An untested hypothesis regarding closed-circuit television (CCTV) is that the use of CCTV surveillance systems causes the loss of informal citizen guardianship activities in camera-surveilled public spaces. This hypothesized effect is empirically tested in two ways. In the first approach, an examination of survey responses between respondents who were aware, without prompting, of a public space surveillance camera system (24.4% of the respondents) and those who were not aware of the cameras is undertaken. The expectation is that preexisting knowledge of the cameras will be associated with attitudes associated with a self-reported reduced willingness to exercise guardianship actions. In the second approach, time series data sets of calls for service in a CCTV-surveilled area and a comparison control zone are examined. Neither method revealed empirical evidence of a degrading of informal citizen guardianship activities following the installation of CCTV cameras.
Armitage, R. (2002). To CCTV or not? A review of current research into the effectiveness of CCTV systems in reducing crime. London: National Association for the Care and Resettlement of Offenders.
2.
Barnes, G. (1995). Defining and optimizing displacement in crime and place. Washington, DC: Police Executive Research Forum.
3.
Barr, R.,& Pease, K. (1990). Crime placement, displacement, and deflection. In M. Toney& N. Morris (Eds.), Crime and justice: a reviewof research(Vol. 12, pp. 277-318). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
4.
Brown, B. (1995). CCTV in town centres: Three case studies. Police research group crime detection and prevention series(paper no. 68). London: HomeOffice Police Department.
5.
Burrows, J. (1980). Closed circuit television and crime on the London Underground. In R. Clarke & P. Mayhew (Eds.), Designing out crime(pp. 75-83). London: HMSO.
6.
Clarke, M. (1994). Blind eye on the street?Police Review, 89, 29-39.
7.
Fyfe, N. (1996). Citywatching: Closed circuit television surveillance in public spaces. Area, 28(1), 37-46.
8.
Gaylord, M.,& Galliher, J. (1991). Riding the underground dragon: Crime control and public order on Hong Hong's mass transit railway. British Journal of Criminology, 31, 15-26.
9.
Gill, M., & Loveday, K. (2003). What do offenders think about CCTV? In M. Gil (Ed.), CCTV(pp. 81-92). Leicester, UK: Perpetuity Press.
10.
Goold, B. (2004). CCTV and policing. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
11.
Graham, S., Brooks, J., & Heery, D. (1996). Towns on the television: Closed circuit TV in British town and cities. Local Government Studies, 22(3), 1-27.
12.
Groombridge, N., & Karim, M. (1994). As easy as AB and CCTV. Policing, 10, 283-290.
13.
Horne, C. (1996). The case for: CCTV should be introduced. International Journal of Risk, Security and Crime Prevention, 1, 317-326.
14.
Kennedy, D. (1990). Facility site selection and analysis through environmental criminology. Journal of Criminal Justice, 18, 239-252.
15.
Landry, C., & Bianchini, F. (1995). The creative city. London: Demos.
16.
Marx, G. (1988). Undercover: Police surveillance in America. Berkley: University of California Press.
17.
Norris, C.,& Armstrong, G. (1998). Introduction: Power and vision. In C. Norris, J. Moran, & G. Armstrong (Eds.), Surveillance, closed circuit television and social control(pp. 3-18). Aldershot, UK: Ashgate.
18.
Norris, C., & Armstrong, G. (1999). The maximum surveillance society: The rise of CCTV. Oxford, UK: Berg.
19.
Phillips, C. (1999). A review of CCTV evaluations: Crime reduction effects and attitudes towards its use. In K. Painter & N. Tilley (Eds.), Surveillance of public space: CCTV, street lighting and crime prevention(pp. 123-155). Monsey, NY: Criminal Justice Press.
20.
Poyner, B. (1988). Video cameras and bus vandalism. Journal of Security Administration, 111(2), 44-51.
21.
Poyner, B. (1992). Situational crime prevention in two parking facilities. In R. V. Clarke (Ed.), Situational crime prevention: Successful case studies(pp. 174-184). New York: Harrow and Heston.
22.
Rao, C. (1985). When crime on the Underground is good news. Australian Police Journal, 39, 1116-1118.
23.
Scherdin, M. (1992). The halo effect: Psychological deterrence of electronic security systems. In R. V. Clarke (Ed.), Situational crime prevention: Successful case studies(pp. 133-138). New York: Harrow and Heston.
24.
Shah, M.,& Surette, R. (2003). Final report: A field test of a computer vision enhanced crime detection and deterrence system for Downtown Orlando. Orlando: University of Central Florida Metropolitan Center.
25.
Short, E.,& Ditton, J. (1996). Does closed circuit television prevent crime?Edinburgh: Scottish Office Central Research Unit.
26.
Short, E.,& Ditton, J. (1998). Seen and now heard. British Journal of Criminology, 38, 404-428.
27.
Sivarajasingam, V.,& Shepherd, J. P. (1999). Effect of closed circuit television on urban violence. Journal of Accident and Emergency Medicine, 16, 255-257.
28.
Surette, R. (1985). Video street patrol: Media technology and street crime. Journal of Police Science and Administration, 13, 78-85.
29.
Tilley, N. (1993). Understanding car parks, crime and CCTV: Evaluation lessons from safer cities. Police research group crime detection and prevention series (paper no. 42). London: Home Office Police Department.
30.
U.S. Census Bureau. (2004). Statistical abstracts of the United States. Washington, DC: Author.
31.
Webb, B., & Laycock, G. (1992). Reducing crime on the London Underground: An evaluation of three pilot projects. Crime prevention unit (paper no. 30). London: HomeOffice.
32.
Welsh, B., & Farrington, D. (2002). Crime prevention effects of closed circuit television: A systematic review. London: Home Office.
33.
Welsh, B., & Farrington, D. (2004). Evidence-based crime prevention: The effectiveness of CCTV. Crime Prevention and Community Safety, 6(2), 21-33.
34.
Williams, C. (2003). Police surveillance and the emergence ofCCTVin the 1960s. In M. Gill (Ed.), CCTV(pp. 9-22). Leicester, UK: Perpetuity Press.
