Outdoor Lighting and Crime - Amper

8. DISCUSSION
8.1 FACTS SHOULD DISPLACE BELIEFS AND GUIDE ACTIONS
Light, goodness and security on the one hand and darkness, evil and danger on the other are
deeply ingrained in human consciousness and culture. ‘Let there be light’, ‘lighten our
darkness’, ‘shining example’, ‘dark deeds’, ‘black arts’ and ‘cover of darkness’ are some of
the phrases or concepts common to otherwise disparate cultures. It is no wonder that plentiful
outdoor light is so often assumed to be the answer to social problems and crime at night. So
deep is the belief that it biases lay assessments of the pros and cons of light or more light in
particular cases. Some scientists have even been affected in this way. At present, to question
the value of a lighting ‘improvement’ is often to invite ridicule. Obtrusive lighting
complaints are too readily ignored or scoffed at by the lighting perpetrators and authorities as
a sign of eccentricity, or actions of troublemakers.
This must change to the extent that facts and rational thought displace beliefs and primitive
fears in dealing with light-related problems. Relevant facts need to be established from the
available evidence, and made readily accessible to scrutiny.
There still seems much to be learnt from the crime-reducing effects of the power disruptions
in Auckland, New York and elsewhere. By comparison with the accounts of the 1977 New
York event, the Auckland information is remarkably sparse and scattered. Understandably,
New Zealanders may well prefer the event to be forgotten altogether but its full lessons need
to be revealed for their global as well as local value. To begin with, it is suggested that all
available archival material needs to be collected and made readily accessible online, as has
already happened for the New York events.
Relevant circumstances of other lighting and power failures also need to be collected and
published, together with crime details and any photometric data. Before and after time series
data or other appropriate control data could be valuable.
8.2 CAPS AND REDUCTIONS FOR OUTDOOR LIGHTING
Environmental grounds already appear sufficient to justify interruption and reversal of the
unsustainable growth of outdoor lighting. If the findings of this study pass scrutiny, the case
for reduction becomes even stronger. Reduction factors of multiple orders of magnitude may
need to be applied to the worst excesses in commercial lighting, and city-wide overall
reductions of up to fifty are arguable on the basis of the disparities in Table 3 and disparities
between and within Tables 5 to 9.
In the meantime, it would appear justifiable to put all new or increased outdoor lighting
installations on hold indefinitely, other than minimal lighting that can be justified on mobility
safety and traffic safety grounds alone. Even then, compensatory reductions should be
actioned elsewhere as a rigid precondition. Existing decorative lighting and illuminated
advertising would be first choice as a source of compensatory reductions. Windows in all
new buildings will need to be fitted with heavy drapes or shutters that must be used to prevent
the escape of room lighting at night, and the practice would need to be extended to existing
buildings in due course. This might greatly reduce the demand for existing and new tall office
and apartment buildings, but those responsible for promotion of this type of infrastructure in
121