Crime Prevention through Environmental Design - Essay Example

Crime Prevention through Environmental Design Name Institution Crime Prevention through Environmental Design Introduction Within the modern post –industrial society and the criminal justice system, factors such as crime and the fear of crime are becoming pervasive and endemic concerns, which to some extent make it difficult to tackle such issues. According to researchers, there are different dimensions of crime: the target, law, offender, and location. The place-based strategies of preventing crime focuses on the crime site which involves various spatial aspects of the target and specific crime location. It is important to note that if the spatial distribution of the offenders and offences become random, then there would be little concern on the environmental criminology to either the scholars or the analysts on social and criminal policy (Clancey, Lee & Fisher, 2012). Therefore, there is no random distribution of the of crime and crime hot spots have been acknowledged since the nineteenth century even as the industrial revolution resulted in new and previously unconsidered scale of the urbanization process. There have been increasing attentions on the hot spots in the recent years. Crime Prevention through Environmental Design emerged as a place-based mechanism of preventing crime as an independent theory; currently, the theory is becoming fashionable with many countries implementing it globally (Cozens, 2002). There are empirical research attempting to measure various components of the built and social environment in a bid to make critical modifications to it and ensuring evaluation of such practice; however, the research is fraught with several challenges. Schneider and Kitchen cites that within the practice, “it would be difficult to untangle the web of the spider in evaluating the specific place-based prevention measures (2002). Although the policymakers and practitioners require quick decisions on whether the measures in place have been effective or managed to reduce crime, the scholars on the other hand insist on the need to do things properly which require adequate time. The paper aims at discussing the concept of CPTED, presentation of its various elements, and comprehensive analysis of the associated programmes. Crime Prevention through Environmental design (CPTED) CPTED asserts that through designing properly and ensuring effective use of the built environment in a bid to reduce the fear and incidence of crime, there could be improvement in the quality of life (Saville & Atlas, 2008). Such information is based on the studies undertaken in the mid-twentieth century. However, through the years, there have been numerous theoretical disapprovals of issues presented by the CPTED theory (Hedayati, Abdullah, Razak & Maghsoodi, 2011). The continuing refinement of the first generation CPTED through the researchers, practitioners, and policymakers responds to the criticism to construct a wider and rigorous approach considered as the second generation CPTED. The aim of such refinement is to ensure extension that goes beyond the mere physical design with inclusion of various social factors. In the second generation CPTED, the theory applies risk assessment, demographic profiling, socio-economic factors, and community participation (Crowe & Fennelly, 2013). These developments in the theory and Situational Crime Prevention are becoming popular, refined, and improved in the nature of the design. There are several programmes of dealing with crime within the society. However, most of these programmes focus on controlling crime citing that improvement of crime control would in turn reduce crime or ensure adequate prevention in several ways (Seo, 2016). Such reasons form the basis of the many crime control measures throughout the criminal justice system. Figure 1: CPTED MODEL CPTED is a theory of crime prevention that focuses on various techniques and techniques to ensure decline in crime (Radosevich & Regis University, 2012). Moreover, CPTED requires changing various environmental elements to ensure adequate preventing or lessening of the crime, lessening the fear of crime and apprehension of risks associated with crime, and increasing the aesthetic, environmental value. Moreover, it is important to increase the qualitative value of life for citizens that abide with the laws especially ensuring inclination of the physical environment to ensure sustainability of the criminal behaviour. The CPTED approach of preventing crime requires three critical criteria: proper development of a strong police force, ensuring the presence of active citizen groups, and initiation of action to removing various causes of crime and situations in which it thrives (Geason & Wilson, 1989). There are several approaches in which the CPTED is applicable including the social, community, school, group, and applicable-individual group. The individual level programmes focus on the behaviours of individuals; school level includes application of various strategies and techniques. These levels tend to focus on the physical environment, which includes controlling access, integration of the discipline codes, and mentoring. Literature Review Crime is a worldwide issue. Crimes are different based on their desired incentives and etiological processes. Moreover, crime involves three environmental factors that occur simultaneously including the targeted victim, the offender with the motivation of committing the offense, and the presence of the opportunity in committing the crime. Globally, there have been increments in the crime attributes against the property compared to violent crimes. There are several environmental factors influencing crime especially the nighttime conditions, which accords the criminals to act against the intended targets (Cozens, 2008). Concerning various methods of preventing crime, it is clear on the role played by good relationship between the residential communities to ensure adequate prevention of crime rate. The success of the CPTED depends on the five major components including territoriality, surveillance, maintenance and target hardening, access control, and support activity. As a concept, territoriality depends on the reinforcement of the notion of priority concern and ownership sense through legitimizing the users of the space, which in turn improves the opportunities for offending through discouraging the illegitimacy of the users (Sherman, 2002). Surveillance depends on the physical design that enables the promotion of the informal and natural surveillance opportunities for people. Therefore, such practise makes surveillance a part of the guardianship. Whenever the offenders perceive that they are observed, there are high chances that they could offend considering the rising level of potential for intervention, prosecution, and apprehension (Reynald, 2010). Accessibility control plays critical role in reducing the opportunities for the crime through denial of access to the potential targets and ensuring creation of a heightened perception of the women. The other element is the maintenance and target, which aims at hardening and promoting of the positive image and maintaining routinely the built environment in a bid to make sure that the physical environment continues to function effectively and ensure positive transmission to all the users (Zahm, 2007). Through installation of the of the various elements of target hardening, there could be increment in the efforts in place by the offenders in a bid to expend within the commission of crime and support activity which could be defined as the application of the signage and design of encouraging the intended patterns of using the public spaces. However, the measurement of these elements of CPTED is limited which Hedayati (2009) and Minnery and Lim (2005) noted. In addition, the previous researches undertaken by Nes and Rueb (2009), Crowe and Zahm (1994), Cozens (2002), and Shu (2009) mainly focused on single element of the CPTED. The researchers took the measurement of all the five elements of CPTED; nonetheless, there are differences in the components and selection within the residential areas. In their research, Minnery and Lim (2005) undertook a research through evaluation of the four elements of CPTED, which include accessibility control, surveillance, target hardening, and support activity in Gold Coast, Austria. On the other hand, Hedayati (2009) researched on the four components of CPTED including surveillance, access control territoriality, and maintenance in various residential areas. The two researchers focused on the common approach, observation. However, using the observation alone in measuring CPTED elements is lacking and deficient. Other important factors to consider are attitude, scrutiny of the people, actions, and beliefs since the concept requires social interactions while determining the effectiveness towards prevention of crime. Physical Security The major concern for the physical security of many building projects lies within the fact that the designers in most cases do not understand the nature of the crime and criminals or the mechanisms they could employ to avert the crimes through taking positive steps while designing the projects. With continuous ignoring of the crime prevention through environmental design, there could be emergence of soaring residential and commercial burglaries. Therefore, it is vital to note the significance of having a sophisticated physical security planning which offer immense contribution to the overall success of the project (Kang, Kim, Lee, & Lee, 2014). The proper application of the security hardware and elimination of various security flaws would have positive impact of the various crime problems from the structural perspective. The physical security planning is one of the CPTED elements considered critical for the making penetration difficult and time consuming considering the extent of difficulty and length of delaying the major factors in the reduction of the probability that the crime would occur. It is important that various CPTED elements are familiar to the security personnel. The standard tools of trade include the hardware, surveillance, and lighting. Figure 2: Model for Effective Criminal Management However, the CPTED does not only focus on the tools but the manner in which they make the difference. Usually, there is building then ensuring adequate security. However, the CPTED requires ensuring security then building contrary to the old notion. Moreover, the concept recommends not only the security of the building but also that of the surrounding. It is vital to integrate various security programmes within the environment (Cozens, Paul, Hillier, & David, 2012). The initial aim of CPTED was to ensure reduction in crime within the various public housing projects; however, the concept has unlimited applications. CPTED mechanisms aim at changing various factors within the environment in a bid to reduce the opportunities for the environmental conditions to support criminal activities. Even with such benefits, there are arguments for and against the CPTED. Although the police might not be wishing to sit on the planning committee to design the crime-free environments, it is vital to note that the concept is more cost effective, in the end, considering that the police would require little resources to undertake their roles. Moreover, the changes associated with CPTED are permanent in nature; therefore, they do not require costly support programmes that involve many people and money. However, there are researchers arguing against CPTED especially those that view crime occur due to various social conditions associated with poverty and unemployment. Moreover, these researchers cite that through manipulation of the physical environment and focusing on the modification of various behavioural programmes, which are not the substitutes for improving the social services. Several reviews on the CPTED case studies reflect the positive significance of the concept in reducing crime. Schneider and Kitchen (2002) empirically reviewed various researches and suggested that the available evidence on CPTED cite that physical changes in environmental conditions could reduce the crime levels and the fear of crime. A study undertaken on the intervention by CPTED in Oregon suggested significant reduction in the level of burglaries within the commercial properties and stabilization of the quality of life for the neighbours, social cohesion, and physical appearances. However, some of the reviews seemed to offer partial confirmation of the benefits associated with CPTED. For example, a research undertaken by Sherman et al. (2002) which reviewed 122 evaluations on the mechanisms of preventing crime noted that half of the literatures were across environmental design, which plays significance role in demonstrating firm evidence on the reduction of crime. According to Saville (2009), there is need to shift from standardized CPTED theories towards the direction that would guarantee a holistic design, management, and implantation within the societies. Conclusion CPTED theory is a strategy meant for enhancing security with the initials standing for Crime Prevention through Environmental Design and emphasizes on the assessment of crime prevention problems and various manners in the environmental conditions present opportunities criminal behaviours. CPTED aims at finding the problem areas and ensure adequate measures of eliminating and reducing such opportunities. Manipulation of various features of the environment and the manner in which people view the created space is the concept that the CPTED theory uses in trying to eliminate and reducing the opportunities. In most cases, the physical security often depends on the target hardening, which makes the location hard to get inside using the barriers and the mechanical problems. Manipulation environmental elements to enhance security are significant within the modern system of crime prevention, place-based. Viewing the concept of CPTED theory, it is evident that the four principles are common among the researchers; the territoriality, maintenance, surveillance, and natural access control. References Clancey, G., Lee, M., & Fisher, D. (2012). Crime prevention through environmental design (CPTED) and the New South Wales crime risk assessment guidelines: A critical review. Crime Prevention & Community Safety, 14(1), 1-15. Cozens, P. (2002). Sustainable Urban Development and Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design for the British City. Towards an Effective Urban Environmentalism for the 21st Century. Cities, 19(2), 129-137. Cozens, P. (2008). Crime prevention through environmental design in Western Australia: planning for sustainable urban futures. Int. J. SDP, 3(3), 272-292. Cozens, Paul, Hillier, & David. (2012). A Review and Discussion of the History and Development of Defensible Space into the 21st Century. Curtin University of Technology, Curtin University. Crowe, D. T., & Zahm, D. L. (1994). crime prevention through environmental design. NAHB Land Development Magazine. Crowe, T. D., & Fennelly, L. J. (2013). Crime and Loss Prevention. Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design, 2(2), 105-125. Geason, S., & Wilson, P. R. (1989). Designing out crime: crime prevention through environmental design. Australian Institute of Criminology. Hedayati, M., Abdullah, A., Razak, N. A., & Maghsoodi, M. J. (2011). A Review of the Effectiveness of Crime Prevention by Design Approaches towards Sustainable Development. JSD, 4(1), 180-191. Kang, S., Kim, D., Lee, K., & Lee, S. (2014). Application and Assessment of Crime Risk Based on Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design. International Review for Spatial Planning and Sustainable Development, 2(1), 63-78. Minnery, J. R., & Lim, B. (2005). measuring crime prevention through environmental design. Journal of Architectural and Planning Research, 22, 330-341. Radosevich, R. M., & Regis University. (2012). Crime prevention through environmental design and crime rates in apartment settings. Denver, Colo.: Regis University. Reynald, D. M. (2010). Translating CPTED into Crime Preventive Action: A Critical Examination of CPTED as a Tool for Active Guardianship. European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research, 17(1), 69-81. Saville, G. (2009). Chapter 7: In 21st Century Security and CPTED: Designing for Critical Infrastructure Protection and Crime Prevention. In ‘Second-generation CPTED: The Rise and Fall of Opportunity Theory. CRC Press, Taylor & Franci. Saville, G., & Atlas, R. (2008). Implementing CPTED. Designing for Critical Infrastructure Protection and Crime Prevention, 4(5), 523-529. Schneider, R. H., & Kitchen, T. (2007). Crime prevention and the built environment. London: Routledge. Seo, J. K. (2016). Critical review of Urban Environmental Design for Crime Prevention as Sustainable Urban Development: Focusing on the Approaches of Environmental Design and Secured by Design. Journal of Local Government Studis, 28(1), 51-75. Sherman, L. W. (2002). Evidence-based crime prevention. London: Routledge. Shu, C. F. (2000). Housing layout and crime vulnerability. London: University of London. Van, N. A., & Rueb, L. (2009). Spatial behaviour in Dutch dwelling areas: how housing layouts affects the behaviour of its users. Stockholm: 7th International Space Syntax Symposium. Zahm, D. L. (2007). Using crime prevention through environmental design in problem-solving. Washington, DC: U.S. Dept. of Justice, Office of Community Oriented Policing Services. Read More