Perception of (in)security and risks

Perception of (in)security/risks

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 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.”
• 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.

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 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 - usecitizen participation or local open dialogue methods);
• 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 Usage patterns of an urban area and related needs of the user (including spaces); Facilitation of usage possibilities for different types of people (integrative spaces); Allowance of communication through the design of public spaces (meeting points). Marginalized people Marginalized people use public space as recreation area, and thus, they also rely on it; The usage of public space should be encouraged and supported by planning toilets, banks etc.; Creation roofed areas (sheltered installations) with no specific function. Local experts Local experts, like policeman or social workers of a public place, can easily identify and broach (social) issues of the area and therefore represent an important source of information and for urban planners; In each planning step, urban planners should involve interdisciplinary teams, consisting of planners and local experts.
Objects	Light/Lighting Public places should be designed in areas with different illumination types; In order to avoid “hot spots of fear”, the planning of main streets, parks, pedestrian underpasses, subways etc. should consider powerful lighting and clear visible areas. Visibility/overviewability and vitalization Urban planners should use more glazed materials to facilitate the visibility and an easy overview of public places; Improvement of social security by using robust and sustainable materials. Plants/maintenance of green areas Consideration of esthetic and functional aspects of green areas; Avoidance of planning green tunnels and green areas with no visibility and clear overview. Environmental pollution Environmental pollution increases the citizens perception of insecurity on public spaces. Therefore urban planners should promote longlasting and sustainable materials; Effective and user-oriented urban planning focuses also on reducing environmental pollution (e.g. waste bins, free toilets).
Dynamic elements	Good orientation/overview of public spaces Urban planning should concentrate on the overview of urban areas for the purpose of orientation; Usage of a clear guidance system for important functional areas, like subway, stations of public transports or pedestrian underpasses;. Introduction of adequate usage concepts for different mobility patterns (e.g. pedestrian, bicycle); Important target points/destinations should be visible from a longer distance. Traffic speed and circulation Introduction of adequate usage concepts for different traffic patterns (e.g. bicycle, public transports); Concentration both on functional and esthetic aspects of public spaces allow fostering the possibility of “shared space” in order to enable urban and social skills (competences). Public places as meeting points The urban planning process should provide concepts for different comfortable and “cozy” public spaces, where people living in the same urban area can spend time together, get to know each other etc.: familiar encounters in the residential area increase the subjective sense of security
Image/Identity of places	Image/Identity In this context, image means the reputation of a place; eanwhile identity is characterized by the history and usage of it. It is very important that urban planners consider these two aspects to create secure and agreeable rehabilitation of places. Diverse actions of public participation helps to integrate elements of identity and image of a public space in the urban planning process; Each step of the urban planning process should consider aspects of identity and image of urban areas.

Related subjects

• Risk communication
• Security culture
• Culture aspects

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/>