Difference between revisions of "Security"

From Securipedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
 
(33 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
 
[[Category:Threat]]
 
[[Category:Threat]]
[[File:ae.png|25px|right|This is a page providing background in a specific field of expertise]]'''Security''' is the degree or act of protection of persons or objects against [[is the opposite of::risk]] stemming from the threat type [[reduces::human intent]].
+
[[File:ae.png|25px|right|This is a page providing background in a specific field of expertise]]
  +
[[File:Ask security.jpg|250px|right]]
  +
  +
'''Security''' is the degree or act of protection of persons or objects against [[risk]] stemming from the threat type [[human intent]].
   
 
==Security in the urban environment==
 
==Security in the urban environment==
Security concerns harm done by persons by wilful action. As these actions are generally prohibited by law, these actions constitute [[reduces::crime|crimes]]. Security threats can therefore be classified by crime type.
+
Security concerns harm done by persons by wilful action. As these actions are generally prohibited by law, these actions constitute [[crime|crimes]]. Security threats can therefore be classified by crime type. The gravity of the crimes can range from fairly minor, such as pickpocketing, to very serious, such as terrorism. An exhaustive listing of all crime types distinguished in the various countries of Europe would not be useful, as this would encompass local regulations and crimes not relevant in an urban context. For this purpose, a categorisation of [[Security issues|criminal acts]] was developed.
   
== Crime categorisation ==
 
  +
The following security related topics are covered in Urban Securipedia:
The following classes of offences are used, or have been used, as legal terms of art:
 
* Offence against the person<ref name="ReferenceA">For example, by the [[Visiting Forces Act 1952]]</ref>
 
* Violent offence<ref name="ReferenceB">For example, by section 31(1) of the [[Criminal Justice Act 1991]], and by the [[Criminal Justice Act 2003]]</ref>
 
* Sexual offence<ref name="ReferenceB"/>
 
* Offence against property<ref name="ReferenceA"/>
 
   
An exhausite listing of all crime types distinguished in the various countries of Europe would not be useful, as this would encompass local regulations and crimes not relevant in an urban context. This is why we developed the categorisation of [[Security issues]], a listing of the crimes that are of prime concern to the urban planner.
 
  +
*[[Security threats|Threats]]
  +
*[[Security Vulnerability|Vulnerabilities]]
  +
*[[Measures]]
   
There is no uniform categorisation of crime used all over Europe. Rather, each country uses its own system to classify and record crime, but at a very generic level, the collected statistics are reported to a central European database, called eurostat yearly<ref>http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/crime/data/database</ref>. The crimes in this database are subdivided into:
 
  +
At present, these topics are only covered where relevant for VITRUV and PRoTECT.
* Homicide
 
* Violent crime
 
* Robbery
 
* Domestic burglary
 
* Vehicle theft
 
* Drug trafficking
 
   
The US statics, recorded by the Criminal Justice Information Services, a subdivision of the FBI, drill down to a much greater level of detail<ref>http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/</ref>, but use the highest level subdivision of 'violent crime' and 'property crime'.
 
  +
Urban Securipedia provides knowledge and tooling primarily intended for use by three types of stakeholders:
   
The UK crime statistics, recorded in the annual report 'Crime in England and Wales'<ref>https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/116435/hosb0812.pdf</ref>, uses still another categorisation of crimes, the highest subdivision of which is:
 
  +
*the urban planner, involved in the development and security of the urban environment
* Property crime
 
  +
*the event planner, involved in the organization and security of events in public space (against [[terrorism]]) such as an event organiser, but could also be a municipality
* Drug offences
 
  +
*the local security practitioners such as law enforcement agencies or municipalities, involved in securing urban environments (locally) with other stakeholder against crimes (specifically terrorism)
* Other miscellaneous offences
 
   
==Occurence of crime==
 
  +
The information contained within Urban Securipedia is however useful for many other types of stakeholders with security challenges or researchers in this field.
[[File:crimestatseu.png|thumb|right|400px|'''Crimetype statistics in the EU''']]An indication of the relative size of these crime types and their development through the years is given in the figure <ref>Derived from [http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/product?code=crim_gen&language=en&mode=view Eurostat crime statistics database] "Crim_gen"</ref>.
 
  +
  +
===Security for the urban planner===
  +
As the built environment can influence social behaviour, including criminal behaviour, the urban design can influence the (absolute and perceived) level of safety and security of the future residents. Three elements that are conductive for crimes to take place<ref name="plus" /> are:
  +
  +
*a motivated offender
  +
*a suitable goal or victim and
  +
*suitable opportunity (such as an absence of witnesses).
  +
  +
The urban environment and consequently, urban planning, can influence the likelihood of each of these elements being present. For example, the presence of offenders and potential victims (and particularly the meeting of the two) can be potentially influenced by a careful design of traffic flows and opportunities can be minimized by optimizing surveilability and minimizing deserted areas.
  +
  +
Of course, to effectively address crime by urban design, one needs to know the effect urban design can have on crime and underlying causes and what urban design instruments can be used to influence these effects. Urban Securipedia aims to support the urban planner in exactly this; it provides both instruments that can be incorporated in the urban planning and design process and insight in the effects the urban environment will have (both with or without implementation of these instruments) on crime. The effects of these instruments on criminals are predictable by sake of the actions of criminals being -to a large degree- rational and predictable:
  +
  +
*Offenders are very rational about maximising their opportunities. They weigh up the amount of effort they would need to make to commit a criminal act compared with the profits they would make from the crime. The immediate situation is the sum of the information from the environment which a motivated offender collects in order to make his/her decision before committing a crime<ref name="plus">[http://www.plus-eu.com/downloads/Final-Report_english-german.pdf Plus consortium, ''Final report'', Landeskriminalamt Niedersachsen, Zentralstelle Prävention, June 2012]</ref>.
  +
*Crime, and particularly violent crime, is the consequence of social conflicts that can escalate where there are corresponding external situational conditions: for example, long waiting time in conditions such as heat, noise, provocations, crowds in small spaces, etc., lead in the end to stress situations which then cause conflicts<ref>Wortley, Richard; ''Situational Precipitators of Crime'', In: Wortley Richard / Mazerolle Lorraine (Hrsg.), Environmental Criminology and Crime Analysis. Willan. Collumpton and Portland, 2008.</ref>.
   
== Security as a public good ==
 
 
From the political and public administration point of view, security is often conceived of as a public good. This means in particular that
 
From the political and public administration point of view, security is often conceived of as a public good. This means in particular that
   
# it rests on commonly acquired values. Those values can be material (capital, infrastructure, utilities, etc.) or immaterial ([[Security culture|security culture]], sense of community, etc.)
+
#it rests on commonly acquired values. Those values can be material (capital, infrastructure, utilities, etc.) or immaterial ([[Security culture|security culture]], sense of community, etc.)
# it is commonly produced. This includes public-private partnerships as well as [[Citizen participation|citizen participation]] and ownership (see [[Civic culture|civic culture]]);
+
#it is commonly produced. This includes public-private partnerships as well as [[Citizen participation|citizen participation]] and ownership (see [[Civic culture|civic culture]]);
# nobody should be a priori exempt from its consumption.
+
#nobody should be a priori exempt from its consumption.
   
 
It is therefore important to reconcile the idea of security with that of [[Community safety|community]].<ref>I. Loader/N. Walker: Civilizing Security. Cambridge et al.: Cambridge University Press, 2007. </ref> This can be done, for example, by including the concept of [[Security culture|security culture]] into concepts for urban planning.
 
It is therefore important to reconcile the idea of security with that of [[Community safety|community]].<ref>I. Loader/N. Walker: Civilizing Security. Cambridge et al.: Cambridge University Press, 2007. </ref> This can be done, for example, by including the concept of [[Security culture|security culture]] into concepts for urban planning.
   
Critics have reprimanded any "clubbing of private security", which in their view contributes to the deconstruction of security as a public good, to the benefit of a short-sighted approach of mere physical risk reduction.<ref>T. Hope: Crime victimisation and inequality in risk society. In: R. Matthews/J. Pitts: Crime, Disorder and Community Safety. A New Agenda? London/New York: Routledge, 2001, p. 216.</ref> This includes scepticism of approaches to urban planning such as the [["designing out" approach]], as well as any production of security by use of exclusionary practices.<ref>G. Hughes: The Politics of Crime and Community. Basingstoke: Palgrave, 2007.</ref>
+
Critics have reprimanded any "clubbing of private security", which in their view contributes to the deconstruction of security as a public good, to the benefit of a short-sighted approach of mere physical risk reduction.<ref>T. Hope: Crime victimisation and inequality in risk society. In: R. Matthews/J. Pitts: Crime, Disorder and Community Safety. A New Agenda? London/New York: Routledge, 2001, p. 216.</ref> This includes scepticism of approaches to urban planning such as the [["designing out" approach]], as well as any production of security by use of exclusionary practices.<ref>G. Hughes: The Politics of Crime and Community. Basingstoke: Palgrave, 2007.</ref>
  +
  +
===Security for the event planner and local security practitioners===
  +
For decades, terrorism has been a reality in many European countries and a continuous threat to a great number of European cities. It seriously threatens the safety, the values of democratic states and the rights and liberties of citizens. Acts of terrorism bring about long-term negative effects for cities and high social costs. Not only from a financial, but also from a psychological point of view in the sense of an increased feeling of insecurity among locals and visitors<ref>Efus. (2005). Secucities: Cities against Terrorism-Training Local Representatives in Facing Terrorism. Last visited on 19-02-2019 : <nowiki>https://issuu.com/efus/docs/cities_against_terrorism</nowiki> </ref>.
  +
  +
As stated by the European Commission in the Action Plan to support the protection of public spaces, ''“local and regional authorities are also important stakeholders in the protection of public space”''. In light of this, local authorities responsible for the safety and security of their citizens must be aware of the vulnerabilities of their public spaces in order to be able to adopt appropriate measures to prevent and mitigate terrorist attacks and their consequences<ref>European Commission. (2017). Action Plan to support the protection of public spaces. Last visited on 19-02-2019: <nowiki>https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/sites/homeaffairs/files/what-we-do/policies/european-agenda-security/20171018_action_plan_to_improve_the_protection_of_public_spaces_en.pdf</nowiki>.</ref>.
  +
  +
An important stakeholder that concerns itself with the security of public areas is the event planner, who must take into account the possible risks and vulnerabilities when organising an event at a public venue. A second important category of stakeholders are local security practitioners, such as Law Enforcement Agencies (LEAs) or municipalities who are involved with public security in the urban environment in general (and in case of terrorist threats, most notably at potential [[soft targets]]) and who play an important role in the safeguarding of the public before, during and after an event. LEAs entail organisations such as the local, state or special police. Due to recent terrorist attacks in cities, often local governments (like municipalities) are also involved in the security and protection of public spaces against terrorism and work closely together with LEAs or event planners.
   
 
{{references}}
 
{{references}}

Latest revision as of 13:23, 21 April 2021

This is a page providing background in a specific field of expertise
Ask security.jpg

Security is the degree or act of protection of persons or objects against risk stemming from the threat type human intent.

Security in the urban environment

Security concerns harm done by persons by wilful action. As these actions are generally prohibited by law, these actions constitute crimes. Security threats can therefore be classified by crime type. The gravity of the crimes can range from fairly minor, such as pickpocketing, to very serious, such as terrorism. An exhaustive listing of all crime types distinguished in the various countries of Europe would not be useful, as this would encompass local regulations and crimes not relevant in an urban context. For this purpose, a categorisation of criminal acts was developed.

The following security related topics are covered in Urban Securipedia:

At present, these topics are only covered where relevant for VITRUV and PRoTECT.

Urban Securipedia provides knowledge and tooling primarily intended for use by three types of stakeholders:

  • the urban planner, involved in the development and security of the urban environment
  • the event planner, involved in the organization and security of events in public space (against terrorism) such as an event organiser, but could also be a municipality
  • the local security practitioners such as law enforcement agencies or municipalities, involved in securing urban environments (locally) with other stakeholder against crimes (specifically terrorism)

The information contained within Urban Securipedia is however useful for many other types of stakeholders with security challenges or researchers in this field.

Security for the urban planner

As the built environment can influence social behaviour, including criminal behaviour, the urban design can influence the (absolute and perceived) level of safety and security of the future residents. Three elements that are conductive for crimes to take place[1] are:

  • a motivated offender
  • a suitable goal or victim and
  • suitable opportunity (such as an absence of witnesses).

The urban environment and consequently, urban planning, can influence the likelihood of each of these elements being present. For example, the presence of offenders and potential victims (and particularly the meeting of the two) can be potentially influenced by a careful design of traffic flows and opportunities can be minimized by optimizing surveilability and minimizing deserted areas.

Of course, to effectively address crime by urban design, one needs to know the effect urban design can have on crime and underlying causes and what urban design instruments can be used to influence these effects. Urban Securipedia aims to support the urban planner in exactly this; it provides both instruments that can be incorporated in the urban planning and design process and insight in the effects the urban environment will have (both with or without implementation of these instruments) on crime. The effects of these instruments on criminals are predictable by sake of the actions of criminals being -to a large degree- rational and predictable:

  • Offenders are very rational about maximising their opportunities. They weigh up the amount of effort they would need to make to commit a criminal act compared with the profits they would make from the crime. The immediate situation is the sum of the information from the environment which a motivated offender collects in order to make his/her decision before committing a crime[1].
  • Crime, and particularly violent crime, is the consequence of social conflicts that can escalate where there are corresponding external situational conditions: for example, long waiting time in conditions such as heat, noise, provocations, crowds in small spaces, etc., lead in the end to stress situations which then cause conflicts[2].

From the political and public administration point of view, security is often conceived of as a public good. This means in particular that

  1. it rests on commonly acquired values. Those values can be material (capital, infrastructure, utilities, etc.) or immaterial (security culture, sense of community, etc.)
  2. it is commonly produced. This includes public-private partnerships as well as citizen participation and ownership (see civic culture);
  3. nobody should be a priori exempt from its consumption.

It is therefore important to reconcile the idea of security with that of community.[3] This can be done, for example, by including the concept of security culture into concepts for urban planning.

Critics have reprimanded any "clubbing of private security", which in their view contributes to the deconstruction of security as a public good, to the benefit of a short-sighted approach of mere physical risk reduction.[4] This includes scepticism of approaches to urban planning such as the "designing out" approach, as well as any production of security by use of exclusionary practices.[5]

Security for the event planner and local security practitioners

For decades, terrorism has been a reality in many European countries and a continuous threat to a great number of European cities. It seriously threatens the safety, the values of democratic states and the rights and liberties of citizens. Acts of terrorism bring about long-term negative effects for cities and high social costs. Not only from a financial, but also from a psychological point of view in the sense of an increased feeling of insecurity among locals and visitors[6].

As stated by the European Commission in the Action Plan to support the protection of public spaces, “local and regional authorities are also important stakeholders in the protection of public space”. In light of this, local authorities responsible for the safety and security of their citizens must be aware of the vulnerabilities of their public spaces in order to be able to adopt appropriate measures to prevent and mitigate terrorist attacks and their consequences[7].

An important stakeholder that concerns itself with the security of public areas is the event planner, who must take into account the possible risks and vulnerabilities when organising an event at a public venue. A second important category of stakeholders are local security practitioners, such as Law Enforcement Agencies (LEAs) or municipalities who are involved with public security in the urban environment in general (and in case of terrorist threats, most notably at potential soft targets) and who play an important role in the safeguarding of the public before, during and after an event. LEAs entail organisations such as the local, state or special police. Due to recent terrorist attacks in cities, often local governments (like municipalities) are also involved in the security and protection of public spaces against terrorism and work closely together with LEAs or event planners.

Footnotes and references

  1. 1.0 1.1 Plus consortium, Final report, Landeskriminalamt Niedersachsen, Zentralstelle Prävention, June 2012
  2. Wortley, Richard; Situational Precipitators of Crime, In: Wortley Richard / Mazerolle Lorraine (Hrsg.), Environmental Criminology and Crime Analysis. Willan. Collumpton and Portland, 2008.
  3. I. Loader/N. Walker: Civilizing Security. Cambridge et al.: Cambridge University Press, 2007.
  4. T. Hope: Crime victimisation and inequality in risk society. In: R. Matthews/J. Pitts: Crime, Disorder and Community Safety. A New Agenda? London/New York: Routledge, 2001, p. 216.
  5. G. Hughes: The Politics of Crime and Community. Basingstoke: Palgrave, 2007.
  6. Efus. (2005). Secucities: Cities against Terrorism-Training Local Representatives in Facing Terrorism. Last visited on 19-02-2019 : https://issuu.com/efus/docs/cities_against_terrorism
  7. European Commission. (2017). Action Plan to support the protection of public spaces. Last visited on 19-02-2019: https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/sites/homeaffairs/files/what-we-do/policies/european-agenda-security/20171018_action_plan_to_improve_the_protection_of_public_spaces_en.pdf.