Difference between revisions of "Community safety approach"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
| (19 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| + | [[Category:Safety]] |
||
| − | =Community safety approach= |
||
| + | [[Category:Social]] |
||
| − | == Imntroduction == |
||
| − | The '''community safety approach'''<ref>R. |
+ | The '''community safety approach'''<ref>Matthews R., Pitts J. : Crime, Disorder and Community Safety. A New Agenda?. London/New York: Routledge, 2001. </ref> advocates a general shift in infrastructural, political, and public conceptions of security, from situational prevention to [[safety]] and [[security]] of a community as a whole. This requires a particular “multicultural sensibility for planning”, including how cultures “''orient their actions,[... or] suggest how they might use formal planning processes.''”<ref>Baum H. S.: Culture Matters – But It Shouldn't Matter Too Much, in: Burayidi M. A. (ed.): Urban Planning in a Multicultural Society. Westport, CT: Greenwood, 2000, 115.</ref> |
| ⚫ | The community safety approach builds upon the approach of [[Cultural criminology|cultural criminology]] to combine material or artifactual aspects with social aspects of culture. It rests on the idea of making risks and threats visible and encouraging citizens to get involved in structural prevention. This is based on strengthened neighbourhoods and informal, social control. [[Urban planning]] and architecture naturally would have an important role to play in realizing such an approach. |
||
| + | ==Security-related aspects and benefits== |
||
| − | ==Prevention== |
||
| + | *Supports situational [[crime]] and [[Urban terrorism|terrorist]] prevention by using structural (e.g. [[designing out approach|designing out]]/[[designing in]]) measures; |
||
| ⚫ | The |
||
| + | *Considers infrastructural aspects to reduce security threats; |
||
| − | |||
| + | *Supports individual and community reaction to crime and terrorist threats; |
||
| − | |||
| + | *Supports community response activities by facilitating response and emergency measures. |
||
| − | ==Risk reduction== |
||
| − | Basically this approach rests on a concept of [[Risk reduction|risk reduction]]<ref>T. Hope/T. M. Shaw: Communities and Crime Reduction. London: HMSO, 1988. </ref>, but by the mid-1990s it was found not to meet public safety needs in risk-prone areas. The solution was sought in a comprehensive approach that at the same time would retain the local focus of the original community safety approach. As a result, crime control was connected to the general idea of maintaining a normatively good order in a society, reaching from criminal up to environmental issues, and at the same time the concept of devolution of responsibility for enacting such a “comprehensive community safety strategy”.<ref>R. Matthews/J. Pitts: Introduction: Beyond Criminology?. In: R. Matthews/J. Pitts (eds.): Crime, Disorder and Community Safety: A New Agenda?. London/New York: Routledge, 2001, pp. 1-25, p. 4.</ref> |
||
| + | ==Approaches how to address it== |
||
| + | *Follow a [[comprehensive approach]] to urban planning: |
||
| + | :- Consider infrastructural/structural requirements to [[safety]] and [[security]]; |
||
| + | :- Consider political requirements to safety and security; |
||
| + | :- Consider societal and community requirements to safety and security. |
||
| + | *Include multicultural aspects and culturally related requirements; |
||
| + | *Integrate [[citizen participation]] as a standard procedure in security related urban planning; |
||
| + | *Consider prevention, mitigation and response aspects in urban planning project (see [[crisis management cycle]]). |
||
{{references}} |
{{references}} |
||
| − | |||
| − | = MAP = |
||
| − | |||
| − | <websiteFrame> |
||
| − | |||
| − | website=http://securipedia.eu/cool/index.php?wiki=securipedia.eu&concept=Community_safety_approach |
||
| − | height=1023 |
||
| − | |||
| − | width=100% |
||
| − | |||
| − | border=0 |
||
| − | |||
| − | scroll=auto |
||
| − | |||
| − | align=middle |
||
| − | |||
| − | </websiteFrame> |
||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | <headertabs/> |
||
Latest revision as of 11:30, 9 July 2013
The community safety approach[1] advocates a general shift in infrastructural, political, and public conceptions of security, from situational prevention to safety and security of a community as a whole. This requires a particular “multicultural sensibility for planning”, including how cultures “orient their actions,[... or] suggest how they might use formal planning processes.”[2]
The community safety approach builds upon the approach of cultural criminology to combine material or artifactual aspects with social aspects of culture. It rests on the idea of making risks and threats visible and encouraging citizens to get involved in structural prevention. This is based on strengthened neighbourhoods and informal, social control. Urban planning and architecture naturally would have an important role to play in realizing such an approach.
- Supports situational crime and terrorist prevention by using structural (e.g. designing out/designing in) measures;
- Considers infrastructural aspects to reduce security threats;
- Supports individual and community reaction to crime and terrorist threats;
- Supports community response activities by facilitating response and emergency measures.
Approaches how to address it
- Follow a comprehensive approach to urban planning:
- - Consider infrastructural/structural requirements to safety and security;
- - Consider political requirements to safety and security;
- - Consider societal and community requirements to safety and security.
- Include multicultural aspects and culturally related requirements;
- Integrate citizen participation as a standard procedure in security related urban planning;
- Consider prevention, mitigation and response aspects in urban planning project (see crisis management cycle).
