Evaluating Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) Principles in Educational Institutions: Occupant Insights

Corresponding authors: Komal Komal, komalchoudhary85710@gmail.com; Radhika G, radhikag.architect@gmail.com

1. Introduction

Campus violence encompasses various forms, including sexual harassment, ragging, and disputes driven by caste or politics, which tragically can lead to fatalities or severe injuries. Educational institutions, entrusted with the responsibility of nurturing students' awareness of societal ills and fostering their intellect and ethical values, have been grappling to quell the surge of campus violence. The intricate socio-political fabric of India further fuels the factors that ignite such violence. This study delved into an exploration of Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED) concepts, particularly focusing on the third-generation principles. These principles encapsulate an inclusive blend of psychological and emotional considerations, championing community well-being, and fostering inclusivity. This entails integrating social aspects like community engagement, guardianship, and the maintenance of public spaces. Additionally, it underscores the pivotal role of community involvement and social cohesion in thwarting criminal activities within educational institutions.

The study aimed to comprehend the impact of these principles—whether their implementation or absence thereof—on the welfare, security, and efficiency of occupants within educational institutions. To achieve this, a thorough examination of the concepts of crime prevention through the built environment and third-generation CPTED principles was conducted through literature analysis. Subsequently, a comprehensive questionnaire was administered to various educational institution stakeholders, encompassing faculty, students, and others, to assess the effectiveness of CPTED principles in preventing crime.

The study hinges on investigating how the application of CPTED principles, especially those belonging to the third generation, contributes to the mitigation or prevention of criminal incidents within educational institutions. This evaluation was performed via both qualitative and quantitative analyses. The culmination of the study aims to present insights into the effectiveness of CPTED implementation in fostering safe and productive environments. The intention is to equip architects and educational institutions with empirical evidence to make informed decisions regarding the integration of CPTED principles, ensuring the safety and well-being of their occupants. This research draws reference from case studies where CPTED principles have been effectively implemented, enhancing the depth and breadth of the study's approach.

2. Literature Review

2.1. College Campus

A standard definition of a college campus is “ the grounds of a school, college, university or hospital”. Although it can also be referred to as a mind-set or as a physical property (Whitaker & Pollard, 2013). To simplify this debate, a system of levels of where and to whom violence can take place is necessary.

These levels of violence are:

1. The violence that happens to anyone within the geographical boundaries of campus, regardless of whether a constituent or an outsider is a target or an offender (Whitaker & Pollard, 2013).
2. The violence that happens between its constituents in their institutional and social roles, outside of its institutional boundaries (Whitaker & Pollard, 2013).
3. The violence that takes place in the institutional roles even though it happened to constituents outside both institutional boundaries and institutional roles(Whitaker & Pollard, 2013).1489 International Journal of Policy Sciences and Law Volume 1, Issue 3
4. The violence that is inflicted on others beyond their institutional roles and beyond the institutional roles and the institution’s boundaries (Whitaker & Pollard, 2013).
5. Most college authorities agree that the college administration is responsible for the first level of violence. As one moves down the levels, away from institutional roles and responsibilities, the college administrators become less responsible.
6. Violence is thus a highly debatable concept in terms of levels.
7. For example, Analysis of type, level, factors and effects of campus violence are represented in table 1.

2.2. Overview of CPTED Concept and Principles

Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) has evolved over several decades, with its roots dating back to the mid-20th century.

2.3. Difference between first, second & Third Generation CPTED Principles

2.4. Influence of CPTED Concept and Principles in India

The concepts of CPTED started to gain attention in India in the late 20th century. Urban planners, architects, and criminologists began to recognize the importance of designing environments that deter crime. The 1990s and early 2000s saw a growing interest among Indian academics and professionals in integrating CPTED principles into urban planning and design projects. Indian academics and researchers have contributed to the study of CPTED in the Indian context, discussing its relevance, challenges, and potential impact. CPTED's adoption in India aligns with global trends in recognizing the importance of creating safe, inclusive, and well-designed environments. Several organizations in India such as National Institute of Urban Affairs (NIUA), Safety and Security Society of India (SSSI), Smart Cities Mission (Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs), Educational institutions like Indian Institute of Technology Delhi (IIT Delhi), Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS) Mumbai, India are working towards promoting and implementing Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) principles to create safer and more secure environments.

This research covered the following theme to analyse the data related to CPTED effectiveness in prevention of campus violence and creating safety and increased productivity by seeking insights and analysing the effects from the occupants of Educational Institutions.

1. Design and Planning Strategies
2. Psychological and Sociological aspects
3. Technological integration
4. Evaluation and Metrics
5. Case studies
6. Community Engagement

3. Literature Review

Crime prevention through environmental design (CPTED) strategies have received new attention and active usage in the planning of school buildings (Fujii et al., 2013). Systematic inquiries of the effects of CPTED in learning environments are still relatively new (Shariati & Guerette, 2019), but advocates hope that the approach will enable educators to succeed in their objective to reduce opportunity for violent behavior while allowing students to feel safe and comfortable (Lamoreaux & Sulkowski, 2020).

Scholars describe these crime prevention strategies as a comparatively cost effective yet meaningful set of interventions to address safety concerns (Vagi, 2018); they represent a less obtrusive alternative to the "fortification" of schools with potential to satisfy the competing goals of securing schools from external threats and students' psychological comfort (Lamoreaux & Sulkowski, 2020;Vagi, 2018). While CPTED strategies are generally considered promising tools to reduce opportunities for crime (Shariati & Guerette, 2019), research on CPTED in learning environments has moved from its potential for crime prevention towards the effects on students' fear of crime or violence at school (Lamoreaux & Sulkowski, 2021). Teenagers' fears are noteworthy because feeling unsafe affects school climate (Perumean-Chaney & Sutton, 2013), students' test scores, and attendance rates (Benbenishty et al., 2002;Lacoe, 2016;Milam et al., 2010)

4. Research Hypothesis

Assessing Educational Institutions by involving Occupants insights would improve Safety and wellbeing by bringing awareness about the concept of third generation principles of Crime Prevention through the built environment which reveals and supports physical planning, social and environmental improvements in the educational campus which could prevent campus violence.

5. Research Methodology

• Step 1:Identified a Problem
• Step 2: Research question
• Step 3: Literature study
• Step 4: Data Collection
• Step 4a: secondary data
• Step 4b: Primary data - Questionnaire - tools
• Step 5: Analysing the data (Qualitative and Quantitative analysis)
• Step 6: Findings
• Step 7: Conclusions and Recommendations

(add flow chart)

6. Approach

1. To analyse whether principles of CPTED is applied in the Built environment of Institutions Spaces.
2. Analysing the existing Built Environment scenario with respect to Safety

Questionnaire sample to be added here:

7. Analysis

7.1. To analyse whether principles of CPTED is applied in the Built environment of Institutions Spaces and what is the satisfaction level with respect to the occupants about the safety and wellbeing in different zones such as access, surveillance, physical planning and lighting aspects etc. Two types of survey questionnaire were prepared and circulated to the occupants of educational institutions only across India.

1. Survey form 1 tiled as “Crime Prevention through Enviornment Design Survey- Institutional space”
2. Survey form 2 titled as “Assessment Level 2 on Crime prevention in Educational Campus through Built Environment”

The research underwent a random sampling method, the total samples collected were 30, the feedback were taken from the occupants of educational institutions only and they were students, faculty, non teaching staff and others contributed their inputs for the survey taken.circulated online using google form.

7.2. The questionnaire were filled up by 18 institutions across India as listed below:

7.3. Sample of questionnaire and its results in the form of graph is attached below:

1. Based on the first question, personal information such as name, their email id was collected for future reference.
2. Question was related to the name of the educational Institutions. Out of various applications of educational institutions, the highest scoring 14 percent of samples were received by students compared to faculty which was 7 percent and other players such as professionals, Professors and non staff residents were more or less 3.3 %. The total number of random samples collected across the country were 30 numbers only.

3. The next question understand the samples from various institutions across India

8. The survey 1 were designed under three Sections

8.1. Survey 1_Section A: To analyse whether principles of CPTED is applied in built environment of Institutional Spaces

1. Questions were related to understand the perception of occupants with respect to safety, impact of mental health in relation with spaces, reactions of existing scenario of educational institutions with respect to safety, awareness and application of CPTED principles in the campus.

8.2. Survey 1_Section B: Analysing the existing Built Environment scenario with respect to Safety

1. Questions were related to understand impact of design elements such as lighting, importance of directional aids and results of principles of CPTED implementation in educational campuses.

8.3. Survey 1_Section C: Insights from Occupants (Community Involvement in improvements)

1. Analysing the Design and planning strategies such as architectural elements with respect to lighting, security and safety environments.

9. The survey 2

This survey was designed to know about psychological aspects of safety and security was analysed with respect to college Campuses along with the parameters of Safety, lighting, natural or technological surveillance, physical planning and access control and maintenance with illustrations of various functional spaces of institutional campuses.

9.1. Fear of crime experienced in and out of educational campus:

• Robbery Outside the campus gate
• Not safe for girls during night outside the campus
• Attack of Snakes and monkeys
• Inside campus felt safe but not immediate outside of the campus

10. Findings

10.1. Summary of Suggestions submitted by occupants from various Educational Institutions are as follows:

• Occupants suggested that Implementation of CPTED principles are mandatory, believing that it helps to stop external threats, internal malpractices and threats. Also mentioned, female students and staff would be benefited too.
• Supporting the point, the educational campus must be safe and secure for students and staff.
• Recommended for a chick list to ensure safety and comfort in the campus environment.
• As per their experience, it is informed that CPTED has been overlooked for a long time and the idea developing will bring positive results in securing a safe environment.
• Insisted different levels of safety to be incorporated in different zones based on the requirements and assessments.
• Most important spaces where surveillance is suggested in the dead zones or spaces where less people movement is happening.
• Use of sensory appliances are advised.

Overall from the survey type 1, it is understood that all the occupants were suggesting to implement CPTED Principles and considered safety and wellbeing with respect to the built environment mandatory. It is believed that their personal growth and development in benefitted. The occupants voted for natural surveillance in the physical planning, requested to incorporate emergency buttons in the system, improvement in security mechanism, and maintenance in the common areas with respect to landscaping.

8. Conclusions

Overall It is mandatory that CPTED principles are benefitting in the improvement of safety, security and wellbeing of Educational Institutions. Then their assessment of campuses needs to be implemented by involving occupants to scale the services provided and for the improvements to be made. Thus the study ensures that initiatives from educational institutions and involving the community in the development and maintenance phase would majorly prevent crime by following CPTED principles.

Acknowledgements

We would sincerely than the responders of the survey form, my student komal for building a questionnaire and collating information and insights and the support from faculty of School of Planning and Architecture team to introduce this concept and providing awareness about CPTED. Because of this opportunity, i could understand the importance of principles and its impact with the occupants connecting to built environment. 

Bibliography

• Adams, J. (1973), “Review of defensible space”, Man – Environment Systems, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 267-8.
• Allatt, P. (1984), “Residential security: containment and displacement of burglary”, Howard Journal of Criminal Justice, Vol. 23 No. 1, pp. 99-116.
• Beavon, D., Brantingham, P.L. and Brantingham, P.J. (1994), “The influence of street networks on the patterning of property offenses”, in Clarke, R.V. (Ed.), Crime Prevention Studies, Vol. 2, Criminal Justice Press, Monsey, NY.
• Bellamy, L. (1996), “Situational crime prevention and convenience store robbery”, Security Journal, Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 41-52.
• Gill, M. and Turbin, V. (1999), “Evaluating ‘realistic evaluation’: evidence from a study of CCTV”,
• in Painter, K. and Tilley, N. (Eds), Surveillance of Public Space: CCTV, Street Lighting and Crime Prevention, Criminal Justice Press, Monsey, NY.
• Gordon, C.L. and Brill, W. (1996), The Expanding Role of Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design in Premises Liability. National Institute of Justice, Research Brief, US Department of Justice, Washington, DC, April.

Website Reference:

https://www.lawyered.in/legal-disrupt/articles/campus-violence/ 

newspaper_criminal activities in campus

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/visakhapatnam/rising-incidents-of-violence-in-schools-colleges-raise-alarm/articleshow/70352721.cms 

Speaking to TOI, noted psychiatrist NN Raju said, “We have o..

Read more at:

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/70352721.cms?utm_source=contentofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst 

Psychiatrists attribute the reason for violence among studen..

https://www.lawyered.in/legal-disrupt/articles/campus-violence/