Difference between revisions of "Perception of (in)security and risks"
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
[[Category:Safety]][[Category:Social]] |
[[Category:Safety]][[Category:Social]] |
||
+ | '''Perception of (in)security and risks''' depends on [[Risk perception mechanisms|general psychological mechanisms]] but also on cultural and social factors. Risk is never an objective figure but always "negotiated" or "constructed" within society, based on cultural backgrounds. |
||
− | '''Perception of (in)security/risks''' is 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 organisation of political and social relations. |
||
+ | ==Relevance for security-related urban planning== |
||
− | *Risk is always selected from within a society, based on cultural backgrounds. |
||
⚫ | Only focusing on objective risk reduction is not enough in security-related urban planning. 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.''"<ref>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.</ref> Appropriate [[risk communication]] that accompanies urban planning can help reduce the gap between perceived/felt and factual risk/security. Moreover, perception of security and risks is often 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. |
||
− | *Risk is considered a ‘social construct’ and cannot be assessed against an ‘objective’ risk. |
||
⚫ | |||
− | *Optimised [[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. |
||
⚫ | |||
− | ==Security related aspects and benefits== |
||
− | * 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 behaviour 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. |
||
− | |||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | |||
− | * Consider dimensions impacting citizens security perceptions in urban places (see below); |
||
− | * Consider relevant public [[security culture|security cultures]] on both the level of government and the level of citizens; |
||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | |||
− | |||
⚫ | |||
{| class="wikitable" |
{| class="wikitable" |
||
|- |
|- |
||
Line 76: | Line 52: | ||
*Each step of the urban planning process should consider aspects of identity and image of urban areas. |
*Each step of the urban planning process should consider aspects of identity and image of urban areas. |
||
|} |
|} |
||
+ | |||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | |||
==Related subjects== |
==Related subjects== |
Revision as of 23:50, 4 February 2013
Perception of (in)security and risks depends on general psychological mechanisms but also on cultural and social factors. Risk is never an objective figure but always "negotiated" or "constructed" within society, based on cultural backgrounds.
Contents
Only focusing on objective risk reduction is not enough in security-related urban planning. 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] Appropriate risk communication that accompanies urban planning can help reduce the gap between perceived/felt and factual risk/security. Moreover, perception of security and risks is often 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.
Dimensions impacting citizens' perception of security of 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
|
Approaches how to address it
- Consider risk perception mechanisms;
- 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 - use citizen participation methods, in particular local open dialogue methods and participatory diagnosis;
- 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.
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.