CPTED Reduces both the Incidence and Fear of Crime - Literature review Example

CPTED Reduces both the Incidence and Fear of Crime Name: Institution: CPTED Reduces both the Incidence and Fear of Crime The theory of CPTED is based on the premise that crime is as a result of the possibilities presented by the physical environment among other factors. With this being the case, the theory proposes that it should be possible to modify the physical surroundings so that crime is less probable to occur. CPTED is unusual when compared with other crime prevention or security measures because it specifically focuses on aspects of design, while other measures tend to be directed at target hardening, that is, use of locks, bars and cameras. Moreover, CPTED is also different from some police activities; the concept encourages prevention and considers design and place while policing traditionally valued an efficient and effective response to incidents. Contemporary approaches including CPTED emerged out of research on the relationship between crime and location. CPTED looks at crime problems and the ways in which diverse features of the surroundings give possibilities for detrimental and unwanted behaviors. The approach attempts to remove these possibilities by changing various aspects of the building, the site and how the place is used. The rationale of this literature review is to examine whether the premise that CPTED reduces both the incidence and fear of crime with an overall aim of looking at what evidence suggests on this premise. Zahm (2011) notes that CPTED considers a broad array of problems and not just crime hence is can help in reducing crime. It is an approach that is based on a systematic analysis of crime events and the conditions and factors that contribute to crime with an aim of eliminating these factors. Moreover, after such an analysis, CPTED results to a set of programs that are proactive and tailored to the problem and the location. The premise is also valid because it engages a selection of citizens, government agencies as well as local institutions, each of which has a responsibility to play in defining the problem and deciding an appropriate solution. Evidence suggests that though there has been limited research on the effectiveness of this approach, CPTED has had a significant impact in Australia (Crime Prevention Victoria, 2003; Sutton, Cherney & White, 2013). In Australia, CPTED has become very popular among police, state and territory crime prevention units. A number of CPTED guidelines have been formulated. For example, in Victoria, Queensland and Western Australia CPTED has been developed as a distinct priority (Colquhoun, 2004). The central government units work with relevant state government departments to integrate CPTED guidelines into planning advice. The Western Australia Office of Crime Prevention has a broad initiative that provides funds for local government to conduct CPTED projects. Moreover, in Queensland, the government has developed CPTED guidelines and uses these as a foundation for training community groups (Western Australia Planning Commission, 2006; Queensland Government 2007). The aim of these schemes in not just to assist in the development of local initiatives but to influence planning decisions by state and local authorities and ensure that CPTED becomes part of mainstream planning processes (Clancey, Lee & Fisher, 2012). Clancey, Lee and Fisher (2012) in their further study on the approach of CPTED look at the New South Wales guidelines. The scholars argue that the current guidelines limit the assessment of the crimes and coming up with solutions. Moreover, the authors argue that the guidelines lack diagrams and photos that bring down their overall utility. Nevertheless, he authors go further and argue that with proper revision, the guidelines will become more useful. Moreover, just recently, Clancey (2015) argued that CPTED can be used to design safer cities because it has proved to be efficient in cities where the approach has been applied. The author suggests that with the use of practical guidelines, and then CPTED officials can apply theory and evidence-based practices to design safer cities hence supporting the premise that CPTED reduces crime as well as the fear of crime. Past studies demonstrate that there is a relationship between the components of CPTED and the fear of crime as well as the crime itself. Sakip, Johari and Salleh, (2012) examine this relationship and suggest that CPTED is an effective approach to not only reducing crime but also eliminating the fear of crime. In a previous study, Schneider and Kitchen (2007) had established that some of the components of CPTED bring down the fear of crime. In particular, the researcher established that lighting the pedestrian areas at night improves visibility hence enables people to act instantly if faced by any threat. However, this notion contradicts an assumption made earlier by Pain (2000) who suggested that improved visibility brings up the fear of crime. In his study, he argues that improved visibility can only work in isolated buildings and rubbish dumps where there is a perception of criminal activities in the area. With improved visibility on given distances gives an individual a chance to act instantly if they perceive that they are faced with some bodily harm. For example, if a person is walking on a well-lit street and notices some suspicious activity, they walk in the other direction or report the matter to the relevant authorities. Moreover, people feel more secure when they are in a well-lit room unlike when they are in a place that is dimly-lit (Blobaum, 2005). This view is supported by Atlas (2011) who uses an example of how poorly designed parking facilities can lead to security risks. Parking arrangements, whether they are surface lots or below the ground are perceived as dark, isolated and dangerous environments. The primary goal of designing safe garages is to generate an ambiance that makes probable criminals feel that they will be observed and advance the chances they will be confronted. In order to accomplish these goals, careful application of CPTED principles and practices is essential. For example, in New South Wales, parking design guidelines include CPTED requirements. Sakip and Abdullah, (2012) in their study focus on the approach of CPTED in residential areas and in particular gated communities. The researchers established that CPTED is effective in reducing the anxiety of crime in gated communities since it focuses on proactive measures. At this point, it is of merit to note that the effectiveness of the concept of CPTED is based on five elements. These elements are territoriality, surveillance, access control, maintenance and target hardening as well as support activity. Boeting (2006) focuses on the element of surveillance by suggesting that it is the primary determinant on whether a criminal will commit a crime. The author further argues that with increased surveillance, the will be not only a reduction in crime but also a reduction in the fear of crime. The other element of CPTED that has been focused on by several researchers is maintenance. For example,Loukaitou-Sideris and Eck (2007)suggest that cleanliness of a surrounding not only expresses a sense of attachment but also reduces the fear of crime. Their study was based on the broken window theory; this theory suggests that broken window sends a signal that the owners do not care or there is no one living in the house hence increasing the fear of crime. Moreover, the study found out that improper disposal of garbage also increases the fear of crime; this is supported by an earlier research by Cozens, Saville and Hillier (2002) who notes that poorly maintained neighborhoods are seen as places that are less defended hence increasing the fear of crime. Such a view supports the notion that CPTED helps in bringing down the incidence and fear of crime. Furthermore, the access control component of the CPTED approach has also been studied by several scholars. This strategy aims to reduce the incidence as well as the fear of crime by giving a perception to the offenders of the risks that they will face if they undertake their criminal activities (Cozens et al. 2005). The access control strategy uses obstructions such as solid walls, automatic locks as well as alarms systems to prevent burglary. Hirschfield (2004) in his study demonstrates that unsecured prosperities face a higher risk of being burglarized. With the use of this CPTED element, then there will be a reduction in both crimes as well as the fear of crime. Thorpe and Gamman (2013) look at the application of the CPTED approach by putting into perspective some of the elements of the approach. The authors use Seoul in their case study and conclude that although CPTED elements can be used to reduce the incidence and fear of crime, more needs to be done to ensure that all the elements are used modern approaches. Moreover, evidence from past studies suggests that bringing down the fear and incidence of crime will mean the more sustainable development of an area. Hedayati, Abdullah, Razak & Maghsoodi (2011) argue that reducing the incidence along with the fear of crime can be done by addressing socio-economic issues as well as environmental sustainability. The authors go further and argue that a healthy image of a community is defined by how secure and sustainable it is. This view is supported by an earlier research which argued that the safety of the physical environment is imperative for its sustainability (Black, 2004). These two studies demonstrate that CPTED is can not only reduce the fear and incidence of crime but also determine the sustainable development of a place. CPTED is most favorably implemented by a multidisciplinary team of stakeholders that focus on reducing crime opportunity and fear of crime in specific places. Desirable secondary benefits of CPTED are lower crime rates, a greater sense of community, more beautified properties and higher property values. New technologies, new challenges and new uses of spaces create additional need for CPTED strategies to reduce crime opportunity and the fear of crime. Moreover, modern advances in technology and building management systems will enable the explosion of technological and space management advances in the use of the built environment. The emergence of the internet embedded computing devices and high-speed network communications has created opportunities and challenges for security personnel. What is more, more information and methods to secure places are available. However, the use, as well as application of CPTED concepts, remains relevant and essential to best practices in the industry. CPTED can be used to reduce crime opportunities in new ways other than the traditional ways. These ways include protecting and discouraging crime on information system superhighways. The increased use of social networks also increases the connectivity of individuals but at the same time introduces additional security risks that can be mitigated by CPTED concepts (Fennely & Crowe, 2013). Based on this literature review, this paper concludes that the approach of CPTED can be used to reduce the incidence and fear of crime. All the studies reviewed in this paper demonstrate the effectiveness of CPTED. The studies show evidence-based approaches to the application of CPTED in the contemporary world. Moreover, it is the view of this paper that some of the elements of the CPTED approach need to be reviewed to fit into the current context of crime challenges as suggested by one of the studies reviewed. The Literature review has also taken into consideration some of the states in Australia where the approach has been implemented and successfully worked. In this literature review, the success of CPTED has been seen in the state of New South Wales, Queensland and Western Australia. In general, with proper planning and organization, the concept of CPTED can be used to not only bring down the incidence of crime but also reduce the fear of crime. People will feel more secure and will walk around freely without the fear of getting attacked. Furthermore, people in a neighborhood will have a keen eye on their neighbors and ensure that any suspicious activities are reported. Furthermore, it is the view of this literature review that the future of CPTED looks bright with the integration of technology into the various elements of the approach. Overall, this paper finds that the premise that CPTED reduces incidence and fear of crime is valid. References Atlas, R. (2013). 21st century security and CPTED. Boca Raton: CRC Press. Blobaum, A. (2005). Perceived Danger in Urban Public Space: The Impacts of Physical Features and Personal Factors. Environment And Behavior, 37(4), 465-486. doi:10.1177/0013916504269643 Clancey, G. (2015). Think crime! Using evidence, theory and crime prevention through environmental design (CPTED) for planning safer cities. Crime Prevention And Community Safety, 17(1), 67-69. doi:10.1057/cpcs.2014.18 Clancey, G., Fisher, D., & Lee, M. (2011). Current Issues in Criminal Justice - Do crime risk assessment reports measure crime risks? (Humanities & Social Sciences Collection) - Informit. Current Issues In Criminal Justice, 23(2), 235. Retrieved from http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/CICrimJust/2011/28.html 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 And Community Safety, 14(1), 1-15. doi:10.1057/cpcs.2011.10 Colquhoun, I. (2004). Design out Crime: Creating Safe and Sustainable Communities. Amsterdam: Architectural Press. Cozens, P., Saville, G., & Hillier, D. (2005). Crime prevention through environmental design (CPTED): a review and modern bibliography. Property Management, 23(5), 328-356. doi:10.1108/02637470510631483 Crime Prevention Victoria (2003) Safer Design Guidelines for Victoria. Melbourne: Crime Prevention Victoria and Department of Sustainability and Environment. Crowe, T., & Fennelly, L. (2013). Crime prevention through environmental design. Amsterdam: Elisiver. Hedayati Marzbali, M., Abdullah, A., Razak, N., & Maghsoodi Tilaki, M. (2011). A Review of the Effectiveness of Crime Prevention by Design Approaches towards Sustainable Development. JSD, 4(1). doi:10.5539/jsd.v4n1p160 Loukaitou-Sideris, A., & Eck, J. (2007). Crime Prevention and Active Living. American Journal Of Health Promotion, 21(4s), 380-389. doi:10.4278/0890-1171-21.4s.380 Pain, R. (2000). Place, Social Relations and The Fear of Crime: A Review. Progress in Human Geography. Prog Hum Geogr, 24(3), 365-387. doi:10.1191/030913200701540474 Sakip, S., & Abdullah, A. (2012). Measuring Crime Prevention through Environmental Design in a Gated Residential Area: A Pilot Survey. Procedia - Social And Behavioral Sciences, 42, 340-349. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.04.198 Sakip, S., Johari, N., & Salleh, M. (2012). The Relationship between Crime Prevention through Environmental Design and Fear of Crime. Procedia - Social And Behavioral Sciences, 68, 628-636. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.12.254 Schneider, R., & Kitchen, T. (2007). Crime prevention and the built environment. London: Routledge. Sutton, A., Cherney, A., & White, R. (2013). Crime prevention (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Thorpe, A., & Gamman, L. (2013). Walking with Park: Exploring the ‘reframing’ and integration of CPTED principles in neighbourhood regeneration in Seoul, South Korea. Crime Prevention And Community Safety, 15(3), 207-222. doi:10.1057/cpcs.2013.6 Queensland Government (2007) Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) Guidelines for Queensland, Brisbane: Queensland Police Service Western Australia Planning Commission (2006) Designing Out Crime: Planning Guidelines. Perth. Western Australia Planning Commission. Zahm, D. (2011). Using crime prevention through environmental design in problem-solving (2nd ed.). Philadelphia: DIANE Publishing. Read More