Difference between revisions of "Social aspects"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
To be able to understand how current or future security measures have an effect on the social function we need first to know what is understood by social functions of urban object in particular and of the urban environment in general. Secondly, we need to know what the mechanisms are through which safety measurements effect, positively or negatively, the social functions. |
To be able to understand how current or future security measures have an effect on the social function we need first to know what is understood by social functions of urban object in particular and of the urban environment in general. Secondly, we need to know what the mechanisms are through which safety measurements effect, positively or negatively, the social functions. |
||
| ⚫ | |||
To understand the concept of social functions we need to keep in mind that mobility, economic and safety are of course also social in nature. But to facilitate sense making, we have distinguished social functions as a separate category, which will be described from a sociological and a psychological perspective. |
To understand the concept of social functions we need to keep in mind that mobility, economic and safety are of course also social in nature. But to facilitate sense making, we have distinguished social functions as a separate category, which will be described from a sociological and a psychological perspective. |
||
| + | ====General, sociological perspective==== |
||
| ⚫ | |||
| − | While security aspects have only recently figured more prominently in urban planning, much of that planning has rather direct effects on citizens’ security. For example, best practices of design for security <ref>E.g., http://www.designforsecurity.org/about/crime-previention-through-environmental-design, by Greater Manchester Police. </ref> acknowledge that tactical design needs to be combined with other methods of crime prevention, such as social and community-based strategies. |
||
| − | |||
| − | Identification of foundations and practical methods to integrate social and culture aspects in the VITRUV urban planning tool will facilitate the consideration of multiple threats and vulnerabilities in the context of urban planning. This will help to implement a [[resilience]]-enhancing [[comprehensive approach]] to urban security. |
||
| − | |||
| − | Social aspects are citizen-related aspects, and security in urban space is societal security. That given, citizens should always be part of security and related considerations in urban planning since citizens are the ultimate end-users. However, it is not easy to address citizens by built infrastructure in order – for example – to influence their behaviour using that infrastructure. The reason for this is that – among other things due to culture aspects – citizens ‘read’ built urban environment in different ways: One central tenet in [[environmental psychology]] is that meaning intentionally embodied in built environment is not always decoded by citizens according to that intention. |
||
| − | |||
| − | Conversely, urban structure has an impact on social processes, and this needs to be addressed in strategic urban planning as far as security considerations are concerned. Design features of urban infrastructure influence citizens’ perception of the risk that infrastructure is at, or that it is assumed to mitigate or prevent. Design features also influence the general perception of criticality of that infrastructure. |
||
| − | |||
| − | Secure environments also facilitate the meeting of social needs by help of built infrastructure. Commonly, societal needs are addressed in [[is goal for::urban planning]] (such as need for recreation area, need for public transport improvement, need for bike routes, need for social gathering places and culture resources, special needs of vulnerable groups (such as children, disabled, elderly etc.). Many of them have security/safety relevance. Examples include: |
||
| − | # Lighting of or video installation at urban spaces, bus stops, etc., that helps reducing crime rates, robberies, sexual harassment etc. |
||
| − | # According standardised constructions to avoid chemical leaching from/around industrial sites and to avoid substance harassment and environmental pollution; |
||
| − | # According physical protection of urban rivers and channels (also sewage) to avoid flooding/overflowing; |
||
| − | # Child friendly construction norms and standards for schools and preschools to avoid injuries (e.g. safety areas near streets); |
||
| − | # Additional parking houses/garages to provide for increased drivers’ needs – improvement of ventilation systems to control exhaust fumes and avoid health problems; |
||
| − | # Counter-terrorism design measures to avoid terrorist attempts; |
||
| − | # Etc. |
||
| − | |||
| − | A further social aspect to consider is that different security issues have different effects on citizens’ perception of security. Security culture research has shown that social fear of crime typically reduces personal fear of crime. <ref>http://www.cpsi-fp7.eu/cpsi_papers.htm [WP/D4.4; to be further specified]:</ref> A conclusion relevant for urban planning is that a predominance of security issues located at social level will lead to less concerns and demands of the citizens regarding design measures at more individual levels, such as for example directed against pickpocketing or vehicle theft. |
||
| − | |||
| − | Practical addressing of social aspects and aspects of [[is goal for::Security_culture|security culture]] in security-related urban planning can best be accomplished by appropriately involving citizens, based on a set of introduced methods of [[can be done by::Citizen_participation|citizen participation]]. |
||
====Entry points for social aspects in security-related urban planning==== |
====Entry points for social aspects in security-related urban planning==== |
||
Revision as of 10:51, 20 November 2013
In this Securipedia page, the focus is on the social functions of urban objects in an urban environment. In the graphic of the Securipedia overall structure, the assumption is depicted that (potential) measures that mitigate (potential) threats have impact on the social functions of urban objects, because of the consequences for the design and accessibility of the objects and the urban environment in general.
[insert picture]
To be able to understand how current or future security measures have an effect on the social function we need first to know what is understood by social functions of urban object in particular and of the urban environment in general. Secondly, we need to know what the mechanisms are through which safety measurements effect, positively or negatively, the social functions.
Contents
Description
To understand the concept of social functions we need to keep in mind that mobility, economic and safety are of course also social in nature. But to facilitate sense making, we have distinguished social functions as a separate category, which will be described from a sociological and a psychological perspective.
General, sociological perspective
- Analytical perspectives
- Critical infrastructure: Types of impact of critical infrastructure failure on citizens and society
- Citizen acceptance aspects, including practical aspects of addressing them
- Security as a public good
- Citizen participation
- Community safety approach
- Cooperative Discourse
- Social risk perception and communication of risk (risk perception mechanisms and parts of page on risk)
- Failure of critical services: Societal aspects
- Critical infrastructure: Types of impact of critical infrastructure failure on citizens and society
- Perception of (in)security
- Local open dialogue
- Experimental participation method
Culture aspects
Design features of urban infrastructure influence citizens’ perception of the risk that infrastructure is at, or that it is assumed to mitigate or prevent. Design features also influence the general perception of criticality of that infrastructure. These two are important aspects of security culture. While urban sociology and socially concerned urban planning have gained much insight on environments such as pleasant calming or exciting[1] secure environments have been addressed to a far lesser extent. But there are several further reasons why it is important to consider culture aspects in urban planning:
- First, culture determines the behaviour and perception of people and thus determines the (perceived) security.
- Second, cultural behaviour can be directed by the surroundings, and thus by the result of urban planning.
- Third, the framework for urban planning is also to some extent culturally determined: Different perceptions and disputes about risk and security can be linked to competing worldviews, as they are paramount in multicultural cities: Conceptions of risk, security and solutions to security problems vary according to the organisation of political and social relations.
- Overview of culture aspects
- Security culture
- Civic culture
- Community safety approach
- Cultural criminology
- Social risk perception and communication of risk (risk perception mechanisms and parts of page on risk)
- Ecological perspective
- Failure of critical services: Societal aspects
- Perception of (in)security and risks
Footnotes and references
- ↑ Cf. Nasar J. L.: Environmental Psychology and Urban Design in: Banerjee, T. Loukaitou-Sideris, A. (eds.): Companion to Urban Design. London/New York: Routledge, 2001, 162-174 (168).
