Security issue: Graffiti

Grafitti on a storefront in New York

Grafitti is the defacement of property by means of writing or drawings scribbled, scratched, or sprayed on a surface in a public place without the consent of the owner or person having custody or control.

Description

Motives for graffiti are various and the type of graffiti varies with the motives. A classification of types of graffiti with the associated features is presented in http://www.popcenter.org/problems/graffiti/. This classification is presented in the table below.

Types of Graffiti and Associated Motives
Type of Graffiti	Features	Motives
Gang	Gang name or symbol, including hand signs Gang member name(s) or nickname(s), or sometimes a roll-call listing of members Numbers. Distinctive, stylized alphabets. Key visible locations Enemy names and symbols, or allies' names	Mark turf Threaten violence Boast of achievements Honor the slain Insult/taunt other gangs
Common Tagger	High-volume, accessible locations High-visibility, hard-to-reach locations May be stylized but simple name or nickname tag or symbols. Tenacious (keep re-tagging).	Notoriety or prestige Defiance of authority.
Artistic Tagger	Colourful and complex pictures known as masterpieces or pieces.	Artistic Prestige or recognition.
Conventional Graffiti: Spontaneous	Sporadic episodes or isolated incidents.	Play Rite of passage Excitement, impulsive.
Conventional Graffiti: Malicious or Vindictive	Sporadic, isolated or systematic incidents.	Anger Boredom Resentment Failure Despair
Ideological	Offensive content or symbols Racial, ethnic or religious slurs Specific targets, such as synagogues. Highly legible Slogans.	Anger Hate Political Hostility Defiance

Contributing circumstances

Known circumstances to influence the likelihood or effect of graffiti, are presented in the table below:

Contributing Circumstance	Influence	Description
Shops in the area	Increases likelihood of being selected target	Retailing and manufacturing premises have a much greater chance of falling victim to vandalism than domestic premises.
Crowds	Increases level of aggression.	Vandalism is a form of aggression, and this is (amongst others) influenced by crowding.
Presence of adolescents.	Increases the number of potential offenders.	According to Tygert (1988) and Zweig and Ducey (1978), vandalism reaches its peak frequency in seventh grade, and then progressively decreases with each succeeding grade.
Vulnerable objects in area	Increases number of targets.	Public furniture with easy access which is easily damaged, especially if failing with spectacular effects (such as glass panes) are attractive targets for vandals.
High levels of vandalism in the vicinity.	Increases likelihood of targeting.	As is true for all forms of aggression, the single best predictor of future vandalistic behaviour is similar past behaviour. Having known vandals in the vicinity thus strongly increases the chance to fall victim to vandalism.
Low level of social monitoring.	Decreases level of social correction.	A decreased perceived risk of detection and correction decreases the perceived need for restraint of unwanted behaviour.
Low level of physical monitoring (e.g. cameras).	Decreases likelihood of detection.	This reduces the possibilities of intervening and increases the likelihood of the conflict escalating. Low levels of physical monitoring contributes to less enforcement of the law, which undermines other efforts to prevent assault and other crimes occurring.
Long reaction times or inadequate action of reaction force.	Decreases likelihood of apprehension	Untimely or inappropriate reactions to violence lead to a perception of little control, which will increase perceived risk for the public and decrease perceived risk for the perpetrators. Also, reducing the impact of an assault (by timely intervention) will also be impossoble and lead to greater effects of incidents.
Incompatible zonings.	Increases of the likelihood of conflict.	Incompatible zonings, and activities therein, can increase the likelihood of vulnerable groups and potential offenders meeting. The composition and compatibility of adjoining land uses should be sufficiently considered by urban planners.
High levels of unemployment	Increases likelihood of targeting	High levels of unemployment are associated with higher levels of vandalism.
Low levels of ownership	Decreases the inhibitions for committing the crime	Uncertainty of ownership can reduce responsibility and increase the likelihood of crime and anti-social behaviour going unchallenged.
Low levels of maintenance	Decreases the inhibitions for committing the crime	Studies showed that low levels of maintenance and aesthetic quality are associated with high rates of vandalism. Designing for easy maintenance and a (for the user) pleasing aesthetic appearance can therefore reduce the risk of vandalism.

• Other graffiti or deterioration
• Vulnerable objects
  • transportation systems
  • highly visible surfaces (also mobile targets, such as buses or trains!)
  • blank surfaces
  • light coloured surface
  • large and plain surfaces
  • reachable surfaces
• Absence of apparent ownership
• Poor lighting
• Little surveillance/oversight
• Close to gang activity
• Male youth

Impacts

Social impact

Known social impacts of "graffitism" include changing citizens perception of (in)security and fear of crime. This usually happens in a way that has an effect on the gap between "felt" and "factual" security, since individuals tend to make - correct or incorrect - reasoning on societal security as a whole based on immediate environmental clues. This is known as the "broken glass phenomenon".

Economic impact

Graffiti (as a form of vandalism) leads to considerable costs in both a direct (primary) and a indirect (secondary) way. Direct costs of graffiti come in the form of:

• Preventive costs in anticipation of graffiti as a form of vandalism (e.g. security measures, insurance);
• Material and immaterial costs as a consequence of graffiti (e.g. physical damage, clean up costs, repairs, medical costs, mental harm); and
• Responsive costs to graffiti (e.g. the costs of detection and prevention, prosecution, support trial, etc.).

In general, the (direct) costs to repair, replace, and clean up property defaced by graffiti are paid for by the communities, private property owners, small business and public agencies. Moreover, the presence of graffiti can trigger secondary economic impacts. Although most research studies conclude that criminal offences such as vandalism and graffiti can have a significant negative impact on real estate prices , there is still no real consensus on the extent of this impact. Moreover, graffiti vandalism can have a negative impact on local businesses (as consumers decide to shop in other places), and can lead to the potential loss of funding for community organisation, youth groups and school programs.

Measures

• Understanding what makes an urban area attractive for graffiti (some will seek out highly visible areas, large surfaces and surfaces at a height from the ground, etc)
• Promoting or creating alternative activities for youths (e.g. youth clubs)
• Encourage dialogue among community groups, residence groups and institutions
• Rapid cleaning
• Anti-graffiti coating
• Surveillance/reaction force
• Non flat, dark or colourful surfaces
• Controlling access to vulnerable surfaces
• Electronic detection
• Targeted development control policies

Urban planners need to be more conscious of changes in contemporary post modernist youth behaviour. Planning needs must be cognisant of both utility of place and changing behavioural patterns.

Reducing Rewards to Offenders
#	Response	How It Works	Works Best If...	Considerations
1	Detecting graffiti rapidly and routinely	Permits rapid removal	…locations are regularly monitored	Requires commitment and resources — efforts should not be piecemeal; can involve employees, police, citizens, hotlines, and other means
2	Removing graffiti rapidly	Reduces time graffiti is visible, thus thwarting offenders' objective of having graffiti be widely seen	…removal is very quick and consistent	Removal may be expensive, difficult and/or coercive (e.g., victims, as well as offenders, may be sanctioned)
Increasing the Risk of Detection
3	Increasing natural observation of graffiti-prone locations	Increases risk of detection	…graffiti occurs in low-visibility places	Efforts to improve lighting, reduce shrubbery and improve sight lines are most effective if the area is not isolated for long periods of time
4	Increasing formal observation of graffiti-prone locations	Increases risk of detection; information can aid investigations	…there are high- risk hot spots	Can use undercover personnel, other employees and electronic means; easily available; can be used on transit systems
5	Increasing electronic security	Increases risk of detection	…offenders are targeting large areas such as transit lots	Can be cost effective; information can aid investigations
6	Conducting publicity campaigns	Increases risk of detection	…information is widely disseminated, and risk of detection increases	May contribute to increased graffiti reports and extend deterrent effect
Increasing the Difficulty of Offending
7	Vandal-proofing graffiti-prone locations	Increases difficulty of applying graffiti (may also decrease graffiti visibility, reducing motives); some methods facilitate removal	…there are chronic graffiti locations	Can be expensive if done retroactively; offenders may change their methods or targets; may stimulate and challenge offenders; some measures, such as using grooved, slanted or heavily textured walls, or otherwise unappealing graffiti surfaces, can be very effective; may be unsightly
8	Controlling access to graffiti-prone locations	Makes it more difficult to access or vandalize properties	…property or operations can support design changes	May be expensive, but very effective; may best be incorporated into construction and planning designs; most effective if behaviour is also regulated, such as in apartment complexes or transit stations
9	Focusing on chronic offenders	Increases risk of detection of prolific graffiti offenders	…there is a small group of chronic offenders	Requires offender identification and follow-up
Responses With Limited Effectiveness
10	Controlling graffiti tools	Makes it more difficult for offenders to get paint or markers	…offenders are easily deterred, and merchants comply	Difficult to enforce; offenders can seek tools elsewhere; tools are easily accessed, transported and hidden
11	Channelling behaviour into more acceptable activities	Intended to provide creative outlets	…offenders are artistically motivated	Graffiti boards and walls can be placed in highly visible locations; they appear to attract little vandalism; they may not attract the target group
12	Providing alternative activities and services	Intended to engage and provide supervision to youth	….offenders are jobless, bored or unsupervised	Difficult to identify and involve chronic offenders; programs may be expensive.
13	Involving youth in developing programs	Intended to tap offenders' consciences and create ownership	…offenders are not highly invested in the graffiti lifestyle	Little deterrent effect for chronic offenders
14	Expanding applicable laws	Increases threat of punishment to deter offenders	…laws target particular problems	Can be time consuming; offenders believe they won't get caught, so they don't worry about punishment
15	Holding parents accountable	Involves parents in controlling offenders' behaviour	….offenders are juveniles	Offenders can often hide behaviour from parents; parents may have little control
16	Increasing sanctions for offenders	Raises the risks associated with graffiti	…combined with investigative enforcement activities	Because apprehension of offenders is low, may have little deterrent effect; sanctions should be applied systematically; requires collaboration with prosecutors and judges; can consist of fines, community service or loss of driver's license
17	Applying new technologies	Reduces motives, deflects or diverts offenders, or increases detection	…the technology fits the problem	May be expensive and require substantial adaptation or experimentation
18	Establishing juvenile curfews	Increases the risk of detection for certain offenders	…graffiti typically occurs late at night, and offenders are juveniles	Difficult to enforce
19	Warning offenders	Intended to increase fear of detection	…detection is increased, and consequences are unpleasant	Apprehension of offenders is low; warnings of dire consequences may not be effective