Improved Street Lighting Reduces Property Crime

Improved street lighting is widely thought to be an effective means of preventing crime, second in importance only to increased police presence. Indeed, residents in crime-ridden neighborhoods often demand that the lighting be improved, and recent research generally bears out their expectation that improved lighting does reduce crime.

Improved street lighting is much less controversial than some other responses to street crime, including street closures and video surveillance. Improved street lighting serves many functions and is used in both public and private settings. The prevention of personal and property crime is one of its objectives in public space, which is the main focus of this proposal.

Literature Review

Past research has proven that improved street lighting does in fact reduce property crime. Contrary to popular belief, improved street lighting has produced many adverse situations, such as serving as an aid to crime. Lighting in general can help a criminal see what he/she is doing, pick out a target, avoid surveillance, find escape routes, etc.

Although one can argue that improved lighting can aid in crime, it remains as a popular alternative across the United States, as well as in other countries such as Britain. A Study by David P. Farrington and Brandon C. Welsh (2008), analyzed eight American and five British case studies where improved street lighting had been used as one of the main measures to help tackle crime in problem areas. The study found that in the five British case studies improved street lighting schemes led to a substantial fall in crime of 30%.

Peoples' perceptions that street lighting could enhance their personal safety and the physical environment around them is highlighted in a study by Ken Willis, Neil Powe and Guy Garrod (2003), about the value of improved street lighting in rural areas. The study surveyed over 1,200 households in rural and some urban areas in Bedfordshire, North Yorkshire and Wiltshire through focus groups and an extensive household survey about street lighting. The survey highlighted how respondents in both the focus groups and the household survey considered street lighting as a mechanism to improve road and personal safety, reduce road accidents and keep children safe on the streets. In particular 61.3% of respondents who answered the household survey felt that good street lighting reduced crime and 66.4% felt that street lighting made their homes more secure. 75.4% of respondents who answered the household survey also felt that street lighting could help improve their personal safety. Thus street lighting was perceived by respondents to be a practical measure that could enhance their own safety as well as the environment around them and that crime was reduced when improved street lighting was available. This illustrates how improved street lighting can enhance the general public's personal safety as well as the physical environment, thus helping people to go out after dark and feel safe.

Since there is already research on the effectiveness of improved street lighting on crime, this research proposal hopes to contribute to knowledge in the field of criminal justice. In one way, this proposal will further the research of improved street lighting as an alternative method of reducing crime. Also, this proposal hopes to aid in the support to find more effective ways to reduce crime overall. This is worthwhile because if this method is found to be effective, then eventually the overall amount of crime will decrease in time.

Theory

It is the intention of this research proposal to find that property crime will become less likely when the improvement of street lighting has been implemented in certain areas. The independent concept is the improved street lighting, which has been described in the previous section of this proposal. The dependent concept that will be measured will be property offenses.

By property offenses, this proposal is concerned with vandalism and theft (includes motor vehicle theft) Vandalism will be defined as any willful or malicious defacement of public or private property. Theft will be defined as the unlawful taking of one's property. This research proposal expects to find that property crime will become less likely in areas that have improved street lighting.

This research proposal hypothesizes that the number of property crimes committed varies inversely with improved street lighting. This means the number of acts of vandalism and theft varies inversely with improved street lighting as well. Overall, it is apparent that improved street lighting will have a positive impact on the amount of property crimes in the areas that it's implemented.

The basis for this proposition is apparent. The dependent variables should decrease after street lighting is improved because of a few simple reasons. First, Improved lighting deters potential offenders by increasing the risk that they will be seen or recognized when committing crimes. Second, police become more visible, thus leading to a decision to desist from crime.

Third, if improved lighting leads to the arrest and imprisonment of repeat offenders they can no longer commit crimes in the area. Fourth, improved lighting can encourage residents to spend more time on their stoops or in their front yards in the evenings and thus increase informal surveillance. And lastly Fifth, improved lighting can encourage more people to walk at night, which would increase informal surveillance.

Method

I.) Design: Randomized post-test only control group design:

R X O

R O

The design of this experiment will use the randomized post-test only control group design. First, the streets being studied will be the areas surrounding Buffalo State College in Buffalo, NY. Second, the streets will be randomly assigned (R) to either the treatment group (X) or the non-treatment group.

Observation (O) will be conducted by counting the number of property crimes reported from public surveys of people living on the streets being studied. Random assignment of the streets being studied will be performed by simply flipping a coin. This way, each street has an equal chance of going to either the treatment or non-treatment group.

II.) Measurement:

This particular experiment intends to measure each dependent variable using official survey results of people who live on these streets. The survey will be obtained with the cooperation of the neighborhood and will only be used for the purposes of this experiment. The number of reports for larceny, for example, will be recorded prior to the experiment and then 3 months after the experiment has been completed. The same routine will be done for the other dependent variable of vandalism.

The system of scored that will be used to represent the subject being placed in the treatment group will be shown by a number one (1). If a subject is placed onto the non-treatment group, the number zero (0) will be used to represent that case. These particular numbers will be used for recording purposes as well as in the data matrix.

The reliability of this particular method of measurement will be evaluated by the test-retest method. An initial count will be coded at the end of the first 3-month period, and then another count will be coded at the end of another 3-month period one year later during the same 3 months. After this method has been completed, the researchers will go back and evaluate the data, determining if improved street lighting has an effect on property crimes in these given areas being studied. Validity of this method is sustained because the survey reports show the number of occurrences of the dependent variables.

III.) Sample:

This experiment will be performed in the surrounding areas around Buffalo State College in Buffalo, NY. These areas include streets contained in a block on the South of the campus (see picture below). The streets that will be involved in this experiment will be randomly assigned by the flipping of a coin, to either the treatment group or non-treatment group. The treatment groups will have double the lights put in that are there now, and the non-treatment group will remain.

IV.) Analytical Procedures:

(See attached photo of the table)

At the beginning of each row, there is a number i.e. 01, which represents a single subject in the experiment. To the right of the street identification number there is either a number one (1) or zero (O). These numbers represent whether or not the street received the treatment of double lighting. Number one (1) represents that the street was in the treatment group and zero (O) means that the street was in the non-treatment group.

The numbers to the right of the independent variable represent the number of reports conducted by a survey for the dependent variables of larceny and vandalism. This particular data illustrates the fact that improved street lighting works and causes the two dependent variables to decrease. This is illustrated by the lower numbers shown under the dependent variable column next to the number one (1) in the independent variable column. In the row where the subject was in the non-treatment group (0), the counts under the dependent variable columns show larger numbers.

The statistical procedure that this experiment would use would be Pearson correlation. This procedure would be done in order to discover if improved street lighting has a statistically significant effect.

Construct validity would be examined by correlating the two dependent variables of larceny and vandalism with each other. Then, each dependent variable would be correlated with the independent variable of improved street lighting. Statistical significance would be satisfied if a significant negative correlation was found between improved street lighting and larceny and between improved street lighting and vandalism. These results would support the hypothesis discussed earlier in this proposal. A positive correlation between assaults and vandalism would also be ideal and would help solidify construct validity.

Discussion

I.) Ethics:

This particular experiment will adhere to the standards of the Institutional Review Board. Informed consent will be given to each and every inhabitant on each of the streets being studied. The intention of this experiment is to eliminate any potential harm and/or annoyances that could surface, i.e. too much light. If there is any major objections, the research will end immediately and the appropriate procedures will be in place to handle the situation.

Also, the names and other relevant information of the subjects will remain confidential. Throughout the experiment, the subjects being surveyed will remain anonymous to the researchers and will only be identified in data as a case number.

II.) Evaluation of internal validity:

a.) History: Any outside incident that may occur, will affect both the treatment group and the non-treatment group alike. This reasoning exposes history as a
non-threat to validity.

b.) Maturation: This experiment will be conducted within a 3 month window, which does not allow maturation to have an effect on internal validity.

c.) Testing: Due to the randomized post test only design, subjects are not exposed to a pretest. This gives the subjects no chance to please the researcher.

d.) Instrumentation: The measurement process that will be implemented will not vary at all; therefore it could not influence the results.

e.) Regression: The measurement of the dependent variable is reliable, therefore regression will not be a threat to internal validity.

f.) Selection: The streets picked are to a confined area or block and in most cases have some history of the dependent variables being present; therefore selection will not be a threat to internal validity.

g.) Mortality: The only way a subject will be moved from the survey process will be due to emergency circumstances only; therefore mortality will be a non threat to internal validity.

h.) Interaction of selection and maturation: Once again, due to the short, 3 month experiment being conducted, there is not enough time for this threat to have an impact on internal validity.

Overall, internal validity will be eliminated because of the use of random assignment of subjects into either a treatment group or a non-treatment group.

III.) External Validity:

Due to the fact that the experiment will take place in Buffalo, NY, the results will apply to other areas of similar demographics. Being that Buffalo is a medium size city with a population of just under 300,000, it has similar geographic characteristics as other medium sized cities. These characteristics include, but are not limited to: education, population and income.

Places where the results will not be relevant could be rural areas or areas where there are very large populations. Adding and improving street lighting in areas that are highly populated could be very expensive due to the high number of streets. Yes, there are a lot of streets in Buffalo, but taking a sample such as one block of streets seems to be a much more accurate approach than to do that in a city such as Los Angeles or New York City. Overall, this experiment hopes to discover and implement more effective ways of lighting our streets and reducing property crime, or just crime in general.

Chester, R. (2006). The Benefits of Improved Street Lighting. Research and Strategy Research Paper , 3-4.

Farrington, B. P. (2008). Effect of Improved Street Lighting on Crime. The Campbell Collaboration , 32-33.

Willis, K. P. (2003). The Value of Improved Street Lighting in Rural Areas: Final Report. Centre for Research in Environmental Appraisal & Management , 11-24.