Property Management

Emerald Article: Crime prevention through environmental design (CPTED): a review and modern bibliography Paul Michael Cozens, Greg Saville, David Hillier

Article information:
To cite this document: Paul Michael Cozens, Greg Saville, David Hillier, (2005),"Crime prevention through environmental design (CPTED): a review and modern bibliography", Property Management, Vol. 23 Iss: 5 pp. 328 - 356 Permanent link to this document: http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/02637470510631483 Downloaded on: 22-05-2012 References: This document contains references to 241 other documents To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com This document has been downloaded 14231 times.

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by UNIVERSITI TEKNOLOGI MARA For Authors: If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service. Information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Additional help for authors is available for Emerald subscribers. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information. About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com With over forty years' experience, Emerald Group Publishing is a leading independent publisher of global research with impact in business, society, public policy and education. In total, Emerald publishes over 275 journals and more than 130 book series, as well as an extensive range of online products and services. Emerald is both COUNTER 3 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation.
*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

The Emerald Research Register for this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/researchregister

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/0263-7472.htm

PM 23,5

Crime prevention through environmental design (CPTED): a review and modern bibliography
Paul Michael Cozens
Department of the Premier and Cabinet, Perth, Australia

328
Received January 2005 Revised April 2005

Greg Saville
University of New Haven, New Haven, Connecticut, USA, and

David Hillier
University of Glamorgan, Pontypridd, UK
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to critically review the core ndings from recently published place-based crime prevention research. The paper aims to critically evaluate the available evidence on the contribution of crime prevention through environmental design as a crime prevention strategy. Design/methodology/approach Large-scale evaluations of crime prevention through environmental design (CPTED) are reviewed with a view to clarifying current knowledge on the evidence of crime prevention through environmental design. Findings The review concludes that there is a growing body of research that supports the assertion that crime prevention through environmental design is effective in reducing both crime and fear of crime in the community. Research limitations/implications Although the paper may not review all the evaluations of CPTED, it nonetheless provides a detailed compilation and overview of the most signicant research in the area, including an extensive and modern bibliography on the subject. Research implications will be the subject of a forthcoming paper. Practical implications CPTED is an increasingly fashionable approach and is being implemented on a global scale. Additionally, individual components such as territoriality, surveillance, maintenance, access control, activity support and target-hardening are being widely deployed. However, the evidence currently available is inconclusive and much criticised, which effectively prevents widespread intervention and investment by central government. The paper details the difculties associated with demonstrating the effectiveness of CPTED. Originality/value The paper concludes that although empirical proof has not been denitively demonstrated, there is a large and growing body of research, which supports the assertion that crime prevention through environmental design is a pragmatic and effective crime prevention tool. This review provides an extensive bibliography of contemporary crime prevention through environmental design and a follow-up paper will discuss the future research priorities for it. Keywords Crimes, Crime research, Burglary, Surveillance, Urban areas Paper type Literature review

Property Management Vol. 23 No. 5, 2005 pp. 328-356 q Emerald Group Publishing Limited 0263-7472 DOI 10.1108/02637470510631483

Introduction Crime and the fear of crime are pervasive and endemic concerns in modern post-industrial society and criminal justice systems are clearly failing to tackle both issues.

Brantingham and Brantingham (1991) have argued that there are four dimensions to any crime namely, the law, the offender, the target and the location. Place-based crime prevention strategies focus upon the crime site the spatial aspects of a target and the specic location of crime. Crucially, Herbert and Hyde (1985) note that if the spatial distribution of offences and offenders were random, then environmental criminology would be of little interest to either scholars or commentators on either criminal or social policy. Indeed, crime is not randomly distributed and hot spots of crime have been acknowledged since the mid-nineteenth century (Guerry, 1833; Fletcher, 1849; Mayhew, 1862) as the Industrial Revolution produced a new and previously unconsidered scale of urbanisation. The study of hot spots has received increasing attention in recent years (i.e. Nasar and Fisher, 1993; Lupton, 1999). As a place-based crime prevention strategy, crime prevention through environmental design (CPTED) emerged as an independent theory and is now increasingly fashionable and is being implemented worldwide (Cisneros, 1995). Empirical research, which attempts to measure the component parts of the built and social environment, to make purposeful modications to it and evaluate the effectiveness of such interventions, is fraught with difculty. Indeed, Schneider and Kitchen (2002, p. 158) comment that in practice, it would be as difcult as untangling a spiders web to evaluate the effectiveness of specic place-based crime prevention measures. Gill and Turbin (1999, p. 180) concur policymakers and practitioners want quick decisions about whether a measure has been effective or has reduced crime, while academics stress the need to do things properly, which takes time. In stating that, this paper will briey discuss CPTED and present the key arguments for the application of the component parts of CPTED and more comprehensive CPTED programmes. This review also provides an extensive bibliography on the subject of CPTED. What is CPTED? CPTED is an acronym for crime prevention through environmental design which asserts that the proper design and effective use of the built environment can lead to a reduction in the fear and incidence of crime, and an improvement in the quality of life (Crowe, 2000, p. 46). It is based on studies executed from the mid-twentieth century onwards (Lynch, 1960; Jacobs, 1961; Angel, 1968; Jeffery, 1971; Newman, 1973; Gardiner, 1978; Clarke and Mayhew, 1980; Poyner, 1983; Coleman, 1985). A range of theoretical criticisms of CPTED have been expressed (e.g. see Adams, 1973; Hillier, 1973; Kaplan, 1973; Bottoms, 1974; Mawby, 1977; Mayhew, 1979; Booth, 1981; Poyner, 1983) and are discussed elsewhere (see Cozens et al., 2001a). However, ongoing renement, of what is now known as rst-generation CPTED, by researchers, practitioners and policy makers, has arguably responded to criticism to craft a more robust and rigorous approach referred to as second generation CPTED (Saville and Cleveland, 1997). This renement extends beyond mere physical design to include social factors. Second generation CPTED uses risk assessments, socio-economic and demographic proling (Saville, 1996; Plaster Carter, 2002) as well as active community participation (Sarkissian and Perglut, 1994; Sarkissian and Walsh, 1994; Saville, 1995; Sarkissian et al., 1997; Plaster Carter, 2002). Such developments in CPTED (e.g. Taylor et al., 1980; Wilson and Kelling, 1982; Poyner, 1986; Sarkissian and Walsh, 1994; Saville, 1995; Crowe, 2000; Zelinka and Brennan, 2001) and Situational Crime Prevention[1] in Britain (Clarke and Mayhew, 1980; Clarke, 1992, 1995, 1997) have popularised, rened and advanced the design-affects-crime debate.

CPTED

329

PM 23,5

330

Following Newman (1973), Moffat (1983) proposed that there are six broad characteristics to rst-generation CPTED concepts; territoriality, surveillance (informal and formal), access control, image/maintenance, activity programme support and target hardening (see Figure 1). By optimising opportunities for surveillance, clearly dening boundaries (and dening preferred use within such spaces) and creating and maintaining a positive image, urban design and management can discourage offending. This is explained by the fact that offenders are potentially more visible to law-abiding others, and therefore, perceive themselves to be more at risk of observation and subsequent apprehension. Additionally, a well-maintained and appropriately used environment can signify that a sense of ownership and proprietary concern exists within the community. Some researchers (e.g., Fisher and Nasar, 1992) have introduced a threefold grouping of physical features; prospect (for the user), refuge (for the potential offender) and escape (for the user and potential offender) into CPTED theory and Taylor and Harrell (1996, p. 9) conclude; research conrms that fear [of crime] is higher in locations that offer good refuge for the potential offender but low prospect and escape for the user. Research supporting CPTED component parts Since CPTED is a complex strategy that will include a range of interventions and behavioural responses from various user groups, the research examined will be presented and analysed under six broad headings (not always mutually exclusive),

Figure 1. First-generation CPTED the key concepts

namely; territoriality, surveillance, access control, activity support, image/management, and target hardening. CPTED studies using multiple interventions are also examined. Territoriality Territoriality is a design concept directed at reinforcing notions of proprietary concern and a sense of ownership in legitimate users of space thereby reducing opportunities for offending by discouraging illegitimate users. In rst-generation CPTED it is the primary umbrella concept upon which all the others are based. Different forms include symbolic barriers (e.g. signage) and real barriers (e.g. fences or design that clearly denes and delineates between private, semi-private and public spaces). Access control and surveillance will also contribute towards promoting territoriality by promoting legitimate users informal social control. CPTED emphasises crime prevention techniques that exploit the opportunities in the environment both to naturally and routinely facilitate access control and surveillance, and to reinforce positive behaviour in the use of the environment (Crowe, 2000, p. 37). These strategies are not independent of one another, and they act in concert to use physical attributes to separate public, public-private and private space, to dene ownership (e.g. fences, pavement treatments, signs, landscaping and artwork) and dene acceptable patterns of usage, in addition to promoting opportunities for surveillance. A study by Brown and Bentley (1993) showed how some burglars used territoriality to evaluate risk and territoriality was also supported by the ndings from a study of fear of crime (Perkins and Taylor, 1996). Eliminating any unassigned spaces and ensuring all spaces have a clearly dened and designated purpose, are routinely cared-for and monitored is also a component of territoriality. Research on territoriality has shown it to be most effective at the local level (Brown and Altman, 1983; Taylor, 1988; Ratcliffe, 2003) although it is fraught with difculties associated with denition, interpretation and measurement. Indeed, Merry (1981) observes how territoriality varies between cultures, neighbourhoods and individual groups. Although still controversial, enhanced levels of territoriality have been linked to reduced levels of recorded crime and fear of crime (e.g. Taylor et al., 1985; Brown, 1987; Brown and Perkins, 1992; Perkins et al., 1992; Perkins and Taylor, 1996; Brown, 2001; Ratcliffe, 2003). Surveillance Physical design has the capacity to promote informal or natural surveillance opportunities for residents and their agents and surveillance is part of capable guardianship (Painter and Tilley, 1999). If offenders perceive that they can be observed (even if they are not), they may be less likely to offend, given the increased potential for intervention, apprehension and prosecution. Different types include natural (e.g. residents self-surveillance opportunities as facilitated by windows) formal or organised (e.g. police patrols) and mechanical surveillance strategies (e.g. street lighting and CCTV). Surveillance informal/natural. Angel (1968) predicted that certain critical levels of street activity and population density were linked to crime. A critical crime zone of intensity was therefore one that could support low numbers of people but in sufcient densities to contain both victims and offenders. Loukaitou-Sideris (1999) has proposed

CPTED

331

PM 23,5

332

that a second level population density exists; where the density is sufciently high to mask a range of less serious offences such as pick pocketing and petty theft. In a review of studies relating to residential burglary, Sorenson (2003) observes how burglars avoid targets that are readily overlooked by neighbours and/or passers-by. Properties with low levels of lighting at night, high walls/fences, or thick trees or shrubbery can provide concealment opportunities for burglars particularly when close to points of access such as windows and doors (Weisel, 2002). The intervisibility and enhanced surveillance opportunities provided by terraced housing, for example, have been noted by a number of researchers (Newman, 1975; Pascoe, 1993; Steventon, 1996; Hillier and Shu, 2000a; Cozens et al., 2001b) and the UK Government, explicitly in the DETR Bulletin No. 32 The Layout of Residential Roads and Footpaths (DETR, 1998). Research being conducted at University College London, at the Space Syntax Laboratory claims linear integrated spaces with some through movement and strong intervisibility of good numbers of entrances . . . are the safest spaces (Hillier and Shu, 2000b, p. 4). However, the existence of natural surveillance opportunities within the built environment does not necessarily mean that surveillance is routinely taking place, or that any direct action by citizens (e.g. challenging, reporting or direct intervention) is guaranteed (Barr and Pease, 1992). Indeed, this is one of the reasons for the development of second generation CPTED, which now seeks to engender positive social activities and diversity to encourage neighbours to take ownership of space and take advantage of natural surveillance. Surveillance formal/organised. Formal (or organised) surveillance is also provided by local stakeholders (shop keepers, security guards). Four studies of increased formal guardianship at parking lots and garages have demonstrated reductions in car-related crime (Poyner, 1991; Laycock and Austin, 1992; Poyner, 1994; Barclay et al., 1996) while one study found no such reduction (Hesseling, 1995). Poyner (1991) notes that strategies to control access may reduce thefts of vehicles, but may do little to impact on theft from vehicles, raising the issue that what guards actually do may be as important as their physical presence. In the retail industry, in stores with two, as opposed to one member of staff on duty, fewer robberies were reported in a number of studies (Hunter and Jeffery, 1992). Even though a study by La Vigne (1991) found no such relationship, a major study by Figlio points to a strong effect (National Association of Convenience Stores, 1991). That study examined 340 retail stores in America and found that robberies declined in stores that changed from employing one to two staff. Where police evaluated a city regulation requiring two staff to be on duty, robberies declined immediately after the regulation was introduced (Clifton, 1987) and for several years afterward (Bellamy, 1996). CCTV and silent alarms did not reduce robberies in a study of 55 stores (Crow and Erickson, 1984), although interactive CCTV did reduce robberies in their rst year of introduction (National Association of Convenience Stores, 1991). Retail store redesign to enhance surveillance yielded signicant reductions in shoplifting in one store (Farrington et al., 1993). Security guards have long been used to reduce crime and have been shown to prevent bank robberies (Hannan, 1982) along with the use of protective screens (Grandjean, 1990). In Victoria, Australia, a range of security devices (screens, guards and cameras) reduced bank robberies (Clarke et al., 1991) although patrols by the mobile security guards known as the Guardian Angels at railway stations did not

reduce crime in America (Kenney, 1986) or on the London Underground, England (Webb and Laycock, 1992). An increase in ticket collectors at a Canadian ferry terminal reduced fare evasion by an estimated 20 per cent (Deschamps et al., 1992) while a Dutch initiative using over 1,000 unemployed young people to monitor ticket use resulted in signicant reductions in cases of recorded assaults and harassment (Van Andel, 1986). However, neither of these studies used control groups as a baseline comparison against which to measure existing trends, or to include other independent factors that may be acting to reduce crime in the wider community. Surveillance mechanical (CCTV). Evaluating the effectiveness of CCTV is also problematic and despite the rapid growth in the deployment of CCTV, particularly in British cities Armitage (2002, p. 1) argues, there is very little substantive research evidence . . .that CCTV works. However, some studies report positive ndings. Poyner (1988) reviewed the effectiveness of the installation of CCTV on buses and found reductions in vandalism on the targeted buses and the diffusion of benets to the entire eet. Webb and Laycock (1992) found CCTV installation at London Underground stations reduced robberies compared with a control group and similarly CCTV at parking lots has been found to reduce car-related crime (Poyner, 1991; Tilley, 1993). Brown (1995) reported on three evaluations of CCTV in Britain, which resulted in reductions in burglaries, car thefts and theft from vehicles. Some studies also revealed that CCTV can signicantly reduce levels of fear of crime within the community (Chatterton and Frenz, 1994; Sarno, 1996; Mahalingham, 1996). Eck (1997) reviewed one empirical CCTV study of 15 housing complexes for the elderly in England (Chatterton and Frenz, 1994) and reported signicant reductions in burglary. Skinns (1998) evaluated CCTV in Doncaster (UK) and found vehicle crime reduced while other property crimes were not. Armitage et al. (1999) discovered CCTV signicantly decreased all recorded property crime (burglary, car crime, criminal damage, handling stolen goods and fraud) in Burnley (UK). CCTV may deter criminal offences (e.g. vehicle crime or burglary) due to a perceived increase in the risk of detection (that may outweigh the perceived potential benets). However, in alcohol-related crime (such as public disorder) where rationality is often absent, the deterrent effect of CCTV may be nullied. More recently, in a Home Ofce study, Welsh and Farrington (2002) systematically reviewed the crime prevention impact of CCTV in 18 evaluations. The evaluation incorporated meta-analytic techniques (the arithmetic extraction of net success (Pawson and Tilley, 1997)) and used before-and-after measures of crime for both experimental and control areas. Overall, a 5 per cent reduction in recorded crime was reported and half of the studies, (all in the UK) revealed a fall in recorded crime. CCTV was found to have a signicant crime reduction effect on recorded vehicle crime (from eight studies) but no effect on violent crime (from ve studies). This anomaly may be partially explained by the link between violent crime and alcohol/drug abuse. In terms of the city centre and public housing areas there was little evidence of crime reduction and in four public transport studies, two found reductions, one found no effect and one found an increase in recorded crime. In car parks, however, there was evidence of a signicant (41 per cent) reduction in vehicle crime in experimental areas compared with control areas (although other strategies, such as lighting and signage, were also present in all the ve studies of car parks). The studies of city centre and

CPTED

333

PM 23,5

334

public transport measured a much wider range of crimes and Welsh and Farrington (2002) raise the question as to whether the package of interventions, focused on a specic crime type (car-related) is what made the CCTV-led schemes in car parks apparently so effective. Armitage (2000, p. 5) summarises this review (Welsh and Farrington, 2002) suggesting, CCTV appears to have no effect on violent crime, a signicant effect on vehicle crimes and it is most effective when used in car parks. Armitage, 2002 observes how the effects of CCTV on crime can begin before the cameras become operational (Brown, 1995) by virtue of publicity campaigns. She also highlights the fact that the preventative potential of CCTV has a life cycle such that, unless routine management and publicity is maintained, any initial reductions in crime will evaporate (Webb and Laycock, 1992; Brown, 1995; Tilley, 1993; Armitage et al., 1999). Forthcoming research by the Home Ofce and Department of Transport and Local Regions (DTLR) will seek to address the lack of systematic evaluation (Armitage, 2002). Wilson and Sutton (2003) review open-street CCTV in Australia and note that Pawson and Tilleys realistic evaluation framework (Pawson and Tilley, 1997) is widely considered as a sophisticated evaluation methodology noting that both Brown (1995) and Armitage et al. (1999) have applied it. They conclude that the effectiveness of CCTV remains to be established in what locations and under what conditions (Wilson and Sutton, 2003, p. 6) but warn against jettisoning the strategy, implying there is potential for CCTV as a crime reduction tool. Moreover, in consideration of the extensive range of different CCTV systems and the variable and unscientic monitoring and management strategies that are in operation, the problems associated with measuring and comparing studies on the effectiveness of CCTV is exacerbated still further. Surveillance mechanical (lighting). After dark, surveillance opportunities are affected by lighting conditions and much research has been conducted on this subject (for a review see Cozens et al., 2003). In America in the 1960s many cities began major street lighting programmes to reduce crime and initial results found that such improvements produced substantial reductions in recorded crime (Berla, 1995; Wheeler, 1967; Wright et al., 1974; Tyrpak, 1975; Hartley, 1974). These projects resulted in the decision by the Law Enforcement Assistance Agency to fund a review of these positive results (Tien et al., 1979). Of 103 studies, only 15 were considered sufciently rigorous for evaluation and the review of these studies found that the results were inconclusive, and that other indicators of crime should be used in addition to recorded crime data. Farrington and Welsh (2002) argue that this review should have stimulated more studies but was mistakenly interpreted as demonstrating that lighting had no obvious effect on levels of crime and funding for research on this topic in the USA evaporated. In the UK, lighting studies in Hammersmith and Fulham (Painter, 1991a) and the North West of England (Painter, 1991b) reported reductions in crime and disorder. A Home Ofce funded study (Atkins et al., 1991) conducted in Wandsworth found no effect on crime, as did a review by Ramsay (1991) although it did suggest improved street lighting could reduce the fear of crime. Other studies in Cardiff (Herbert and Moore, 1991), Hull (Davidson and Goodey, 1991), Leeds (Burden and Murphy, 1991) and Strathclyde (Ditton et al., 1993) produced inconclusive ndings using before and after comparisons but failed to provide a control area (Painter and Farrington, 1997). Bainbridge and Painter (1993) studied improved lighting in Birminghams inner city, which despite the collection and analysis of some additional social survey data, also

proved inconclusive. Methodological inadequacies have raised serious doubts about the validity of many of these exploratory studies (Painter and Farrington, 1997). A study by Painter and Farrington (1997), which used experimental and control areas, showed reductions in crime and an increase in pedestrian street use. They concluded in the experimental area, there was a substantial and signicant decrease in the incidence of all categories of crime after the improved street lighting (Painter and Farrington, 1997, p. 221). The most recent review of lighting and crime research re-examined a number of studies conducted in the UK and the USA (Farrington and Welsh, 2002). This systematic review (which excluded several poorly designed lighting evaluations) found that improved street lighting reduced recorded crime overall by 7 per cent in the eight American studies and by 30 per cent in the ve UK studies, and reductions in recorded crime were also demonstrated during the day suggesting that street lighting is likely to have an effect by increasing community pride and informal social control rather than by simply improving surveillance opportunities (Farrington and Welsh, 2002). Across all the studies the crime reduction effect was 20 per cent. The UK studies included Poyner (1991), Shaftoe (1994), Poyner and Webb (1997), Painter and Farrington (1997, 2001a) and Painter and Farrington (1999). Studies have also revealed that the nancial benets (based upon government estimates of the nancial costs of various crimes) of improved street lighting schemes far outweighed their initial costs (Painter and Farrington, 2001b). In the context of recent research, Pease (1998, p. 2) argues the case is proven and states our aim should now be to use context-appropriate lighting schemes as part of a full repertoire of crime reduction tactics. In summary, natural surveillance (e.g. residents self-surveillance opportunities as facilitated by windows) formal surveillance (e.g. police patrols) and mechanical surveillance strategies (e.g. street lighting and CCTV) have all proven effective in reducing both crime and the fear of crime. Access control Access control is a CPTED concept focused on reducing opportunities for crime by denying access to potential targets and creating a heightened perception of risk in offenders. Access control can include informal/natural (e.g. spatial denition), formal/organised (e.g. security personnel) and mechanical (e.g. locks and bolts) strategies (the latter two are discussed under the sub headings surveillance and target hardening respectively). Studies by Newman (1973; 1980, 1996) and others (Poyner, 1983; Coleman, 1985; Poyner and Webb, 1991) have all indicated an association between design features and levels of crime; particularly features that allowed unrestricted pedestrian movement through residential complexes. However, researchers have also found that busier streets with some pedestrian movement have experienced reduced levels of recorded crime (Hillier and Shu, 2000a, 2000b). Poyner (1992) evaluated the impact of widening aisles at an open-air market in Birmingham, England, nding signicant reductions in recorded robberies over a two-year period. At Clason Point in New Yorks Bronx district such routes through the public housing complex were reduced in number and the lighting and surface appearance of the buildings was improved. A signicant reduction in crime (54 per cent) was reported (Newman, 1996) although there was no control group. In a study by Poyner (1994),

CPTED

335

PM 23,5

336

overhead walkways were removed from a British public housing project with reductions in purse snatching but not burglary (no control group). In Chicago (Popkin et al., 1995a, 1995b), ground oor entrances to public housing complexes were enclosed in new lobbies with the installation of concierges and metal detectors. Most residents reported signicant reductions in shootings, violence and drug dealing (no control group). From this overview, Eck (1997, pp. 7-8) states: these evaluations are suggestive of possible benecial effects in reducing pedestrian movement through large public housing complexes. According to Eck (1997) research has suggested that areas with unregulated access have more crime than areas with street layouts with more restricted access (White, 1990; Beavon et al., 1994). In Miami, Atlas and Le Blanc (1994) reported on the closure of 67 streets with no signicant reductions in recorded robberies and assaults compared with two control areas. Newmans study of the changes to a grid street layout of the Five Oaks neighbourhood in Ohio (Newman, 1996) found that total recorded crime in the city rose 1 per cent while in the target neighbourhood recorded crime declined by 26 per cent and violent crime declined by 50 per cent. Half of the residents stated that fear of crime had been reduced and Newman reported that housing values had increased. In London, two attempts to reduce street-level prostitution used road closures, rerouting and an increased police presence. After road closures (and an increase in policing prior to the road closures) in Finsbury Park, soliciting and kerb-crawling virtually disappeared (with little recorded displacement) and reported crime fell by 50 per cent (Matthews, 1992). In Streatham a similar project reported a decline in trafc ows along major thoroughfares, a reduction in arrests of kerb-crawlers (although there may be several explanations of this) and residents reported a decline in prostitution at street level (Matthews, 1993). As a real and symbolic barrier to crime, protective screens on buses have signicantly reduced assaults (Poyner and Warne, 1986) while new automatic gates have curtailed fare evasion on public transport and reportedly increased ticket sales of some 10 per cent in comparison with control stations without gates (Clarke, 1993). New gates at transit stations in New York have led to a reduction in arrests (Weidner, 1997). Bullet-proof barriers at banks reduced robberies signicantly (up to 65 per cent) compared with the control group (Ekblom, 1987, 1988) and time lock cash boxes (Clarke and McGrath, 1990) at betting shops in Australia reduced robberies considerably compared with the control group. Furthermore, exact fare requirements for bus users in New York resulted in a dramatic (90 per cent) reduction in robberies of bus drivers (Chaiken et al., 1974). A retrospective American study (Lasley, 1996) in Los Angles reported on the installing of barriers on 14 streets with high levels of drug trafcking, shootings and homicides. Part of a larger law enforcement initiative, the barriers were designed to make the drive to and purchase of drugs more difcult and to prevent drive-by shootings. Lasley (1996) compared reported crime for one year before installation, the two years during installation and for the four years afterwards, along with reported crime in four adjacent control areas. The net effect was a 65 per cent decline in homicides. Although Eck (1997) observes that no signicance tests were conducted for this study, he concludes that street closure evaluations have been conducted with greater rigour and appear to be promising. Ekblom (2002) reports on an alley-gating project in Birmingham, England where 80 per cent of burglaries were committed using access from rear alleys. After erecting 62

alley-gates, steel palisade fencing, the distribution of 400 ultraviolet property-marking kits and stickers and a local newsletter, a 53 per cent decline in burglaries was reported. However, it is impossible to isolate the impact of alley-gating per se, due to the multiple interventions undertaken. Activity support Activity support involves the use of design and signage to encourage intended patterns of usage of public space. Crowe (2000) notes how within reason, activity generation and support seeks to place inherently unsafe activities (such as those involving money transactions) in safe locations (those with high levels of activity and with surveillance opportunities). Similarly, safe activities serve as magnets for ordinary citizens who may then act to discourage the presence of criminals. This approach clearly contains elements of territoriality, access control and surveillance. Although increased numbers of pedestrians may provide additional eyes on the street and potentially discourage some offences, this may also actually encourage and provide other targets for crime (e.g. pick-pocketing). Crucially, in terms of theory, practice and policy the issue of permeability (the levels of through trafc and pedestrian movement) is currently hotly contested with some CPTED applications seeking to minimise escape routes (e.g. SBD), while others (e.g. New Urbanism) support optimising permeability to promote maximum activity levels. However, Schneider and Kitchen (2002, p. 225) argue it is about choice and that although there is a clear clash of ideas here, that does not mean that they cannot co-exist. Sorensen (2003, p. 34) observes, pedestrian trafc thus seems to increase risk (from the standpoint of target selection) and decrease risk (from the standpoint of natural surveillance) depending on whether that trafc is through trafc or local trafc. There is a growing body of research on mixed-use neighbourhoods where it found that opportunities for crime are reduced by virtue of the increased range of activities in spatial and temporal terms (Poyner and Webb, 1991; Pettersson, 1997). It is contended that the systematic zoning of areas for particular uses reduces the number of potential eyes on the street (Jacobs, 1961). Furthermore, promoting street-level activity by encouraging the practice of residential provision above retail units is a relatively recent innovation (Wekerle and Whitzman, 1995; Ofce of the Deputy Prime Minister, 2004). Research concerning the mapping and monitoring of pedestrian movement (Hillier and Shu, 2000a, 2000b) is clearly supportive of more permeable layouts, which promote intervisibility. Image/management Promoting a positive image and routinely maintaining the built environment ensures that the physical environment continues to function effectively and transmits positive signals to all users. The signicance of the physical condition and image of the built environment and the effect this may have on crime and the fear of crime has long been acknowledged (Lynch, 1960) and an extensive body of research now exists. In terms of the management of private rental housing, Eck (1997, pp. 7-10) argues, we have strong evidence that improving management of rental properties can reduce drug related crime. Vacant premises have been found to represent crime magnets (Spelman, 1993) and smaller buildings were a preferred site for drug dealing since they had less management and nancial resources to regulate such criminal activity.

CPTED

337

PM 23,5

338

On public transport, a clean up programme was undertaken to remove grafti from all train cars and stations (Sloan-Howitt and Kelling, 1990) on the New York subway system. Grafti was signicantly reduced and in spite of increased police attention to grafti, arrests for the offence also declined. In Victoria, Australia, following a programme promoting the rapid repair and rehabilitation of vandalised equipment, Carr and Spring (1993) found that train availability increased 45 per cent and reported crimes against the person declined 42 per cent. At the New York Port Authority Bus Terminal 63 specic design interventions (including access control, cleaning and enhancing formal surveillance by staff) signicantly reduced robberies and assaults (Felson et al., 1996). Crucially, much research suggests that the routine maintenance of the urban environment will signicantly assist in reducing crime (Wilson and Kelling, 1982; Kraut, 1999; Ross and Mirowsky, 1999; Ross and Jang, 2000; Cozens et al., 2001b). Wilson and Kellings Broken Windows thesis (Wilson and Kelling, 1982) stressed the vital importance of maintaining the environment as a physical indicator of levels of social cohesion and informal social control and various researchers have developed this theme (Skogan and Maxeld, 1980; Lewis and Maxeld, 1980; Lewis and Salem, 1986; Vrij and Winkel, 1991; Nair et al., 1993; Kelling and Coles, 1996). Ross and Mirowsky (1999) claim that research has consistently found that the presence of neighbourhood incivilities results in increased levels of fear (Covington and Taylor, 1991; Lewis and Maxeld, 1980; Perkins et al., 1990; Perkins and Taylor, 1996; Rohe and Burby, 1988; Taylor and Covington, 1993). In terms of criminal activity, the presence or absence of social and physical signs of disorder and decay may be crucial. Indeed, for Taylor (1991, p. 970) the environmental image offenders have of an area is associated with the extent to which the area is victimised. Target hardening Target hardening increases the efforts that offenders must expend in the commission of a crime and is the most long-established and traditional approach to crime prevention. However, there is much disagreement concerning whether or not target hardening should be considered as a component of CPTED. It is directed at denying or limiting access to a crime target through the use of physical barriers such as fences, gates, locks, electronic alarms and security patrols. Crucially, excessive use of target hardening tactics can create a fortress mentality and imagery whereby residents withdraw behind physical barriers and the self-policing capacity of the built environment is damaged, effectively working against CPTED strategies that rely on surveillance, territoriality and image. One burglary reduction strategy is upgrading locks and security at points of access. Examples include the installation of deadbolt locks on doors, the reinforcement of the doors themselves, the installation of locks on windows, and the use of double-pane glass (which is both more difcult and noisier to break). In the UK (Budd, 1999, p. 60), reports intimated that 61 per cent of recorded burglaries involved forced entry through doors and windows (37 per cent were forced open, 24 per cent were smashed). However, 22 per cent involved no forced entry, where locks and windows were left open (Budd, 1999). A study by Allatt (1984) found that target-hardening strategies resulted in reductions in burglaries and Tilley and Webb (1994) compared two target-hardened English public housing estates with a control group, nding signicant reductions in burglaries in both complexes.

In conclusion, Sorenson (2003, p. 36) notes that Budds (1999) multivariate analysis of British Crime Survey (BCS) data strongly suggests the effectiveness of security measures. Knights and Pascoe (2000) reviewed both British and international studies of the available evidence and concur. Most recently, ndings from a study of burglary in the UK, USA and the Netherlands (Tseloni et al., 2004) found security measures in the home to be one of four variables affecting victimisation rates across all three countries, indicating the success of target hardening measures in reducing recorded burglary at an international level. In summary, the review of the CPTED components of surveillance, access control, territorial reinforcement, activity support, image/management, and target hardening intimates that they have all individually contributed to reducing crime and the fear of crime in a broad range of studies. Research supporting comprehensive CPTED strategies This section examines research that has evaluated more comprehensive CPTED studies where multiple interventions were conducted. CPTED in the UK is arguably operationally best represented by the Secured By Design scheme (SBD). It is a broad-based initiative; applicable (among others) to new-build housing and three recent SBD evaluations (Armitage, 1999; Pascoe, 1999; Brown, 1999) have all reported positive results in terms of reduced levels of recorded crime and perceptions of fear of crime (for a review see Cozens et al., 2004). In the Home Ofce Brieng Note 7/00, Armitage (2000) reports that the additional average cost of incorporating enhanced security features at the construction stage has been estimated at 400 and notes that the average cost of burglary to the victim (at 1999 prices) was 2,300 (Brand and Price, 2000) Armitage (2000, p. 4) argues the extra expenditure required to build or refurbish housing to SBD standards would appear to be a worthwhile investment. Furthermore, a recent study has highlighted security against crime as the most important factor to be considered when designing a home (Armitage and Everson, 2003). This initiative has gained political support and momentum to the extent that it is now compulsory for all new-build public housing projects in Wales to be built to approved SBD specications. CPTED interventions can be found throughout the USA and Canada although the reporting of empirical ndings is limited. However, from 1971 to 1973, urban planner Richard Gardiner was hired by the US Department of Justice to conduct the rst empirical test of CPTED at the neighbourhood-level of planning. The Hartford Neighhorhood Anti-Crime Study analysed the result of urban structure and crime opportunities in the Asylum Hill neighbourhood of Hartford, Connecticut. After three years of extensive data collection, it was the rst comprehensive large scale study to determined there was a direct relationship between crime and the structure of neighbourhood design, and that properly designed urban form can help mitigate crime opportunities (Gardiner, 1978). The results of the Hartford study led to the nationwide development of a federal program to implement, and analyse, CPTED strategies in a number of cities across America. Schneider and Kitchen (2002, p. 158) claim the Five Oaks project in Ohio is one of the best documented cases which reported a 26 per cent decrease in recorded crime after a range of CPTED interventions (Newman, 1996). However, multiple

CPTED

339

PM 23,5

340

interventions inevitably obscure the detailed understanding of what each intervention contributed. Schneider and Kitchen (2002) report on various CPTED projects in residential areas such as Harbordale in Florida, where interventions resulted in increasing property values (5.5 per cent) and a signicant decline in crime rates. Although intervening variables have complicated the issue there is no doubt that residents perceive crime to be lower and the quality of life to be improved by virtue of the citys place-based crime prevention interventions in Harbordale (Schneider and Kitchen, 2002, p. 163). After a range of CPTED interventions in Portland Oregon (Kushmuk and Whittermore, 1981), there was a reduction in burglaries of commercial properties and a stabilisation of the neighbourhoods quality of life, physical appearance and social cohesion among the business community (Schneider and Kitchen, 2002, p. 173). CPTED in industrial areas has also been implemented. One example in California (Peiser and Chang, 1998) focused on access control, reducing escape routes, improved signage, target hardening, improved lighting, CCTV and night time security patrols. Break-ins, vandalism and grafti were drastically reduced (from every weekend to bi-monthly) and the occupancy rate in the industrial park increased from 75 per cent to 98 per cent in one year. According to the Parks management, the costs of the security measures were far outweighed by income generated from increased rents, higher occupancy rates and shorter vacancy periods (Schneider and Kitchen, 2002). However, the precise details of what worked and how it worked are clearly not revealed in such a multiple strategy intervention. Schneider (2002, p. 389) reviewed successful CPTED case studies in Canada (though not independently evaluated) and argues that it is most successful when residents are made aware of and educated upon the design strategies that have been implemented and their role in maximising the potential of these strategies. Relating to public transport, Loukaitou-Sideris (1999) empirically based research analysed environmental features associated with high crime bus stops in Los Angeles and conrmed desolation and lack of surveillance, crowding, broken windows, and easy escapes as signicant factors. In line with other research on the importance of convenience store location (Leistner, 1999), she advises that bus stops should not be located in dead spaces. Furthermore, the Washington DC Metro System has been identied in the crime prevention literature as having been specically designed to facilitate less crime by using CPTED strategies (La Vigne, 1997). When compared to three other urban rail transit systems recorded crime was lower and was not correlated with the crime levels associated with the spaces immediately above the station. Four key reviews of place-based interventions provide valuable insights. Poyner (1993) reviewed 122 evaluations of crime prevention projects and found that for all crime, over half of the evaluations in the environmental design or improvement category (24 out of 45) demonstrated rm evidence of crime reduction. A further 12 evaluations indicated limited evidence of crime reduction. Some of the more positive evaluations included: lighting, fencing, design changes to improve surveillance by staff, clean up of neighbourhoods, road closures/street changes, wider market gangways, electronic access control, car steering-column locks and target removal or modication. Poyner (1993, p. 21) concludes that there is optimism in the eld of crime prevention but such a broad analysis does not tell us what makes an individual crime

prevention project successful, but it makes it quite clear that many of the measures already known in the crime prevention eld can be made to work. Feins et al. (1997) extensively reviewed four residential areas noting that the cases are suggestive that location-based crime prevention tactics . . . do reduce crime, although they are not proof that this is the result (Schneider and Kitchen, 2002, p. 158). In Sherman et al. (1997) Eck reports on the situation regarding research evaluations of crime at places. A total of 99 place-based crime prevention evaluations were reviewed and crucially, most (90 per cent) displayed some evidence of crime reduction effects. A review of 28 CPTED studies on robbery (Casteel and Peek-Asa, 2000) found higher reductions (from 30 per cent to 84 per cent) in multiple component CPTED studies (16) and all but one of the single component studies (12) demonstrating the broad nature of the CPTED approach allows its adaptation to many settings, and results indicate this as an effective approach to reducing robberies. In Ecks (1997) review, only one location-based study (Eck and Wartell, 1996) was ranked 5 (that is employing the most robust research techniques using randomised controlled experiments[2], which seek to measure and compare the outcomes of two or more interventions) and cautiously, Eck (1997, pp. 6-7) observes how few studies have been replicated at a strong level of scientic evidence. However, in a revised assessment Eck (2002, p. 242) notes that knowledge of which CPTED strategies work is severely limited because places themselves have only recently become a subject of study (Eck and Weisburd, 1995). Since the 1997 review, improved lighting in public open spaces has been categorised as being an effective evidence-based intervention that works (Eck, 2002). In addition to these CPTED oriented studies, evaluations in other elds provide evidence of the effectiveness of the approach. In a US Department of Justice review of over a hundred problem-solving projects conducted by police departments across the country, 57 per cent of successful projects used CPTED strategies as a major response (Scott, 2000). In fact, beyond traditional criminal justice strategies to solve neighbourhood problems Scott (2000, p. 162) discovered that the single most frequently used type of response was altering the physical environment to reduce opportunities for problems to recur. The police in these problem-solving initiatives demonstrated a willingness and capacity to modify the environment in which problems occurred as an effective means of modifying the behaviour of offenders and potential victims. Clearly, CPTED has been found to reduce crime and the fear of crime in numerous evaluations and to increase property values and investment in the area. At an empirical level, support for the effectiveness of comprehensive CPTED programmes has not been unequivocally demonstrated. However, Eck (2002, p. 241) claims there are a large number of place-focused prevention tactics with evidence of effectiveness. Limits to the CPTED approach Despite the evidential support presented for CPTED, in common with all crime prevention strategies, there are limitations to this approach. First, irrational offenders (e.g. those intoxicated by alcohol or drugs) are potentially less likely to be deterred by rst-generation CPTED strategies, but similarly, they might be less likely to respond predictably to any crime prevention initiatives.

CPTED

341

PM 23,5

342

Second, negative socio-economic and demographic dynamics can also reduce the efcacy of CPTED strategies, or enhance the efcacy of CPTED if those dynamics are positive. Realizing the importance of this fact was one of the driving forces behind the creation of second generation CPTED in the late 1990s (Saville and Cleveland, 1997). Merry (1981) identied undefended space where cultural and social factors inuence the propensity for resident action and self-policing. Social conditions may nurture fear, reduce the inclination to intervene and result in the withdrawal of the individual into the home, which becomes heavily fortied. Atlas (1991) notes that it is not just town planners, designers and police ofcers that have successfully used the principles of defensible space. Atlas (1991, p. 65) observes how offensible space may exist where drug dealers and criminals utilise CPTED principles to create safe or offensible space within and from which they may carry out their criminal activities. Third, displacement has been a major criticism levelled at CPTED. Hakim and Rengert (1981) claim that there are ve types, where the implementation of crime prevention measures in one area can displace existing crime in terms of location, time, tactics, targets and type of crime. However, recent research from America, suggests that displacement can be utilised as a positive tool, rather than as a negative side-effect (Saville, 1998). This can be achieved by monitoring the wider environment and considering and planning against the possible knock-on effects of CPTED initiatives. Moreover, it can also be argued that displacement occurs as a negative side-effect of all existing crime prevention initiatives and is not a criticism that is exclusive to CPTED. Fourth, the ecological threshold or tipping point (Saville, 1996) of a neighbourhood is the notion that like any natural ecosystem, it has a limited capacity for certain activities and functions. Returning to the original social ecology formulations of CPTED from Jacobs (1961), tipping points treat neighbourhoods as social ecosystems. Environmental decline and increasing rates of vacancy in a given neighbourhood may breach the tipping point and result in the out-migration of residents, social capital and economic resources and set in motion a vicious spiral of decline. Under such conditions all crime prevention strategies are likely to be limited in their effectiveness. This concept of neighbourhood capacity and the tipping point is one of the four principles of second generation CPTED, the other three being community culture, cohesion, and connectivity (Saville and Cleveland, 2003a, 2003b). Finally, when CPTED is applied without sufcient community participation and becomes overly reliant on target hardening, a fortress mentality can result, where citizens and neighbourhoods (e.g. gated communities) withdraw behind walls, fences, and fortied homes. This effectively works against CPTED concepts, designed to support social interaction and promote activity and eyes on the street. This also raises the question as to how many studies are potentially limiting their crime reduction effectiveness by using rst as opposed to second generation CPTED. Impact and scope of CPTED The impact and scope of CPTED is certainly evident in the recent emergence of ideas regarding the synergies between CPTED and urban sustainability (Du Plessis, 1999; Napier et al., 1998; Vanderschueren, 1998; Cozens, 2002). Indeed, residents of crime-ridden communities often experience some of the most severe environmental and social problems. A sustainable community must therefore, be one that is dened as

safe, perceives itself to be safe and is considered by others to be safe. Arguably, the standardization of CPTED concepts in planning processes could avoid the repetition of some of the unsustainable design failures of the recent past and contribute towards a form of urban environmentalism for the twenty-rst century (Cozens, 2002). Furthermore, it has been observed (Kennedy, 1993; Gordon and Brill, 1996; Hanson, 1998; Grant, 2001) that courts in America are increasingly holding landlords and others liable for failing to take sufcient security precautions to prevent criminal attack on their invitees, tenants and guests (Kennedy, 1993, p. 106). Such cases have resulted in CPTED specialists being called upon to act as expert witnesses, where design is implicated as a causal factor. This trend is likely to migrate to Britain (Ineld, 2000) and potentially, could have a signicant, far-reaching impact elsewhere. Signicantly, some nations/states (e.g. the UK and some American and Australia states) have begun to create/amend existing legislative and planning policy frameworks to incorporate CPTED practice and procedures into the planning process. Conclusions In the light of the recent reviews of place-based crime prevention (Poyner, 1993; Eck, 1997; Feins et al., 1997; Casteel and Peek Asa, 2000; Eck, 2002; Sorenson, 2003) and the systematic reviews of lighting (Farrington and Welsh, 2002), CCTV (Welsh and Farrington, 2002), target hardening (Budd, 1999; Knights and Pascoe, 2000; Tseloni et al., 2004) and SBD (Armitage, 1999; Brown, 1999; Pascoe, 1999) the research supporting the effectiveness of CPTED is clearly accumulating. There is condence that as a comprehensive CPTED programme, the UKs SBD works, although critics and supporters alike are still unaware as to precisely why (Topping and Pascoe, 2000; Cozens et al., 2004) and such sentiments arguably apply to CPTED in general. Schneider and Kitchen (2002, p. 158) comment that despite the fact that the crime data support the contention that place-based applications work, the physical, management and community organisational interventions in these cases are woven together in complex ways that defy individual analysis. Furthermore, Draper (2000) observes that CPTED clients are often unwilling to fund follow-up research evaluating CPTED interventions and that even when this is an objective, client condentiality can often result in the non-dissemination of ndings. Moreover, studies which do not support CPTED (of which there are many) tend to report that design factors were less effective than other variables, rather than reporting no effectiveness whatsoever. In Sherman et al. (1997, 2002) the effectiveness of the majority of the place-based initiatives was categorised as unknown and most failed to meet the rigorous methodological and evaluative standards, this does not necessarily mean that they did not work, merely that it cannot be empirically proven that they worked. There are of course, studies of the effectiveness of the component parts of CPTED and of more comprehensive CPTED programmes that have not successfully managed to reduce either recorded crime or the fear of crime. It is also suggested that many of these studies may not have met the rigorous evaluative standards recommended by Sherman et al. (1997, 2002) and therefore, in scientic terms, it cannot be unambiguously asserted that CPTED does not work. Indeed, Eck (2002) reported that there were no place-based evaluations that did not work, claiming the existing empirical uncertainty about what works, at which places,

CPTED

343

PM 23,5

344

and against which crimes should not distract us from the broader nding that opportunity blocking tactics at places can be productive (Eck, 2002, p. 281). Grabosky (2003) has argued that science is beginning to inform crime control, highlighting the Campbell Crime and Justice web sites (available at: www.aic.gov.au/ campbellcj/ (accessed 6 September 2004)) extensive list of systematic studies (over 5,000). However, only a minority (24) are currently relevant to crime prevention and most are oriented towards developmental crime prevention, rather than place-based programmes. This is perhaps testament to the difculties of measuring both crime (recorded crime and/or fear of crime) and the impact of complex physical interventions on behavioural patterns operating within a dynamic, multi-dimensional socio-spatial environment. Crowe (2000, p. 220) argues CPTED is a self-evident concept that has been used successfully for many centuries. Research and assessment over the last 30 years have conrmed the utility of what many people think is just good, common sense. In summary, the insights presented in this review clearly indicate CPTED can be effective in reducing recorded crime and the fear of crime. What is less certain is precisely how CPTED and its component parts work, where it works best and how to systematically evaluate its effectiveness (or otherwise) beyond reasonable doubt.
Notes 1. Like CPTED, Situational Crime Prevention (SCP) seeks to reduce opportunities for crime. However, it is centred upon highly specic categories of crime (Clarke, 1992) and extends beyond environmental design using specic products, technology and procedures to reduce opportunities for crime. SCP utilises 24 techniques in four broad categories with the objective of increasing perceived effort, increasing perceived risks, reducing anticipated reward and inhibiting rationalisations. 2. The randomised controlled trial is the gold standard of evaluation and involves assigning subjects randomly to treatment and control groups, and comparing the outcomes recorded for each group. Because participants are randomly assigned, signicant differences in outcome are attributable to the treatment as opposed to any other factor. References Adams, J. (1973), Review of defensible space, Man Environment Systems, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 267-8. Allatt, P. (1984), Residential security: containment and displacement of burglary, Howard Journal of Criminal Justice, Vol. 23 No. 1, pp. 99-116. Angel, S. (1968), Discouraging crime through city planning, working paper No. 75, University of California, Berkeley, CA. Armitage, R. (1999), An Evaluation of Secured by Design Housing Schemes Throughout the West Yorkshire Area, University of Hudderseld, Hudderseld. Armitage, R. (2000), An Evaluation of Secured by Design Within West Yorkshire, Home Ofce Brieng Note 7/00, Crown Copyright, London. Armitage, R. (2002), To CCTV or not to CCTV? A review of current research into the effectiveness of CCTV systems in reducing crime, NACRO Crime and Social Policy Newsletter, May. Armitage, R. and Everson, S. (2003), Building for burglars, Crime Prevention and Community Safety: An International Journal, Vol. 5 No. 4, pp. 15-25.

Armitage, R., Smyth, G. and Pease, K. (1999), Burnley CCTV evaluation, in Painter, K. and Tilley, N. (Eds), Surveillance of Public Space: CCTV, Street Lighting and Crime Prevention. Crime Prevention Studies, Vol. 10, Criminal Justice Press, Monsey, NY, pp. 179-99. Atkins, S., Husain, S. and Storey, A. (1991), The Inuence of Street Lighting on Crime and Fear of Crime, Crime Prevention Unit Paper Number 28, Crown Copyright, London. Atlas, R. (1991), The other side of defensible space, Security Management, March, pp. 63-6. Atlas, R. and LeBlanc, W.G. (1994), The impact on crime of street closures and barricades: a Florida case study, Security Journal, Vol. 5 No. 3, pp. 140-5. Bainbridge, D.I. and Painter, K. (1993), The Impact of Public Lighting on Crime, Fear of Crime and Quality of Life: A Study in the Moseley and Showell Green Areas of Birmingham, Institute of Criminology, Aston Business School, Birmingham and University of Cambridge, Cambridge. Barclay, P., Buchley, J., Brantingham, P.J., Brantingham, P.L. and Whinn-Yates, T. (1996), Preventing auto theft in suburban Vancouver commuter lots: effects of a bike patrol, in Clarke, R.V. (Ed.), Preventing Mass Transit Crime. Crime Prevention Studies, Vol. 6, Criminal Justice Press, Monsey, NY. Barr, R. and Pease, K. (1992), A place for every crime and every crime in its place: an alternative perspective on crime displacement, in Evans, D.J., Fyfe, N.R. and Herbert, D.T. (Eds), Crime, Policing and Place, Essays in Environmental Criminology, Routledge, London, pp. 196-216. Beavon, D., Brantingham, P.L. and Brantingham, P.J. (1994), The inuence of street networks on the patterning of property offenses, in Clarke, R.V. (Ed.), Crime Prevention Studies, Vol. 2, Criminal Justice Press, Monsey, NY. Bellamy, L. (1996), Situational crime prevention and convenience store robbery, Security Journal, Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 41-52. Berla, N. (1995), The Impact of Street Lighting on Crime and Trafc Accidents, Education and Public Welfare Division, Library of Congress Legislative Reference Service, Washington, DC. Booth, A. (1981), The built environment as a crime deterrent. A re-examination of defensible space, Criminology, Vol. 18 No. 4, pp. 557-70. Bottoms, A.E. (1974), Book review of defensible space, The British Journal of Criminology, Vol. 14 No. 2, pp. 203-6. Brand, S. and Price, R. (2000), The Economic and Social Costs of Crime, Home Ofce Research Study Number 217, Home Ofce, London. Brantingham, P.L. and Brangtingham, P.J. (1991), Environmental Criminology, Sage Publications, Beverly Hills, CA. Brown, B. (1987) in Stokols, D. and Altman, I. (Eds), Handbook of Environmental Psychology, Wiley, New York, NY, pp. 505-31. Brown, B. (1995), CCTV in Town Centres: Three Case Studies, Police Research Group Crime Detection and Prevention Series Paper 68, HMSO, London. Brown, J. (1999), An evaluation of the secured by design initiative in Gwent, South Wales, MSc dissertation, Scarman Centre for the Study of Public Order. University of Leicester, Leicester. Brown, B. (2001), New homes/old homes: physical environment and residential psychology predicting crime, Proceedings of the International CPTED Conference, 24-27 September, Brisbane, Australia, pp. 167-177.

CPTED

345

PM 23,5

346

Brown, B. and Altman, B. (1983), Territoriality, defensible space and residential burglary: an environmental analysis, Journal of Environmental Psychology, Vol. 3 No. 3, pp. 203-20. Brown, B.B. and Bentley, D.L. (1993), Residential burglars judge risk: the role of territoriality, Journal of Environmental Psychology, Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 51-61. Brown, B. and Perkins, D. (1992), Disruptions in place attachment, in Altman, I. and Low, S. (Eds), Place Attachment, Plenum, New York, NY, pp. 279-304. Budd, T. (1999), Burglary of Domestic Dwellings: Findings from the British Crime Survey, Home Ofce Statistical Bulletin 4/99, Home Ofce, London. Burden, T. and Murphy, L. (1991), Street Lighting, Community Safety and the Local Environment, The Leeds Project, Leeds Polytechnic, Leeds. Carr, K. and Spring, G. (1993), Public transport safety: a community right and a communal responsibility, in Clarke, R.V. (Ed.), Crime Prevention Studies, Vol. 1, Criminal Justice Press, Monsey, NY. Casteel, C. and Peek-Asa, C. (2000), Effectiveness of crime prevention through environmental design (CPTED) in reducing robberies, American Journal of Preventative Medicine, Vol. 18 No. 5, pp. 99-115. Chaiken, J.M., Lawless, M.W. and Stevenson, K.A. (1974), Impact of Police on Crime: Robberies on The New York City Subway System. R-1424-NYC, The New York City Rand Institute, New York, NY. Chatterton, M.R. and Frenz, S.J. (1994), Closed circuit television: its role in reducing burglaries and the fear of crime in sheltered accommodation for the elderly, Security Journal, Vol. 5 No. 3, pp. 133-9. Cisneros, H.G. (1995), Defensible Space: Deterring Crime and Building Community, Urban Institute, Department of Housing and Urban Development, Washington, DC. Clarke, R.V. (Ed.) (1992), Situational Crime Prevention: Successful Case Studies, 1st ed., Harrow and Heston, New York, NY. Clarke, R.V. (1993), Fare evasion and automatic ticket collection in the London underground, in Clarke, R.V. (Ed.), Crime Prevention Studies, Vol. 1., Criminal Justice Press, Monsey, NY. Clarke, R.V. (1995), Situational crime prevention, in Tonry, M. and Farrington, D.P. (Eds), Building a Safer Society: Strategic Approaches to Crime Prevention, Crime and Justice, Vol. 19, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL. Clarke, R.V. (Ed.) (1997), Situational Crime Prevention: Successful Case Studies, 2nd ed., Harrow and Heston, New York, NY. Clarke, R.V. and Mayhew, P. (Ed.) (1980), Designing Out Crime, HMSO, London. Clarke, R.V. and McGrath, G. (1990), Cash reduction and robbery prevention in Australian betting shops, Security Journal, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 160-3. Clarke, R.V., Field, S. and McGrath, G. (1991), Target hardening of banks in Australia and displacement of robberies, Security Journal, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 84-90. Clifton, W. (1987), Convenience Store Robberies in Gainesville, Florida: An Intervention Strategy by the Gainesville Police Department, Gainesville Police Department. Photocopy, Gainesville, FL. Coleman, A. (1985), Utopia on Trial, Hilary Shipman Ltd, London. Covington, J. and Taylor, R.B. (1991), Fear of crime in urban residential neighborhoods: implications of between-and-within-neighborhood sources for current models, Sociological Quarterly, Vol. 32 No. 2, pp. 231-49.

Cozens, P.M. (2002), Sustainable urban development and crime prevention through environmental design for the British City. 2002. Towards an effective urban environmentalism for the 21st Century, Cities: The International Journal of Urban Policy and Planning, Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 129-37. Cozens, P.M., Hillier, D. and Prescott, G. (2001a), Crime and the design of residential property. Exploring the theoretical background, Property Management, Vol. 19 No. 2 (paper 1 of 2). Cozens, P.M., Hillier, D. and Prescott, G. (2001b), Crime and the design of residential property. Exploring the perceptions of planning professionals, burglars and other users, Property Management, Vol. 19 No. 4, pp. 222-48 (paper 2 of 2). Cozens, P.M., Pascoe, T. and Hillier, D. (2004), The policy and practice of secured by design (SBD), Crime Prevention and Community Safety: An International Journal, Vol. 6 No. 1, pp. 13-29. Cozens, P.M., Neale, R.H., Whitaker, J., Hillier, D. and Graham, M. (2003), A critical review of street lighting, crime and the fear of crime in the British City, Crime Prevention and Community Safety: An International Journal, Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 7-24. Crowe, T. (2000), Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design: Applications of Architectural Design and Space Management Concepts, 2nd ed., Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford. Crow, W. and Erickson, R. (1984), Cameras and Silent Alarms: A Study of Their Effectiveness as a Robbery Deterrent, Athena Research Corporation, Jackson Hole, WY. Davidson, N. and Goodey, D. (1991), Street Lighting and Crime, the Hull Project, Hull University, Hull. DesChamps, S., Brantingham, P.L. and Brantingham, P.J. (1992), The British Columbia transit fare evasion audit, in Clarke, R.V. (Ed.), Situational Crime Prevention: Successful Case Studies, Harrow and Heston, New York, NY. DETR (1998), Places, Streets and Movement. A Companion Guide to Design Bulletin 32: Residential Roads and Footpaths, HMSO, London. Ditton, J., Nair, G. and Phillips, S. (1993), Crime in the dark: a case study of the relationship between street lighting and crime, in Jones, H. (Ed.), Crime and the Urban Environment, Avebury, Aldershot. Draper, R. (2000), CPTED Must Involve Applied Research, available at: www.network54.com/ Forum/message?forumid=43472&messageid=951677876 Du Plessis, C. (1999), The links between crime prevention and sustainable development, Open House International, Vol. 24 No. 1, pp. 33-40. Eck, J. (1997), Preventing crime at places: why places are important, in Sherman, L.W., Gottfredson, D.C., Mackenzie, D.C., Eck, J., Reuter, P. and Bushway, S.D. (Eds), Preventing Crime: What Works, What Doesnt, Whats Promising, National Institute of Justice Research in Brief, US Department of Justice, Washington, DC. Eck, J. (2002), Preventing crime at places, in Sherman, L., Farrington, D.P., Welsh, B. and Mackenzie, D. (Eds), Evidence-Based Crime Prevention, Routledge, London, pp. 9241-94. Eck, J. and Wartell, J. (1996), Reducing Crime and Drug Dealing by Improving Place Management: A Randomized Experiment. Report to the San Diego Police Department, Crime Control Institute, Washington, DC. Eck, J. and Weisburd, D. (1995), Crime and Place, Criminal Justice Press and Police Executive Research Forum, Monsey, NY. Ekblom, P. (1987), Preventing Robberies at Sub-Post Ofces: An Evaluation of a Security Initiative, Crime Prevention Unit Paper Number 9, Home Ofce, London.

CPTED

347

PM 23,5

348

Ekblom, P. (1988), Preventing post ofce robberies in London: effects and side effects, Journal of Security Administration, Vol. 11 No. 1, pp. 36-43. Ekblom, P. (2002), Stirchley burglary reduction project, Birmingham, UK, paper presented at the European Crime Prevention Network Conference: Summaries and Project Descriptions, Aalborg, pp. 126-32. Farrington, D.P. and Welsh, C. (2002), Effects of Improved Street Lighting on Crime: A Systematic Review, Home Ofce Research Study 251, Development and Statistics Directorate, Crown Copyright, London. Farrington, D.P., Bowen, S., Buckle, A., Burns, H.T., Burrows, J. and Speed, M. (1993), An experiment on the prevention of shoplifting, in Clarke, R.V. (Ed.), Crime Prevention Studies, Vol. 1, Criminal Justice Press, Monsey, NY. Feins, J.D., Epstein, J.C. and Widom, R. (1997), Solving Crime Problems in Residential Neighborhoods: Comprehensive Changes in Design, Management and Use, US Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, Washington, DC. Felson, M., Belanger, M.E., Bichler, G.M., Bruzinski, C.D., Campbell, G.S., Fried, C.L., Grok, K.C., Mazur, I.S., ORegan, A.B., Sweeney, P.J., Ullman, A.L., LaQuanda, M. and Williams, M. (1996), Redesigning hell: preventing crime and disorder at the port authority bus terminal, in Clarke, R.V. (Ed.), Preventing Mass Transit Crime. Crime Prevention Studies, Vol. 6, Criminal Justice Press, Monsey, NY. Fisher, B.S. and Nasar, J.L. (1992), Fear of crime in relation to three exterior site features: prospect, refuge and escape, Environment and Behavior, Vol. 24 No. 1, pp. 34-65. Fletcher, J. (1849), Moral statistics of England and Wales, Journal of Royal Statistical Society of London, Vol. 12 No. 3, pp. 151-81. Gardiner, R. (1978), Design for Safe Neighborhoods: The Environmental Security Planning and Design Process, US Department of Justice, Washington, DC (currently: the National Institute of Justice), September. Gill, M. and Turbin, V. (1999), Evaluating realistic evaluation: evidence from a study of CCTV, in Painter, K. and Tilley, N. (Eds), Surveillance of Public Space: CCTV, Street Lighting and Crime Prevention, Criminal Justice Press, Monsey, NY. Gordon, C.L. and Brill, W. (1996), The Expanding Role of Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design in Premises Liability. National Institute of Justice, Research Brief, US Department of Justice, Washington, DC, April. Grabosky, P. (2003), The science of crime control, Radio National Broadcast with Robyn Williams, 15 June, available at: www.abc.net.au/rn/science/ockham/stories/s877779.htm Grandjean, C. (1990), Bank robberies and physical security in Switzerland: a case study of the escalation and displacement phenomena, Security Journal, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 155-9. Grant, S. (2001), Liability and public authorities for environmental design in Australia, Proceedings of the International CPTED Conference, September 24-27, Brisbane, Australia, pp. 303-10. Guerry, A.M. (1833), Essai Sur la Statistique Morale de la France avec Cartes, Crouchard, Paris. Hakim, S. and Rengert, G.F. (1981), Crime Spillover, Sage, Beverly Hills, CA. Hannan, T.H. (1982), Bank robberies and bank security precautions, Journal of Legal Studies, Vol. 11 No. 1, pp. 83-92. Hanson, R.K. (1998), Liability on franchise premises: footing the bill for crime, Business Horizons, available at: www.ndarticles.com/cf_0/m1038/n4_v41/21015195/print.jhtml. Hartley, J.E. (1974), Lighting Reinforces Crime, Buttenheim, Pittseld, MA.

Herbert, D.T. and Hyde, S.W. (1985), Environmental criminology: testing some area hypotheses, Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 259-74. Herbert, D. and Moore, L. (1991), Street Lighting and Crime, The Cardiff Project, Cardiff University, Cardiff. Hesseling, R. (1995), Theft from cars: reduced or displaced?, European Journal of Criminal Policy and Research, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 79-92. Hillier, B. (1973), In defence of space, RIBA Journal, Vol. 11, November, pp. 539-44. Hillier, B. and Shu, S. (2000a), Crime and urban layout: the need for evidence, in Ballintyne, S., Pease, K. and McLaren, V. (Eds), Secure Foundations: Key Issues in Crime Prevention, Crime Reduction and Community Safety, Institute of Public Policy Research, London, pp. 224-48. Hillier, B. and Shu, S. (2000b), Do burglars understand defensible space?, Space Syntax web site available at: www.bartlett.ucl.ac.uk/spacesyntax/housing/BillCrimePaper/BillCrimePaper. html Hunter, R. and Jeffrey, C.R. (1992), Preventing convenience store robbery through environmental design, in Clarke, R.V. (Ed.), Situational Crime Prevention: Successful Case Studies, Harrow and Heston, Albany, NY. Ineld, P. (2000), personal discussion, the Suzy Lamplugh Trusts Responding to Workplace Violence seminar, London Voluntary Resource Centre, Holloway, London, 10 October. Jacobs, J. (1961), The Death and Life of Great American Cities, Vintage Books, New York, NY. Jeffery, C.R. (1971), Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design, Sage Publications, Beverly Hills, CA. Kaplan, S. (1973), Book review of defensible space, Architectural Forum, Vol. 98, p. 8. Kelling, G.L. and Coles, C.M. (1996), Fixing Broken Windows. Restoring Order and Reducing Crime in Our Communities, Touchstone, Simon and Schuster, New York, NY. Kennedy, D.B. (1993), Architectural concerns regarding security and premises liability, Journal of Architectural and Planning Research, Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 105-29. Kenney, D. (1986), Crime on the subways: measuring the effectiveness of the guardian angels, Justice Quarterly, Vol. 3 No. 4, pp. 481-96. Knights, B. and Pascoe, T. (2000), Burglaries Reduced By Cost Effective Target Hardening, DETR Contract Number cc1675, Building Research Establishment, Garston. Kraut, D.T. (1999), Hanging out the no vacancy sign: eliminating the blight of vacant buildings from urban areas, New York University Law Review, Vol. 74 No. 7, pp. 1139-77. Kushmuk, J. and Whittermore, S. (1981), Re-Evaluation of Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design in Portland, Oregon, NCJ Document 80573, US Department of Justice, Washington, DC. La Vigne, N. (1991), Crimes of convenience: an analysis of criminal decision-making and convenience store crime in Austin, Texas, Masters thesis. University of Texas, Austin, TX. La Vigne, N. (1997), Safe transport: security by design on the Washington Metro, in Clarke, R.V. (Ed.), Preventing Mass Transit Crime. Crime Prevention Studies, Vol. 6, Criminal Justice Press, Monsey, NY. Lasley, J.R. (1996), Using Trafc Barriers to Design Out Crime: A Program Evaluation of LAPDs Operation Cul-De-Sac, Report to the National Institute of Justice. California State University, Fullerton, CA, November.

CPTED

349

PM 23,5

350

Laycock, G. and Austin, C. (1992), Crime prevention in parking facilities, Security Journal, Vol. 3 No. 3, pp. 154-60. Leistner, D. (1999), Convenience stores and crime: design and locational issues, unpublished Masters Degree Terminal Report, Department of Urban and Regional Planning, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL. Lewis, D.A. and Maxeld, M.G. (1980), Fear in the neighborhoods: an investigation of the impact of crime, Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, Vol. 17 No. 2, pp. 160-89. Lewis, D.A. and Salem, G. (1986), Fear of Crime; Incivility and the Production of a Social Problem, Transactions, New Brunswick, NJ. Loukaitou-Sideris, A. (1999), Hot spots of bus stop crime: the importance of environmental attributes, Journal of the American Planning Association, Vol. 65 No. 4, pp. 395-412. Lupton, D. (1999), Dangerous places and the unpredictable stranger: constructions of fear of crime, Australian and New Zealand Journal of Criminology, Vol. 32 No. 1, pp. 1-15. Lynch, K. (1960), The Image of the City, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA. Mahalingham, V. (1996), Sutton town centre public perception survey, in Bulos, M. and Grant, D. (Eds), Towards a Safer Sutton, London Borough of Sutton, London. Matthews, R. (1992), Developing more effective strategies for curbing prostitution, in Clarke, R.V. (Ed.), Situational Crime Prevention: Successful Case Studies, Harrow and Heston, New York, NY. Matthews, R. (1993), Kerb-Crawling, Prostitution and Multi-Agency Policing, Crime Prevention Unit Series Paper 43, Police Research Group, Home Ofce, London. Mawby, R.I. (1977), Defensible space: a theoretical and empirical appraisal, Urban Studies, Vol. 14 No. 1, pp. 169-79. Mayhew, H. (1862), London Labour and the Condition of the London Poor, Grifn, Bohn. Mayhew, P. (1979), Defensible space: the current status of crime prevention theory, The Howard Journal of Penology and Crime Prevention, Vol. 18, pp. 150-9. Merry, S. (1981), Defensible space undefended: social factors in crime prevention through environmental design, Urban Affairs Quarterly, Vol. 16 No. 3, pp. 397-422. Moffat, R. (1983), Crime prevention through environmental design a management perspective, Canadian Journal of Criminology, Vol. 25 No. 4, pp. 19-31. Nair, G., Ditton, J. and Phillips, S. (1993), Environmental improvements and the fear of crime, British Journal of Criminology, Vol. 33 No. 4, pp. 555-61. Napier, M., Du Plessis, C., Liebermann, S., Kruger, T., Shaw, M., Louw, A. and Oppler, S. (1998), Environmental Design for Safer Communities in South Africa, 1 and 2, Council for Scientic and Industrial Research, Pretoria. Nasar, J.L. and Fisher, B. (1993), Hot spots of fear and crime: a multi-method investigation, Journal of Environmental Psychology, Vol. 13 No. 2, pp. 187-206. National Association of Convenience Stores (1991), Convenience Store Security Report and Recommendations, National Association of Convenience Stores, Alexandria, VA. Newman, O. (1973), Defensible Space People and Design in the Violent City, Architectural Press, London. Newman, O. (1975), Reactions to the defensible space study and some further readings, International Journal of Mental Health, Vol. 4 No. 3, pp. 48-70. Newman, O. (1980), Community of Interest, Anchor Press/Doubleday, New York, NY.

Newman, O. (1996), Creating Defensible Space, US Department of Housing and Urban Development Ofce of Policy Development and Research, Washington, DC. Ofce of the Deputy Prime Minister (2004), Places: The Planning System and Crime Prevention, Ofce of the Deputy Prime Minister, Home Ofce, London. Painter, K.A. (1991a), An Evaluation of Public Lighting as a Crime Prevention Strategy with Special Focus on Women and Elderly People, Manchester University, Manchester. Painter, K.A. (1991b), The West Park Estate Survey: An Evaluation of Public Lighting as a Crime Prevention Strategy, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Painter, K.A. and Farrington, D.P. (1997), The crime reducing effect of improved street lighting: the Dudley Project, in Clarke, R.V. (Ed.), Situational Crime Prevention: Successful Case Studies, 2nd ed., Harrow and Heston, Guilderland, NY, pp. 209-26. Painter, K.A. and Farrington, D.P. (1999), Improved street lighting: crime reducing effects and cost-benet analyses, Security Journal, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 17-32. Painter, K.A. and Farrington, D.P. (2001a), Evaluating situational crime prevention using a young peoples survey, British Journal of Criminology, Vol. 41 No. 2, pp. 266-84. Painter, K.A. and Farrington, D.P. (2001b), The nancial benets of improved street lighting, based on crime reduction, Lighting Research Technology, Vol. 33 No. 1, pp. 3-12. Painter, K. and Tilley, N. (1999), Surveillance of Public Space: CCTV, Street Lighting and Crime Prevention, Criminal Justice Press, Monsey, NY. Pascoe, T. (1993), Domestic Burglaries: The Police View, Information Paper IP20/93, Building Research Establishment, Garston. Pascoe, T. (1999), Evaluation of Secured by Design in Public Sector Housing. Final Report, BRE, Watford. Pawson, R. and Tilley, N. (1997), Realistic Evaluation, Sage Publications, London. Pease, K. (1998), Lighting and Crime: Summary, available at: www.ile.co.uk/documents/ Lighting_and_crime_summary.htm Perkins, D. and Taylor, R. (1996), Ecological assessments of community disorder: their relationship to fear of crime and theoretical implications, American Journal of Community Psychology, Vol. 24 No. 1, pp. 63-107. Perkins, D., Florin, P., Rich, R., Wandersman, A. and Chavis, D. (1990), Participation and the social and physical environment of residential blocks: crime and community context, American Journal of Community Psychology, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 83-115. Perkins, D., Wandersman, A., Rich, R. and Taylor, R. (1992), The physical environment of street crime: defensible space, territoriality and incivilities, Journal of Environmental Psychology, Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 29-49. Pettersson, G. (1997), Crime and mixed-use development, in Coupland, A. (Ed.), Reclaiming the City: Mixed Use Development, Spon, London, pp. 179-202. Pieser, R. and Chang, A. (1998), Situational crime prevention in Cerritos and Paramount Industrial Parks, in Felson, M. and Peiser, R. (Eds), Reducing Crime Through Real Estate Development and Management, Urban Land Institute, Washington, DC, pp. 91-101. Plaster Carter, S. (2002), Community CPTED, The Journal of the International Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design Association, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 15-24. Popkin, S., Gwiasda, V., Rosenbaum, D., Anderson, A., Olson, L., Lurigio, A. and Taluc, N. (1995a), An Evaluation of the Chicago Housing Authoritys Anti-Drug initiative: A Model of Comprehensive Crime Prevention in Public Housing, Abt Associates Inc., Cambridge, MA.

CPTED

351

PM 23,5

352

Popkin, S., Olson, M., Lurigio, A., Gwiasda, V. and Carter, R. (1995b), Sweeping out drugs and crime: residents views of the Chicago Housing Authoritys Public Housing Drug Elimination Program, Crime and Delinquency, Vol. 41 No. 1, pp. 73-99. Poyner, B. (1983), Designing Against Crime: Beyond Defensible Space, Butterworths, London. Poyner, B. (1986), Model for action, in Heal, K. and Laycock, G. (Eds), Situational Crime Prevention From Theory into Practise, HMSO, London. Poyner, B. (1988), Video cameras and bus vandalism, Journal of Security Administration, Vol. 11 No. 2, pp. 44-51. Poyner, B. (1991), Situational crime prevention in two parking facilities, Security Journal, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 96-101. Poyner, B. (1992), Video cameras and bus vandalism, in Clarke, R.V. (Ed.), Situational Crime Prevention: Successful Case Studies, 1st ed., Harrow and Heston, New York, NY. Poyner, B. (1993), What works in crime prevention: an overview of evaluations, in Clarke, R.V. (Ed.), Crime Prevention Studies, Vol. 1, Criminal Justice Press, Monsey, NY. Poyner, B. (1994), Lessons from Lisson Green: an evaluation of walkway demolition on a British housing estate, in Clarke, R.V. (Ed.), Crime Prevention Studies, Vol. 3, Criminal Justice Press, Monsey, NY. Poyner, B. and Warne, C. (1986), Violence to Staff: A Basis for Assessment and Prevention, Tavistock, London. Poyner, B. and Webb, B. (1991), Crime Free Housing, Butterworths-Architecture, London. Poyner, B. and Webb, B. (1997), Reducing theft from shopping bags in city centre markets, in Clarke, R.V. (Ed.), Situational Crime Prevention: Successful Case Studies, 2nd ed., Harrow and Heston, Guilderland, NY, pp. 83-9. Ramsay, M. (1991), The Effect of Better Street Lighting On Crime and Fear: A Review, Crime Prevention Unit Paper Number 29, Crown Copyright, London. Ratcliffe, J. (2003), Suburb Boundaries and Residential Burglars, Trends and Issues in Crime and Criminal Justice No. 246, Australian Institute of Criminology, Canberra. Rohe, W.M. and Burby, R.J. (1988), Fear of crime in public housing, Environment and Behavior, Vol. 20 No. 6, pp. 700-20. Ross, C.E. and Jang, S.J. (2000), Neighbourhood disorder, fear and mistrust: the buffering role of social ties with neighbours, American Journal of Community Psychology, Vol. 28 No. 4, pp. 401-20. Ross, C.E. and Mirowsky, J. (1999), Disorder and decay: the concept and measurement of perceived neighbourhood disorder, Urban Affairs Review, Vol. 34 No. 3, pp. 412-32. Sarkissian, W. and Perglut, D. (1994), The Community Participation Handbook, 2nd ed., Impact Press, Sydney. Sarkissian, W. and Walsh, K. (Eds.) (1994), The Community Participation in Practice: Casebook, Institute for Science and Technology Policy, Murdoch University, Perth. Sarkissian, W., Cook, A. and Walsh, K. (Eds.) (1997), The Community Participation in Practice: A Practical Guide, Institute for Science and Technology Policy, Perth. Sarno, C. (1996), The impact of closed circuit television on crime in Sutton town centre, in Bulos, M. and Grant, D. (Eds), Towards a Safer Sutton? CCTV One Year On, London Borough of Sutton, Sutton. Saville, G. (1995), Crime Problems, Community Solutions: Environmental Criminology as a Developing Prevention Strategy, AAG Publications, Vancouver.

Saville, G. (1996), Assessing risk and crime potentials in neighbourhoods, paper presented at the 1st Annual International CPTED Association Conference, Calgary, 30 October-1 November. Saville, G. (1998), New tools to eradicate crime places and crime/niches, paper presented at the Safer Communities; Strategic Directions in Urban Planning Conference, Melbourne, 10-11 September. Saville, G. and Cleveland, G. (1997), Second-generation CPTED in schools, paper presented at the 1st Annual International CPTED Association Conference, Orlando, FL. Saville, G. and Cleveland, G. (2003a), An introduction to 2nd Generation CPTED: Part 1, CPTED Perspectives, Vol. 6 No. 2, pp. 4-8. Saville, G. and Cleveland, G. (2003b), An introduction to 2nd Generation CPTED: Part 2, CPTED Perspectives, Vol. 6 No. 1, pp. 7-9. Schneider, R. (2001), Best practices in crime prevention through environmental design: canadian case studies, Proceedings of the 6th Annual International Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) Conference, 24-27 September, Brisbane, Australia, pp. 373-390. Schneider, R. and Kitchen, T. (2002), Planning For Crime Prevention: A Transatlantic Perspective, Routledge, London. Scott, M.S. (2000), Problem-Oriented Policing: Reections on the rst 20 Years, US Department of Justice, Ofce of Community Oriented Policing Services, Washington, DC. Shaftoe, H. (1994), Easton/Ashley, Bristol: lighting improvements, in Osborn, S. (Ed.), Housing Safe Communities: An Evaluation of Recent Initiatives, Safe Neighbourhoods Unit, London, pp. 72-7. Sherman, L., Farrington, D., Welsh, B. and Mackenzie, D. (2002), Evidence-Based Crime Prevention, Routledge, London. Sherman, L.W., Gottfredson, D.C., Mackenzie, D.C., Eck, J., Reuter, P. and Bushway, S.D. (1997), Preventing Crime: What Works, What Doesnt, Whats Promising. National Institute of Justice Research in Brief, US Department of Justice, Washington, DC. Skinns, D. (1998), Crime reduction, diffusion and displacement: evaluating the effectiveness of CCTV, in Norris, C., Moran, J. and Armstrong, G. (Eds), Surveillance, Closed Circuit Television and Social Control, Ashgate, Aldershot. Skogan, M. and Maxeld, M. (1980), Reactions to Crime Project, Center for Urban Affairs, Northwest University, Evanston, IL. Sloan-Howitt, M. and Kelling, G.L. (1990), Subway grafti in New York City: gettin up vs. meanin it and cleaning it, Security Journal, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 131-6. Sorensen, D. (2003), The nature and prevention of residential burglary: a review of the international literature with an eye towards prevention in Denmark, available at: www. jur.ku.dk/medarbejdere/davesorensen/Publikationer/Nature.pdf (accessed 19 July 2004). Spelman, W. (1993), Abandoned buildings: magnets for crime?, Journal of Criminal Justice, Vol. 21 No. 3, pp. 481-95. Steventon, G. (1996), Defensible space: a critical review of the theory and practise of a crime prevention strategy, Urban Design International, Vol. 1 No. 3, pp. 235-45. Taylor, R.B. (1988), Human Territorial Functioning, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Taylor, R.B. (1991), Towards an environmental psychology of disorder. delinquency, crime and fear of crime, in Stokols, D. and Altman, I. (Eds), Handbook of Environmental Psychology, Krieger Publishing, Melbourne, FL, pp. 951-86.

CPTED

353

PM 23,5

354

Taylor, R.B. and Covington, J. (1993), Community structural change and fear of crime, Social Problems, Vol. 40 No. 3, pp. 374-95. Taylor, R.B. and Harrell, A.V. (1996), Physical Environment and Crime, National Institute of Justice. US Department of Justice, Washington, DC. Taylor, R.B., Gottfredson, S.D. and Brower, S. (1980), The defensibility of defensible space: a critical review and a synthetic framework for future research, in Hirschi, T. and Gottfredson, M. (Eds), Understanding Crime, Sage, Beverly Hills, CA, pp. 53-71. Taylor, R.B., Schumaker, S. and Gottfredson, S. (1985), Neighborhood-level links between physical features and local sentiments: deterioration, fear of crime, and condence, Journal of Architectural Planning and Research, Vol. 2 No. 2, pp. 261-75. Tien, J.M., ODonnell, V.F., Barnett, A. and Mirchandani, P.B. (1979), Street Lighting Projects: National Evaluation Program, Phase 1 Report, National Institute of Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice, US Department of Justice, Washington, DC. Tilley, N. (1993), Understanding Car Parks, Crime and CCTV: Evaluation Lessons from Safer Cities, Crime Prevention Unit Series Paper 42, HMSO, London. Tilley, N. and Webb, J. (1994), Burglary Reduction: Findings From Safer Cities Schemes, Crime Prevention Unit Paper 51, Home Ofce, London. Topping, P. and Pascoe, T. (2000), Countering household burglary through the secured by design scheme: does it work? An assessment of the evidence, 1989-1999, Security Journal, Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 71-8. Tseloni, A., Wittebrood, K., Farrell, G. and Pease, K. (2004), Burglary victimization in England and Wales, the United States and the Netherlands: a cross-national comparative test of routine activities and lifestyle theories, The British Journal of Criminology, Vol. 44 No. 1, pp. 66-91. Tyrpak, S. (1975), Newark High-Impact Anti-Crime Program: Streetlighting Project Interim Evaluation Report, Ofce of Criminal Justice Planning, Newark, NJ. Van Andel, H. (1986), Crime prevention that works: the case of public transport in the Netherlands, British Journal of Criminology, Vol. 29 No. 2, pp. 47-56. Vanderschueren, F. (1998), Towards safer cities, UNCHS Habitat Debate, Vol. 4 No. 1. Vrij, A. and Winkel, W. (1991), Characteristics of the built environment and fear of crime: a research note on interventions in unsafe locations, Deviant Behavior, Vol. 12 No. 2, pp. 203-15. Webb, B. and Laycock, G. (1992), Reducing Crime on the London Underground: An Evaluation of Three Pilot Projects, Crime Prevention Unit Paper 30, HMSO, London. Weidner, R. (1997), Target hardening at a New York city subway station: decreased fare evasion- at what price?, in Clarke, R.V. (Ed.), Preventing Mass Transit Crime. Crime Prevention Studies, Vol. 6, Criminal Justice Press, Monsey, NY. Weisel, D. (2002), Burglary of Single-Family Houses, Department of Justice, Ofce of Community Oriented Policing Services, Washington, DC. Wekerle, G. and Whitzman, C. (1995), Safe Cities: Guidelines for Planning Design, and Management, Van Nostrand, New York, NY. Welsh, B. and Farrington, D. (2002), Crime Prevention Effects of Closed Circuit Television: A Systematic Review, Home Ofce Research Study Number 252, Home Ofce, London. Wheeler, S. (1967), The Challenge of Crime in a Free Society. Presidential Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice, US Government Printing Ofce, Washington DC.

White, G.F. (1990), Neighborhood permeability and burglary rates, Justice Quarterly, Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 57-67. Wilson, D. and Sutton, A. (2003), Open-Street CCVT in Australia. Australian Institute of Criminology Trends and Issues in Crime and Criminal Justice No. 271, Australian Institute of Criminology, Canberra. Wilson, J.Q. and Kelling, G.L. (1982), The police and neighbourhood safety Broken windows, The Atlantic Monthly, Vol. 3 No. 2, pp. 29-38. Wright, R., Heilweil, M., Pelletier, P. and Dickinson, K. (1974), The Impact of Street Lighting on Crime, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI. Zelinka, A. and Brennan, D. (2001), Safescape: Creating Safer, More Livable Communities through Planning Design, Planners Press, Chicago, IL. Further reading Bennett, T. and Wright, R. (1984), Burglars on Burglary, Gower, Aldershot. Butler, G. (1994), Shoplifters views on security: lessons for crime prevention, in Gill, M. (Ed.), Crime at Work: Studies in Security and Crime Prevention, Perpetuity Press, Leicester. Clarke, R.V. and Felson, M. (1993), Routine Activity and Rational Choice, Transaction, New Brunswick, NJ. Clarke, R.V. and Homel, R. (1997), A revised classication of situational crime prevention techniques, in Lab, S. (Ed.), Crime Prevention at the Crossroads, Criminal Justice Press, Cincinnati, OH, pp. 17-30. Clarke, R.V. and Weisburd, D. (1994), Diffusion of crime control benets: observations on the reverse of displacement, in Clarke, R. (Ed.), Crime Prevention Studies, Vol. 2, Criminal Justice Press, Monsey, NY. Crow, W. and Bull, J. (1975), Robbery Deterrence: An Applied Behavioral Science Demonstration Final Report, Western Behavior Sciences Institute, La Jolla, CA. Department of the Environment and Welsh Ofce (1994), Planning Out Crime Circular 5/94, Crown Copyright, London. Ditton, J. and Short, E. (1998), When open street CCTV appears to reduce crime: does it just get displaced elsewhere?, CCTV Today, Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 13-16. Felson, M., Berends, R., Richardson, B. and Veno, A. (1997), A community policing initiative to discourage abuse of alcohol, in Homel, R. (Ed.), Crime Prevention Studies, Vol. 7, Criminal Justice Press, Monsey, NY. Forrester, D.H., Chatterton, M.R. and Pease, K. (1988), The Kirkholt Burglary Prevention Demonstration Project, Rochdale, Home Ofce, London, Crime Prevention Unit Paper No. 13. Forrester, D.H., Frenz, S., OConnell, M. and Pease, K. (1990), The Kirkholt Burglary Prevention Project: Phase II, Home Ofce, London, Crime Prevention Unit Paper No. 23. French, P. (1996), Inside the offenders mind, CCTV Today, Vol. 3 No. 3, pp. 16-19. Gabor, T. (1981), The crime displacement hypothesis: an empirical examination, Crime and Delinquency, Vol. 26 No. 3, pp. 390-404. Green, L. (1993), Treating deviant places: a case study examination of the beat health program in Oakland, California, PhD dissertation, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ. Green, L. (1995), Cleaning up drug hotspots in Oakland, California: the displacement and diffusion effects, Justice Quarterly, Vol. 12 No. 5, pp. 737-54.

CPTED

355

PM 23,5

356

Green, L. (1996), Policing Places with Drug Problems, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA. Homel, R., Hauritz, M., Wortley, R., McIlwain, G. and Carvolth, R. (1997), Preventing alcohol-related crime through community action: the surfers paradise safety action project, in Clarke, R.V. (Ed.), Crime Prevention Studies, Vol. 7, Criminal Justice Press, Monsey, NY. Hope, T. (1994), Problem-oriented policing and drug market locations: three case studies, in Clarke, R.V. (Ed.), Crime Prevention Studies, Vol. 2, Criminal Justice Press, Monsey, NY. Hunter, J. (1978), Defensible space in practise, Architects Journal, Vol. 11, October, pp. 675-8. Jeffrey, C.R. (1969), Crime prevention and control through environmental engineering, Criminologica, Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 35-58. Jeffery, C.R. (1999), CPTED: past, present and future, paper presented at the 4th Annual International CPTED Association Conference. Mississauga, Ontario, 20-22 September. Johnson, S. and Loxley, C. (2001), Installing Alley-gates: Practical Lessons from Burglary Prevention Projects, 2/01, Policing and Reducing Crime Unit Brieng Note 2/01, Home Ofce, London. Laycock, G. (1985), Property Marking: a Deterrent To Domestic Burglary?, Crime Prevention Unit Paper Number 3, Home Ofce, London. Lurigio, A.J., Davis, R.C., Regulus, T.A., Gwiasda, V.E., Popkin, S.J., Dantzker, M.L., Smith, B. and Ouellet, L. (1993), An Evaluation of the Cook County States Attorneys Ofce Narcotics Nuisance Abatement Unit, Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority, Chicago, IL. Norris, C. and Armstrong, G. (1999), CCTV and the social structuring of surveillance, in Painter, K. and Tilley, N. (Eds), Surveillance of Public Space: CCTV, Street Lighting and Crime Prevention, Criminal Justice Press, Monsey, NY. Norris, C., Moran, J. and Armstrong, G. (Eds.) (1998), Surveillance, Closed Circuit Television and Social Control, Willow Tree Press, Ashgate, NY. Pease, K. (1991), The Kirkholt project: preventing burglary on a British public housing estate, Security Journal, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 73-7. Poyner, B. and Webb, B. (1992), Reducing theft from shopping bags in city center markets, in Clarke, R.V. (Ed.), Situational Crime Prevention: Successful Case Studies, Harrow and Heston, New York, NY. Saville, G. and Cleveland, G. (1997), 2nd generation CPTED: an antidote to the social Y2K virus of urban design, paper presented at the 2nd Annual International CPTED Conference, Orlando, FL, 3-5 December, available at: www.cpted.net Shaw, C.R. and McKay, H.D. (1969), Juvenile Delinquency and Urban Areas, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL (originally published in 1942). Smith, S.J. (1987), Designing against crime? Beyond the rhetoric of residential crime prevention, Property Management, Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 146-50. Weisel, D. (1990), Tackling Drug Problems in Public Housing: A Guide for Police, Police Executive Research Forum, Washington, DC. Wilson, S. (1978), Updating defensible space, Architects Journal, Vol. 11, October, p. 674.