Closed Circuit Television Systems in the United Kingdom - Coursework Example

Student Name: Tutor: Title: CCTVs effectiveness Course: Table of Contents Table of Contents 2 Introduction 3 Effectiveness of CCTV 4 Evaluation 10 Conclusion 13 References 14 Introduction Television systems are important for the day to day dispensation of information and communication. They are divided into open circuit television systems and closed circuit television systems. Normal open circuit television targets an indefinite group of viewers while closed circuit television systems or CCTV are aimed at providing video to a definite number of viewers. A CCTV transmits pictures/images to those individuals connected to the specific transmission system. An increase in insecurity coupled with technological advancement has led to widespread usage of CCTV. Governments, local authorities, public and private companies have adopted the use of CCTV. Traditionally CCTV is used as a form of property crime prevention, in fighting traffic offences, assault cases and bribery. In the United Kingdom public spending on CCTV is in excess of £250 million over the past ten years hence the need to prove its effectiveness (Welsh et al, 2009). This paper tries to discuss the effectiveness CCTV in preventing and/or reducing crime. It can be argued that CCTV is quite effective in the fight against crime. In his review of CCTV as a crime deterring technique, Larry (2012) found out that CCTV is integral in the fight against crime in both public and private settings. He argued that as CCTV is usually detectable, it prevents those offences from criminals that are afraid of getting detected and apprehended. It also enables easier prosecution of criminals as CCTV is admissible in court and increases the safety of law preserving officers. It is also used in the fight against terrorism. CCTV usage is widely used in Great Britain. Statistics show that around 4.2 million closed circuit televisions are in operation in the UK (Norris, McCahill and Wood, 2004) .These make up 1 CCTV for every 14 people. In the United States of America 26 million CCTV cameras are believed to be in operation. (Davies p. J. et al, 2006)Worldwide, there is a continued rise in the installation of CCTV as a surveillance tool (Norris et al, 2004) Based on fact and research, this essay will try to open-mindedly discuss CCTVs, their impact on crime, advantages and disadvantages. After this, the case of CCTV effectiveness will finally be put to rest. Effectiveness of CCTV The cost of crime in the United Kingdom published by the home office in the year 2000 showed the increasing drop in the economy caused by crime. The calculations for this cost considered violent crime perpetuated against individuals and the costs incurred by private institutions and corporations. There was therefore need to improve on the ways to fight crime hence the investment in CCTV (Dubourg, Hamed and Thorns, 2005). The government came up with strategies that would help towards the achievement of this goal that include improving on the performance of crime enforcement agencies by funding their CCTV acquisition program.(Fussey P ,2004). A lot of research has been conducted on the effectiveness of CCTV. Research done by the home office research, development and statistics directorate showed a significant improvement in the safety of the areas where CTV’s were installed. The research showed that crimes like theft, aggression and violence in public places were precluded (Gill and Spriggs, 2005).This research by Gill and Spriggs (2005) was carried out in diverse locations around the country. It included places like hospitals, town centers, car parks, city outskirts, a main road and residential areas. These areas had previously recorded incidences of robbery, burglary, anti-social behavior, harassment, vandalism, prostitution, graffiti, shop theft and drug dealing .The CCTV systems used also varied in size with low key areas being fitted with few cameras while areas with a higher record of crime problems were fitted with a high number of cameras. The London car park had a system comprising of 600 cameras. These systems were fixed in that individual cameras could not be moved from one location to another. Police statistics were then recoded and compared to model/control area. Using these results, the percentage change in crime levels within the areas was then deduced. The levels of crime 12 months prior to CCTV installation were compared to crime levels 12 months after CCTV installation. The findings of the study revealed that there was a small reduction in crime levels, with the results depending on the size of the target area and its control (Gill and Spriggs, 2005). Armitage (2002) agreed with Gill and Spriggs (2005) on the effects of CCTV on different types of crime. His research revealed that property crime like burglary, shoplifting, vandalism and criminal damage was significantly reduced by the installation of CCTV. The study found out that there had been a reduction in car crime in the car parks in which CCTV was operational when compared to a period before CCTV installation or when compared to control areas. The research, which was carried out in several towns across the country found out that the closed circuit cameras were particularly effective in an enclosed or sheltered establishment. In regards to the use of CCTV in town centers Brown (1995) found out that CCTV reduced the cases of personal crime (assault) within small towns. The diffusion effect occurs when those areas adjacent to those covered by CCTV also experience a relative drop in crime (Skinns, 1998).Video cameras set up in supermarkets to curb shoplifting have an effect of reducing property damage because the perpetrators fear being caught on camera. There is evidence that suggests that in some cases the publicity surrounding the installation of CCTV is enough to act as a deterrent. Armitage et al (1999) indicate that in Burnley, there was a reduction in crime one month prior to the installation of the CCTV. In his book, Criminology, Larry (2012) concurs with Welsh and Farrington (2009) who find CCTV to be of many uses in public and private capacities. They found out that after a case study involving 41 places around the world, CCTV have a fairly significant impact on crime. The research found out that CCTV are most effective in crime prevention in car parks and have been most effective in the United Kingdom compared to other countries. This, they found out was because, in the United Kingdom the general public supports the usage of CCTV in public areas for the sake of crime prevention. The management of data from CCTV when done correctly also increased the entire systems effectiveness (Remagnino and Velastin, 2006) The effectiveness of CCTV is not only confined to the United Kingdom. Studies done in the United States of America also support the effectiveness of CCTV, the usage of closed circuit television got public support in 2008 after an outbreak of criminal violence that claimed the lives of 26 public school children and left many more injured in Chicago (Welsh et al, 2009). This upsurge in crime led to the connection of around 4500 cameras in schools to the police headquarters. This program allows the monitoring of cameras on the outside of buildings by police. This was viewed as an important step in the fight against crime hence proving that CCTV is essential in the surveillance and crime fighting industries. The Routine Activity Theory which was developed by Marcus Felson and Lawrence Cohen states that a crime is committed if there is a motivated offender, the availability of a target and the absence of a competent guardian (Attorney generals department, 2011). A criminal offence may only occur when the offender believes that the target is worth it and there is an absence of a capable guardian. Any action that prevents the meeting of all these three factors reduces the probability of a crime being committed. CCTV takes the place of a competent guardian therefore reducing this probability (Woodhouse J, 2010). This system of surveillance also increases the probability of detection. The cameras capture the video /images of a criminal activity leading to punishment, imprisonment or increased supervision. In a paper for Leicester University exploring the effectiveness of closed circuit television as the main prevention measure against theft in the retail textile sector in the United Kingdom, the usage of this surveillance technique was validated. The study revealed the occurrence of about 5.3 million crimes on average per year. This cost the sector an estimated £1.9 million. Customers and staff were the ones involved hence the need to find ways of effectively preventing its occurrence. This rise in retail crime was successfully combated by the installation of CCTV which saw the number of units lost fall from 123 to 91 within six months (Beck and Willis, 1999). Conversely this research is not entirely conclusive in its support of CCTV as a surveillance tool in the fight against crime. It cannot be scientifically or mathematically proven that the fall in crime in the above cases was entirely due to CCTV. Different singular factors or a combined number of factors may be the reason for the fall in crime levels. CCTV just takes the credit for these drops in crime. Most if not all of the research carried out by different people and groups tend to agree that their research is not 100% right. Others agree that even though CCTV has been majorly influential in the reduction of property crimes such as car crimes and those in enclosed areas, they agree that CCTV does not affect impulsive crimes like alcohol related crimes and personal crimes like assault. Therefore, the research on the subject appears very variable even though there have been no studies on the causes in variation of the research findings. The research by the Home office admitted that though they have been cases of success in the usage of CCTV to curb crime, some cases did not provide such positive results. The study tries to gauge if CCTV reduces the fear of crime. The study reveals that fear of crime is defined in various ways (Farral et al 2000). But the feeling of being safe can be unaltered by crime. While some people felt safe with the installation of CCTV, others were not. People need to be able to see the cameras for them to feel a semblance of safety but many people do not notice them (Ditton, 2002). It is therefore not definitive whether the usage of CCTV works even though different criteria have been used in assessing its effectiveness. In the research of effectiveness of CCTV in the outskirts of London, there was a marked rise in the levels of crime six months before the erection of CCTV poles which again declined three months to the erection of the poles. These suggest that reduction in crime levels should be treated with prudence. This is because crime in the control area begun falling prior to introduction of CCTV while levels of crime in the target area fell later indicating that the large effect size is not necessarily the work of CCTV. Gill and Turbin (1999) came up with the negative effects of CCTV. It includes decreased vigilance of law enforcement because of over reliance on CCTV hence creating extra potential for crime and decreasing the advantages of vigilance. It may also lead to people avoiding areas with CCTV coverage hence reducing the protection derived from surveillance by association. Mathematical models and formulas used in the analyzing of the figures found in research also tend to affect the conclusion made. In the research by Gill et al (2005) the estimates made were two: using the unweighted mean and using the inverse variance weighted mean. These two provide the best framework for analysis and provide nearly the same results as the inverse variance weighted mean(Lipsey and Wilson,2001)The two different analyzing techniques provide two different approximations of the effects of CCTV on the level of crime. The unweighted mean method produced results suggesting no significant effect of the CCTV on crime while the inverse variance weighted mean method showed an increase in crime levels in the areas under study (Gill et al, 2005). The social cost of CCTV is factor acting against its unilateral adoption .There is fear that funding for CCTV systems in the United Kingdom has been because of the success of schemes that were assessed with feeble designs that were incompetently carried out and even interference from the government ( Painter,1999;Perry et al,2006) . The large sums of money necessary for installation of CCTV therefore begs the question; are there better and cheaper methods of surveillance? (Welsh et al, 2009). It is then necessary to carry out a serious evaluation of cost versus effectiveness before making an informed decision (Moore 2002). The measures available for surveillance are diverse and include: Superior street lighting Security guards Position managers Defendable space Position managers perform surveillance by virtue of their positions. They include people like bus conductors, bus drivers and train conductors. Though, their surveillance duties come after their normal duties of employment. Defendable spaces involve the modification to the environment to make use of available natural surveillance on streets and other open spaces. Design changes may include clearing of bushes, building street barricades and rebuilding of windows. These methods are evidently cheaper than the use of CCTV. (Welsh and Farrington, 2009) Invasion of people’s confidentiality and privacy also work against the effectiveness of CCTV as a surveillance tool for the fight against crime. The usage of CCTV is seen as an unwanted intrusion into private affairs of people and their activities. It is a threat to their right to privacy hence the general hostility towards their installation and subsequent success as surveillance systems. There is therefore need to act against these resistance from the general public for the system to enjoy higher forms of success (Welsh et al ,2009).The use of CCTV is also viewed as a way by the state to assert control over its citizens. It is viewed as a system that shows the power and control exercised by the state over its citizens (Griffin et al, 2007). Griffin et al (2007), in his research, points out that most cities are divided into nodes in relation to the CCTV placement. This is viewed as more of a prison society with government in charge of this urban space. There are calls for the government to include the public in its decision making about CCTV (Pickles, 2012). Evaluation After looking at both sides of this research, it is therefore prudent to agree with Larry (2012), Gill and Spriggs (2005), Welsh and Farrington (2009) and Armitage et al (1999) on their assertions that CCTV is effective in fighting crime. It has been proved that CCTV installation is essential for protecting lives, property, privacy, information and the environment. With the correct design and installation of CCTV, it effectively acts a crime deterrent. It acts on the psychology of criminals hence preventing them from carrying out their intended criminal offences. It has also been clearly established that CCTV systems helps in the identification of the perpetrators of criminal activities after the review of recorded video retrieved from CCTV system. The drop in crime documented by the home office goes a long way in proving the importance of CCTV and the continued need to invest in this system to reduce the crime levels in the country. CCTV has been effectively utilized in the prevention of both man-made and natural catastrophes. It brings a level of awareness in the prevention of accidents and disasters. A study in Birmingham highlighted how its aim of deterrence of felonies, anti-social behavior and a decrease in levels of fear within the town was hugely successful after installation of CCTV.(Fussey,2004) Statistics from private companies, corporations and property owners all go a long way in validating the importance of CCTV. Supermarkets, which have installed CCTV, don’t suffer from as many theft cases as before the installation. This drop in percentages of crimes committed against these institutions show that CCTV is effective in the fight against crime. The research done by Beck and Willis (1999) fully corroborated this conclusion. The usage of CCTV in the transport sector has had a large and positive impact on the streamlining of traffic activities and the reduction of traffic offences. The capability of CCTV lends its usefulness in traffic monitoring and the recording of violations leading to the apprehension of the perpetrators. This fact has led to a reduction in traffic violations as offenders know they cannot go without detection and eventual punishment (Sefton council, 2013).this therefore gives credence to the argument that CCTV is effective in all its aspects of operation. The negative views given about the effectiveness of CCTV are valid but are just too few to counter its advantages. These negative views can also be easily addressed by installation of high quality designs and usage of CCTV along other surveillance techniques like street lighting which will go a long way in increasing the percentage success rate of CCTV. Public awareness on the advantages of CCTV will effectively get rid of Griffin et al (2007) declaration that CCTV is used by the state as a control tool over its citizens. The fear about the costs of installation of CCTV is unfounded. How can anyone put a price on security? This cost is necessary for the well being and security of society and should therefore not be used to de-campaign the effectiveness of CCTV. Conclusion The building of a secure social order is achievable through the use of CCTV. CCTV on its own is perfect for the fight against property crime like car crime and burglary because the offenders view the penalty of getting caught to be heavier than the benefits. It is therefore very beneficial in car parks as it is a significant crime deterrent. However, CCTV has very little or no impact on violent crime or those crimes committed under the influence of alcohol. Therefore there is need to find ways that will improve on the benefits of CCTV usage. The use of CCTV in addition to other surveillance techniques is more beneficial than either system alone. It is therefore necessary to complement CCTV usage with improvement in street lighting to effectively fight and reduce crime levels. For large property owners, local authorities, and business owners this research is useful and should provide a basis for their decision making in selection of CCTV or other forms of surveillance. It will also be important in the allocation of public resources while putting into consideration where CCTV is most effective and the fact that CCTV when combined with improved street lighting are very effective in reducing total crime. Evaluations done in city centers, public housing schemes, car parks and public transport are very positive on the subject. Standard police analysis of the countries /towns/markets crime proliferation can be used to determine the places at risk of being affected by property crimes .this information can then be used to guide the allocation of CCTV. To avoid public resistance and hostility, measure should be put into place to improve on the way CCTV is harmonized. References Armitage, R, 2002, To CCTV or not to CCTV: A review of current research into the effectiveness CCTV systems in reducing crime. Retrieved From Attorney General and Justice , 2011, Routine Activity theory: crime prevention Retrieved From Brown, B, 1995, CCTV in Town Centres: Three Case Studies -Police Research Group Crime Detection and Prevention Series Paper 68, HMSO Beck, A and Willis, A, 1999, ‘Context-Specific Measures of CCTV Effectiveness in the Retail Sector New York: Criminal Justice Press. Davies, P and Valentine T, 2006, CCTV on trial: Matching video images with the defendant in the dock. London, Goldsmiths, university of London. Ditton, J, 2000, ‘Crime and the City: Public Attitudes to CCTV in Glasgow’, British Journal of Criminology, 40, 692-709. Dubourg, R. Hamed, J and Thorns, J, 2005, The economic and social costs of crime against individuals and households. Retrieved from < http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20110218135832/rds.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs05/rdsolr3005.pdf> Farrall, S., Bannister, J., Ditton, J. and Gilchrist, E, 2000, ‘Social Psychology and the Fear of Crime: Re-examining a Speculative Model’, British Journal of Criminology, 40, 399-413. Fussey, P, 2004, New labour and new surveillance: theoretical and political ramifications of CCTV implementation in the UK. Available at < http://www.surveillance-and-society.org/articles2 (2)/newlabour.pdf> Griffin D and Halpin, F. E, 2007, Development in E-Government: a critical analysis, Washington D.C. IOS press. Gill, M and Spriggs, A, 2005, Assessing the impact of CCTV. London. Crown copyright Goold, J. B, 2004, CCTV and policing: Public are surveillance and police practices in Britain. London: Oxford university press. Lipsey, M and Wilson, D.B, 2001, Practical meta analysis, California: Sage publishers. Moore M.H, 2002, The limits of social science in guiding policy: criminology and public policy. Perry A, Dougall C., Farrington P.D, 2006, Reducing crime: The effectiveness of criminal justice interventions, Chichester; John Wiley and sons, Ltd. Painter, K, Surveillance of Public Space: CCTV, Street Lighting and Crime Prevention, New York: Criminal Justice Press. Skinns, D, 1998, ‘Crime Reduction, Diffusion and Displacement: Evaluating the Effectiveness of CCTV’ in Norris, Moran and Armstrong (1998). Sefton council, 2013, CCTV for traffic control. Available at TOA Corporation , 2005, Closed circuit television systems. Available at Pickles N, 2012, The price of privacy: Councils spend half a billion pound on CCTV in four years. Available at < http://www.bigbrotherwatch.org.uk/home/2012/02/price-privacy-councils-spend-521m.html> Remagnino, P and Velastin, S. A, 2006, Intelligent distributed video surveillance systems. Welsh, C and Farrington P. D, 2009, Making public places safe: surveillance and crime prevention, London; Oxford university press. Woodhouse J, 2010, CCTV and its effectiveness in tackling crime. Retrieved From www.parliament.uk/briefing papers/SN05624.pdf Read More