Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-669899f699-swprf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-28T06:02:46.555Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

20 - Gating as governance: the boundaries spectrum in social and situational crime prevention

from PART 3 - Comparative crime control and urban governance

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 June 2011

By
Sarah Blandy
Edited by
Adam Crawford
Sarah Blandy
Affiliation:
University of Leeds
Adam Crawford
Affiliation:
University of Leeds
Get access

Summary

Introduction

This chapter is concerned with crime prevention as part of a broader picture of urban governance. It focuses on residential areas in the UK and specifically on gated developments, a relatively new but fast-proliferating form of housing frequently cited as an exemplar of the current era's ‘fortress mentality’ (see Blakely and Snyder 1997; McKenzie 1994; and special issues of Environment and Planning B 2002 29: 3, GeoJournal 2006 66: 1–2, and Housing Studies 2005 20: 2). Academic debate has tended to concentrate on analysing the driving forces for gated communities as a particular urban form and on the implications of their recent growth for social exclusion and social cohesion, with less emphasis on whether gated communities are effective in preventing crime or merely cause displacement. The term ‘gated community’ is usually understood as a form of private residential neighbourhood defined by a physical boundary, as well as by a legal framework which relates only to that neighbourhood and which binds the residents contractually through their property rights (Atkinson et al. 2003).

Here it is argued that boundaries and enclosures of all kinds are now established as a key technique of governance in late modernity, the period from the latter half of the twentieth century to the present (Garland 2001). Walls are a visible sign of the current obsession with boundaries, and can be seen at many scales: the fortified border between Mexico and the USA, the West Bank wall, guarded refugee camps and gated communities.

Type
Chapter
Information
International and Comparative Criminal Justice and Urban Governance
Convergence and Divergence in Global, National and Local Settings
 , pp. 519 - 544
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Allen, R. (1999) ‘Is what works what counts? The role of evidence-based crime reduction in policy and practice’, Safer Society, 2, 21–3.Google Scholar
,Association of Chief Police Officers/Crime Prevention Initiatives Limited (2004a) Secured by Design Principles, www.securedbydesign.com/pdfs/SBD-principles.pdf.
,Association of Chief Police Officers/Crime Prevention Initiatives Limited (2004b) Secured by Design Refurbishments, www.securedbydesign.com/pdfs/refurbishments.pdf.
,Association of Chief Police Officers/Secured by Design (2009) Secured by Design New Homes, www.securedbydesign.com/pdfs/newHomes2009.pdf.
Atkinson, R. and Blandy, S. (2007) ‘Panic rooms: the rise of defensive homeownership’, Housing Studies, 22, 443–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Atkinson, R., Blandy, S., Flint, J. and Lister, D. (2003) Gated Communities in England, London: Office of the Deputy Prime Minister.Google Scholar
Bauman, Z. (2001) Community: Seeking Safety in an Insecure World, Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
Beck, U. (1992) Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity, London: Sage.Google Scholar
Beckford, C. and Cogan, P. (undated) The Alleygater's Guide to gating alleys, http://crimereduction.homeoffice.gov.uk/gating.pdf.
Blakely, E. J. and Snyder, M. G. (1997) Fortress America, Washington DC, Brookings Institute and Lincoln Institute of Land Policy.Google Scholar
Blandy, S. (2006a) ‘Gated communities in England: historical perspectives and current developments’, GeoJournal, 66, 15–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blandy, S. (2006b) ‘Gated communities: a response to, or remedy for, anti-social behaviour?’ in Flint, J. (ed), Housing, Urban Governance and Anti-social Behaviour: Perspectives, Policies and Practice, Bristol: Policy Press, pp. 239–55.Google Scholar
Blandy, S. and Lister, D. (2005) ‘Gated communities: (ne)gating community development?’, Housing Studies, 20, 287–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blandy, S. and Parsons, D. (2004) ‘Gated communities in England: rules and rhetoric of urban planning’, Geographica Helvetica, 58, 314–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blandy, S., Green, S. and McCoulough, E. (2004) Building Boundaries in NDC areas, London: Neighbourhood Renewal Unit, Office of the Deputy Prime Minister.Google Scholar
Blomley, N. K. (1994) Law, Space and the Geographies of Power, New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Blomley, N. K. (2005) ‘Flowers in the bathtub: boundary crossings at the public-private divide’, Geoforum, 36, 281–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blunkett, D. (2004) Decentralising Government: Choice, Communities and the Role of Local Authorities, Speech to New Local Network annual conference, 22 January 2004, www.nlgn.org.uk/public/2004/from-empire-to-community-the-challenge-for-21st-century-governance/.
Cauter, L. (2004) The Capsular Civilisation: On the City in the Age of Fear, Rotterdam: NAi Publisher.Google Scholar
Clarke, R. V. (2000) ‘Situational prevention, criminology and social values’ in Hirsch, A., Garland, D., and Wakefield, A. (eds.), Ethical and Social Perspectives on Situational Crime Prevention, Oxford: Hart, pp. 97–112.Google Scholar
Cohen, S. (1985) Visions of Social Control, Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
Cowan, D. and McDermont, M. (2006) Regulating Social Housing: Governing Decline, Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
Cozens, P. M., Saville, G. and Hillier, D. (2005) ‘Crime prevention through environmental design (CPTED): a review and modern bibliography’, Journal of Property Management, 23, 328–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crawford, A. (1998) Crime Prevention and Community Safety, London: Longman.Google Scholar
Crawford, A. (2003) ‘Contractual governance of deviant behaviour’, Journal of Law and Society, 30, 479–505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crawford, A. and Lister, S. (2007) The Use and Impact of Dispersal Orders: Sticking Plasters and Wake-up Calls, Bristol: Policy Press.Google Scholar
Dean, M. (1999) Governmentality: Power and Rule in Modern Society, London: Sage.Google Scholar
Delaney, D. (2004) ‘Tracing displacements: or evictions in the nomosphere’, Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 22, 847–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Delaney, D., Ford, R. T. and Blomley, N. (2001) ‘Preface: where is law?’ in Blomley, N., Delaney, D. and Ford, R. T. (eds.), The Legal Geographies Reader, Oxford: Blackwell, pp. xiii–xxii.Google Scholar
,Department of Communities and Local Government (2005) Planning Policy Statement 1 (PPS 1) Delivering Sustainable Development, London: DCLG.Google Scholar
,Department of Communities and Local Government (2006a) Planning Policy Statement 3 (PPS3) Housing, London: DCLG.Google Scholar
,Department of Communities and Local Government (2006b) Respect and Housing Management: Using Good Neighbour Agreements, Housing Research Summary No. 226, London: DCLG.Google Scholar
,Department of Communities and Local Government (2008) Communities in Control: Real People, Real Power, White Paper Cm. 7427, London: DCLG.Google Scholar
,Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions, with the Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment (DETR CABE) (2000) By Design: Urban Design in the Planning System: Towards Better Practice, London: DCLG.Google Scholar
Ellison, N. and Burrows, R. (2007) ‘New spaces of (dis)engagement? Social politics, urban technologies and the rezoning of the city’, Housing Studies, 22, 295–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flint, J. (2006) (ed.) Housing, Urban Governance and Anti-Social Behaviour: Perspectives, Policy and Practice, Bristol: The Policy Press.Google Scholar
Garland, D. (2000) ‘Ideas, institutions and situational crime prevention’ in Hirsch, A., Garland, D. and Wakefield, A. (eds.), Ethical and Social Perspectives on Situational Crime Prevention, Oxford: Hart, pp. 1–16.Google Scholar
Garland, D. (2001) The Culture of Control: Crime and Social Order in Contemporary Society, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Giddens, A. (1991) Modernity and Self Identity: Self and Society in the Late Modern Age, Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
Hastings, A. and Dean, J. (2003) ‘Challenging images: tackling stigma through estate regeneration’, Policy & Politics, 31(2), 171–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haywood, J., Kautt, P., Whitaker, A. (2009) ‘The effects of “alley-gating” in an English town’, European Journal of Criminology, 6(4), 361–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Healey, P. (1996) ‘The communicative turn in planning theory and its implications for spatial strategy formations’, Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 23(2), 217–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holder, J. and Harrison, C. (2003) (eds.) Law and Geography, Current Legal Issues, vol. 5, Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
,Home Office (2006) Operation Gate It, London: Home Office.Google Scholar
Hope, T. (2001) ‘Crime victimisation and inequality in risk society’ in Matthews, R. and Pitts, J. (eds.), Crime, Disorder and Community Safety: A New Agenda?, London: Routledge, pp. 13–218.Google Scholar
Hughes, G. (2004) ‘Straddling adaptation and denial: crime and disorder reduction partnerships in England and Wales’, Cambrian Law Review, 35, 1–22.Google Scholar
Keilthy, P. (2007) ‘We need fences and gates to bar gangs, estate pleads’, Camden New Journal, 8 November 2007, www.thecnj.com/camden/2007/110807/news110807_21.html.
Kitchen, T. (2002) ‘Crime prevention and the British planning system: new responsibilities and older challenges’, Planning Theory and Practice, 3, 155–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lawless, P. (2006) ‘Area-based urban interventions: rationale and outcomes: the new deal for communities programme in England’, Urban Studies, 43(11), 1991–2011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levan, V. (2005) ‘Making public housing safer in France: the gentle rise of situational crime prevention?’, Champ Penal, http://champpenal.revues.org/65.
,Live Strategy (2002) Telephone Survey into Attitudes Towards Gated Communities in England, for the Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors (Unpublished data, on file with author).
,London Borough of Camden (2006) Camden Planning Guidance December 2006, www.camden.gov.uk/ccm/cms-service/stream/asset/?asset_id=563105.
Low, S. (2003) Behind the Gates: Life, Security and the Pursuit of Happiness in Fortress America, London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Lupton, R. (2003) Neighbourhood Effects: Can We Measure Them and Does It Matter? CASE paper 73, London: Centre for the Analysis of Social Exclusion, London School of Economics.Google Scholar
McKenzie, E. (1994) Privatopia: Homeowner Associations and the Rise of Residential Private Government, New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Manzi, T. and Smith-Bowers, B. (2005) ‘Gated communities as club goods: segregation or social cohesion?’, Housing Studies, 20, 345–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matthews, R. (2002) ‘Crime and control in late modernity: review essay’, Theoretical Criminology, 6(2), 217–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Merry, S. E. (2001) ‘Spatial governmentality and the new urban social order: controlling gender violence through law’, American Anthropologist, 103(1), 16–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Newman, O. (1973) Defensible Space: Crime Prevention Through Urban Design, New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Newman, O. (1995) ‘Defensible space: a new physical planning tool for urban revitalisation’, Journal of the American Planning Association, 61, 149–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
,Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (2003) Sustainable Communities: Building for the Future, London: HMSO.Google Scholar
,Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (2004) Safer Places: The Planning System and Crime Prevention, London: HMSO.Google Scholar
,Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (2005) Citizen Engagement and Public Services: Why Neighbourhoods Matter, London: HMSO.Google Scholar
O'Malley, P. (1999) ‘Governmentality and the risk society’, Economy and Society, 28, 138–48.Google Scholar
Perry, R. W. (2000) ‘Governmentalities in city-scapes’, Political and Legal Anthropology Review, 23(2), 65–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Putnam, R. D. (2000) Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community, New York: Simon and Schuster.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reich, C. (1964) ‘The new property’, Yale Law Journal, 73, 733–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rose, N. (1994) ‘Expertise and the government of conduct’, Studies in Law, Politics and Society, 14, 359–97.Google Scholar
Rose, N. (1996) ‘The death of the social? Re-figuring the territory of government’, Economy and Society, 25(3), 327–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rose, N. (2000) ‘Government and control’, British Journal of Criminology, 40, 321–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sampson, R. and Raudenbush, S. (1999) ‘Systematic observation of public spaces: a new look at disorder in urban neighbourhoods’, American Journal of Sociology, 105, 603–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sanchez, T. W., Lang, R. E. and Dhavale, D. (2005) ‘Security versus Status? A first look at the census's gated community data’, Journal of Planning Education and Research, 24, 281–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saunders, P. (1990) A Nation of Home Owners, London: Unwin and Hyman.Google Scholar
Simester, A. and Hirsch, A. P. (2006) ‘Regulating offensive conduct through two-step prohibitions’ in Hirsch, A. P. and Simester, A. (eds.), Incivilities: Regulating Offensive Behaviour, Oxford: Hart, pp. 173–95.Google Scholar
Simon, J. (2007) Governing through Crime: How the War on Crime Transformed American Democracy and Created a Culture of Fear, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
,Social Exclusion Unit (1998) Bringing Britain Together: A National Strategy for Neighbourhood Renewal, London: SEU.Google Scholar
Stenson, K. (2001) ‘The new politics of crime control’ in Stenson, K. and Sullivan, R. R. (eds.), Crime, Risk and Justice: The Politics of Crime Control in Liberal Democracies, Cullompton: Willan, pp. 15–28.Google Scholar
Sutton, A., Cherney, A. and White, R. (2008) Crime Prevention: Principles, Perspectives and Practices, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
,Urban Design Alliance (2003) Design for Cohesive Communities, Written Evidence Memorandum to the Select Committee on ODPM, Session 2002–3, London: HMSO.Google Scholar
Valverde, M. (1996) ‘“Despotism” and ethical liberal governance’, Economy and Society, 25(3), 357–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, J. Q. and Kelling, G. L. (1982) ‘Broken windows’, Atlantic Monthly, March, 29–38.Google Scholar
Wilson Doenges, G. (2000) ‘An explanation of sense of community and fear of crime in gated communities’, Environment and Behaviour, 32(5), 597–611.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilton, R. D. (1998) ‘The constitution of difference: space and psyche in landscapes of exclusion’, GeoForum, 29, 173–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wood, M. (2004) Perceptions and Experiences of Antisocial Behaviour, London: Home Office.Google Scholar
Young, J. (1999) The Exclusive Society: Social Exclusion, Crime and Difference in Late Modernity, London: Sage.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×