Advertisement

Closed-Circuit Television Surveillance

  • Brandon C. Welsh
  • David P. Farrington

Closed-circuit television (CCTV) surveillance cameras serve many functions and are used in both public and private settings. The prevention of personal and property crime is among its primary objectives. As an intervention targeted at crime, CCTV is a type of situational crime prevention (Clarke, 1995). According to Clarke and Homel’s (1997) classification of situational crime prevention, CCTV is viewed as a technique of “formal surveillance.” In this regard, CCTV cameras are seen to enhance or take the place of security personnel.

Keywords

Public Housing Violent Crime Control Area Crime Prevention Experimental Area 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Armitage, Rachel. 2002. T o CCT V or Not ? A Review of Current Research into the EVectiveness of CCT V Systems in Reducing Crime. London, England: National Association for the Care and Resettlement of Offenders.Google Scholar
  2. —— , Graham Smyth, and Ken Pease. 1999. ‘‘Burnley CCTV Evaluation.’’ In Surveillance of Public Space: CCT V , Street L ighting and Crime Prevention. Crime Prevention Studies, Vol. 10, edited by Kate Painter and Nick Tilley, 225-250.Google Scholar
  3. Monsey, NY: Criminal Justice Press. Brown, Ben. 1995. CCT V in T own Centres: T hree Case Studies. Crime Detection and Prevention Series Paper, No. 68. London, England: Home Office.Google Scholar
  4. Burrows, John N. 1980. ‘‘Closed Circuit Television on the London Underground.’’ In Designing Out Crime, edited by Ronald V.G. Clarke and Patricia Mayhew, 75-83. London, England: Her Majesty’s Stationery Office.Google Scholar
  5. Clarke, Ronald V. 1995. ‘‘Situational Crime Prevention.’’ In Building a Safer Society: Strategic Approaches to Crime Prevention. Crime and Justice: A Review of Research, Vol. 19, edited by Michael Tonry and David P. Farrington, 91-150. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  6. —— . 2001. Effective Crime Prevention: Keeping Pace with New Developments. Forum on Crime and Society 1: 17-33.Google Scholar
  7. —— , and Ross Homel. 1997. ‘‘A Revised Classification of Situational Crime Prevention Techniques.’’ In Crime Prevention at a Crossroads, edited by Steven P. Lab, 17-27.Google Scholar
  8. Cincinnati: Anderson. Clarke, Ronald V., and David Weisburd. 1994. ‘‘Diffusion of Crime Control Benefits: Observations on the Reverse of Displacement.’’ In Crime Prevention Studies, Vol. 2, edited by Ronald V. Clarke, 165-183. Monsey, NY: Criminal Justice Press.Google Scholar
  9. Cohen, Jacob. 1988. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. Second ed. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  10. Cook, Thomas D., and Donald T. Campbell. 1979. Quasi-Experimentation: Design and Analysis Issues for Field Settings. Chicago: Rand McNally.Google Scholar
  11. Ditton, Jason, and Emma Short. 1999. ‘‘Yes, It Works, No, It Doesn’t: Comparing the Effects of Open-Street CCTV in Two Adjacent Scottish Town Centres.’’ In Surveillance of Public Space: CCT V , Street L ighting and Crime Prevention. Crime Prevention Studies, Vol. 10, edited by Kate Painter and Nick Tilley, 201-224. Monsey, NY: Criminal Justice Press.Google Scholar
  12. Eck, John E. 1997. ‘‘Preventing Crime at Places.’’ In Preventing Crime: W hat Works, W hat Doesn’t, W hat’s Promising, Lawrence W. Sherman, Denise C. Gottfredson, Doris L. MacKenzie, John E. Eck, Peter Reuter, and Shawn D. Bushway, chapter 7. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice, U.S. Department of Justice.Google Scholar
  13. —— . 2002. ‘‘Preventing Crime at Places.’’ In Evidence-Based Crime Prevention, edited by Lawrence W. Sherman, David P. Farrington, Brandon C. Welsh, and Doris L. MacKenzie, 241-294. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  14. Farrington, David P., Martin Gill, Sam J. Waples, and Javier Argomaniz. 2005a. Studying the Effects of CCTV on Crime: Meta-Analysis of a National Evaluation. Unpublished paper. Farrington, David P., Trevor H. Bennett, and Brandon C. Welsh. 2005b. The Cambridge Evaluation of the Effects of CCTV on Crime. In Imagination for Crime Prevention: Essays in Honor of Ken Pease. Crime Prevention Studies, edited by Graham Farrell. Monsey, NY: Criminal Justice Press, in press.Google Scholar
  15. Farrington, David P., and Kate A. Painter. 2003. How to Evaluate the Impact of CCTV on Crime. Crime Prevention and Community Safety 5: 7-16.Google Scholar
  16. Grandmaison, Rachel, and Pierre Tremblay. 1997. E´valuation des Effets de la Télé-Surveillance sur la Criminalité Commise dans 13 Stations du Métro de Montréal. Criminologie 30: 93-110.Google Scholar
  17. Home Office Policing and Reducing Crime Unit. 2001. Invitation to T ender Evaluation of CCT V Initiatives. Unpublished document. London England: Author.Google Scholar
  18. Jones, Hayley E. 2005. Measuring EVect Size in Area-Based Crime Prevention Research. Unpublished M.Phil. thesis. Cambridge, England: Statistical Laboratory, Cambridge University.Google Scholar
  19. Koch, Brigitte C.M. 1998. T he Politics of Crime Prevention. Aldershot England: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  20. Mazerolle, Lorraine, David C. Hurley, and Mitchell Chamlin. 2002. Social Behavior in Public Space: An Analysis of Behavioral Adaptations to CCTV. Security Journal 15: 59-75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Murphy, Dean E. 2002. ‘‘As Security Cameras Sprout, Someone’s Always Watching.’’ New York T imes, 29 September, pp. 1, 22.Google Scholar
  22. Musheno, Michael C., James P. Levine, and Denis J. Palumbo. 1978. Television Surveillance and Crime Prevention: Evaluating an Attempt to Create Defensible Space in Public Housing. Social Science Quarterly 58: 647-656.Google Scholar
  23. Nieto, Marcus. 1997. Public V ideo Surveillance: Is It an EVective Crime Prevention T ool ? Sacramento, CA: California Research Bureau, California State Library.Google Scholar
  24. Norris, Clive, and Gary Armstrong. 1999. T he Maximum Surveillance Society: T he Rise of CCT V. Oxford, England: Berg.Google Scholar
  25. Phillips, Coretta. 1999. ‘‘A Review of CCTV Evaluations: Crime Reduction Effects and Attitudes Towards Its Use.’’ In Surveillance of Public Space: CCT V , Street L ighting and Crime Prevention. Crime Prevention Studies, Vol. 10, edited by Kate Painter and Nick Tilley, 123-155. Monsey, NY: Criminal Justice Press.Google Scholar
  26. Piquero, Alex R., David P. Farrington, and Alfred Blumstein. 2003. ‘‘The Criminal Career Paradigm.’’ In Crime and Justice: A Review of Research, Vol. 30, edited by Michael Tonry, 359-506. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  27. Poyner, Barry. 1991. Situational Crime Prevention in Two Parking Facilities. Security Journal 2: 96-101.Google Scholar
  28. 1993. ‘‘What Works in Crime Prevention: An Overview of Evaluations.’’ In Crime Prevention Studies, Vol. 1, edited by Ronald V. Clarke, 185-193. Monsey, NY: Criminal Justice Press.Google Scholar
  29. Sarno, Christopher. 1996. ‘‘The Impact of Closed Circuit Television on Crime in Sutton Town Centre.’’ In T owards a Safer Sutton? CCT V One Year On, edited by Marjorie Bulos and Duncan Grant, 13-49. London, England: London Borough of Sutton.Google Scholar
  30. Shadish, William R., Thomas D. Cook, and Donald T. Campbell. 2002. Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Generalized Causal Inference. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
  31. Skinns, David. 1998. Doncaster CCT V Surveillance System: Second Annual Report of the Independent Evaluation. Doncaster, England: Faculty of Business and Professional Studies, Doncaster College.Google Scholar
  32. Squires, Peter. 1998. An Evaluation of the Ilford T own Centre CCT V Scheme. Brighton, England: Health and Social Policy Research Centre, University of Brighton.Google Scholar
  33. Tilley, Nick. 1993. Understanding Car Parks, Crime and CCT V : Evaluation L essons from Safer Cities. Crime Prevention Unit Series Paper, No. 42. London, England: Home Office.Google Scholar
  34. Webb, Barry, and Gloria Laycock. 1992. Reducing Crime on the L ondon Underground: An Evaluation of T hree Pilot Projects. Crime Prevention Unit Series Paper, No. 30. London, England: Home Office.Google Scholar
  35. Welsh, Brandon C., and David P. Farrington. 1999. Value for Money? A Review of the Costs and Benefits of Situational Crime Prevention. British Journal of Criminology 39: 345-368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. —— . 2000. ‘‘Monetary Costs and Benefits of Crime Prevention Programs.’’ In Crime and Justice: A Review of Research, Vol. 27, edited by Michael Tonry, 305-361. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  37. —— . 2002. Crime Prevention EVects of Closed Circuit T elevision: A Systematic Review. Home Office Research Study, No. 252. London, England: Home Office.Google Scholar
  38. Williamson, Douglas, and Sara McLafferty. 2000. ‘‘The Effects of CCTV on Crime in Public Housing: An Application of GIS and Spatial Statistics.’’ Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Society of Criminology, San Francisco, November.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Brandon C. Welsh
    • 1
  • David P. Farrington
    • 2
  1. 1.University of Massachusetts Lowell870 Broadway StreetMA
  2. 2.University of CambridgeSidgwick AvenueCambridge

Personalised recommendations