|
In 1995, a student from Taiwan, Simon Shu, questioned
whether or not Newman's
ideas of defensible space actually worked in practice.
Shu used burglary as an example of one crime that Newman claimed
could be prevented through proactive design. He
studied burglaries not in terms of a house's address, but
in terms of how the burglar actually gained access to the
dwelling from public space. He criticized the "defensible
space" idea, saying that there is no use living on a
'safe' street or cul de sac if you are in fact burglarized
from a back alley or a nearby vacant lot.
Shu's results suggest that there is no single
spatial factor that deters crime. Other factors, such as zoning,
demographics, and neighborhood cohesion affect crime at individual
houses.While I certainly cannot claim to find a causation,
I noticed increases in crime even in houses that were renovated.
[Click here
to read about how studying individual houses and their histories
is related to my study]
Home Ownership
But defensible space is not merely an unrealistic theory.
There are other matters as well that might affect crime rates
in rehabilitated houses. In Providence, when an abandoned
house is rehabilitated, the nonprofit organization or the
City of Providence gains ownership over the parcel. The organization
then has the ability to renovate and rent out apartments or
to sell the whole house to a local homeowner. Importantly,
there is now someone (or many people) who are charged with
overseeing the property - the city, the nonprofit, a new homeowner
- whereas when it was vacant, there was no one.
|