Wilson and Kelling (1982) introduced Zimbardo’s "broken windows" into the lexicon a little over 30 years ago. This article explores broken windows from a legal policy perspective, with the aim of putting forth a framework for integrating what we know (or think we know) about the potential effects of broken windows policing into our goals for improving high-crime neighborhoods.

A narrative review was carried out of key social science research on the broken windows perspective.

The first part of the article explains the appeal of broken windows to legal theorists interested in challenging criminal law policy based on a law and economics approach. The second part reviews maturing broken windows research and evaluations of broken windows policing. The third part explains the contours of an analysis that addresses the value of broken windows policing from a legal policy perspective.

While I remain a tentative fan of broken windows policing, I argue that the modest outcomes of broken windows policing do not justify the problems these policies create from a procedural justice context. The policy literature ignores this trade-off, and a curriculum framework that emphasizes how the criminal justice system educates citizens may offer a promising alternative.