Abstract
This paper will argue that the effectiveness of CPTED ought to be judged in terms of the extent to which it is successful in facilitating opportunities for active guardianship of places. With this premise in mind, the CPTED component of surveillance will provide the focal point of investigation. Reynald (Crime Prevention and Community Safety: An International Journal, 11(1):1-20, 2009, Journal of Research in Crime & Delinquency, 2010b) demonstrated that supervision or natural surveillance is one of the core dimensions of active guardianship in residential areas. This paper will begin with an illustration of how the CPTED principles are translated into crime preventive action in residential environments by using observational data to get a first-hand look at how CPTED functions in practice. The paper will then go on to combine these field observations with interview data from residents themselves to show the ways in which opportunities for the CPTED component of surveillance are affected, not simply by the design of the physical environment, but also by the context in which the opportunities exist. These results will be used to critically reflect on some inherent conflicts and points of neglect in the relationship between the components of surveillance, territoriality and image/maintenance, as a means of airing some of the conceptual and practical weaknesses that may serve to limit the existing CPTED model.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
The other CPTED-related variables that were measured included territoriality, image/maintenance and target hardening.
The territoriality scale measure was composed of physical barriers, landscaping, front garden and outdoor seating on properties in the 2009 study, and also showed a significant negative correlation with active guardianship. In Reynald (2010b), the territoriality measure was revised by dissecting the physical barriers variable and including more measures of signs of ownership, including decorations, property signs and nameplates. The relationship with surveillance opportunities remained the same (significant negative correlation), but there was a significant positive relationship with active guardianship in this study.
The image/maintenance scale measure was composed of graffiti, litter, state of disrepair of properties and broken lights/windows.
References
Armitage, R. (2000). An evaluation of secured by design within West Yorkshire. Home Office Briefing Note 7/00. London: Crown Copyright.
Armitage, R. (2007). 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). Monsey: Criminal Justice Press and Willan Publishing.
Barr, R., & Pease, K. (1992). A place for every crime and every crime in its place: An alternative perspective on crime displacement. In D. J. Evans, N. R. Fyfe, & D. T. Herbert (Eds.), Crime, policing and place, essays in environmental criminology. London: Routledge.
Brantingham, P. J., & Brantingham, P. L. (1981). Environmental criminology. In P. J. Brantingham & P. L. Brantingham (Eds.), Notes on the geometry of crime (pp. 27–54). Prospect Heights: Waveland.
Brantingham, P. J., & Faust, F. L. (1976). A conceptual model of crime prevention. Crime & Delinquency, 22, 284–296.
Brown, B. B., & Altman, I. (1983). Territoriality, defensible space and residential burglary: an environmental analysis. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 3, 203–220.
Coupe, T., & Blake, L. (2006). Daylight and darkness targeting strategies and the risks of being seen at residential burglaries. Criminology, 44(2), 431–464.
Cozens, P. (2008). Crime prevention through environmental design. In R. Wortley & L. Mazerolle (Eds.), Environmental criminology and crime analysis. UK: Willan Publishing.
Cozens, P., Hillier, D., & Prescott, G. (2001). Crime and the design of residential property- exploring the theoretical background Part 1. Property Management, 19(2), 136–164.
Cozens, P. M., Pascoe, T., & Hillier, D. (2004). Critically reviewing the theory and practice of Secured By Design (SBD) for residential new-build in Britain. Crime Prevention and Community Safety: An International Journal, 6(1), 13–29.
Cozens, P., Saville, G., & Hillier, D. (2005). Crime prevention through environmental design (CPTED): a review and modern bibliography. Journal of Property Management, 23(5), 328–356.
Crowe, T. (2000). Crime prevention through environmental design: applications of architectural design and space management concepts (2nd ed.). Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.
Ekblom, P. (2006). Crime prevention through environmental design - time for an upgrade? Paper presented at 17th Annual Conference on Problem-Oriented Policing, Madison, USA.
Ekblom, P. (2007). Crime reduction through surveillance and design presentation by Professor Paul Ekblom at the International Crime Reduction Conference organised by the Province of Alberta, Banff, Canada (9th - 11th October).
Ekblom, P. (2009a). Bringing crime prevention through environmental design into the 21st century. Sweden: Solna City Council.
Ekblom, P. (2009b). Teasing apart territoriality...and reassembling it as a useful concept for practice, research and theory. Paper Presented at the Crime Prevention Conference, Keele University (May 2009).
Jacobs, J. (1961). The death and life of great American cities. New York: Random House.
Lemanski, C. (2004). A new apartheid? The spatial implications of fear of crime in South Africa. Environment & Urbanization, 16, 101–111.
Lynch, J. P., & Cantor, D. (1992). Ecological and behavioral influences on property victimization at home: implications for opportunity theory. Journal of Research in Crime & Delinquency, 29(3), 335–362.
Macdonald, J. E., & Gifford, R. (1989). Territorial cues and defensible space theory: the burglar’s point of view. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 9, 193–205.
Mawby, R. I. (1977). Defensible space: a theoretical and empirical appraisal. Urban Studies, 14, 169–179.
McCord, E., Ratcliffe, J., Garcia, M. R., & Taylor, R. B. (2007). Nonresidential crime attractors and generators elevate perceived neighborhood crime and incivilities. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 44(3), 295–320.
Merry, S. E. (1981). Defensible space undefended: social factors in crime control through environmental design. Urban Affairs Quarterly, 16, 397–422.
Newman, O. (1972). Defensible space: Crime prevention through urban design. New York: Macmillan.
Reynald, D. M. (2009). Guardianship in action: developing a new tool for measurement. Crime Prevention and Community Safety: An International Journal, 11(1), 1–20.
Reynald, D. M. (2010a). Guardians on guardianship: factors affecting the willingness to monitor, the ability to detect potential offenders & the willingness to intervene. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 47(3), 358–390.
Reynald, D. M. (2010b). Factors Associated With the Guardianship of Places: Assessing the relative importance of the spatio-physical and socio-demographic contexts in generating opportunities for capable guardianship. Journal of Research in Crime & 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.
Saville, G., & 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 URL: http://www.e-doca.eu/content/docs/CPTED_2ndGeneration.pdf).
Skogan, W. G., & Maxfield, M. G. (1981). Coping with crime. Beverly Hills: Sage.
Taylor, R. B. (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. NY: Wiley.
Taylor, R. B., Gottfredson, S. D., & Brower, S. (1984). Block crime and fear: defensible space, local social ties, and territorial functioning. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 21, 303–331.
Taylor, R. B., Koons, B., Kurtz, E., Greene, J., & Perkins, D. (1995). Streetblocks with more nonresidential landuse have more physical deterioration: evidence from Baltimore and Philadelphia. Urban Affairs Review, 30, 120–136.
van Nes, A. (2005). Burglaries in the burglar's vicinity. In A. Nes (Ed.), 5th international space syntax symposium volume I (pp. 479–493). Amsterdam: Techne Press.
Welsh, B., & Farrington, D. (2009). Making public places safer: Surveillance and crime prevention. NY: Oxford University Press.
Wilson, J. Q., & Kelling, G. (1982). Broken windows: the police and neighborhood safety. Atlantic Monthly, 249, 29–38.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Reynald, D.M. Translating CPTED into Crime Preventive Action: A Critical Examination of CPTED as a Tool for Active Guardianship. Eur J Crim Policy Res 17, 69–81 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10610-010-9135-6
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10610-010-9135-6