BULACAN STATE UNIVERSITY

College of Architecture and Fine Arts

City of Malolos, Bulacan 3000, Philippines
Tel. NO. (044) 919-7800 to 99 local cafabsu@live.com

Passive Crime Control Through

Environmental Design (CPTED) in
Philippine Economic and Socialized Housing
A paper presented to the College of Architecture and Fine Arts
in partial fulfillment of the requirements in RM 423

Submitted by:
Batas, Ricah Anne P.
14-114535

BSAR 4A

Submitted to:
Ar. Geronimo R. Lajom

Saturday, 12 May 2018

Table of Contents

Chapter 1
Introduction ……………………………..…………………………………………………………….. 1
A. The Problem and Its Setting
a. Background of the Study …………………………………………………………….. 2
b. Statement of the Problem …………………………………………………………….. 5
c. Goals and Objectives …….…………………………………………………………….. 5
d. Scope and Limitations ...…………………………………………………………….. 7
e. Significance of the Study …………………………………………………………….. 7
f. Assumptions ………………….…………………………………………………………….. 8
g. Definition of Terms …….…………………………………………………………….. 8
B. Review of Related Literature .………………………………………………………….. 9
C. Theoretical/Conceptual Framework ……………………………………………….. 18
D. Methodology of Research ……………………………………………………………….. 19
E. Bibliography …………………….……………………………………………………………….. 21
 CHAPTER 1

Introduction

In the Philippines, demand and supply of housing is crucial especially in the

urban sector. Factors like location or distance from employment, inadequate basic
services, and quality of security and protection influence the demand of housing
programs. When not met, housing programs became ineffective, demand declines then
backlog continues. Most towns and cities in the country have been unprepared for the
rapid rate and high level of urbanization that exerted tremendous pressure on
towns/cities’ infrastructure and basic services. This lack of access to infrastructure and
basic services led to the growth of unregulated settlements or slums.

While slums are characterized for having poor environment, due to evident
environmental deprivation and urban poverty, slum sectors then breed urban crime.
This is determined by their uncontrolled social, economic, and ecological
environments. In regenerating cities, improving these low-income sectors needs to be
put into focus. Government has tolerated the growth of slums while the housing market
has not been able to keep pace with urban housing demand. Thus, calls for housing
program empowerment with an environment fit for the low-income communities in
consideration with environmental safety and security.

1
A. The Problem and Its Setting

a. Background of the Study

Urbanization has brought extreme problems and advancements in a society. The

urbanization process has been accompanied by significant migration to metropolitan
areas where most urban activities are concentrated. The economic opportunities in
towns and cities attract low and middle-income people from the rural areas in search of
new or better income opportunities (Ballesteros, 2010). Implications of urban growth
have created an increased demand for housing. With this, sustainable development
aimed by cities are affected. The role of human settlements in achieving sustainable
development has been brought into sharp focus with the phenomenon of urbanization.
Uncontrolled migration has led to the proliferation of slums, squatter areas and sidewalk
shops. It is estimated that in Metro Manila alone, 5.48 million or 61.2% of the eight
million population are squatters. The urban poor are also beset with high cost of living,
financial difficulties, unstable jobs, lack of capital, limited educational opportunities,
inadequate health and sanitation, and shortage of housing. National and local
government planners and implementers therefore face increasing demands for urban
services like public transportation, garbage collection, piped water, electricity, schools
and health facilities. Deterioration of living conditions in urban areas has produced its
share of juvenile delinquency, drug dependency, prostitution, mental illness, physical
disability, suicides, family and personal disorganization, environmental degradation,
pollution, garbage and sewerage disposals, traffic jams and congestion, conditions that
create fertile breeding grounds for crime (Sanidad-Leones, 2006).

In the Philippines, slums are characterized by poor sanitation, overcrowded and

crude habitation, inadequate water supply, hazardous location and insecurity of tenure.
Their bad habitat has adverse implications to health and peace of mind that deepens
income poverty. The main asset of the poor is labor but bad environment makes this
asset vulnerable to poor health and mental stress. The impact on physical and mental
health reduces the productivity of the poor, causes fragile family relations due to
irritation and frustration, poor school performance of children and higher vulnerability
to commit crimes and violence (Ballesteros, 2010). Thus, deprives people of a quality
of life to have better incomes and gainful environment.

2
 Over the years, resettlement programs like socialized and economic housing
programs for slums have shown to largely failed due to issues linked with safety and
sustainability. Government approach to housing has always been client-based targeting
specific beneficiaries and measuring accomplishments in terms of individual housing
assistance hence concerns about the community and the environment of the poor have
not really been translated into investment programs. In today’s setting, the country’s
socio-economic housing programs develop a kind of environment susceptible to crime
as studies link poverty and the environment to crime, fear of crime and victimization.
Housing and slum reform projects that simply concentrated in engineering and
construction solutions failed because they also failed to consult with and involve the
people’s needs for whom they were intended. Without such input, security features are
likely to be resented, taken down, or evaded (Harell & Taylor, 1996).

Crime prevention through environmental design (CPTED) is one of the most

popular urban planning strategies for improving safety in cities. The use of design and
CPTED ideas goes back a long way and CPTED-style security measures can be traced
to early human settlements. These include the establishment of iron-age forts and
castles, which used landscaping, walls, moats, and drawbridges to control access
(Schneider and Kitchen 2002). CPTED (pronounced ‘‘sep-ted’’ and also known as
Designing out Crime) draws on ideas that argue that it is possible to use the built urban
form to reduce opportunities for crime. Some of the more recent origins of CPTED can
be traced to Jane Jacobs (1961), C. Ray Jeffery (1969, 1971), and Oscar Newman (1972,
1973), among others. Though widely used for decades, the concept still faces criticisms
acknowledging its problems and limitations.

For the crime prevention side, these are the problems and limitations of CPTED:
(a) “One size fits all” as one of its limitations. For example, one of its principles –
territoriality may not be universal, the cultural context will be important. (b) There are
contradictions between its principles – e.g. surveillance versus territoriality. For
example, a high fence may keep people out, but once they are over the fence, it will
block surveillance from the street. (c) CPTED also carries much historical baggage.
The principles and theories haven’t been combined into an integrated model, but
lumped together in a rather arbitrary way, like bricks thrown into a barrel at successive
times. This has resulted in duplication, overlaps and gaps. Regarding knowledge
management, in most guidebooks the main principles are simply placed side by side,

3
requiring each user to fit them together as best they can. Simple in appearance,
confusing in practice. Generally, CPTED fails to consider the whole system, humans
and all, and focuses too exclusively on the physical aspect. Consequently, given that
more than half of the World’s population is now urbanized and is projected to rise to
60 percent by 2030 (van Ginkel and Marcotullio 2007), it is argued that ideas of CPTED
are increasingly important and in need of review.

Meanwhile in the Philippine setting, the use of traditional crime interventions,

defined by the exclusive use on labor-intensive procedures (e.g., security guards and
police patrols) and capital-intensive mechanical/electronic devices (e.g., security
cameras, locks, and fences), only present larger risks in increasing crime rates (Cozens
& Love, 2015). Studies have documented that when innocent people see instruments
which are intended to protect, they feel less safe and have heightened fear reactions. On
the other hand, these are the challenges which passive security aims to solve: quietly
protecting people. A design feature which deters threats while remaining largely
invisible to its users, and without the ongoing maintenance and energy costs that
traditional security entails which basically fits the low-income community setting.

Society is always changing – now, faster than ever. CPTED must pursue a
moving target and become adaptable itself. Thus, the need to explore passive strategies
of CPTED. And to re-work CPTED comprehensively means the core concepts should
all be cast in terms of the same discourse/s (functional, causal-mechanistic, perceptual,
technical etc.) and highlight its passive strategies that fits with the Philippine socialized
and economic housing setting.

4
b. Statement of the Problem

Main Problem:

The low-income community, given their social, economic, and ecological status
is characterized by poor living environment which created impact on their physical and
mental health. This lead into reduced productivity thus increasing vulnerability to
crime, fear of crime, and violence. Subsequently, in consideration to the socio-cultural
and economic factors, how can passive CPTED measures decrease environmental
deprivation in Philippine socio-economic housing setting towards effective crime
control?

Sub Problems:

1. The failure of CPTED to consider the whole system, humans and all, and its
too exclusive focus on the physical aspect, produces non-adaptive principles
and strategies towards behavioral changes determined by socio-cultural
context of the residents.

2. Crime prevention is often simplistically set against other design principles,

such as defensiveness versus accessibility, influencing the balance between
privacy and freedom versus security.

3. The exclusive use of labor-intensive procedures and capital-intensive

mechanical/electronic devices as traditional crime interventions affect
people’s feeling and heightened reactions towards safety, consequently
leading to resentment of such strategies.

c. Goals and Objectives

Goal: To develop design strategies in establishing a risk- and crime-free slum

community with consideration to their socio-economic systems.

Objective 1: To introduce design approaches that reinforce physical

environment adaption with desired human behavior induced by
socio-cultural aspects.

5
Strategies:

1. Conduct survey on slum areas to determine their socioeconomic and

demographic characteristics.
2. Conduct environmental behavioral studies on slum areas to determine
the relationship of the socio-cultural aspects with their way of living as
defined by the physical environment.
3. Conduct environmental behavioral studies on socio-economic housing
programs to determine behavior adjustments brought about by new
environment.
4. Thorough analyses on crime prevention strategies with concepts relating
to behavior-based physical environments through secondary sources.

Objective 2: To enhance overlapping and opposing principles of CPTED that

will aid in balancing privacy and security of users.

Strategies:

1. Conduct thorough analyses on individual principles of CPTED and its

applications and criticisms from secondary sources and case studies.
2. Conduct interviews on residents in slum areas regarding their perception
to privacy to determine specific design strategies of CPTED to be used.
3. Conduct interviews on residents in socio-economic housing programs
regarding their perception to privacy given by their new environment.

Objective 3: To present passive design strategies from principles of CPTED that

will influence the users’ perception towards neighborhood crime.

Strategies:

1. Thorough analyses on local traditional crime prevention strategies.

2. Interview a professional specializing in government housing programs
to determine common problems on crime in the Philippine housing
setting in terms of perception to crime, privacy and security.
3. Conduct survey on slum areas and socio-economic housing programs
regarding their perception to passive crime prevention strategies.

6
e. Scope and Limitations

Scope:

The study will only cover slum households from urban areas in the Philippines.
It includes those who are poor due to inadequate income and those non-income poor
but are environmentally deprived. All data that are relevant to the study will be
presented as long as it is significant. This includes local and foreign data collection and
analysis regarding sustainable and crime-reduced environments, and CPTED -
extending to its concepts of origin. While environmental design focuses mainly on
physical aspects determined by social, economic, and cultural influences only, in its
applications to Philippine socialized and economic housing only.

Limitations:

There will be limitations upon conducting the study. Having a time frame of
almost only a month of research period, the inquisition of enough local data that will
be gathered using behavioral studies, interviews and surveys will be affected. Thus
quality and credibility of results from analyses may be low. Also, availability of
updated and local data may be a problem due to the ignorance to the concept of CPTED
in the Philippines. However, several case studies and data from the internet and other
secondary sources will be used as extensive research.

f. Significance of the Study

Mainly, slum population will be the direct beneficiaries of the study. Creating
an improved environment for them that well-suits their needs and adversity accordingly
will improve their lives. This environment may help inhabitants in uplifting status and
confidence in the society. Also, these new and cheaper quality neighborhoods will
encourage other minimum wage earners that are not categorized slums to opt to settle
in such communities.

The study will also indirectly benefit the government. For this may serve as a
basis and guide in planning more efficient communities. It will not only help raise
concerns in these marginalized sectors of the society, but also help the government
towards the aim for sustainable development. While the interests of private housing
developers in continuously investing in programs for the poor may be increased upon
the creation of new and sustainable designs of increased demand. Lastly, in a larger

7
context, the study will help addressing urban sprawl, revitalization of housing sectors
supports urban regeneration.

e. Assumptions

In line with the Philippine Housing Industry Roadmap: 2012-2030 by the

Subdivision & Housing Developers Association, Inc. (SHDA), this study helps promote
the country’s goal for sustainable development. Funding will be allocated by the
government through the SHDA to attain its vision of eliminating housing backlog by
2030. While the Housing and Land Use Regulatory Board (HLURB) will be using this
study as a guideline for creating more safety-oriented policies not only in housing but
also in other structures.

g. Definition of Terms

• Low-income household. Families who earn an average of Php 9,061 per month.
• Slums. Connote poverty, congestion, filth, dilapidated structures and inadequate
basic services. It is a social condition and is also a consequence of poverty. In
this condition, neighborhoods are beyond the margin of the law because housing
does not bring about structural quality and does not meet existing standards of
ownership.
• Environmental deprivation. Absence of physical environmental conditions that
can contribute to good health and wellbeing.
• Socialized and economic housing. Refers to housing programs and projects
covering houses and lots or home lots only undertaken by the government or
the private sector for the unprivileged and homeless citizens which shall include
sites and services development, long term financing, liberalized terms on
interest payments, and such other benefits.
• Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED). The proper design
and effective use of the built environment can lead to a reduction in the fear and
incidence of crime, and an improvement in the quality of life
• Traditional crime intervention- the exclusive use on labor-intensive procedures
(e.g., security guards and police patrols) and capital-intensive
mechanical/electronic devices (e.g., security cameras, locks, and fences)
• Passive architecture. Design which does not make use of human and mechanical
interventions.

8
B. Review of Related Literature

TITLE: Linking Poverty and the Environment

Slums are characterized by their environment with poor sanitation, overcrowded

and crude habitation, inadequate water supply, hazardous location and conflicts with
secured property rights. Their way of living and living conditions denote poverty in
terms of both inadequate incomes and environmental deprivation. As the people living
in slums are highly vulnerable to different forms of risks – both natural and man-made,
they tend to have lower productivity and even more vulnerable to crime and violence.
Slums have the most unsafe and unhealthy living conditions in urban areas.

Not all households in slums are income poor. Slum poverty covers a wider
segment of the urban population. It includes those who are poor due to inadequate
incomes and those non-income poor but are environmentally deprived. Only about 32%
of the total slum population are poor based on national poverty lines of Php 20,688 per
capita. While there are minimum wage earners and casual workers who continue to live
in slums because there is no alternative and they cannot afford the cost of traveling from
distant less expensive peri urban regions for work and income earning opportunities in
urban centers.

In addition, slum poverty is primarily urban environmental poverty. The low

incomes of households in slum communities are the basis for their environmental
poverty. However, their bad habitat has poor implications to health and peace of mind
that deepens income poverty. The main asset of the poor is labor but bad environment
makes this asset susceptible to poor health and mental stress. The impact on physical
and mental health reduces the productivity of the poor, causes fragile family relations
due to irritation and frustration, poor school performance of children and higher
vulnerability to commit crimes and violence.

TITLE: The need for Housing Programs Empowerment

Government programs for urban poor shelter have barely addressed the housing
backlog. In the government’s action agenda towards poverty alleviation, the
development of the Philippine housing sector or more specifically the sector of low-
cost housing, is its major component. The National Housing Authority administers
resettlement programs for families with income below the poverty threshold

9
specifically for families displaced from sites earmarked for government infrastructure
project or those in areas identified as danger zones. However, the implementation of
these schemes has been constraint by several issues. First, Presidential Land
Proclamations are constrained by several bureaucratic legalities that prevent the
utilization of proclaimed lands for settlement in addition to the absence of financing
scheme to develop these lands for the poor. Second, the resettlement housing sites of
the NHA are often in areas far from the livelihood or place of work of beneficiaries.
Third, the housing loan facility those who are employed in the formal sector and limits
access of the poor who are mostly engage in the informal sector.

Government programs for housing the poor do not address urban environmental
poverty. Government approach to housing has always been client-based targeting
specific beneficiaries and measuring accomplishments in terms of individual housing
assistance thus concerns about the community and the environment of the poor have
not really been translated into investment programs.

TITLE: Livable Cities

Livable city integrates the safe city concept and defined to focus on the crime
problem in urbanized areas. In recent years, it is also suggested that community crime
prevention has some effect to an activation of local communication and improvement
of residents’ sense of security. Research have provided evidence that areas
characterized by limited prospect, blocked escape and high concealment evoke fear and
those physical environmental characteristics associated with higher levels of crime,
then declining community stability.

Stability in the neighborhood is theorized to lead to more primary and secondary

ties in a neighborhood, which in turn leads to greater neighborhood social control.
Residential stability refers to the amount of change in the population level of a
neighborhood. Extreme fluctuations in this denotes unsustainable and inefficient
neighborhood.

TITLE: Surveys of public safety

As an important dimension of the quality of life, public safety has always been
part of the core agenda of Social Weather Stations. The questionnaires of the standard
Social Weather Surveys—twice a year in 1986-91, quarterly since 1992—have two

10
modules on public safety. One module has questions about the victimization of families
by crime. A second asks about public anxiety as to the safety of the home and of
neighborhood streets. With these modules, the SWS surveys provide regular statistical
indicators of public safety —i.e., as reported by representative samples of Filipinos.

Victimization by common crimes. In a standard SWS survey, the respondent

(an adult drawn at random from the household members) is asked if anyone in the
family was a victim of the following common crimes at any time in the past six months:
a) pickpocketing or robbery of personal property anywhere outside the home; b) break-
in or burglary of the home itself; c) theft of any motor vehicle; and d) physical violence.

A large proportion of crimes are not captured by the police blotter, since they
are not reported by victims to the police at all. From other survey probes done from
time to time, we have learned that many victims: a) consider some crimes too minor to
be worth the effort to report them; b) do not trust the police to recover their stolen
property or to capture the criminals; c) are afraid of retaliation by the criminals; d) are
related to the criminals and so are willing to let them go unpunished; etc.

Perceived insecurity of the home and the neighborhood. The second module of
items about public safety in the quarterly Social Weather Surveys has three
“agree/disagree” questions about the security of the neighborhood:

1) “In this neighborhood, people are usually afraid that robbers might break into their
homes.”

2) “In this neighborhood, people are usually afraid to walk the streets at night because
it is not safe.” The first two questions are quite traditional in other countries’ surveys;
they have been in all Social Weather Surveys ever since 1986.

3) “In this neighborhood, there are already too many people addicted to banned drugs.”
This question was introduced in 2005 and maintained thereafter.

Title: Crime: Violent Victimization, Fear of Crime, and Social Isolation

Public housing is associated with serious social problems, including crime.

Researchers have found that inhabitants’ fear of crime rooted from perceptions of the
community and assessment of police effectiveness. Apparently, studies indicate that in
areas showing visible signs of economic decline and physical deterioration (e.g.,

11
abandoned buildings, littered streets and sidewalks, graffitied walls), fear of crime is
high. Moreover, in disadvantaged urban neighborhoods characterized by a high level
of trust among neighbors and a shared willingness among neighbors to help one
another, fear of crime and rates of violent victimization are lessened. When “collective
efficacy” or community cohesion is present, only then is fear of crime minimized if not
eliminated.

Study on forms and perception of crime was conducted in Camden, New Jersey.
Interviews from women inhabitants were analyzed and resulted into three major
themes: (1) experiences of violent victimization; (2) fear of crime; and (3) social
isolation.

1. Theme One: Experiences of Violent Victimization

Violent victimization experiences included having been punched or hit, beaten

up and/or sexually assaulted by husband, boyfriend, relative, or acquaintance.

2. Theme Two: Fear of Crime

Results inhabitants from not going out alone at night, keeping their doors and
windows locked when they are at home to prevent violent victimization from the hands
of strangers.

3. Theme Three: Social Isolation

One sub-theme was distrust of the police and the second was distrust of or
unfamiliarity with neighbors.

TITLE: Causes of Crimes Associated with Urbanization

1. Poverty. Many authorities in the field of criminal justice say that poverty is a major
cause of crime. This is not of course to say that it follows that a person who wallows in
wealth cannot be a criminal. Many crimes are committed even by the rich. Furthermore,
many people mired in poverty, have remained respectable and exemplary citizens. It is
evident that poverty Per Se is not the only reason or cause but it is a major predispositive
factor.

2. Lost Family Values. Today as the country becomes more and more industrialized,
there is an evident loosening of family ties the family gets together less and less as a
group, with all members present, except during special events. Each member of the

12
family has his own schedule of activities, his own interests, his own friends. All these
factors prevent family members from having opportunities for cooperative activity,
preventing the development of strong personal relationships.

3. Working Mothers. The employment and exodus of women from the home where
mothers like me have to be employed, some out of necessity others to augment the
family income, have somehow contributed directly or indirectly to the commission of
crimes.

4. Ignorance. Many become victims of crime because they are not aware of the modus
operandi of crime syndicates and are not crime prevention-conscious. Often times,
instances of miscarriage of justice on the part of either the offender or the victim, could
be blamed on their ignorance.

5. Injustices/Abuses These constitute the powerful motives for most of the crime against
persons perpetrated either by the victims or their loved ones as cases of revenge or
vendetta. Worse yet, these could serve also as the reason for the same criminals to yet
perform some more crime as a way of pre-empting a vendetta or silencing the victims
and/or their witnesses. The high propensity to avenge injustices/abuses among Filipinos
makes this factor abet crime in a very potent and violent manner.

6. Soft State. Non-enforcement of several laws and ordinances, massive graft and
corruption, absenteeism on the part of government officials or lack of basic services
give rise to the lack of discipline and low regard for the laws by the citizenry, which
spawn lawlessness and crime.

7. Fear. This problem is so pervasive that it affects practically the entire society.
whether rich or poor. People are afraid, not only while they are on the streets; but also
right inside their homes. Kidnapping for ransom, bank robberies/hold ups, murders,
homicides, crime against chastity and other heinous crimes instil so much fear among
the citizenry.

8. Others. There are many other breeding grounds of crime. (i) Movies that glorify
criminals and show a lot of violence and tabloids that depict lewd scenes contribute to
the rise in crime; (ii) Modern technology that tends to increase the capabilities of crime
syndicates to perpetrate more crimes that are becoming more difficult to bust and/or

13
solve; and (iii) Lack of sound crime prevention planning and the apathy of the
community towards involvement in anti-crime campaigns.

TITLE: Crime Prevention through Environmental Design

The closest thing to an ‘official’ definition of CPTED was given by Tim Crowe of the
US National Institute for Crime Prevention. CPTED is

The proper design and effective use of the built environment, that can lead to a
reduction in the fear and incidence of crime and an improvement in the quality
of life. …The goal of CPTED is to reduce opportunities for crime that may be
inherent in the design of structures or in the design of neighborhoods (2000:
46).

a. CPTED principles

There are seven main principles of CPTED.

• Defensible space (Newman 1972) is about designing buildings/enclosures to

help occupants, owners and users keep criminals out.

• Access control is more specifically about actively keeping certain people out of
buildings/enclosures, and the structures, procedures and technologies to achieve
this, whilst admitting those people with a right to be there.

• Territoriality covers the human motivation to control space, who enters it and
what people do within it. Good designs increase this motivation (although
territoriality can have a negative side, with gang turf for example (Kintrea et al.
2008)).

• Surveillance concerns how design and technology can help people acting as
crime preventers, whether police, employees, owners or general public, to see
or hear suspicious people or criminal behaviour, and take some appropriate
action.

• Target hardening is about making physical structures like walls, windows and
doors resistant to attack and penetration by criminals.

• Image covers the appearance of a building, place or neighbourhood, not just

aesthetics but relating also to social reputation and stigma of the place and its
inhabitants. These factors can increase crime levels or feelings of insecurity,

14
 and harm economic regeneration. Maintenance contributes to appearance,
obviously, but also to issues like effectiveness of security systems.

• Activity support is a more dynamic, yet more nebulous concept. It concerns the
beneficial effect of having significant numbers of people in, or passing through,
a particular place, who are doing routine, honest activities like shopping or
dining. The rationale is that by their presence and behaviour they will deny
offenders some opportunities to commit crime. This doesn’t always apply
because committing some crimes, like pickpocketing, is easier in crowds.
b. CPTED Criticisms

CPTED is also in a rather strange position academically and professionally – a

disciplinary ‘No Man’s Land’. It’s isolated empirically and theoretically from the rest
of criminology and crime prevention, even from situational prevention; and isolated,
too, from the main body of design and architecture.

On the crime prevention side,

• There are problems with the individual principles of CPTED. For example,
territoriality may not be universal – the cultural context will be important.

• There are contradictions between its principles – e.g. surveillance versus

territoriality. For example, a high fence may keep people out, but once they are over
the fence, it will block surveillance from the street.

• And (as said above) the detailed criminological evidence base needs developing on
the specific risks of crime which CPTED seeks to tackle, and what interventions
work in what contexts. Broken windows theory in particular, while plausible, has
received only partial support from research;1 but CPTED practitioners often
uncritically accept it.

• CPTED also carries much historical baggage. The principles and theories haven’t
been combined into an integrated model, but lumped together in a rather arbitrary
way, like bricks thrown into a barrel at successive times. This has resulted in
duplication, overlaps and gaps. Regarding knowledge management, in most

15
 guidebooks the main principles are simply placed side by side, requiring each user
to fit them together as best they can. Simple in appearance, confusing in practice.

On the design and architecture side,

• CPTED sometimes fails to consider the whole system, humans and all, and focuses
too exclusively on the physical aspect.

• Crime Prevention is often simplistically set against other design principles, such as
defensiveness versus accessibility, when design should be about creative
optimisation of all the relevant values and benefits. The Design Against Crime
Research Centre, for example, aims to create designs which are simultaneously
user-friendly whilst abuser unfriendly, of high aesthetic quality, which are not
‘vulnerability-led’ and avoid being fear-enhancing ‘paranoid products’ (Gamman
and Thorpe 2007).

• Many police users of CPTED in practice see ‘design’ as a set of physical

products/buildings – one of many alternative domains of intervention. Design
should also be seen as a process – a creative, innovative but disciplined way of
doing and thinking, which applies to all kinds of crime prevention.

TITLE: Passive Architecture

Passive security in architecture can be broadly defined as “a design feature which deters
threats while remaining largely invisible to its users.” Passive security is also
predominantly productless — so rather than existing as products to be specified, passive
security is about using good design to add a layer of privacy, security, and protection.

Active security is more readily visible and more in line with what most people
think of as traditional security. Examples include spiked gates, high fences, barbed
wire, metal detectors, security cameras, and armed security patrols. These security
options all project an outward signal of aggression and many of these will require
ongoing costs to maintain.

This tendency for active security to intimidate is the impetus for the passive
security movement. Active security may scare or intimidate its inhabitants and visitors.
Studies have documented that when innocent people see instruments which are intended
to protect, they feel less safe and have heightened fear reactions. While, crime

16
prevention has traditionally relied almost exclusively on labor-intensive procedures
(e.g., security guards and police patrols) and capital-intensive mechanical/electronic
devices (e.g., security cameras, locks, and fences) often significantly increasing
existing operating costs for personnel, equipment, and buildings.

17
 C. Theoretical/Conceptual Framework

PROBLEM
Slum community, characterized by poor
environment has greater vulnerability to crime, fear
of crime, and violence

CRIME PREVENTION CONCEPTS

Traditional Crime Crime Prevention Through

Prevention Strategies Environmental Design
LIMITATIONS

LIMITATIONS
Use of labor-extensive Imbalance on Non-adaptive
procedures and capital existing crime to behavioral
expensive present larger prevention strategies changes
risks in crime rate
RESEARCH TOPICS

Implications on Overlapping and

Passive Socio-
fear of crime contradictions between One size
security cultural
and safety principles of crime fits all
aspects
prevention strategies

Application on relocation housing programs

OBJECTIVES

Natural and practical security in Redesigned CPTED Behavioral based

physical environment through its key principles design environment

0
0
Concepts and Theories Integration
0
SUMMARIZED EFFECTS 0

Focused attention on
Reduced crime Increased housing
low-income
opportunities demand
community

OUTPUT
Passive Crime Prevention Through Environmental
Design (CPTED) in Philippine Socio-Economic Housing

18
D. Methodology of Research

People/Organization
Objectives Tactics Instruments Expected Output Time Frame
Involved
1. To determine -Conducting survey -People living in -Survey form -Current data on -From 10am to 3pm
qualities or urban slum areas -Pens socioeconomic and
characteristics demographic
present in urban slum characteristics of
areas urban slum areas
2. To determine -Conducting -People living in -Paper -List of specific - From 8am to 10pm
influences brought Environmental urban slum areas -Pen behaviors induced by
about by socio- Behavioral Study -Relocatees in -Camera the environment
cultural aspects to the (EBS) Philippine housing -Computer
physical environment -Browsing the programs -Internet connection -Library hours
internet
- Library research
3. To identify -Conducting -People living in -Computer -Review on CPTED -1 hour per
strengths and interviews urban slum areas -Internet connection criticisms interviewee
weaknesses of -Browsing the -Relocatees in -Paper -Data on CPTED -Library hours
CPTED internet Philippine housing -Pen principles’
- Library research programs -Books applications and
limitations
4. Identification of -Conducting -Planning -Voice recorder -Detailed analysis of -2-3 hours
needs of Philippine interviews professional, in -Interview form crime prevention
housing programs in charge of -Pen strategies used in the -Library hours

19
terms of -Browsing the implementation of -Paper Philippines and its
environmental and internet government housing -Computer effectivity
crime safety -Library research programs -Books
-People living in
urban slum areas
-Relocatees in
Philippine housing
programs

5. Identification of -Conducting survey -People living in -Survey form -List of specific -From 10am to 3pm
passive crime urban slum areas -Pens crime prevention
prevention strategies -Relocatees in strategies with
applicable in Philippine housing reduced influences on
neighborhood setting programs personal and public
safety and fear of
crime

20
E. Bibliography

Mangahas, M. (2016). Surveys of public safety. Social Weathers Stations.

Retrieved from http://opinion.inquirer.net/96633/surveys-of-public-safety.

Ballesteros, M.M. (December 2010). “Linking Poverty and the Environment:

Evidence from Slums in Philippine Cities”, Philippine Institute for
Development Studies.

Matsukawa A. (13 March 2018). “Crime Prevention Through Community

Empowerment: An Empirical Study if Social Capital in Kyoto, Japan”.

Newman, O. (April, 1996). “Creating Defensible Space”, U.S. Department of

Housing and Urban Development.

Renzetti, C. M., Maier, S. L. (December, 2002). ““Private” Crime in Public

Housing: Violent Victimization, Fear of Crime and Social Isolation Among
Women Public Housing Residents”, University of Kentucky.

Snell, C. (2001) “Neighborhood Structure, Crime and Fear of Crime: Testing

Bursik and Grasmick’s Neighborhood Control Theory”.

Crowe, T. D. (2013) “Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design”.

Izadifara, A., Yazdanfarb, S., Hosseinic, S., Norouzian-Malekid, S. (August 25-

27, 2014) “Relationship between Support of Social Activities and Fear of Crime
in Iran Residential Complex”, Asian Conference on Environment-Behaviour
Studies Chung-Ang University, Seoul, S. Korea.

Katyal, N.K. (2002). “Architecture as Crime Control”, Georgetown University

Law Center.

Sanidad-Leones. “The Current Situation of Crime Associated with

Urbanization: Problems Experienced and Countermeasures Initiated in the
Philippines”

Cozens, P., Love, T. (2015). “A Review and Current Status of Crime Prevention
through Environmental Design (CPTED)”, Journal of Planning Literature.

Ekblom, P. (2010) “Redesigning the Language and Concepts of Crime

Prevention Through Environmental Design”, University of the Arts London.
McKay, T. (2015). Behavioral based design. Retrieved from
https://www.peelpolice.ca/en/crimeprevention/resources/behaviouralbaseddesi
be4.pdf

Seung Lee J., Park S., Jung S., (2016). “Effect of Crime Prevention through
Environmental Design (CPTED) Measures on Active Living and Fear of
Crime”. Department of Urban Design and Planning, Hongik University, Korea

Waller I., (2009). Effective measures for the prevention of crime associated
with urbanization. Retrieved from www.unafei.or.jp/english/pdf/RS_No6
8/No68_09VE_Waller1.pdf