Difference between revisions of "Perception of (in)security and risks"
Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
[[Category:Social]] |
[[Category:Social]] |
||
=Perception of (in)security/risks= |
=Perception of (in)security/risks= |
||
− | '''Perception and perceived (in)security/risks'' are strongly determined by culture, and by social and cultural values. Different perceptions and disputes about [[risk]] and [[security]] can be linked to competing worldviews: Conceptions of risk, security and solutions to security problems vary according to the organization of political and social relations. |
+ | '''Perception and perceived (in)security/risks''' are strongly determined by culture, and by social and cultural values. Different perceptions and disputes about [[risk]] and [[security]] can be linked to competing worldviews: Conceptions of risk, security and solutions to security problems vary according to the organization of political and social relations. |
*Risk is always selected from within a society, based on cultural backgrounds. |
*Risk is always selected from within a society, based on cultural backgrounds. |
Revision as of 18:19, 17 October 2012
Contents
Perception of (in)security/risks
Perception and perceived (in)security/risks are strongly determined by culture, and by social and cultural values. Different perceptions and disputes about risk and security can be linked to competing worldviews: Conceptions of risk, security and solutions to security problems vary according to the organization of political and social relations.
- Risk is always selected from within a society, based on cultural backgrounds.
- Risk is considered a ‘social construct’ and cannot be assessed against an ‘objective’ risk.
- Risk information and design features of urban infrastructure influence citizens’ perception of the risk that infrastructure is at: “[…]the perception of insecurity in cities depends largely upon the substantial amount and constant flow of information that urban residents receive from many sources.”[1]
- Optimized risk communication can help reduce the gap between perceived/felt and ‘factual’ risk/security.
- Perception of security and risks is gender-dependent which leads to different urban protection needs. Understanding the various situations and individual needs should inform all aspects of urban planning and management.
- Optimized risk communication can help reduce the gap between perceived/felt and ‘factual’ risk/security
- Citizens' perception is largely independent from objective risk. Only focusing on objective risk reduction will not prevent problems in perceived risks.
- Usually there is a gap between subjective (perceived or felt) risks and objective (factual) risks. This influences individual and public behaviour and response.
- Technical/technological only solutions will not succeed in risk reduction. Risk is also impacted by social behavior which again results from social perception.
- Including gender-related and group-specific differences in perception and views on risks and security allows for specific responds. This helps to decrease specific risk situations and increase security.
- Unperceived risks remain unanswered. However, perception of risks allows for risk response and mitigative action. This is the basis for a common security culture.
- Different aspects of urban dynamics (e.g. pedestrians, bicycle riders, public transport) are an important part of city life and can therefore influence the perception of (in-)security in urban areas.
Approaches how to address it
- Consider risk perception mechanisms;
- Consider dimensions impacting citizens security perceptions in urban places (see below);
- Consider relevant public security cultures on both the level of government and the level of citizens;
- Base security design and measures on citizens’ perception of insecurity, feeling of vulnerability and acceptance of technological solutions for security problems;
- Inform citizens on risks of urban spaces/places before and after planning implementations;
- Inform citizens on specific structural, design and material choices (see: designing in and designing out);
- Involve citizens in planning decisions and processes to consider their views and requests (citizen participation);
- Consider gender and group specific risk views and security associations;
- Adapt planning decisions according to citizens views and adopt specific requests;
- Compensate gaps in risk perception vs. factual risks by adequate risk communication;
- Planning tools aiming at increasing urban resilience should be sensitive to the social context to which they are applied.
Dimensions impacting citizens security perception in urban places
Dimensions | Aspects to consider in urban planning |
---|---|
People | Diversity
Marginalized people
Local experts
|
Objects | Light/Lighting
Visibility/overviewability and vitalization
Plants/maintenance of green areas
Environmental pollution
|
Dynamic elements | Good orientation/overview of public spaces
Traffic speed and circulation
Public places as meeting points
|
Image/Identity of places | Image/Identity
|
Related subjects
Footnotes and references
- ↑ United Nations Human Settlements Programme (UN-HABITAT (2007a): Enhancing urban safety and security. London: Earthscan. Retrieved from: http://www.unhabitat.org/pmss/listItemDetails.aspx?publicationID=2432 [last access: 2012-05-23]:19.
MAP
<websiteFrame>
website=http://securipedia.eu/cool/index.php?wiki=securipedia.eu&concept=Perception_of_(in)security
height=1023
width=100%
border=0
scroll=auto
align=middle
</websiteFrame>
<headertabs/>