Global Report on Human Settlements 2007 - PoA-ISS

Urban crime and violence: Policy responses
97
There are two points that need to be made about these
policy responses. First, they are not watertight compartments
but involve considerable areas of overlap. A simple
illustration of this is the fact that a programme targeting
young men because this group commits a high proportion of
crime will often seek to deflect their activities in more
acceptable directions, including investing in strengthening
social capital in areas such as education, sport and recreation,
and cultural activities. Second, it is not necessarily a
question of choosing between these approaches because it is
possible to combine elements of several or all of them.
Indeed, available evidence suggests that a carefully managed
programme that combines several elements of these
approaches in ways that recognize the connections between
them and their appropriateness to the local context has a
better chance of success than merely focusing on a single
element. This is because deeply-embedded problems of
crime and violence are rarely amenable to simple, onedimensional
solutions. Programmes of this nature are often
generated and promoted through partnerships of various
kinds.
Enhancing urban safety and security through
effective urban planning, design and
governance
The process of enhancing urban safety and security through
effective urban planning, design and governance is still in its
infancy in many parts of the world, although in some
countries such as the UK, the US and Canada it is more
advanced. The attempts of the UK government to get the
planning system to regard crime prevention as one of its
major objectives in the drive to secure sustainable development
have already been referred to earlier. But such a
‘top-down’ process would be of little value by itself unless it
is accompanied by effective action at the local level. The
Bradford case study prepared for this <strong>Global</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 49
explores this area (see Box 4.6). It is clear from this case that
key issues here include the following:
• An important role for the police service based upon its
experience in handling crime is providing advice to the
key players in the development process about how the
opportunity to commit crimes can be reduced or eliminated
through the ways in which buildings and spaces
are designed.
• There should be a recognition of the opportunity
provided by the development control part of the
planning service to ensure that crime issues are
carefully considered in approving development proposals,
including the possibility that projects that do not do
this might be refused planning permission.
• Since the planning system in the UK is ‘plan led’, 50
appropriate policies need to be in the development plan
to provide a formal basis for this activity.
• Effective working relationships must exist between all
of the key players in the development process and, in
particular, in this context between planners and police
architectural liaison officers. 51
The Bradford case study demonstrates that much has been
achieved in moving towards a situation where crime prevention
is well integrated within the planning process. However,
it also shows that there is still work to be done in developing
effective working relationships and agreed stances between
the key players. This is clearly one of the important lessons
that can be drawn from this case – the major elements can
be in place, but a lot still depends upon effective working
relationships between the key players.
Available evidence shows that CPTED-based
approaches to the processes of shaping new development
Deeply-embedded
problems of crime
and violence are
rarely amenable
to simple, onedimensional
solutions
Box 4.6 The Bradford Unitary Development Plan on planning for crime prevention
The Bradford Unitary Development Plan (which is the formal development
plan for the City of Bradford) was adopted in October
2005. It includes Policy D4, which is its most specific policy on
planning for crime prevention, and its central message is that
‘Development proposals should be designed to ensure a safe and
secure environment and reduce the opportunities for crime.’ At its
heart, what this is seeking to do is to get developers to think about
crime prevention as part of the design process, rather than as a
later add-on, so that when proposals are presented to the planning
system for formal approval, crime prevention is already integral to
them. As such, it draws heavily on the traditions of CPTED, as
expressed through the British police’s Secured by Design scheme.
To this end, developers are expected to think, in particular, about
the following issues:
• natural surveillance of public and semi-private spaces,
especially in relation to entrances to developments, paths, play
spaces, open spaces and car parks;
• defensible space, which should be created with the clear definition,
differentiation and robust separation of public, private and
semi-private space so that all spaces are clearly defined and
adequately protected in terms of use and ownership;
• lighting of the development and, in particular, of streets and
paths;
• design and layout of pedestrian, cycle and vehicular routes into
and within the site, including how these integrate with existing
patterns;
• landscaping and planting, especially to avoid the creation of
hiding places and dark or secluded areas.
The policy also advises developers to make early contact with the
police architectural liaison officer for Bradford when considering
significant development proposals, and it promises that more
detailed guidance will be published in future to supplement the
outline provided by Policy D4.
Source: Kitchen, 2007