Crime prevention - as an organised function of government, business or not-for-profit groups - should be based on evidence. Unfortunately, this does not always occur, especially in the 'public policy' domain of government. Instead, the crime prevention policy agenda is often driven by political ideology and anecdotal evidence with insufficient planning and evaluation (Sherman, Farrington, Welsh, & MacKenzie, 2002). Therefore, in many cases, the effectiveness of various crime prevention measures is unknown or unintended consequences are generated, including displacement of crime or deterrence of legitimate activities (Grabosky, 1996). With this in mind, this chapter emphasises the importance of 'standards', focusing on planning, consultation, social and procedural justice, sustainability, and systematic evaluation. The chapter begins with an outline of four types of prevention methods, described by Homel (2015) as 'developmental', 'community', 'criminal justice' and 'situational'.