Abstract
Secured by Design (SBD) is a place-based approach to crime reduction that brings together standards of physical security with the broader principles of Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) to set minimum requirements that enable properties to be awarded SBD status. Developed in 1989 in England, SBD is managed by Police Crime Prevention Initiatives and delivered by Designing Out Crime Officers (DOCOs), Architectural Liaison Officers (ALOs) and Crime Prevention Design Advisors (CPDAs) located within each police force. Whilst the effectiveness of the scheme has been evaluated, so far studies have drawn only on police-recorded or self-reported crime. This study adds offender perceptions to that collection of evaluations. Twenty-two prolific burglars were asked to interpret a series of 16 images of residential housing. The results confirm that housing design plays a key role in influencing offender decision-making, the risk of surveillance and standards of physical security being primary deterrents. The findings highlight areas for improvement within the scheme, particularly relating to measures based upon the concepts of defensible space and management and maintenance.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Abbreviations
- ACPO:
-
Association of Chief Police Officers
- ALO:
-
Architectural Liaison Officer
- CPDA:
-
Crime Prevention Design Advisor
- CPTED:
-
Crime Prevention through Environmental Design
- DCLG:
-
Department for Communities and Local Government
- DOCO:
-
Designing Out Crime Officer
- ODPM:
-
Office of the Deputy Prime Minister
- SBD:
-
Secured by Design
References
Armitage, R. (2000). An evaluation of secured by design housing within West Yorkshire – Briefing Note 7/00. London: Home Office.
Armitage, R. (2004). Secured By design – An investigation of its history, Development and future role in crime reduction. Unpublished PhD Thesis, University of Huddersfield, Huddersfield.
Armitage, R. (2006). Sustainability versus safety: Confusion, conflict and contradiction in designing out crime. In G. Farrell, K. Bowers, S. Johnson, & M. Townsley (Eds.), Imagination for crime prevention: Essays in Honour of Ken Pease, Crime prevention studies (Vol. 21, pp. 81–110). Monsey, New York: Criminal Justice Press and Willan Publishing.
Armitage, R. (2013). Crime prevention through housing design: Policy and practice, Crime Prevention and Security Management Book Series. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Armitage, R. (2017a). Burglars’ take on crime prevention through environmental design. Security Journal, 31, 285. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41284-017-0101-6.
Armitage, R. (2017b). Crime prevention through environmental design. In R. Wortley & M. Townsley (Eds.), Environmental criminology and crime analysis (pp. 259–285). New York: Routledge.
Armitage, R., & Monchuk, L. (2011). Sustaining the crime reduction impact of secured by design: 1999 to 2009. Security Journal, 24(4), 320–343.
Armitage, R., Monchuk, L., & Rogerson, M. (2010). It looks good, but what is it like to live there? Assessing the impact of award winning design on crime. Special Volume of European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research, 17(1), 29–54.
Birks, D., & Davies, T. (2017). Street network structure and crime risk: An agent-based investigation of the encounter and enclosure hypothesis. Criminology, 55(4), 900–937.
Bowers, K. J., & Guerette, R.T. (2014). Effectiveness of situational crime prevention. In G. Bruinsma & D. Weisburd (Editors in Chief) Encyclopaedia of Criminology and Criminal Justice (pp. 1318–1329). New York: Springer.
Brantingham, P. J., & Brantingham, P. L. (1993). Environment, routine and situation: Toward a pattern theory of crime. Advances in Criminological Theory, 5, 259–294.
Brooke, M. (2013). Secured by design – The story so far. Safer Communities, 12(4), 154–162.
Brown, B. B., & Altman, I. (1983). Territoriality, defensible space and residential burglary: An environmental analysis. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 3, 203–220.
Brown, B., & Bentley, D. (1993). Residential burglars judge risk: The role of territoriality. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 13, 51–61.
Budd, T. (1999). Burglary of domestic dwellings. Findings from the British Crime Survey. Issue 4/1999. London: Home Office.
Clarke, R. V. (1992). Introduction. In R. V. Clarke (Ed.), Situational crime prevention – Successful case studies (pp. 3–36). New York: Harrow and Heston.
Copes, H., & Hochstetler, A. (2014). Consenting to talk: Why inmates participate in prison research. In P. Cromwell & M. Birzer (Eds.), Their own words: Criminals on crime (pp. 19–33). New York: Oxford University Press.
Cozens, P., Hillier, D., & Prescott, G. (2001). Defensible space: Burglars and police evaluate urban residential design. Security Journal., 14, 43–62.
Cromwell, P. F., & Olson, J. N. (1991). Breaking and entering: An ethnographic analysis of burglary. Newbury Park: Sage.
Davies, T., & Johnson, S. D. (2014). Examining the relationship between road structure and burglary risk via quantitative network analysis. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 31, 481. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10940-014-9235-4.
Department for Communities and Local Government. (2005). Planning policy statement 1: Delivering sustainable development. http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/planningpolicystatement1. Accessed 21 Mar 2012.
Department for Communities and Local Government. (2006). Circular 01/2006: Guidance on changes to the development control system. London: DCLG.
Department for Communities and Local Government. (2008). The code for sustainable homes: Setting the standard in sustainability in new homes. London: DCLG.
Department for Communities and Local Government (2011). Planning policy statement 3: Housing. http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/pps3housing. Accessed 21 Mar 2012.
Department for Communities and Local Government. (2012a). External review of government planning practice guidance. London: DCLG.
Department for Communities and Local Government. (2012b). National Planning Policy Framework. London: DCLG.
Department of Environment, Transport and the Regions. (1999). Towards an urban renaissance – Final report of the urban task force. London: DETR.
Department of the Environment. (1994). Planning out crime: Circular 5/94. London: DoE.
Elffers, H. (2010). Misinformation, misunderstanding and misleading as validity threats to accounts of offending. In W. Bernasco (Ed.), Offenders on offending: Learning about crime from criminals (pp. 13–22). Cullompton: Willan.
Everson, S. (2000). Repeat offenders and repeat victims: Mutual attraction or misfortune? Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Huddersfield.
Great Britain. (1998). Crime and Disorder Act 1998. Chapter 37. London: HMSO.
Homel, R., Macintyre, S., & Wortley, R. (2014). How burglars decide on targets: A computer-based scenario approach. In B. LeClerc & R. Wortley (Eds.), Cognition and crime: Offender decision making and script analyses (pp. 26–47). Oxford: Routledge.
Housing Corporation. (2003). Scheme development standards (5th ed.). London: Housing Corporation.
Housing Corporation. (2007). Design and quality standards. London: Housing Corporation.
Jacobs, J. (1961). The death and life of great American cities. New York: Random House.
Jeffery, C. R. (1971). Crime prevention through environmental design. Beverly Hills: Sage.
Johnson, S., & Bowers, K. J. (2010). Permeability and burglary risk: Are Cul-de-Sacs safer? Quantitative Journal of Criminology, 26(1), 89–111.
Johnson, S. D., & Bowers, K. J. (2014). How guardianship dynamics may vary across the street network: A case study of residential burglary. In Liber amicorum voor Henk Elffers. NSCR: Amsterdam.
Jones, A., Valero-Silva, N., & Lucas, D. (2016). The effects of ‘secure warm modern’ homes in Nottingham: Decent homes impact study. Nottingham: Nottingham City Homes.
Kearns, J. N., & Fincham, F. D. (2005). Victim and perpetrator accounts of interpersonal transgressions: Self-serving or relationship-serving biases? Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31(3), 321–333.
Montoya, L., Junger, M., & Ongena, Y. (2016). The relation between residential property and its surroundings and day- and night-time residential burglary. Environment and Behavior, 09(2014), 516–549. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916514551047.
Moss, K., & Pease, K. (1999). Crime and Disorder Act 1998: Section 17 a wolf in sheep’s clothing? Crime Prevention and Community Safety: An International Journal, 1(4), 15–19.
Nee, C. (2003). Research on burglary at the end of the millennium: A grounded approach to understanding crime. Security Journal, 16(3), 37–44.
Nee, C., & Meenaghan, A. (2006). Expert decision making in burglars. British Journal of Criminology, 46, 935–949.
Nee, C., White, M., Woolford, K., Pascu, T., Barker, L., & Wainwright, L. (2015). New methods for examining expertise in burglars in natural and simulated environments: preliminary findings. Psychology, Crime & Law, 21(5), 507–513. https://doi.org/10.1080/1068316X.2014.989849.
Newman, O. (1973). Defensible space: People and design in the Violent City. London: Architectural Press.
Office of the Deputy Prime Minister. (2000). Our towns and cities: The future – Delivering an urban renaissance. London: ODPM.
Office of the Deputy Prime Minister and Home Office. (2004). Safer places – The planning system and crime prevention. London: HMSO.
Pascoe, T. (1999). Evaluation of secured by design in public sector housing – Final report. Watford: BRE.
Pease, K. (2001). Cracking crime through design. London: Design Council.
Pease, K., & Gill, M. (2011). Direct and indirect costs and benefits of home security and place design. Leicester: Perpetuity Research and Consultancy International Ltd..
Reppetto, T. A. (1974). Residential crime. Cambridge: Ballinger.
Reynald, D. (2009). Guardianship in action: Developing a new tool for measurement. Crime Prevention and Community Safety, 11, 1–20.
Reynald, D. (2010). Guardians on guardianship: Factors affecting the willingness to supervise, the ability to detect potential offenders, and the willingness to intervene. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 47(3), 358–390.
Reynald, D. M., & Elffers, H. (2009). The future of Newman’s defensible space theory linking defensible space and the routine activities of place. European Journal of Criminology, 6(1), 25–46.
Secured by Design. (2016). Secured by Design New Homes – 2014. London: Secured by Design.
Shaw, M., & Pease, K. (2000). Research on repeat victimisation in Scotland: Final report. Edinburgh: Scottish Executive Central Research Unit.
Sidebottom, A. L., Tilley, N., Johnson, S., Bowers, K., Tompson, L., Thornton, A., & Bullock, K. (2017a). Gating alleys to reduce crime: A meta-analysis and realist synthesis. Justice Quarterly, 35, 55. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418825.2017.1293135.
Sidebottom, A.L., Armitage, R., Tompson, L. (2017b, March). Reducing crime through secured by design: A systematic review. Secured by Design National Training Event 2017. Northampton.
Taylor, R. (2002). Crime prevention through environmental design (CPTED): Yes, no, maybe, unknowable and all of the above. In R. B. Bechtel & A. Churchman (Eds.), Handbook of environmental psychology (pp. 413–426). New York: Wiley.
Taylor, R., & Gottfredson, S. D. (1987). Environmental design, crime and prevention: An examination of community dynamics. Crime and Justice: An Annual Review of the Research, 8, 387–416.
Teedon, P., Reid, T., Griffiths, P., Lindsay, K., Glen, S., McFayden, A., & Cruz, P. (2009). Secured by design impact evaluation final report. Glasgow: Glasgow Caledonian University.
Tseloni, A. (2006). Multilevel modeling of the number of property crimes: Household and area effects. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series A (Statistics in Society), 169(2), 205–233.
Tseloni, A., Ntzoufras, I., Nicolaou, A., & Pease, K. (2010). Concentration of personal and household crimes in England and Wales. European Journal of Applied Mathematics, 21(45), 325–348.
Tseloni, A., Thompson, R., Grove, L. E., Tilley, N., & Farrell, G. (2014). The effectiveness of burglary security devices. Security Journal (advance online publication 30 June 2014; https://doi.org/10.1057/sj.2014.30).
Van Der Voordt, T. J. M., & Van Wegen, H. B. R. (1990). Testing building plans for public safety: Usefulness of the delft checklist. Netherlands Journal of Housing and Environmental Research, 5(2), 129–154.
van Gelder, J.-L., Nee, C., Otte, M., van Sintemaartensdijk, I., Demetriou, A., & van Prooijen, J.-W. (2017). Virtual burglary: Exploring the potential of virtual reality to study burglary in action. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 54(1), 29–62. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022427816663997.
Vollaard, B., & Ours, J. C. V. (2011). Does regulation of built-in security reduce crime? Evidence from a natural experiment. The Economic Journal., 121(May), 485–504.
Weisburd, D. (2015). The law of crime concentration and the criminology of place. Criminology, 53(2), 133–157.
Wiles, P., & Costello, A. (2000). The ‘road to nowhere’: The evidence for travelling criminals (Home Office Research Study 207). London: Home Office.
Winchester, S., & Jackson, H. (1982). Residential burglary: The limits of prevention (Home Office Research Study Number 74). London: Home Office.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Armitage, R. (2018). Domestic Burglary: Burglar Responses to Target Attractiveness. In: Reducing Burglary. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-99942-5_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-99942-5_3
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-99941-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-99942-5
eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)