Perceptions of safety in suburban neighbourhoods: exploring the influence of the physical environmen

1
Perceptions of safety in suburban neighbourhoods
exploring the influence of the physical
environment

• Sarah FosterPhD StudentUWA School of Population
  Health
• PATREC Research Forum
• 19 September 2006

2
Presentation outline

• Safety and Walking Study
• Background
• Theoretical model
• Physical environment
• Project methodology

3
Project aim

• To investigate the relationship between urban
  design factors related to perceived safety and
  walking in the local neighbourhood

4
Objectives

• Compare Liveable and conventional neighbourhoods
  in terms of the design features that promote
  safer communities
• Examine whether neighbourhood design features
  that promote surveillance influence the
  perception of safety among residents
• Explore the association between neighbourhood
  presentation and perceived safety
• Examine the association between neighbourhood
  safety and resident walking

5
RESIDE Project

• 5 Year longitudinal study
• Aims to evaluate the impact of neighbourhood
  design on health
• Walking
• Cycling
• Use of public transport
• Sense of community
• Evaluate Liveable Neighbourhoods
• design guidelines

6
Background

• Physical inactivity is responsible for 8 of the
  total burden of disease in Australia
• Growing interest in the role of the built
  environment to promote physical activity

7
Research problem

• Concerns about safety may limit physical activity
• Research focuses on numerous correlates of
  walking
• Neighbourhood safety in public health

8
Safety from crime

• Inconclusive results to date
• Fractured nature of the research
• Measurement of crime-related safety

9
Measurement

• Subjective measurements
• Judgments about crime
• Assessments of crime
• Is crime a problem in your neighbourhood?
• Global measures of safety
• How safe do you feel walking in your
  neighbourhood at night?

10
Measurement

• Judgements vs. emotional responses
• Fear of crime
• Constrained behaviour
• Protective behaviour

11
Other research

• Objective measures
• Police statistics
• Rating police attention
• Neighbourhood audits
• Apply subjective and objective measures
• Combined measures

12
Theoretical model
Social environment
Physical environment
Individual factors
Natural surveillance
Time of day
Perceptions of safety
Neighbourhood walking
13
Individual factors

• Certain groups in society tend to exhibit more
  fear of crime
• More significant associations between
  crime-related safety and PA for these groups
• Significant results when men and women analysed
  separately

14
Social environment

• Social capital
• Features of social organisation that facilitate
  co-operation between citizens for mutual benefit
• Crime in the community may reflect the level of
  social capital
• ? Social capital ? crime

15
Social environment

• Collective efficacy
• Social cohesion of the neighbourhood
• Residents willingness to intervene for the common
  good
• Trust implicit in social capital is a necessary
  precursor to collective efficacy
• ? Collective efficacy
• ? crime / incivilities

16
Theoretical model
Social environment
Physical environment
Individual factors
Natural surveillance
Time of day
Perceptions of safety
Neighbourhood walking
17
Theoretical model
18
Physical environment

• Neighbourhood design
• Natural
• surveillance
• Neighbourhood presentation

19
New urbanism

• Mixed density
• Mixed use
• Pedestrian car friendly
• Access to public transport
• Sense of community
• Create safe and inviting streets for pedestrians
  through activity and surveillance

20
New urbanism

• Elements that encourage walking
• Presence of footpaths and walking trails
• Destinations within walking distance
• Street connectivity
• Aesthetics
• Walkability ? sense of community
• Safety from crime?
• Accessibility and permeability ? offenders
• Homogeneity, segregated land uses, restricted
  vehicular pedestrian access ? safety from crime

21
Walkable neighbourhoods

• Walkable neighbourhoods may generate more
  pedestrian traffic
• Does the presence of pedestrians really make
  people feel safer?

22
Pedestrians surveillance

• Pedestrians make the streets safer, lively and
  interesting to watch (Jacobs 1962)
• Higher housing densities and local businesses
  generate street traffic

23
Pedestrians and perceived safety

• Unsafe places quiet and deserted / poorly lit
  (Vrij and Winkel 1991)
• Pedestrian volume and perceived safety?
• (Lupton 1999, Hunter and Baumer 1982)

24
Pedestrians and perceived safety

• Interaction with social connectedness
• Seeing the stranger versus being the stranger

25
Urban design features

• Surveillance from housing
• Setbacks
• Front porches
• Garage location / back alleys
• Fencing / landscaping

26
Surveillance from housing

• Neighbourhood design
• mixed density
• houses overlooking POS

27
Street lighting

• Street lighting improvements associated with
• ? Crime rates
• ? Fear of crime
• ? Pedestrian activity after dark
• ? Belief that other pedestrians would offer
  assistance if required

28
Neighbourhood presentation

• Incivilities
• Litter, graffiti, vandalism
• Associated with ? crime, fear of crime, perceived
  crime, poorer health outcomes

29
Suburban incivilities

• Housing condition (e.g. garden and lawn
  maintenance)
• Indicates place attachment
• Territoriality symbolic barrier between public
  and private space

30
Methodology

• Aim to investigate the relationship between
  urban design factors related to perceived safety
  and walking in the local neighbourhood

31
Theoretical model
32
Data collection

• Safety and Walking Study
• Subjective - survey questions
• Objective - neighbourhood ratings
• RESIDE Project
• Neighbourhood walking
• Transport
• Recreation
• Pedometer data
• Environmental data
• Public open space audit
• Destinations
• Walkability index

33
Safety questionnaire

• New and existing questions
• Reliability testing (n190)
• Posted to RESIDE participants
• Phase 1 Supplement (Apr - Sept 2006)
• Phase 2 Included in RESIDE 3rd questionnaire
  (Oct 2006 - Apr 2007)

34
Safety questionnaire

• Questions
• House design and street surveillance
• Fear or crime / perceived risk
• Assessments of local problems / crime
• Experiences of victimisation
• Protective and constrained behaviour
• Collective efficacy

35
Environmental data

• RESIDE Public open space audit
• All POS gt 2 ac within 1.6 km of respondents homes

36
Public open space audit

• Surveillance from houses
• Graffiti, litter, vandalism
• Lighting

37
Environmental data

• Other possibilities
• Street audit for surveillance, incivilities,
  personalisation, maintenance
• Police crime statistics
• Newspaper content analysis
• Street lighting

38
Conclusion

• Results will contribute to research on the
  neighbourhood correlates of walking and
• Highlight the influence, if any, that suburban
  design has on resident perceptions of safety

39
Acknowledgements

• Research Staff
• Ms Claire Ruxton (Project Administration)
• Ms Andrea Lange (Research Assistant)
• Mrs Judy Maloney (Interviewer)
• Survey Research Centre
• Students
• Ms Hayley Cutt (PhD - APAI)
• Ms Sarah Foster (PhD)
• Mr Ryan Falconer (PhD)
• Ms Jacinta Francis (PhD)
• Mr Vincent Learnihan (Masters)
• Collaborators and industry partners
• Department for Planning Infrastructure
• NHF
• Planning Commission
• Petcare Information Advisory Service

• Investigators
• Prof Billie Giles-Corti
• Prof Matthew Knuiman
• Dr Anna Timperio
• Dr Kimberly Van Niel
• Dr Fiona Bull
• Mr Trevor Shilton
• Mr Max Bulsara
• Dr Terri Pikora (Research Manager)
• Prof Jeff Kenworthy
• Patric de Villiers
• Funders

40
Collaborators
Support from
Sponsors