984). Such disparities are likely to be artifacts of the samples studied, as well as the proclivities of mental health practitioners to apply various diagnostic labels and definitions to explain criminal behaviour (Foucault 1978). The mere presence of mental disorder within an individual does not automatically equate to it being the cause of fire-setting behaviour. For example, a failing business burnt down by an owner who has an intermittent history of schizophrenia could be more closely connected to poor returns on the business, rather than the mental disorder, and thus motivated by profit.
Empirical examinations of arsonists who have been referred to psychiatric hospitals have generally found that schizophrenia, personality disorders, various forms of mental handicap, substance abuse, and mood disorders are the most frequent diagnoses (Koson & Dvoskin 1982). Each of these, and the concept of pyromania, are briefly discussed below.
Schizophrenia is a debilitating mental disorder where an individual can suffer from a range of symptoms, the most notable being delusions and hallucinations. These can impair the individual’s ability to comprehend the true nature and circumstances of his or her environment. An example in the context of arson may be an individual suffering from paranoid delusions of persecution that sets a nearby house light in the belief that government surveillance equipment has been monitoring them. In reality no such surveillance or equipment actually exists.
A personality disorder is an enduring pattern of inner experience and behaviour that deviates from the expectations of the individual’s culture, is pervasive and inflexible, has an onset in adolescence, is stable over time and leads to distress or impairment. There are a variety of personality disorders but the most pertinent is possibly the Antisocial Personality Disorder. Antisocial Personality Disorder is characterised by a pattern of disregard for, and violation of, the rights of others4. An example in the context of arson may be an individual who suffers a very minor affront owing to poor service from a bank clerk who, rather than simply dismissing such a trivial incident as most people would do, instead returns to the bank later to light a fire in retaliation for this affront. Another relevant personality disorder is the Histrionic Personality Disorder. This is typically characterised by a pattern of excessive emotionality and attention-seeking4. An example of an arsonist with such traits may be someone who deliberately lights a fire, raises the alarm and may even seek to inject themselves into the action by heroically attempting to extinguish the fire.
Mental handicap, for the purposes of this essay, refers to mental impairment of some physical or neurological origin. Individuals with these impairments do not necessarily possess any inherent proclivity to lighting fires per se, but may have reduced cognitive functions that can render them more impulsive, suggestible or unable to appreciate the consequences of their actions (Shea 2002). These diminished cognitive functions, when combined with contextual factors, may lead to fire-setting behaviour.
The consumption of drugs and alcohol in excessive quantities has an uninhibiting effect upon the normal controls of human behaviour. Thus, intoxicating substances can act as catalyst to antisocial acts (such as arson) which an individual in a state of sobriety may not normally indulge in.
Although pyromania is probably the most well-known psychological disorder associated with firesetting, considerable debate has emerged since the 1850s on what pyromania is, and whether such a discrete psychological entity truly exists (Geller 1992).
Some authors associate the term with fire-setting for the pleasure of observing flames (Vreeland & Lewin 1980), whereas others use it to describe those motivated by an irresistible impulse to light fires (Lester 1975). Fire-setting has also been associated with sexual satisfaction (Prins 1980). Each of these conceptions of pyromania could also be interpreted within more generic diagnostic classifications of obsession, compulsion or sexual perversion.
More recently, Shea (2002) has observed that the application of the DSM-IV (the American Psychiatric Association’s diagnostic guide for mental diseases) criteria for pyromania has evolved into a default category which is used only when fire-setting behaviour cannot be explained by other motives or psychological factors. Consequently, there appears to be little agreement regarding this popular yet elusive term (Geller 1992). Possibly the only point of consensus is that the occurrence of pyromania is extremely rare, which again highlights the question of whether such a discrete disorder truly exists.
Jackson, Glass and Hope (1987) identified certain individuals who lack the ability directly to communicate their frustration, pain or feelings of hostility. These individuals may use arson as a means of communication, to express a desire, wish, or need for change. This includes cry for help or attention-seeking arson, would-be hero arson and attempted suicide. As Geller (1992) argues, arson is a good medium of expression for certain individuals because it is overtly confrontational and requires no verbal exchange or direct communication of any kind.
It must be emphasised that many acts of arson will draw from a mix of these different categories, but just as most colours are a mix of their primary elements, it is useful to identify the primary forms of arson in order to direct strategies that will prevent arson occurring.
Preventing arson is not only a complex and difficult challenge to undertake but it also must cover many different aspects of a far reaching problem. Arson can be prevented by two main approaches; interventions with people who intend to or do commit arson and by protecting, or ‘reinforcing’, the prospective target of arson. This distinction between the person who causes the arson and the target that suffers it has far reaching strategy implications because, in general, different agencies are concerned when dealing with the arsonists as opposed to those when dealing with the targets. Any strategies for dealing with arson to be effective they must incorporate both aspects of arson, perpetrators and targets, into a logical framework on which interventions may be built. For these different organisations to be able to co-ordinate their efforts it is of value that they agree on the various ways in which they can reduce arson.
Firstly, by protecting potential arson targets you can try to eliminate the ‘opportunity’ element of arson, and if this is carried out correctly the levels of arson have been shown to drop. The following points all contribute to preventing arson through taking away the opportunity from the potential arsonist: deny the arsonist fuel, make the premises as arson proof as possible, alert staff/others to arson.
Denying the arsonist fuel could involve removing all combustible waste and materials from open yards, or into an area well clear of buildings and perimeter fences, or store them within locked skips or shelters. Arson can also be reduced by locking away all hazardous goods such as flammable liquids and gas cylinders in separate stores when not in use and at the end of each working day. In addition by immobilising petrol and diesel pumps arson can be reduced at a grander scale.
Arson proofing your property is also suggested, this involves keeping windows and doors in good repair. By making sure fences, walls and gates are high enough and strong enough to deter entry and also checking that gaps beneath doors are as small as possible and sealed where practicable. Letterboxes should also have sheet metal containers fitted on the inside. As well as this step should be taken to secure property at night and fit intruder alarms where appropriate. Arson should always be discussed as a danger to property, especially in vulnerable areas and the suitable training should be given to employees or residence.
Prevention at a practical level is supported by a need to address the psychological issues held by those who commit arson offences. As discussed earlier, by treating both aspects of the arson the problem is more likely to be permanently resolved.
Interventions for arson take local and national precedence within government schemes, here and in America. There are several approaches that have been employed to attempt to cut the number of arsons taking place. National programs such as; training in fire safety, prevention projects, parental awareness programs, therapy and education programs for the fire-setter and access to mental health services all contribute to decreasing arson nationwide.
There are also community based projects that aim to interrupt the fire-setting behaviour. This is carried out by identifying certain ‘fire triggers’ within the arsonist and teaching them how to deal with these feelings. Additionally, by helping arsonists understand the consequences of their actions they are able to understand the affect fire has on their community and its surroundings. This awareness has been shown to reduce arson in those who have attended these programs (Cole et al., 1983). However the presence of serious family problems was also the best predictor of recidivism (Cole et al., 1986).
Taking into account the small percentage of arsonists that are actually caught, it seems imperative then that fire-setters undergo treatment in order for the levels of arson to fall significantly. Treatment approaches should include eclectic multi-faceted approaches to achieve maximum effectiveness. This is to combat the wide range of motives and underlying reasons that lead to arson. Treatment often includes using behaviour modifications, including relaxation therapy, anger control management and improvement in social and communication skills.
An example of this approach would be in Sunderland where the Youth Offending Service has established a multi-stranded strategy that aims reduce offending by young people with a history of fire-setting. The project includes a work experience week with the Arson Task Force and the Fire Brigade, a juvenile fire-setters intervention scheme, and co-operation with the young fire-fighters association. The project encourages young people to think about the consequences of their actions for themselves and for others, and includes an element of reparation to the community as participants take part in a ‘clean up day’ of the local area. In the year up to September 2001, 97 young people, average age 15 years, had been referred to the project. Only 8% of the young people were regular attendees at mainstream schools. Given this, it is encouraging that over 70% of participants successfully completed the project, although evidence in terms of long term impacts on offending behaviour is not currently available (Hermanns et al, 2001).
Tackling specific causes of arson is a popular way of dealing with the problem, for example schemes that specialise in dealing with arson due to malicious intent, support groups for those who commit arson due to mental health problems and programs created for those who’s fire-setting emerges out of serious emotional difficulties.
An example of one of these is the ‘FACE UP’ Arson Program for Young Offenders, it was established in 1991 by Merseyside fire service and Liverpool’s youth justice department in order to specifically target malicious juvenile arsonists. Following its success it has also been adapted for adults and used in the prison service to reduce the risk of fire within prisons. The course aims to confront, challenge and change the offender’s misguided negative attitudes that are seen to underlie the acts of arson. The course is intensive and is designed as an alternative to custody for juveniles aged 10-17 years. Participants are expected to attend two-hour sessions each week for 13 weeks as well as completing home study exercises. If the course is not completed the participant will have to face a custodial sentence (Broadhurst 1999).
There is a huge variety of ways that both the government and communities are attempting to prevent arson. I have discussed the two main strategies used; treating perpetrators and protecting properties. Either of these in isolation will have a limited amount of success, yet employed together they can provide an environment that discourages arson from both directions, therefore having a more permanent and effective outcome.
In conclusion, within this essay I have highlighted a variety of reasons why arson exists within our society and why people commit a crime that is so damaging in so many ways. There are many points that exist that are beyond the boundaries of this essay and so many more explanations as to why people commit arson. However, I have given a summary of the main points that arise within this very complex issue. Following this I have discussed a range of preventive measures already in progress and have stressed the importance of using a multi-faceted approach to solving this ever increasing problem within our society today.
Finally, it is essential that research is continued within the field of arson to gain a greater understanding of not only why people do it, but also to enable us to develop better strategies as to how to prevent it from happening in the first place.
Department for Transport, Local Government & the Regions (2000) Fire Statistics,
United Kingdom, 2000 DTLR: London.
American Psychiatric Association 2000
‘Pyromania’, defined by the American Psychiatric Association as ‘Repeated deliberate and purposeful firesetting associated with tension or affective arousal before the act, followed by intense pleasure or relief when setting the fires or witnessing/participating in the aftermath’ (APA, 1994).