|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CRIME PREVENTION THROUGH ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN AND COMMUNITY POLICING
Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) and community policing can be viewed as part of a comprehensive crime prevention strategy. CPTED and community policing emphasize a problem solving approach to crime prevention as well as close cooperation between police and residents in reducing both crime and fear of crime. Because CPTED emphasizes the systematic analysis of crime in a particular location, it directly supports community policing by providing crime prevention strategies tailored to solve specific problems. (National Institute of Justice – Research in Action, August 1996) The concept or philosophy of Community Oriented Policing appears to be widely accepted not only in the United States but also internationally, as probably the best way to do policing in the 21st century. Coupled with the concepts and theory of Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED), a most powerful ideology and discipline has been formed that can have a very significant impact on reducing not only the incidence of crime but also reducing the fear of crime. Today many law enforcement agencies are attempting to insure that a smooth transition has occurred from traditional policing methods to community policing strategies. During the last few years, a large amount of federal and state grant money has been made available to train police officers in the basic concepts of Community Oriented Policing, with a strong emphasis on changing the traditional police culture to one that relies more heavily on community involvement, input, and support. At the same time, many police agencies have seen the value of training patrol or community policing officers in the basic concepts of CPTED. Whether a law enforcement agency practices a specialized or generalist approach to community policing, one of the most valuable assets for the department to have is a community-focused police force with the ability to relate crime problems, locations, and trends to environmental factors. The basic premise of CPTED simply states that the proper design and effective use of the built environment can lead to a reduction in the fear of crime and the incidence of crime, and to an improvement in the quality of life. The conceptual thrust of CPTED is that the physical environment can be manipulated to produce behavioral effects that will reduce the incidence and fear of crime, thereby improving the quality of life. These behavioral effects can be accomplished by reducing the propensity of the physical environment to support criminal behavior.1 The three key concepts used in CPTED are:
Access control is a design concept directed at decreasing crime opportunity. The major thrust of an access control strategy is to deny access to a crime target and to create a perception of risk in offenders. Surveillance is a design concept directed mainly at keeping intruders under observation. Therefore, the primary thrust of a surveillance strategy is to facilitate observation of potential offenders. The concept of territoriality suggests that physical design can contribute to a sense of territoriality. That is, physical design can create or extend a sphere of influence so that users develop a sense of proprietorship or a sense of territorial influence and potential offenders perceive that influence.2 The SARA (Scanning, Analysis, Response and Assessment) model of problem solving has proven to be a most powerful and successful tool in the effort to attack crime and social disorder situations. We must insure, however that officers are not just going through the motions and using a generic “cookie cutter approach” to every situation that they encounter. Many times officers can show a very impressive after action report detailing how the SARA model was utilized to approach a problem, but when all is said and done the problem still exists. When crime and social disorder problems are approached in a more holistic fashion, the possibility of having a long lasting impact is greatly increased. Greg Saville and Gerry Cleveland discuss this holistic theory, or the ‘marriage of CPTED and Community Oriented Policing,’ in their article entitled Second Generation CPTED. Second generation CPTED recognizes the most valuable aspects of a safe community lie not in structures of the brick and mortar type, but rather in structures of family, of thought and, most importantly of behavior. We may benefit from starting with an examination of the physical aspects of place, but we must end up looking at the social aspects of home and neighborhood — the affective environment. Second generation CPTED offers the promise of greatly enhanced, and more realistic, preventive strategies, equally important, it offers the possibility of a new approach for community building.”3 The importance of police officers having the ability, knowledge, and training to look at crime and social disorder problems from a holistic perspective cannot be overstated. In an environment of increasing specialization and special interests, the police officer may be the only person capable of stepping back and properly assessing the big picture. Timothy D. Crowe gives an excellent example of the importance of seeing the big picture in his book entitled “Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design.” One of the National Crime Prevention Institute’s (NCPI) visiting lecturers, Elizabeth Meehan, a color and light consultant, summarized the problem with interior design. She said, “Illumination consultants are always looking up. Floor covering consultants are always looking down. Wallpaper consultants are always looking at the walls. However, no one usually looks at the whole interior as the sum of its parts. Each profession is trained to focus attention on its unique objectives.”4 I think that we encounter the same type of problem in police work … the traffic enforcement officer looks for speeding vehicles, the crime prevention officer looks for ways to increase the number of neighborhood watches, while the vice officer is concerned about prostitutes, and the narcotics detective focuses on street corner drug sales. The question must be asked, who is looking at the big picture and attempting to implement strategies that will impact all the problems that are affecting the community? At this point, it is essential to remember the most important concept of community policing — the involvement of the community. As we continue to move forward into the 21st century, the marriage of these two concepts, Community Oriented Policing and CPTED should serve as a most formidable force in the fight against crime and the fear of crime. The key to making this so is not the quantity or quality of the training programs for police departments, or the level of acceptance of the concepts among the rank and file, but rather the acceptance by the community of the concepts. If the bond of CPTED and Community Oriented Policing is viewed as just another program, project, or initiative conceived by politicians, then it will be a failure. In other words, the police will throw a party for the community and no one will show up but the “men and women in blue.” How tragic, and if we are brutally honest with ourselves, how “ business as usual.” The government entity, regardless of what level, always seems to develop programs that are designed to do something to people. It is like parents in the 30’s and 40’s forcing a spoon full of cod liver oil on their children on a daily basis. “I know it tastes horrible, but it’s good for you. You’ll take it and you will like it.” An article
written by Paulette Thomas in the Wall Street Journal sums up this
patronizing attitude toward citizens by the city of Pittsburgh (PA).
The headline states, “A small businessman survives many stabs at urban
renewal.” After detailing how a
successful business has been forced to move several times for the cause of
unsuccessful urban renewal efforts, Ms. Thomas states, “… city planners had
begun the last phase of the project — converting the shopping area into a
pedestrian mall … that some thought was the cutting edge of urban planning.
Streets were reconfigured to form a ring around several blocks of
shopping, with parking lots placed outside the perimeter.
But the new East Liberty, more that two decades in the planning and
construction, was a disappointment … the traffic ring turned the community
into a confusing mess of one-way and blocked off, renamed streets. Worse, for the retailers, passing motorists saw only the back
of stores. Teenage gangs began
congregating in the pedestrian mall inside the traffic ring.”
“It enhanced the perception that you were trapped inside with a
criminal population and couldn’t get out because no cars were going by,”
says Stephanie Flom, a former member of East Liberty Development Inc., a
neighborhood organization. “Shoppers
deserted East Liberty.” Several hundred miles to the south in Jacksonville (FL), The Jacksonville Landing has been struggling financially since it opened. Originally consisting of a mix of upscale retail shops and restaurants, The Landing was unable to draw the number of customers needed to become completely self supporting and successful. The Landing design, similar to that of East Liberty in Pittsburgh, has the back of the businesses facing the street, which causes confusion and frustration for potential customers. For out of town visitors staying in nearby hotels, it is virtually impossible to determine where the entrance to The Landing actually is. It is also located in the downtown area of Jacksonville where most residents and tourists fear to tread. There is less than adequate parking nearby which leads to a sense of isolation and fear as customers attempt to negotiate dark, deserted, city streets in an attempt to reach the perceived safety of the “Festival Market Atmosphere” in the interior of The Landing. Due to a lack of successful activity generators, the once touted Landing now sadly consists of a handful of restaurants and shops struggling to stay open, and usually is populated by large numbers of loitering youth rather than customers. Unfortunately, the attitude of urban planners and architects often reflect a philosophy of “we will build it and the police will protect it and make it safe.” Usually there is no one on the design review or initial planning committee that has any knowledge of CPTED, so there is little or no consideration of how the design and layout of the project will impact the incidents of crime in the area. As stated earlier, there is an outstanding opportunity for law enforcement to serve as the only agency able to see the sum of all the parts. Community Oriented Policing, built on the solid foundation of the SARA problem solving model along with the concept of CPTED serve as the framework that will allow the police to have a major impact on the incidents and fear of crime. It is essential however, that law enforcement ensures that the community becomes a true partner in this process. The beginning of community involvement must start with basic education in the concepts of Community Oriented Policing and CPTED. Citizens must understand where we are coming from. They must understand that these concepts really do change the fundamental way the police do business. They must understand that under this new philosophy citizens serve as the foundation for the whole process. The goal must be to take every opportunity to share the concepts and philosophy with the citizens, in whatever environment is available. Effective citizen advisory groups must be formed that are composed of people who understand the overall philosophy of CPTED and Community Oriented Policing. In addition, these advisory groups must have a working, practical understanding of how the philosophy is actually put into practice in their own neighborhoods. This is a time consuming proposition for local police agencies, but its importance cannot be over stated. Involved citizens must clearly understand issues such as, personnel deployment and limitations, the need for tactical deployments and the value of crime prevention initiatives. Citizens must also have frequent and accurate crime incident information. By sharing this information on a regular basis, the citizens are able to separate actual criminal incidents form the perception and fear of crime. Informed and trained citizens must be asked to serve as ambassadors for their local law enforcement agencies. Citizens that volunteer to serve on advisory councils must be informed up front that constant complaining, whining and finger pointing is unacceptable. A true partnership must be formed in an atmosphere of cooperation and mutual respect. Citizens that cannot work in this type of atmosphere or espouse philosophies that are overtly anti-law enforcement should be excluded from participation. Recruitment of a diverse group of citizens should be encouraged. Volunteerism is growing throughout the country and this philanthropic trend should be used for the benefit of improving the quality of life of all citizens, solicit participation from business owners, faith community leaders, and other civic minded people whether they live in the target area or not. As you share more information with citizens, the quality of their shared input and suggestions will increase. This type of cooperative sharing and “give and take” will decrease people’s feelings of hopelessness. They will see results and know that they had direct input in coming up with solutions to their problems. The CPTED trained officer is not intent on telling the professionals how to plan and build cities. Rather, the focus is simply on asking questions and sharing concepts, which hopefully, will lead the professionals to a very important realization --- how they plan and develop cities may increase or decrease the incidence and fear of crime.
|
|
|
