outdoor lighting and crime, part 1 - Astronomical Society of Victoria

More documents

Recommendations

Info

9.4 ASSESSMENT OF REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS Where separate scientific experiments give differing results for a particular quantity, the mean of pooled results generally provides a more accurate estimate. A formal review and meta-analysis can usually do even better by rejecting poorly conducted experiments and weighting the results of those remaining. A recent review and meta-analysis of lighting and crime studies examined was found to include an indiscriminate mix of direct and indirect effects. The meta-analysis result derived for a typical relighting treatment is impracticably beneficial. This follows from the several successive treatments that would be possible in practice, thereby allowing compounded reductions in crime well beyond anything likely on present indications. This error appears to have arisen because of inadequate photometric quantification of lighting treatment, contrary to warnings in the 1977 and 1997 reviews mentioned in Section 9.1 above. Of the 13 studies included in the meta-analysis, serious procedural or analytical shortcomings or both were found in at least five of them. Photometric aspects are inadequately presented in all of these five studies also. A consequence is that researchers failed to recognise when systematic and other errors led to false or overlarge beneficial effects. Removal of suspect studies from the meta-analysis brings the weighted average result much closer to a null effect. Forcing the upper limit for the 95% confidence interval to have a realistic value leads to a null result if all studies are included. It appears that a counterproductive effect of lighting on crime would emerge from discarding the five problematical studies and applying corrections for the various forms of bias thought likely to have acted in some or all of the remaining studies. The best that can be concluded at this stage is that there appears to be no compelling evidence for any appreciable net direct beneficial effect of increased outdoor lighting in reducing actual crime at night or for net indirect beneficial effects by night or day. National lighting standards should not state or imply that outdoor lighting has any value for crime prevention or deterrence. 9.5 DEBUNKING THE MYTH OF LIGHTING FOR CRIME PREVENTION To the extent that outdoor lighting is intended to prevent crime, its capital and operating costs appear to be a waste of public and private funds. It may even be counterproductive. In the case of industrial and commercial infrastructure, the cost burden reduces industrial competitiveness and hinders economic growth. News media have uncritically perpetuated the myth of increased lighting for crime prevention. Journalists and others concerned need to check the facts more carefully. An extensive pro-lighting campaign started in the 1990s appears to have swayed many UK authorities to install brighter outdoor lighting as a supposed crime reduction measure. The UK Crime and Disorder Act 1998 may have accelerated this process. In the year ending April 2002, street crime in the UK was reported as having increased by 28 %, quite inconsistent with the claimed crime-prevention effect of lighting. 52
9.6 CCTV AS AN ALTERNATIVE FOR CRIME PREVENTION Closed-circuit television (CCTV) competes with lighting for available crime-prevention funds. A recent meta-analysis of CCTV intervention studies indicated that the effect was a mere 4% reduction in crime. However, even this meagre result may be unreliable or erroneous because of extraneous confounding factors in real-world experiments. Funding saved by stopping expenditure on more and brighter lighting for crime prevention should not be diverted to CCTV. 9.7 SECURITY LIGHTING AND STREET LIGHTING The lighting and crime issue needs to be better understood. The issue is addressed in Part 2 of this work. Meanwhile, governments should ensure that resources are not wasted by the installation of any more security lighting at all, and that no street lighting or other public lighting extensions or upgrades are agreed where the justification includes or implies crime prevention. Funding earmarked for crime-prevention lighting should be redirected to rectification of existing overbright and glary outdoor lighting. 10 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Several members of the Astronomical Society of Victoria and its Outdoor Lighting Improvement Section provided encouragement and comments on draft material; in particular, Geoff Dudley, Deputy Director of the Section, and Roger Davis, who pioneered interest in lighting improvement in the Society. Members of the International Dark-Sky Association, the British Astronomical Association’s Campaign for Dark Skies, the Sydney Outdoor Lighting Improvement Society, Sensible and Efficient Lighting to Enhance the Nighttime Environment SELENE, NY State) and other groups for the improvement of outdoor lighting offered much encouragement and useful information. James Benya (USA), Dr Dave Crawford (USA), Bob Crelin (USA), Bob Mizon (UK), Dr Steve Pauley (USA) and others commented on draft material and offered useful suggestions. Gail Clyma (USA), Dr Jenik Hollan (Czechia) and Dr Paul Marchant (UK) corresponded helpfully at length about the work over many months. Professor David Farrington (UK) pointed out numerous faults in parts of an early draft and provided journal paper reprints, allowing substantial improvements to be made in accuracy and objectivity. It is a pleasure to acknowledge the extent of all of this support. Mention of individuals or organisations anywhere in this document does not imply their agreement with or responsibility for the content of this document. Finally, this report exists only because the very patient support of my dear wife made it possible. 11 CONFLICTS OF INTEREST The Astronomical Society of Victoria funded the acquisition of ILE (1999) [53], Painter (1999) [81], Pease (1999) [90] and a Hagner EC1 luxmeter for use in this and other outdoor lighting improvement projects. Otherwise, the project was self-funded by the writer. 53
Page 1 and 2: OUTDOOR LIGHTING AND CRIME, PART 1:
Page 3 and 4: National lighting standards should
Page 5 and 6: 9 CONCLUSIONS 51 9.1 EXISTING KNOWL
Page 7 and 8: ments. Useful statistical and logic
Page 9 and 10: “Lighting has received considerab
Page 11 and 12: search. Several of these mention li
Page 13 and 14: account is taken of adverse factors
Page 15 and 16: There were five of these pairs also
Page 17 and 18: “There are a variety of methodolo
Page 19 and 20: changes in recording procedures and
Page 21 and 22: Additional problems of the study re
Page 23 and 24: epresenting a relative change in to
Page 25 and 26: “The most surprising result is th
Page 27 and 28: Pedestrian street use of relit, adj
Page 29 and 30: example is inconsistency between th
Page 31 and 32: and “reactive” views, not to me
Page 33 and 34: To provide a common basis for compa
Page 35 and 36: the lighting range or the total eff
Page 37 and 38: The total response range of the hum
Page 39 and 40: the market, who believed that conge
Page 41 and 42: The eight US studies produced weigh
Page 43 and 44: guidelines it is up to authors to d
Page 45 and 46: crime prevention strategy. Greater
Page 47 and 48: 7.2 LIGHTING FOR CCTV CAMERAS Close
Page 49 and 50: Video cameras with secure recording
Page 51: not gone or would not go into other
Page 55 and 56: [10] BJS (1999) Characteristics of
Page 57 and 58: [35] Farrington, D. P. and Welsh, B
Page 59 and 60: [59] Lewis, E. B. and Sullivan, T.
Page 61 and 62: [83] Painter, K. A. and Farrington,
Page 63 and 64: of the County of Maui. http://dynam

outdoor lighting and crime, part 1 - Astronomical Society of Victoria

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?