Difference between revisions of "Designing out"

From Securipedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
 
(60 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
 
[[Category:Measure]] [[Category:Safety]] [[Category:Social]] [[Category:Threat]]
  
[[Category:Measure]] [[Category:Safety]] [[Category:Social]] [[Category:Threat]]
  +
The '''designing out''' approach aims to reduce [[crime]] and [[Urban terrorism|terrorism]] risk by appropriately shaped built infrastructure. By designing out, the urban environment becomes less attractive as a working ground for criminals and terrorists. Desigining out is one of several methodes of [[environmental design]] to realise [[crime prevention by design]].
   
  +
The approach to designing out assumes that certain types and locations of urban space are significantly more attractive to perpetrators than others, mainly for social and cultural reasons (cf. Geason, Wilson 1989)<ref>Geason S., Wilson P. R.: Designing out Crime. Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design. Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology, 1989. Retrieved from: http://www.aic.gov.au/documents/9/E/8/%7B9E810185-7D54-4480-8EEC-D92D84C3FB36%7Dcpted.pdf [last access: 2011-11-05].</ref>. Therefore, the choice of urban targets is seen as mainly driven by factors such as maximum visibility of casualties, vulnerable and actually harmed people, maximum media exposure and potential for vast spread of fear among the wider population.
−
="designing out" approach=
  
   
  +
Urban planning centred on ''designing out'' helps increase urban [[security]] efficiently. It aims for reducing criminal behaviour, terrorist actions and anti-social behaviour. A converse concept is [[designing in]].
−
== Definition ==
  
−
The "designing-out" approach aims to reduce risk due to crime and [[urban terrorism|terrorism]] by appropriately shaped built infrastructure and by designing the urban environment to become less attractive as a working ground for criminals and terrorists.
  
   
  +
==Security related aspects and benefits==
−
The approach to “designing out” crime and terrorism (cf. Geason/Wilson 1989)<ref>Geason, S./Wilson, P. R. (1989): Designing out Crime. Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design. Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology. Retrieved from: http://www.aic.gov.au/documents/9/E/8/%7B9E810185-7D54-4480-8EEC-D92D84C3FB36%7Dcpted.pdf [last access: 2011-11-05].</ref> assumes that certain types and locations of urban space are significantly more attractive to perpetrators than others, mainly for social and cultural reasons. Therefore, the choice of urban targets is seen as mainly driven by factors such as maximum visibility of casualties, vulnerable and actually harmed people, maximum media exposure and potential for vast spread of fear among the wider population.
 
  +
*Design can impact (criminal/terrorist) behaviour in a positive or negative way.
  +
*Designing out can mitigate, lessen or even prohibit criminal or terrorist acts.
  +
*Designing out reduces crime and terrorist risks and consequences.
  +
*Designing out decreases vulnerability and increases resilience.
   
  +
==Approaches how to address it==
  +
*Consider designing out principles (e.g. HM Government[http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/publications/counter-terrorism/crowded-places/design-tech-issues?view=Binary])
  +
*Get familiar with designing out initiatives (e.g. International CPTED Association[http://www.cpted.net/])
  +
*Get familiar with general design aspects and structural / material aspects
  +
*Integrate considerations on response and emergency measures in the planning process
   
−
==Designing out and counter-terrorism==
 +
==Designing out principles for urban planning==
  +
===Structural principles===
−
On the governmental level, designing out crime and designing in community concepts have been introduced as counter terrorism protective [[security]] strategies (cf. HM Government 2012).<ref>E.g. HM Government: Crowded Places: The Planning System and Counter-Terrorism. Home Office and Department for Communities and Local Government. Crown copyright, 2012. Retrieved from http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/publications/counter-terrorism/crowded-places/design-tech-issues?view=Binary.</ref> They provide guidance for local authorities for preparing local development documents in order to protect crowded places from international terrorist targeting. The UK authorities aim for the creation of safer buildings and places to decrease terrorist attacks and [[vulnerability]]. This example illustrates that urban planning in general and the designing out approach in particular are fundamental [[Crisis management cycle|mitigation]] instruments vis-à-vis urban security risks.
 
  +
Practical designing out principles limit the damage of terrorist attacks by specific [[environmental design]] of built infrastructure. These principles include structural/material aspects such as:
  +
*Access control;
  +
*Stand off distances, to keep people and bomber vehicles away from targets;
  +
*Laminated glass;
  +
*Framed structures;
  +
*Bombshelter areas, etc.
   
  +
===Social/psychological principles===
−
Provided guidance includes advice how to incorporate counter terrorism protective security measures into high design quality; and how to improve security of existing buildings and public realm and environments. Specific requirements for transport facilities (airports, railways, ports) are communicated. Counter-terrorism good design is considered to include risk response and integrating protective security measures. Design principles should be considered as early as possible in planning and development processes and are promoted by the government.
  
  +
General design aspects with mainly psychological designing out effects include the following <ref>Cf. "PluS Initial Report" by LKA NI 2010 LKA NI (eds.): PluS Initial Report Planning Urban Security. Hannover: Landeskriminalamt Niedersachsen, 2010. Retrieved from: http://www.plus-eu.com/docs/PLUS-Initial-Report-online.pdf [last access: 2012-05-23].</ref>
  +
*Orientation;
  +
*Good overview;
  +
*Visibility;
  +
*Lighting (physical surveillance);
  +
*Video installations (formal/organised surveillance);
  +
*Accessibility (access control);
  +
*Vibrant urban environment and multiple social functions;
  +
*Responsibility;
  +
*Natural/informal surveillance ("Eyes on the Street"):
  +
*Avoiding conflicts;
  +
*Ensuring maintenance;
  +
*Etc.
   
  +
For sustainable implementation of “designing out”, following factors need to be considered throughout the planning process<ref>Cf. "PluS Initial Report" by LKA NI 2010 LKA NI (eds.): PluS Initial Report Planning Urban Security. Hannover: Landeskriminalamt Niedersachsen, 2010. Retrieved from: http://www.plus-eu.com/docs/PLUS-Initial-Report-online.pdf [last access: 2012-05-23].</ref>
   
  +
# Integration of citizens through communication and [[Citizen participation|participation methods]];
−
== Designing out principles for urban planning ==
  
  +
# Willingness of the participants to be part of a [[security]] partnership;
−
Owing to the "designing out" approach, initiatives such as [http://www.cpted.net/ "Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design"] have directly derived practical [[urban planning]] principles to limit the damage of terrorist attacks by specific [[environmental design]] of built [[infrastructure]]. These principles include:
 
  +
# Decentralisation and localisation;
  +
# Commitment.
   
  +
==Critics==
−
* Stand off distances, to keep people and bomber vehicles away from targets;
 
  +
Designing out concepts can help reducing fear of crime, but at the same time it can soon raise ethical questions, for example by separating out different ‘types of people’. For example, certain types architectures (often together with commercial policing by private companies) offer middle-class citizens new types of privacy and crime free zones in public commercial malls and places. This usually separates out other ethical groups.<ref>Garland D.: The Culture of Control: Crime and Social Order in Contemporary Society. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 2001, 6-11.</ref>
−
* Laminated glass;
  
−
* Framed structures;
 
−
* Bombshelter areas etc.
 
−  
−  
−
Other aspects related to designing out, for consideration throughout the planning process for designing buildings and public space, include the following (cf. "PluS Initial Report" by LKA NI 2010)<ref>LKA NI (Eds.) (2010): PluS Initial Report Planning Urban Security. Hannover: Landeskriminalamt Niedersachsen: Retrieved from: http://www.plus-eu.com/docs/PLUS-Initial-Report-online.pdf [last access: 2012-05-23].</ref>:
  
−
* Orientation;
  
−
* Good overview;
  
−
* Visibility;
  
−
* Lighting;
  
−
* Accessibility;
  
−
* Vibrant urban environment and multiple social functions;
  
−
* Responsibility;
  
−
* Avoiding conflicts;
  
−
* Ensuring maintenance.
  
−  
−  
−
For sustainable implementation of “designing out”, the following four factors should be present (ibid.):
  
−  
−
1) Willingness of the participants to be part of a security partnership;
  
−
2) Integration of citizens in the planning process through communication and participation methods;
  
−
3) Decentralization and localization;
  
−
4) Commitment.
  
−  
−  
−
== Designing out vs. designing in==
  
−
In contrast to designing out, designing in strives for
 
−  
−
inclusive concepts such as “appreciative planning” (Ameyaw 2000) focus on an inclusive, participatory planning process in/for multicultural metropolitan environment(s):
 
−  
−  
−
== Critics ==
  
−
The effectiveness of the "designing out' approach assumes that certain types and locations of urban space are significantly more attractive to perpetrators than others, mainly for social and cultural reasons. Therefore, the choice of urban targets is seen as mainly driven by factors such as maximum visibility of casualties, vulnerable and actually harmed people, maximum media exposure and potential for vast spread of fear among the wider population. David Garland as one of the most popular proponents of the [[Cultural criminology|cultural criminology]] approach locates fear of crime as a criminological subject of study as well as a public and political concern in the context of the change of the political culture of response to crime as it took place in the Western world in the 1970ies.<ref> David Garland: The Culture of Control: Crime and Social Order in Contemporary Society. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 2001, pp. 6-11.</ref> The decline of the ideal of rehabilitation of convicted, the emergence of new normative ideal of punitiveness and the evolution of "expressive justice" – meaning public shaming and humiliation of culprits together with overemphasizing personal feelings of the victim and public outrage over individual acts of crime – have introduced a new emotional culture into crime policy: Whereas fear of crime originally used to be investigated and politically perceived at the level of "a localized, situational anxiety, affecting the worst-off individuals and neighbourhoods", it now became “regarded as a major social problem and a characteristic of contemporary culture."<ref>Ibid., p. 10.</ref> Accordingly, fear of crime can be read as being a cultural factor – if not "cultural theme"<ref>Ibid., p. 10.</ref> – in itself, rather than being a dependent variable in part influenced by (other) cultural factors.
 
−  
−
As Garland goes on to argue, the victim and its fears have become a "symbolic figure", individual victims are taken as "Everyman" and the public opinion rests on the assumption of a constant increase in crime rates met by no efficient public response, thus reducing public confidence and reinforcing the perception of certain types of [[victimization]] as symbol of the state of public safety/security affairs in general.<ref>Ibid., p. 11.</ref>
  
−  
−  
−
==Further Information==
  
−
* [[Economic effects of anti-crime security measures#Designing Out Crime|The economic impact of designing out crime]];
  
−
* The [http://www.rbkc.gov.uk/pdf/designingoutcrime_spd.pdf Designing Out Crime Supplementary Planning Document];
  
−
* [http://www.designingoutcrime.com/ Designing Out Crime (DOC) research centre] (NSW Department of Attorney General and Justice, in partnership with the University of Technology Sydney);
  
−
* [http://www.designoutcrime.org/ Design Out Crime Research Centre (AU)];
  
−
* [http://www.doca.org.uk/ Designing Out Crime Association];
  
−
* The [http://www.designcouncil.org.uk/our-work/challenges/security/design-out-crime/ Design Council and the Home Office’s Design and Technology Alliance Against Crime]; the [http://www.designcouncil.org.uk/our-work/challenges/Security/Design-out-crime/Design-out-crime-guide/ Designers' Guide]; and the [http://www.designoutcrime.org.uk/toolkit/Design Out Crime Toolkit];
  
−
* [http://www.doca.org.uk// The Crime Prevention Website];
  
−
* [http://www.cpted.net/ The International CPTED (Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design) Association]
  
   
  +
See also [[ethics aspects]].
   
  +
==Links and further Information==
  +
*To understand economic effects of designing out crime see [[Economic effects of anti-crime security measures]].
  +
*The [http://www.rbkc.gov.uk/pdf/designingoutcrime_spd.pdf Designing Out Crime Supplementary Planning Document] provides guidance for developers and planners how to incorporate the principles of designing out crime in all development proposals.
  +
*[http://www.designingoutcrime.com/ The Australian Designing Out Crime (DOC) research centre] (NSW Department of Attorney General and Justice, in partnership with the University of Technology Sydney) applies a ‘Design Thinking’ approach and is a recognised as a leader in innovative, creative and socially responsive design. DOC explores problems to obtain an in-depth understanding of factors contributing to crime in specific problem situations.
  +
*A platform for various activities, initiatives and knowledge/tool exchange is offered by the [http://www.designoutcrime.org/ Design Out Crime Research Centre (AU)].
  +
*[http://www.doca.org.uk/ DOCA Designing Out Crime Association] (UK) provides a forum on the concept of designing out crime to promote safer communities and reduce anti-social behaviour.
  +
*A project called [http://www.designcouncil.org.uk/our-work/challenges/security/design-out-crime/ “Design out Crime”] highlights design role and demonstrates how design can help to prevent crime. It provides the [http://www.designcouncil.org.uk/our-work/challenges/Security/Design-out-crime/Design-out-crime-guide/ Designers' Guide] for free download.
  +
*Information and support for local organisations, practitioners, and communities how to create safer communities and environments can be found on the [http://www.cpted.net/ International CPTED (Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design) Association].
   
 
{{references}}
  
{{references}}
−  
−  
−
= MAP =
  
−  
−
check spelling of content name
  
−  
−
<websiteFrame>
  
−  
−
website=http://securipedia.eu/cool/index.php?wiki=securipedia.eu&concept=%22designing_out%22_approach
  
−  
−
height=1023
  
−  
−
width=100%
  
−  
−
border=0
  
−  
−
scroll=auto
  
−  
−
align=middle
  
−  
−
</websiteFrame>
  
−  
−  
−  
−
<headertabs/>
  

Latest revision as of 14:20, 19 November 2013

The designing out approach aims to reduce crime and terrorism risk by appropriately shaped built infrastructure. By designing out, the urban environment becomes less attractive as a working ground for criminals and terrorists. Desigining out is one of several methodes of environmental design to realise crime prevention by design.

The approach to designing out assumes that certain types and locations of urban space are significantly more attractive to perpetrators than others, mainly for social and cultural reasons (cf. Geason, Wilson 1989)[1]. Therefore, the choice of urban targets is seen as mainly driven by factors such as maximum visibility of casualties, vulnerable and actually harmed people, maximum media exposure and potential for vast spread of fear among the wider population.

Urban planning centred on designing out helps increase urban security efficiently. It aims for reducing criminal behaviour, terrorist actions and anti-social behaviour. A converse concept is designing in.

Security related aspects and benefits

  • Design can impact (criminal/terrorist) behaviour in a positive or negative way.
  • Designing out can mitigate, lessen or even prohibit criminal or terrorist acts.
  • Designing out reduces crime and terrorist risks and consequences.
  • Designing out decreases vulnerability and increases resilience.

Approaches how to address it

  • Consider designing out principles (e.g. HM Government[1])
  • Get familiar with designing out initiatives (e.g. International CPTED Association[2])
  • Get familiar with general design aspects and structural / material aspects
  • Integrate considerations on response and emergency measures in the planning process

Designing out principles for urban planning

Structural principles

Practical designing out principles limit the damage of terrorist attacks by specific environmental design of built infrastructure. These principles include structural/material aspects such as:

  • Access control;
  • Stand off distances, to keep people and bomber vehicles away from targets;
  • Laminated glass;
  • Framed structures;
  • Bombshelter areas, etc.

Social/psychological principles

General design aspects with mainly psychological designing out effects include the following [2]

  • Orientation;
  • Good overview;
  • Visibility;
  • Lighting (physical surveillance);
  • Video installations (formal/organised surveillance);
  • Accessibility (access control);
  • Vibrant urban environment and multiple social functions;
  • Responsibility;
  • Natural/informal surveillance ("Eyes on the Street"):
  • Avoiding conflicts;
  • Ensuring maintenance;
  • Etc.

For sustainable implementation of “designing out”, following factors need to be considered throughout the planning process[3]

  1. Integration of citizens through communication and participation methods;
  2. Willingness of the participants to be part of a security partnership;
  3. Decentralisation and localisation;
  4. Commitment.

Critics

Designing out concepts can help reducing fear of crime, but at the same time it can soon raise ethical questions, for example by separating out different ‘types of people’. For example, certain types architectures (often together with commercial policing by private companies) offer middle-class citizens new types of privacy and crime free zones in public commercial malls and places. This usually separates out other ethical groups.[4]

See also ethics aspects.

Links and further Information

Footnotes and references

  1. ↑ Geason S., Wilson P. R.: Designing out Crime. Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design. Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology, 1989. Retrieved from: http://www.aic.gov.au/documents/9/E/8/%7B9E810185-7D54-4480-8EEC-D92D84C3FB36%7Dcpted.pdf [last access: 2011-11-05].
  2. ↑ Cf. "PluS Initial Report" by LKA NI 2010 LKA NI (eds.): PluS Initial Report Planning Urban Security. Hannover: Landeskriminalamt Niedersachsen, 2010. Retrieved from: http://www.plus-eu.com/docs/PLUS-Initial-Report-online.pdf [last access: 2012-05-23].
  3. ↑ Cf. "PluS Initial Report" by LKA NI 2010 LKA NI (eds.): PluS Initial Report Planning Urban Security. Hannover: Landeskriminalamt Niedersachsen, 2010. Retrieved from: http://www.plus-eu.com/docs/PLUS-Initial-Report-online.pdf [last access: 2012-05-23].
  4. ↑ Garland D.: The Culture of Control: Crime and Social Order in Contemporary Society. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 2001, 6-11.
Retrieved from "https://securipedia.eu/index.php?title=Designing_out&oldid=13379"