There are four elements to a crime, a law, an offender, a target or victim and a place. When these four elements come together, a crime has been committed.
There are four elements to a crime, a law, an offender, a target or victim and a place. When these four elements come together, a crime has been committed. A crime cannot take place without these four elements. There must be a law for an offender to violate; there must a target or a victim for the offender to prey on, and their must a place for this to happen. Environmental criminology is the examination of this fourth element, the place. Environmental criminologists are interested in "land usage, traffic patterns and street design."1 More specifically, environmental criminology is "the study of crime, criminality and victimisation as they relate, first, to particular places, and secondly, to the way that individuals and organisations shape their activities spatially, and in so doing are in turn influenced by place-based or spatial factors."2 This particular field would not exist if there were no relation between the geographical distribution of offences, or of victimisation, or of offender residence. However, there is very clear relationship between these factors, and in this essay I will examine this relationship. I will firstly take a brief look at the history and the emergence of environmental criminology as a field of study and research. I will then look at some of the ways society has tried to reduce the amount of crime faced by residents of cities and towns today. This will include action that can be taken by individuals themselves, or by councils, local governments, the police etc. I will then do a critique of these measures and conclude by considering geographic prophiling, a new mechanism that does not seek to prevent crimes, but rather help solve them.
The study of environmental criminology resulted mainly from the works of Burgess (1925) and Shaw and Mackay (1942).
Burgess introduced an ecological analysis of crime causation. Ecology is the study of animals and plants and how they relate to one another in their natural habitat. Burgess then examined area characteristics instead of criminals for their explanations of high crime. They developed the idea of natural urban areas, which consisted of concentric zones, which extended out from downtown central business district to the commuter zone at the fringes of the city. Each zone had its own structure and organisation, characteristics and unique inhabitants. This is known Burgess' Concentric Zone Theory.
3
Zone A is the Central Business District, Zone B is the Transition, or 'Twilight' Zone, C is the Council Estates, Zone D is the Commuter Zone and Zone E is the Countryside area. The most important zone when considering crime is the Transition Zone. This zone consists of two sections, the wholesale light manufacturing, and the low class residential. This zone would be made up of 19th century terraced buildings with no gardens. They would probably be quite dirty, cheap slum areas. This zone was a high-attraction area for crime because of the number of constantly moving people and low recognition between neighbours.
Clifford Shaw and Henry McKay were researchers at the Chicago's Institute for Juvenile Research and maintained a close relationship with Chicago's Sociology department. They were interested in Burgess's conception of the "natural urban area" of Chicago and used this model to investigate the relationship between crime rates--mainly delinquency--and the various zones of Chicago. They found that the crime rate was distributed throughout the city, delinquency occurred in the areas nearest to the business district, that some areas suffered from high consistent delinquency rates no matter the makeup of the population, that high delinquency areas were characterised by a high percentage of immigrants, non-whites, lower income famines, and finally, and that high-delinquency areas had an acceptance of non-conventional norms, which competed with conventional ones. They collected their data from over 56,000 juvenile court records with covered a period of time from 1900-1933.
I will now go on to look at various measures that are currently in place to try and reduce or prevent the volume of crime present in today's society.
One of the first ways in which people can take steps to reduce their chance of being a target of crime is Target Hardening. Target hardening refers to the simple, straightforward improvement of physical security devices on domestic dwellings such as door locks, window locks, door chains and reinforcing bars. Some facilities could simply not function without target hardening devices, for example, banks and building societies. One good example to consider is that of a simple front door leading into a residential property. Ideally, there should be two locks in addition to the normal Yale lock, with one of these being a mortice deadlock. These two extra locks should be positioned one third from the top and bottom of the door.
Another simple measure is to make sure that your property looks occupied, even when it is not. Get a neighbour to check the property while you are away, or get security lights that operate on a timer. Even something as simple as never leaving a spare key under a plant pot or outside mat must be considered, as these are all places a thief will look first, as it can be common practise among some people to do this.
Another method of target hardening are high fences, or using rose bushes in addition to these fences, as these will deter some opportunist thieves.
Target hardening is a victim orientated defence mechanism and can help reduce the chance of a second burglary if a household is unfortunate enough to fall victim initially. Target hardening works because it helps to overcome the ease with which offenders can gain access to potential victims' homes, which has been shown to be a major factor behind burglary.
Evidence suggesting that installing basic target hardening measures can be effective comes from a review of the British Crime Survey. Between 1997 and 1999, the total number of burglaries fell significantly, by 21%, from 1,628,000 to 1,284,000. This follows less marked falls between 1993 and 1997. The number of burglaries in 1999 was below that measured in 1991. The British Crime Survey also reported that 15% of households across England and Wales without security measures were burgled compared with 4% of those with basic measures in place and 3% of those with higher levels of security. Research indicates that 72% of attempted burglaries failed because of the protection provided by basic security measures.4
The second method of crime reduction I will consider is Closed Circuit Television (CCTV). The purpose of CCTV is to prevent and reduce crime. CCTV tries to reduce crime in city centres especially by increasing the risk of detection by using cameras to monitor certain areas of the city. The central theory behind CCTV is that of deterrence; the idea that the offender will be aware of the cameras presence and will decide the chances of getting caught outweigh the benefits gained from committing the crime. Another reason CCTV works in theory is because of prosecution. Thieves and ...
This is a preview of the whole essay
The second method of crime reduction I will consider is Closed Circuit Television (CCTV). The purpose of CCTV is to prevent and reduce crime. CCTV tries to reduce crime in city centres especially by increasing the risk of detection by using cameras to monitor certain areas of the city. The central theory behind CCTV is that of deterrence; the idea that the offender will be aware of the cameras presence and will decide the chances of getting caught outweigh the benefits gained from committing the crime. Another reason CCTV works in theory is because of prosecution. Thieves and shoplifters can now be caught on camera and the images obtained can be used to help catch and prosecute them. CCTV also works by reducing the level of fear of crime, and when people are more confident and feel safer due to the presence of a camera, it may deter potential criminals from attacking. CCTV, through monitoring, can also prevent crimes from occurring. If a security guard was watching suspicious behaviour on the screen, he could alert shop staff to the persons' behaviour so they can keep a closer eye on them.
CCTV could also help cut down on drug misuse and alcohol induced crimes as problem areas can be targeted with the cameras.
In relation to Edinburgh, there are 13 cameras operating in the city centre around Princes Street, Lothian Road, Picardy Place and the Grassmarket. Since the project was launched in 1998, more than 1255 people have been arrested directly due to CCTV.
There has been a call from a senior police officer to install more cameras, especially with Harvey Nichols recently having opened in the centre, which will surely prove to be a target for stealing and maybe vandalism.
CCTV has made a significant difference to crime levels in the areas where it is installed. Just over a year ago, there were cameras installed in the Sighthill area of Edinburgh, and a Lothian and Borders policeman is of the opinion that it has made a substantial difference in the area the cameras cover. The cameras are place well out of reach from the ground and their stands are covered with a special paint that slips if people were to try and climb the poles.
The third way to reduce crime I will look at is Neighbourhood Watch Schemes. A scheme such as this could be compared to a group of Meerkats. What's so special about them is their natural instinct to work as teams to keep themselves and their young safe. They take turns to go on look-out duty and by being alert warn others in the group of anything that might be suspicious or threatening. As Sir David Attenborough put it, their strength is their unity: "This is the team where it's one for all and all for one."5 Although this may seem like a strange comparison, that is what Neighbourhood Watch is all about - looking out for each other. Neighbours uniting and acting together means that dozens of eyes and ears are ready to pick up on anything happening in the neighbourhood that could cause worry or concern. It's not about being nosy or interfering, it's about being a good neighbour and caring about your community. Neighbour Watch has been described as one of the biggest and most successful crime prevention programmes ever initiated in the UK. It is way of helping the community to help the police with the provision of extra ears and eyes to combat the ever increasing levels of crime we are experiencing today.
Currently, over 55, 000 homes in the Lothian and Borders areas are covered by Neighbourhood Watch Schemes. It is about creating communities who care and who will look out for one another and their property. These schemes can target local crime problems and take action to help prevent them. People can feel safer and more secure knowing that their neighbours are there to help and watch out for them in return for the same.
The final measure of crime reduction I will look at is that of architectural design. This is best illustrated by the concept of Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design, or CPTEC (pronounced sep-ted). This is the idea of using the physical environment as protection against attack and the goal is the reduction of opportunities for crime to occur. This reduction is achieved by employing physical design features that discourage crime, while at the same time encouraging legitimate use of the environment. The uniqueness and success of CPTED stems from the manner in which these techniques are integrated with, and applied to, the architectural design process.
Newman (1972) suggests that designing built environments in such a way as to increase defensible space can reduce crime. 6 Defensible Space are zones which, to provide maximum control, are divided into smaller, clearly defined areas. All areas are designated as either public, semi-private or private. This designation defines the acceptable use of each zone and determines who has a right to occupy it under certain circumstances, therefore making it easier to see if there is someone in the area that should not be there.
Next in the concept of design is territoriality. Territoriality involves an individual's perception of, and relationship with, the environment. A strong sense of territoriality encourages an individual to take control of his or her environment and defend it against attack. Architectural design can take account of this by establishing real or symbolic barriers, for example fencing, which should encourage territoriality.
Furthermore, if buildings are actually designed in a way that means people living in a complex can clearly see the surrounding area, then any criminal may be deterred by this opportunity for surveillance.
Good lighting is one of the most effective crime deterrents. When used properly, light discourages criminal activity, enhances natural surveillance opportunities, and reduces fear.
The Slateford Green residential complex in Edinburgh is a very good example of how architectural design used in correlation with CPTEC can provide a safe living complex and encourage a sense of community among residents. Described as a car-free urban village, Slateford Green comprises 120 flats - 26 for sale, 25 for shared ownership and 69 for social rental including 17 for the Deaf Society and 4 for wheelchair use. 7 Slateford Green was actually designed by the winners of a competition, Hackland + Dore Architects, as it was felt that their design "newly interpreted the traditional tenement form to provide a fresh approach to living in the city, and that the progression from private to public space was subtly handled."8 As was stated earlier, the use of public and private space is very important when considering this method of crime reduction.
As can be seen, there are many successful ways that we can try to reduce and prevent crime. However, these methods all have their problems, and this section of the essay, I will now highlight some of these troubles.
Firstly, I will look at target hardening. The main problem with target hardening is the emergence of the 'fortress mentality'. Although this is possibly not so evident in the UK, there are many places in the world where bars on the windows, armed guards with dogs patrolling the high, barbed wire-tipped fences and security gates to be passed through before gaining entry to your own house. This is target hardening taken to the extreme in unfortunate cases such as Zimbabwe, where the segregation of the rich and poor is in the extreme. Perhaps the National Violence Commission best explains the way in which target hardening can be too excessive. The National Violence Commission (1969:46) stated that these measures are intellectually sterile and have negative connotations of a deeply segregated community. "In a few years, lacking effective public action, this is how these cities will likely look;
* high rise apartment buildings and residential compounds protected by private guards and security devices will be fortified cells for upper-middle and high-income populations living at prime locations in the city
* streets and residential neighbourhoods in the central city will be unsafe in differing degrees, and the ghetto slum neighbourhoods will be places of terror with widespread crime, perhaps entirely out of police control during night time hours. Armed guards will protect all public facilities such as schools, libraries and playgrounds in these areas." 9
The other problem facing target hardening is the erosion of public space. Public spaces could become less and less accessible as we try to strength ourselves against crime attacks. If everyone is taking the same steps to try and keep out possible perpetrators of crime, then we will also maybe shut out our neighbours.
Unfortunately, it is likely that target hardening measures will only deter the opportunist thief. If someone is determined to get into your home, or car, and has cited it as a definite for their chosen crime, then they will more than likely succeed in their task.
It also means that householders who cannot afford to take basic security measures such as improved locks on doors and windows are generally more likely to fall victim to burglary, e.g. people who are young, unemployed, single parents, those with low incomes or who live on council estates,
The next method of crime prevention I will consider the problems of is Neighbourhood Watch. There was not a lot of criticism to be found on Neighbourhood Watch, however, most of the environmental approaches to crime prevention rely very much on the principle of informal social controls operating in cohesive communities and the idea that environmental design can help to encourage a sense of cohesion. This is the core idea behind neighbourhood watch. The main problem encountered with Neighbourhood Watch would therefore maybe seem to be in its implementation. As Murray (1995) points out, however, improved environmental and building design can enhance the quality of life in a community, but if there are elements within that community, which continue to contribute to a pattern of disorder, or there are serious rifts within a community, then no amount of environmental intervention will produce a reduction in crime. 10Thus, those areas which could most benefit from crime prevention strategies are probably the least likely to show an improvement.
There is also the problem of people maybe taking the law into their own hands, with a vigilante attitude being in danger of developing. Also, there is the problem of it being a novelty factor. Although everyone may be very involved at first, the contribution can easily decline after an initial interest.
Next, I will consider the problems with architectural design. The main problems with this sort of environmental control are practical ones. It costs money to manipulate the physical and build or reconstruct places. This also takes time. It takes years for planning, securing approval and then actual remodelling or constructing. There is also the problem of dislocation and relocation. Physical projects frequently involve the removal of individuals and businesses or at least a significant alteration in their life patterns. The final problem is that of sunk costs as physical changes are difficult to alter if proven wrong, if they don't work in practice
Architectural design has also been criticised for representing a somewhat narrow crime prevention approach. It ignores the fact that residents and other legitimate users of the space can in fact commit much crime. Access controls may be of limited value in preventing crime by residents. Also, standard packages of measures will not reduce crime significantly. Packages would have to be tailor made and designed to combat specific problems in specific areas.
There are many problems to think about when considering close circuit television (CCTV) and surveillance. First of all, CCTV was found to have little effect on crimes such as assault.
One of the major glitches with CCTV is that it has the effect of displacement. Displacement argues that introducing a crime prevention measure, in this case CCTV, into a particular area will block opportunities for crime and offenders will therefore select a target elsewhere, or change their choice of crime. In other words, crime is moved and not reduced. This is true of the city as a whole and of suburbs within Edinburgh. In relation to the city, it has been pushed further and further out of the city centre. If you were to consider the city of Edinburgh and look at a map of the city, a lot of the areas with a bad reputation are situated on the outskirts of the city. There are Sighthill and Westerhailles in the west, Pilton in the north, certain areas of Leith are considered to be 'no-go' areas in the east, and then there is Niddrie and Craigmillar in the South.
In relation to the suburbs within the city, a Lothian and Borders policeman said that after the cameras were installed at Sighthill just over a year ago, the area covered by the cameras has got better in relation to crime. However, the offenders have moved to the playing fields over by Stevenson College, where there are no cameras. Also, there have been cameras installed in the worst area of Broomhouse, but this has just resulted in the trouble moving further down the estate to where there are no cameras.
Brown (1995) 11 showed that in relation to personal crime such as robbery or theft from person, there was evidence of geographical displacement to other areas of the city not covered by CCTV.
An Evening News article (16/11/2002) highlighted the problem of feuding teenage gangs that was affecting 2 local schools. The trouble had escalated to such a degree that the headmaster of one of the schools (Portobello) has now arranged it so that police are posted outside the school. This specific problem has been blamed on the effects of displacement. CCTV had recently been installed in the nearby area of Craigmillar and parents felt this had simply resulted in the teenagers being driven into their neighbourhood, which is not covered by cameras. One mother pointed out that the teenagers know there are no CCTV cameras, and therefore less chance of them being caught.
The next problem with CCTV is the cost. Westminster Council estimates that each camera costs £20,000 to install and £12,000 every year to run. This annual cost is mostly the result of the wages spent on those monitoring the screens. This is a very expensive measure of crime reduction when it has been claimed that street lighting could be four times more effective in reducing levels of crime and at a fraction of the cost. 12 This was shown in the case of Duff Street, in Dalry Edinburgh. Crime was a significant problem in this area, but the introduction of better lighting on the street and in residential blocks, has had a considerable reducing effect. Another simpler option would be to have a more physical police presence, more proactive policing, as this has also been shown to reduce crime.
The next area I will cover is that of the level of fear of crime. It has been found that CCTV reduces levels of fear of crime among study respondents. However, there can be room for bias in these studies. One study (Ditton, 1998) showed that when asked questions in a PRO-CCTV survey, 91% of respondents claimed to be in favour of CCTV. When a different sample were asked ANTI-CCTV questions followed by whether or not they were in favour of CCTV implementation, only 56% were in favour. These figures compare to 71% of respondents being in favour when they were not asked any precursor questions. 13
There is also the question could we maybe become complacent? May seem like a strange thing to suggest, but when we are 'living in fear of crime', we may take more care and notice of how our movements and actions could maybe make us more of a target. Reducing this level of fear could make people more careless.
It is also important to consider the life cycle of the cameras. After implementation, CCTV must be closely monitored to ensure success in reducing crime is maintained. The initial reduction in crime experienced my rise again if the publicity of the cameras is not maintained. For example, although when first installed, the London Underground cameras reduced crime by up to 70%, this effectiveness then reduced after 12 months (Web and Laycock, 1992). 14 Furthermore, effects on vehicle crime and criminal damage began to fade after approximately 8 months (Brown, 1995) 15. Crime prevention benefits of CCTV began to fade unless publicity relating to the success of the cameras was maintained (Tilley, 1993)
Next I will briefly look at the offenders' perception of the cameras. Most studies found that offenders are not generally deterred by CCTV presence. (Butler, 1994; Gill and Turbin, 1998; Ditton and Short, 1998). 16 A BBC programme, Crimebeat, highlighted this problem.
Another problem with CCTV that must be taken into account is that of discriminatory monitoring. Those monitoring CCTV have been found to adopt police categories of suspicion when viewing the screens. (Ditton et al, 1999). 17 The target selection of CCTV operators can be massively discriminatory towards males, and in particular, black males. This can transmit a very negative view about their position in society, no matter how law abiding they may be. When certain sections of the community are disproportionately monitored, this not only acts to portray an impression of criminality amongst these groups (the crimes of this group are noticed while the same crimes among other groups go unmonitored and unnoticed), it also conveys a message to these individuals that they are not trusted.
The Stephen Lawrence Inquiry Report places a particular emphasis upon the use of training to deliver 'racism awareness' and valuing cultural diversity' (Recommendations 48-48, as sited on NACRO site). Improved training for those monitoring CCTV systems may go some way to addressing these imbalances.
A final major consideration in relation to problems with CCTV is that of privacy. The UK has more CCTV cameras in operation than any other country in Europe. There are two ways in which to look at his issue. Firstly, does it matter? As with all privacy issues, there is an argument saying that only criminals need to fear systems that monitor location. On the other hand, it could be argued, do you really want someone to be able to know where you are all the time, and do you trust that the information will not be misused? There has been many an occasion when I've done something, then thought 'oh well, at least no one saw'. However, I may well have been caught on camera and not realised it.
All companies and councils who plan to use CCTV and surveillance must conform to the guidelines set down by the Data Protection Act (1998) and the Human Rights Act (1998).
The Data Protection Act 1998 requires that information be obtained fairly and lawfully. This includes codes of practice such as appropriately sized signs (A3 or A4) must be displayed where CCTV is in operation. Also signs should display a clear 'purpose of system' message. Furthermore, the data/images captures should be used for the original purpose intended for the scheme. The cameras should be positioned to ensure that hey avoid capturing images that are irrelevant or intrusive. Finally, individuals have a right to a copy of any personal data held about them
Public authorities such as the police, local authorities, prisons, government departments and courts are also bound by article 8 of the Human Rights Act 1998 which came into force on October 2000. Article 8 states that, initially, everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence. It also states that there shall be no interference by a public authority with the exercise of this right except such as in accordance with the law and is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security, public safety or the economic well being of the country, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, or for the protection of the rights of freedom or others.
In order to apply with A8, public authorities should consider the following principles. They should first consider proportionality. Does the level of threat or risk to community safety warrant he existence of CCTV coverage? Is the level of coverage equal to the level of crime and disorder? Is there a balance between public safety and rights of individual? Next, it should be considered on legal grounds. There is a clearly drawn up Codes of Practices and Procedures document, and operators must be fully aware of and signed up to these procedures. Operators must also be aware they can be held accountable if their monitoring practices are do not conform to the Codes of Practices and Procedures. Finally, they must look at necessity and compulsion. Is CCTV necessary? Or is there other crime reduction measure that would achieve same ends?
As can be seen, although the above crime prevention measures can all go some way to reduce crime, they will not fully eradicate crime, as they are all fraught with problems. So if environmental criminology cannot eliminate the problem of crime, is there any other way in which it can help? One revolutionary new tactic that is currently in use is that of Geographic Profiling." Geographic profiling is an investigative methodology that uses the locations of a connected series of crimes to determine the most probable area of offender residence. It is generally applied in cases of serial murder, rape, arson, and robbery, though it can be used in single crimes (auto theft, burglary bombing, etc.) that involve multiple scenes or other significant geographic characteristics."18
So how does Geographic Profiling work? As has already been discussed, crimes are often not random, but instead have an underlying spatial structure. Crimes tend to occur at locations where, in terms of profit and risk, offenders find suitable victims/targets. As an offender travels between his home, workplace, and social activity sites, his or her activity space (composed of these locations and their connecting paths) describe an awareness region which forms part of a larger mental map-an "image of the city" built upon experience and knowledge.
Geographic Profiling relies on certain inclinations of serial criminals, which support this type of analysis. For example, Geographic Profiling could not work if it was not recognised that they have a "tendency to hunt in known areas, a desire to disguise the home location, quantifiable criteria for perceived distance to crime sites, and an identifiable set of characteristics relating the crimes to a single serial criminal." 19
Geographic Profiling also depends very heavily on crime sites belonging to the same series of crime, or the same offender and also on the knowledge of travelling distance in relation to particular types of crime. For example, a murderer or rapist is likely to travel further than a petty thief or vandal.
Geographic Profiling, although not used to help prevent crimes, is a very useful tool when it comes to solving them, or filtering the evidence to help solve crimes. As can be seen, although all the crime prevention measures can go some way to helping, there is still a lot of ground to be covered. When we compare crime figures across cultures, in Japan the number of violent offences (wounding, common assault, robbery and snatch theft) reported to the police in 1999 was 43,000. In comparison to Britain, the number of crimes reported that were considered 'violent' stood at an astounding 3,246,000. Maybe there is only so much that environmental criminology can contribute when it seems that maybe the individualistic society we live in is simply more prone to crime in comparison to other, more collectivist, cultures. If this is the case, then Geographic Profiling is likely to be used more and more in the coming years.
WORD COUNT - 5033
http://crimeprevention.rutgers.edu/topics/SCP%20theory/theory2.htm
2 Bottoms, A and Wiles, P; The Oxford Handbook of Criminology; Pg 620
3 http://www.kesgrave.suffolk.sch.uk/Curric/geog/burgess.html
4 http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs/hosb1800.pdf
5 http://www.met.police.uk/crimeprevention/neighbor.htm
6 http://www.crimewise.com/library/cpted.html
7 http://www.kalzip.co.uk/projects/slate.htm
8 http://www.kalzip.co.uk/projects/slate.htm
9 American Behavioural Scientist, Nov/Dec76, Vol. 20 Issue 2, p275, 14p
0 http://www.jcg.jersey.sch.uk/subjects/psychology/crime/crimenvironment.html
1 http://www.nacro.org.uk/
2 Scotsman, Saturday 29th June, 2002; myscotsman.co.uk
3 http://www.nacro.org.uk
4 http://www.preventingcrime.org/report/chapter7_10.htm
5 http://www.nacro.org.uk
6 http://www.nacro.org.uk/data/briefings/ nacro-2002062800-csps.pdf
7 http://www.nacro.org.uk/data/briefings/ nacro-2002062800-csps.pdf
8 http://www.ecricanada.com/geopro/index.html
9 http://www.ecricanada.com/geopro/howdoesitwork.html
Laura Duncan 98057758
BA (Hons) Social Science Theoretical Criminology - Coursework
Page 1 of 10
