Less Crime, by Design
01 May 1995-Annals of The American Academy of Political and Social Science (SAGE Publications)-Vol. 539, Iss: 1, pp 114-129
TL;DR: In this paper, a review of contemporary schools of design, some of which can be criticized for narrowness and an uncertain empirical base, a broader definition of prevention is proposed that allows less restricted exploration of how different types of prevention employ design.
Abstract: Design against crime has always existed, but a combination of circumstances has led to its recent takeoff. Design seeks fitness for purpose and involves reconciling conflicting requirements, one of which may be crime prevention. The focus in this article is on design changes to the physical world while acknowledging links with social processes. The aim is to illustrate how design and prevention overlap, not to identify what works. After a review of contemporary schools of design, some of which can be criticized for narrowness and an uncertain empirical base, a broader definition of prevention is proposed that allows less restricted exploration of how different types of prevention employ design. The article then considers the process of preventing crime through design, discussing the special difficulties of designing when offenders can fight back. A wider-ranging look, from an ecological perspective, reveals interesting parallels between design against crime and other fields.
Citations
More filters
TL;DR: Sociological studies sensitive to the issue of place are rarely labeled thus, and at the same time there are far too many of them to fit in this review as discussed by the authors, and it may be a good thing that this research is seldom gathered up as a socology of place, for that could ghettoize the subject as something of interest only to geographers, architects, or environmental historians.
Abstract: Sociological studies sensitive to the issue of place are rarely labeled thus, and at the same time there are far too many of them to fit in this review. It may be a good thing that this research is seldom gathered up as a “sociology of place,” for that could ghettoize the subject as something of interest only to geographers, architects, or environmental historians. The point of this review is to indicate that sociologists have a stake in place no matter what they analyze, or how: The works cited below emplace inequality, difference, power, politics, interaction, community, social movements, deviance, crime, life course, science, identity, memory, history. After a prologue of definitions and methodological ruminations, I ask: How do places come to be the way they are, and how do places matter for social practices and historical change?
1,974 citations
Cites background from "Less Crime, by Design"
...Debate rages on over whether environmental factors affect crime rates net of other social, demographic, or economic variables (Birkbeck & LaFree 1993, Ekblom 1995, McCarthy & Hagan 1992)....
[...]
TL;DR: In this article, a two-tiered analysis of what has come to be referred to as the "security-parks", i.e., that South African variation of the "gated community" which combines Blakely and Snyder's [Fortress America: Gated communities in the United States, Brookings Institution Press, Washington, 1999] typically separable ‘lifestyle', "prestige" and "security zone" gated community types, is presented.
187 citations
Cites background from "Less Crime, by Design"
...The need to fortify against perceived rising crime levels and threats to personal security have resulted in the creation of a “fortress society” (Ekblom, 1995) as gates assuage the fear of random crime....
[...]
TL;DR: In this article, crime prevention through environmental design (CPTED) and its crime risk assessment model represents a valuable tool for New Urbanists to utilize to reduce opportunities for crime and tackle fear of crime in the community.
Abstract: Sustainability now influences government policy in the UK, Australia and USA and planning policy currently advocates high density, mixed-use residential developments in ‘walkable’, permeable neighbourhoods, close to public transport, employment and amenities. This clearly demonstrates the growing popularity, influence and application of New Urbanist ideas. This article reviews the criminological research relating to New Urbanism associated with the three key issues of permeability, rear laneway car parking and mixed-use development. These key issues are discussed from an environmental criminology perspective and challenge New Urbanist assumptions concerning crime. The article proposes that crime prevention through environmental design (CPTED) and its crime risk assessment model represents a valuable tool for New Urbanists to utilise to reduce opportunities for crime and tackle fear of crime in the community. Recommendations for future research and collaboration are discussed.
110 citations
Cites background from "Less Crime, by Design"
...More permeable streets mean more access for all citizens (including potential offenders) and consequently this increases opportunities for crime (Ekblom, 1995)....
[...]
TL;DR: In this paper, a critical review of "Defensible Space" (Newman, 1973) and traces the development of Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) in America and Canada, and Secured By Design (SBD) initiatives in the UK is provided.
Abstract: This paper provides a critical review of “Defensible Space” (Newman, 1973) and traces the development of Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) in America and Canada, and Secured By Design (SBD) initiatives in the UK. It is argued that various aspects of the theory have avoided consideration and require further investigation and research. It is opined that “defensible space” is the theoretical foundation to both CPTED and SBD and it is posited that a thorough re‐examination of Newman’s ideas will serve to deepen our understanding of the complex relationship between the built environment and crime. British (BS8220) and European (CEN TC/325) Standards relating to urban planning and environmental design and crime reduction are currently receiving detailed deliberation and are based firmly upon Newman’s ideas. The projected need for some 4.4 million new homes in Britain (DOE, 1995) by 2016 and Lord Roger’s call for improvements in urban design to reduce suburban migration from cities (DETR, 1999) reiterates the importance of the subject matter. This paper (the first of two) recognises that design per se does not represent the panacea for reducing criminogeneity, rather, that “defensible space” CPTED and SBD should be considered as crime prevention strategies, which can, in common with all other initiatives, contribute to tackling the problem of residential crime. In conclusion, it is argued that further research concerning how “defensible space” is perceived by various crucial stakeholders in society is the way forward in this regard. A second, forthcoming paper (PM, Vol. 19 No. 3) will present these research findings.
110 citations
01 Jan 2009
TL;DR: Situational crime prevention as mentioned in this paper is focused on the settings in which crimes occur, rather than on those committing criminal acts, and it seeks to make crime less attractive and it operates, not through the criminal justice system, but through a host of public and private organizations and agencies.
Abstract: Situational crime prevention is quite different from most other criminological approaches to crime control. Proceeding from an analysis of the settings giving rise to specific kinds of crime or disorder, it seeks to introduce discrete managerial and environmental changes that will reduce the opportunities or incentives for crime. Thus, it is focused on the settings in which crimes occur, rather than on those committing criminal acts. It does not try to eliminate criminal tendencies by arresting and sanctioning offenders or by improving society or its institutions. Rather, it seeks to make crime less attractive and it operates, not through the criminal justice system, but through a host of public and private organizations and agencies – schools, hospitals, transit systems, shops and malls, manufacturing businesses and phone companies, local parks and entertainment facilities, pubs and parking lots – whose products, services, and operations spawn opportunities and incentives for a vast range of different crimes. Felson (2002) describes the main sources of these opportunities and incentives, some of which are summarized in Table 14.1 under the five categories of criminogenic products, poor management, poorly designed buildings and places, “leaky systems,” and criminogenic laws. Researchers in the Home Office Research Unit, the British government’s criminological research department, formulated situational prevention nearly 30 years ago (Clarke, 1980). It was originally thought to be applicable only to “opportunistic” property offenses, such as car theft vandalism and burglary. Quite soon, however, it was applied successfully to assaults, robberies,
97 citations
Cites background from "Less Crime, by Design"
...Sometimes interviewing offenders about their methods can be helpful (Decker, 2005), but when this cannot be done, an alternative is to “think thief” ( Ekblom, 1995 )....
[...]
References
More filters
TL;DR: In this article, the authors used spatial data on 323,979 calls to police over all 115,000 addresses and intersections in Minneapolis over 1 year, showing that crime is both rare (only 3.6% of the city could have had a robbery with no repeat addresses) and concentrated, although the magnitude of concentration varies by offense type.
Abstract: A leading sociological theory of crime is the “routine activities” approach (Cohen and Felson, 1979). The premise of this ecological theory is that criminal events result from likely offenders, suitable targets, and the absence of capable guardians against crime converging nonrandomly in time and space. Yet prior research has been unable to employ spatial data, relying instead on individual- and household-level data, to test that basic premise. This analysis supports the premise with spatial data on 323,979 calls to police over all 115,000 addresses and intersections in Minneapolis over 1 year. Relatively few “hot spots” produce most calls to Police (50% of calls in 3% of places) and calls reporting predatory crimes (all robberies at 2.2% of places, all rapes at 1.2% of places, and all auto thefts at 2.7% of places), because crime is both rare (only 3.6% of the city could have had a robbery with no repeat addresses) and concentrated, although the magnitude of concentration varies by offense type. These distributions all deviate significantly, and with ample magnitude, from the simple Poisson model of chance, which raises basic questions about the criminogenic nature of places, as distinct from neighborhoods or collectivities.
1,841 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors use deflection as a policy tool to achieve a more desirable pattern of crime by replacing new crimes for prevented crimes with deflection of crime from a target.
Abstract: Patterns of crime should be seen as the outcome of crime-control policies and the distribution of opportunities. Such crime-control policies are often argued to have the limited effect of displacing crime, that is, substituting new crimes for prevented crimes. Displacement alone is an inadequate concept; a better formulation centers on the deflection of crime from a target. Some patterns of deflected crime can be regarded as "benign" displacement, while others are considered "malign." Thus conceived, deflection can be used as a policy tool to achieve a more "desirable" pattern of crime. It is already so used, inter alia, by insurance companies with a commercial motive. Better information systems are required to show displacement or deflection, and to assist in monitoring the distribution of crime through space and time. Patterns of criminal activity and victimization can be conceptualized as an outcome of conscious and unconscious decisions by the public, politicians, and the police. These patterns are no...
365 citations
87 citations
TL;DR: In this article, a paradigm is presented for developing and extending Cohen and Machalek's evolutionary ecological theory of expropriarive crime to encompass all criminal behavior, using well-understood concepts from evolutionary ecology to identify the scope and scale necessary for a holistic understanding of crime.
Abstract: A paradigm is presented for developing and extending Cohen and Machalek's evolutionary ecological theory of expropriarive crime to encompass all criminal behavior. The paradigm uses well-understood concepts from evolutionary ecology to identify the scope and scale necessary for a holistic understanding of crime. It demonstrates how consistent empirical findings and insights from the many disciplines that study crime may be integrated into a single comprehensive theoretical framework. At the micro level, it explains how individual criminal behavior is influenced, but not determined, by systematic interactions between factors at ecological, individual, and societal levels over the life cou.rse. At the macro level, it explains the evolution of population-level characteristics such as the frequency and type of crime-and approaches to crime control-as the cumulative result of the behaviors of individuals and their interactions with one another and the environment. If the proposed relationships between domains of variables can be refined, it appears possible to develop a truly general theory of criminal behavior. Research and policy implications of this approach to understanding crime are discussed.
86 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors analyse the outcomes of interactions at the macro level between the decisions of potential offenders to commit crimes and of potential victims to protect their properly, where offenders are seen as consumers of criminal gains and victims as reluctant suppliers of criminal opportunities.
Abstract: Rates of property crimes are analysed as the outcomes of interactions at the macro level between the decisions of potential offenders to commit crimes and of potential victims to protect their properly. In this ralional-interactionisl model, offenders are seen as the consumers of criminal gains and victims as the reluctant suppliers of criminal opportunities. The collective decisions of both parties are determined by crude assessments of perceived gains and costs. Crime rales will stabilize at the point where neither potential offenders nor potential victims can maximize their net gains without provoking the other party to take counlermeasures (by improving security or increasing criminal activity respectively). By its dual focus on offenders and victims the model helps to explain the complicated relationships between levels of affluence and crime rates. It also offers new insights in the differential effectiveness of general deterrence, rehabilitation, conventional offender-oriented crime prevention, and victim-oriented crime prevention.
61 citations