Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design
Gregory Allen
Abstract
As a result of the 9/11 attacks, more and more security assessments being completed by organizations show that most properties are not designed appropriately. The process of crime prevention through environmental design (CPTED) starts with a threat and vulnerability analysis to determine the potential for attack and what needs to be protected. In many cases, protecting a building from physical attack by criminal behavior or terrorist activity only reflects a change in the level and types of threats. A CPTED analysis of a building or property evaluates crime rates and stability as well as core design shortcomings of the physical environment (e.g., blind hallways, uncontrolled entries, or abandoned areas that attract problem behavior).
Keywords
vulnerability assessment; security vulnerability; visibility; criticality; population; collateral mass casualties; target; CBRNE elements; potential threat elements (PTEs); jurisdiction
Introduction
When looking at protecting your organization’s assets, whether they are employees or other tangible assets, there must be a plan in place to eliminate basic threats. One way to do this is through a multidisciplinary approach known as crime prevention through environmental design (CPTED). This strategy uses various kinds of deterrence to affect an offender’s decision to commit a criminal act. It involves altering the physical design of a business or public space to deter illegal action. These design alterations can range from small-scale implementation to more of an overarching concept.
History of Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design
CPTED formally came about in 1971 and was viewed as a limited approach that was given the term “defensible space.” The concept initially received mixed reviews but has been revised over time to create the approach it is today. We now view CPTED as a “built environment” in that we build the deterrence of crime into a public space or building’s design.
In the 1960s, guidelines were developed for addressing security issues. Many ideas were implemented; however, not many were recognized. Eventually, the term CPTED evolved as people recognized that the physical environment had a direct influence on crime and that eliminating boundaries where criminals can hide assisted security and police in deterring crimes.
Early on, the CPTED movement looked at critical crime factors and prevention within schools. It developed from a study that examined the relationships among opportunity for crime, the motivation for that crime, and the risk to the offender if the crime is committed. It was later decided that the level of risk can be controlled by the “victim,” and this is how the concept of design solutions came into play. Crime prevention functions are clearly based on the comprehensive theory that certain designs can prevent a crime from occurring.
The term “defensible space” changed the nature of crime prevention and moved it to the environmental field. This occurred both professionally (businesses) as well as personally (at a residence). The term basically looks at how an offender can be observed; identified; and, hopefully, apprehended. Of course, it is necessary for a person to take the initiative and report a prospective offender. Increasing a sense of security where we work or live encourages people to take ownership of controlling areas of their lives. The philosophy is that when people feel safer within their work space or home life, they are more likely to interact with others, therefore sharing information that can help deter crime.
Through the 1970s, CPTED was more of a theoretical than practical approach and began to incorporate an offender’s behavior as well as behaviors that may influence others. This led to the development of a behavioral model aimed at predicting the effects of changing both the external environment and internal environment of offenders themselves.
During the 1980s, there were mixed reviews on the effectiveness of CPTED. Studies showed that this concept was more effective in residential settings and was based on the interaction of others within a specific setting (e.g., neighborhood watch programs). Defensible space was observed to be marginal at best in professional and commercial settings.
Newer strategies were based on the “broken window” concept, that if an area is well cared for and not abandoned, CPTED can work effectively. If these strategies were used on a consistent basis, crime would eventually decline and possibly go away.
As we move through this chapter, we will find that crime is all about opportunity; therefore, crimes will take place when all of the elements are present: a law, an offender, a target (victim), and a place. This is what we call “the four dimensions of crime.” If we eliminate one or more of these dimensions, it reduces the chance of a crime.
In the 1990s, the study of CPTED influenced the law enforcement and security communities. Research showed that through CPTED, crime can be reduced to 17% to 76% of previous levels. Studies revealed that there is not just a social aspect to crime deterrence but a psychological aspect as well. In the 2000s, the elements of CPTED gained much more attention within the law enforcement community based on the positive effects it has had.
Today, we look at CPTED strategies as relying on the ability to influence offenders’ decisions based on their criminal acts. Based on the research compiled, criminal behavior is viewed as being predicated on the balance of risk to commit a crime versus the rewards it potentially can have. It has been determined that criminals are influenced by perceived risk of detection and apprehension.
There is now a theory, grounded in research, that proper design and effective use of the built environment can reduce crime, as well as the fear of crime, and affect quality of life. Built environment concepts distract offenders from committing a crime. The CPTED concept includes six variables: territoriality, surveillance, access control, maintenance, activity support, and target hardening. When you apply these strategies, crime can be reduced, whether at a business or a residence.
CPTED strategies, when used, create an inconvenient environment to potential offenders, showing what an effective tool it is. However, CPTED efforts cannot be fulfilled without assistance from the community, the stakeholders, and law enforcement. Research has shown that this strategy cannot stop all crimes, but it can deter many criminals who may be attempting illegal acts. CPTED relies on changes to the physical environment that force an offender to make a conscious decision on whether or not to commit a crime. This can be considered a “preventive” behavior mechanism.
CPTED has been shown to be the best overall cost-effective tool in preventing crime. When you have an existing environment and you need to change that landscape to accommodate a CPTED strategy, the initial process may be costly. However, when you incorporate CPTED into an existing design, the cost can become much lower than expected. For example, implementing CPTED lighting design does not require high energy costs and reduces liability costs in the long run.
There can be obstacles to adopting CPTED, such as not having the funds to design and implement the strategy. If this is a public venue, there may be lack of support for funding. Another obstacle is resistance to change, which could be based on not building community cooperation into the planning process, or lack of understanding of the CPTED tool. Be aware that there may be resistance to changing historical venues. Research and experience show that the changes can be minimal, if correctly implemented. Those who believe they already have deterrence measures in place may resist any change because they may think the traditional approach is the most effective way to deter an offender’s behavior. The last obstacle is that there are many existing areas that are not designed for CPTED, and modifying those spaces may be too expensive, as well as difficult to gain support politically.
Keep in mind that CPTED is a problem-solving approach based on accessing areas that place people at risk, leaving them vulnerable to crime. It is a strategy that looks at environmental conditions and attempts to reduce or eliminate crime based on limiting access and encouraging property maintenance. CPTED is different from any other aspect of crime prevention because it focuses on design and is directed toward target hardening to the point that it denies access by using cameras and sensors for the identification and apprehension of offenders.
CPTED is different from traditional policing but is consistent with the concept of problem-oriented policing because it looks at a broad array of problems and not just the crime itself. It looks at a systematic way of addressing crime and its events, as well as the conditions and factors that contribute to the opportunity for a crime to occur. It also incorporates engagement of citizens, government agencies, and local organizations in creating appropriate solutions and long-term prevention.
CPTED is based on research that shows how crime can be specific and situational; that is, criminals will take advantage of opportunities that present themselves. Offenders are more likely to commit a crime in a place they know well, where they know the daily routines and activities, and when there are few observers nearby. The goal is to reduce opportunities for crime by restructuring physical aspects of the landscape or building and redesigning how that space is used.
As a result of 9/11, there has been a dramatic change in how we use CPTED and apply it to security in a built environment. Today’s security professionals have applied many concepts of CPTED to their policies and procedures and made it accessible to architects and law enforcement. When we can apply a step-by-step guideline for real-world learning, it makes it easier to address risk threat assessment and show how relevant it is to implement these concepts into any building plan. We must look at this as a high priority based on critical infrastructure protection and how each element applies to the protection of both private and public sectors. Guidelines must be presented any time there are new construction projects, so this concept can be adopted from the beginning. The bottom line is to deter crime or to introduce the fear of committing a crime to make sure this concept does not fail.
Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design Categories
CPTED is not an easy strategy because behavior must be looked at with various user groups. Researchers must examine and analyze the six basic categories of CPTED to determine its success. Natural surveillance and access control strategies limit the opportunity for a crime to occur. Territorial reinforcement adds social control through a variety of measures. Maintenance and activity support lend the ability to stop a crime. Target hardening strategies pull it all together into crime resolution as a final step.
Territoriality
The first category is territoriality. This is a design concept that reinforces a sense of property ownership that reduces opportunities for an offender and discourages crime. Access barriers are looked at as a priority with CPTED. Access control and surveillance promotes territoriality for social control. It is a crime prevention concept that exploits the opportunities in the environment and promotes the positive behavior of not committing a crime. These concepts work independently from one another and are used in both the private and public sectors.
Territorial reinforcement endorses social control by looking at a space and improving its existence. Environmental design gives control of private spaces by providing a sense of ownership, as well as by limiting offenders’ access to hidden spots within the perimeters of that space. There are several options available when creating a design to limit access to the general public or to limit access to areas only specified for particular staff.
Territorial reinforcement measures will an average user a sense safety while also alerting potential offenders to the risk of committing a crime. Today, most people take pride in what they own and take every necessary measure to protect their belongings and make it challenging to commit a crime. Many criminals do not want to work hard for what they do; therefore, the more difficult we can make it, the less crime will occur.
Natural Access Control
Methods of CPTED include creating access controls, whether they are real or perceptual barriers for entry and movement. There must also be an understanding of who is and who is not allowed access into certain areas. Even the presence of people can serve as a crime deterrent. Access control is a concept focused on reducing the opportunity for crime to occur by denying access to potential targets, as well as heightening the perception of risk by offenders. This has proven to be an effective tool for deterring.
Another method is to provide opportunities to observe and be seen. This includes the chance to observe from adjacent properties or within the perimeter of that site, which could include parking areas, as well as other buildings. Any design should allow people to see and report any irregularities or unusual behaviors.
Access control has as much to do with detour than anything because it is real and creates barriers for movement within an area. These are not concepts that offenders want to be faced with because they deter their desire to commit a crime. In addition, surveillance of activities—even being noticed from other areas—aids in crime prevention.
Natural Surveillance
Surveillance is part of the physical design that has the capacity for both informal and natural detection opportunities. If an offender perceives that he or she can be observed, not only will he or she be less likely to commit a crime, but it increases the potential of being apprehended and prosecuted. If you reduce street activity around a business or residence, there is less opportunity for crime to occur.
The existence of natural surveillance opportunities within a built environment does not mean that surveillance is actually taking place. Whether within an organization or your own residence, people must take ownership of deterring crime.
Although not considered “natural” surveillance, security guards have been around for a long time and are used every day for crime reduction. Routine patrols and the availability to move around are key crime prevention strategies.
Natural surveillance increases the opportunity to recognize people attempting to commit a crime. This occurs by designing the placement of physical features, activities, and pedestrian traffic to maximize visibility and foster positive movement and social interactions within a public or private space. This action limits access to the premises, as well as escape routes.
Natural surveillance measures can also be complemented by mechanical and organizational measures. Closed-circuit television (CCTV) cameras can be used where there is no other alternative for surveillance. Other access control features include selecting the right area for placing entrances and exits, fencing, lighting, and landscape to give more control over crime deterrence. All of these measures give limited opportunity for a crime to take place within private or public places.
Closed-circuit television surveillance is one of the most effective tools today, although it has its problems. CCTV cameras can be hidden or exposed, and each option has a positive effect on crime prevention. CCTV surveillance gives the impression that everyone is being observed, whether they commit a crime or not, and can be used by both businesses and residences. This type of surveillance can be used during nighttime and daytime hours and has the same crime prevention effect either way.
Activity Support
Activity support involves the use of design and signage to enhance intended patterns for usage in public areas. Many studies show that this concept works, but it must be supported by people observing the actions of others.
Image management of part of a built environment that ensures physical space continues to function effectively and positively. It has been shown to be a very effective tool in smaller venues. Much of the research shows that routine maintenance of an urban environment significantly reduces crime. There is an emphasis on maintaining the environment for social cohesion and informal social control. With regard to residential spaces, the presence of neighborhood activities will reduce the opportunity for committing a crime.
Maintenance
Maintenance requires a sense of property ownership. If this deteriorates, there is less control and therefore more of a chance for crime to occur. If you understand the “broken window” theory, you will understand the importance of property maintenance in deterring crime. The theory is based on the idea of making sure a property is well maintained, with no need of repair, which reduces the risk of a crime being committed. Positive action must be taken to show pride in an environment, whether it is a private or public space.
Target Hardening
Target hardening increases the efforts of an offender to commit a crime, which is the most traditional method of crime prevention. It is a direct action of using physical barriers to discourage potential crime targets and we rely on surveillance, territoriality, and image.
One burglary reduction strategy is to upgrade locks and security access points. This is a good example of target hardening.
Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design and Crime Reduction
When we look at the CPTED components of surveillance, access control, territorial reinforcement, activity support, property management, and target hardening, we find that they all or individually contribute to the reduction of crime or the fear of committing a crime.
Many studies in the United States, as well as other countries, have found CPTED to be a reliable component of crime reduction. There is a lot of correlation between crime and the structure of building or public space design, so there are many avenues to mitigate crime.
Research will show a reduction of crime is through “stabilization,” as well as physical appearance and social cohesion, whether it is with neighborhoods or a business community.
CPTED has clearly been found to reduce crime and increase property values. However, even with the support of CPTED and its use with crime prevention strategies, there are limitations to this approach. Offenders who are under the influence of alcohol or other drugs often do not recognize CPTED strategies and are less likely to respond to any crime prevention methods. Negative socioeconomic dynamics can also reduce the effectiveness of CPTED strategies. It has been proven that the driving force behind CPTED is where cultural and social factors influence action and self-policing. Social conditions sometimes nurture fear, discouraging any attempt to intervene in a crime. Likewise, criminals can use CPTED strategies for their own design when it comes to “offensible space.” Additionally, when you look at displacement and CPTED, there is a concern that if you displace existing crime in one area, it can drift into another area. Crime displacement is nonetheless viewed positively.
When neighborhoods decline and vacancy rates increase, property values decrease accordingly. It becomes difficult to properly use a CPTED approach with the necessary community involvement (the “eye on the street” approach).
Practitioners of CPTED include architects, criminologists, and certified protection professionals. Each group works in both business and residential environments and is invested in protecting employees and assets from crime. CPTED can be approached with a risk assessment just as one would approach construction or occupancy evaluation. It is important to have step-by-step guidelines to use the CPTED concepts. Designing safe communities with CPTED and critical infrastructure protection is a continuing effort for homeland security.
The perception of CPTED revolves around the concept of situational crime prevention in that crime is reduced because of environmental change, which most of the time involves little effort or money. Any type of theft, damage, or vandalism is a costly issue for an organization. Architectural design, as well as space management concepts, combined with the proper selection of building materials represents an important aspect in reducing crime in an area. CPTED can perform these tasks based on hardware, technology, and procedures that can reduce that thought of loss or criminal behavior.
When we look at CPTED, one of the questions that arises is: Why here? There are opportunities for crimes as well as other problems that come to the surface out of a variety of environmental conditions related to a building, a site, or a location that is used. Solving these problems requires a full understanding of the place, the opportunity for crime, and the situation. The three CPTED concepts of territoriality, surveillance, and access must be addressed using elements of the environment for this reduction.
CPTED is unique in its approach to crime prevention through design and space. It engages citizens, builders, businesses, government agencies, and law enforcement. Each has an important role to play in defining the problems and long-term planning for solutions. CPTED is based on a blend of criminology, crime prevention, and rational choice theory. Each one of these approaches focuses on the crime and how an offender understands and uses the environment to commit a crime. When we study these issues, we need to look at the crime and how specific it is to the situation as well as how the crime relates to the use of that area.
CPTED is most effective when the focus is on design and productive use of space. The overall design is supported through target hardening (e.g., locks, alarms, security guards). In addition, lighting, physical barriers, natural surveillance, and landscaping must all be considered parts of CPTED. Naturally, this is easiest to achieve when addressing it during the development phase of a project rather than after a space has already been designed.
As we have noticed, crime has increased more than we would have thought; therefore, crime prevention today plays a large role in both the public and private sectors. Being a security professional today, you must familiarize yourself with the principles of environmental crime prevention and learn how they relate to other concepts. It seems that before 9/11, the need for proper security was not as important because many saw no need for it; yet after 9/11, everyone saw the need to take measures for the protection of people, property, and assets. A large part of CPTED is using elements of basic security techniques. As you look at and address security issues, a cost-effective approach must be taken to show the effectiveness of the techniques. Even today, many architects fail to place security measures into their design plans, yet doing so would be an example of a cost-effective security measure.
We now realize that we live with crime every day and know that it can occur any time of the day or night. We must make every effort to deter or stop crime. Hopefully, our efforts will lead to a reduction in crime or at least an increase in apprehension of criminals.
The CPTED approach is more than deterrence; it is crime prevention in itself. It is more than just a traditional dead bolt or a lock on a door, yet it is easily applied and can be inexpensive as well. It can be incorporated into a building, a structure, or a remodeling job, and it has been implemented in communities across the United States. Based on the concepts we have discussed, the creation of CPTED has proven to be an effective tool when it comes to crime prevention. It is a simple design that will eliminate or reduce criminal behavior and at the same time encourage people to watch out for others, as well as the environment. This causes a safer and more viable community, whether in a personal (neighborhood) or professional (business) venue. CPTED is a concept that can be used within any environment that is presented.