Beautiful architecture and crime-free streets go hand-in-hand | Charlie Pearson

The all but forgotten concept within psychology, traditionally known as ‘The Law of Broken Windows’, can be first attributed to the prominent psychologist Philip Zimbardo, whose experiment uncovered the theory in 1969. Albeit, this theory was made considerably more infamous by the former Mayor of New York City, Rudy Giuliani, who made a very public connection between crime, architecture and environment. 

The theory attests that the environmental surroundings of an individual can cause them to act in a criminal manner. Or at least, the finding of ‘broken windows’ - a metaphor for the grouping of ugliness (Kelling, 2016) - will make it more likely that criminal activity will occur in a particular area (Zimbardo, 1969). This theory has its foundations in many notable works, for example, in Jane Jacobs’ 1961 work ‘The Life and Death of Great American Cities’  as well as ‘The Yale Law Journal’ published in 2002 by Neal Katyal. 

Since the uncovering of this theory, they argue that the solution to crime and criminal activity is not just in policing the afflicted area but in designing obedience into the architecture of a community. Subsequently arguing that criminal behaviour can be hardwired into and can, therefore, be removed from a particular community based on the same principles.

The actions undertaken by the new orthodoxy within architecture has left a legacy that has far outlasted the buildings themselves, despite coming of age in a time when the theory of ‘Broken Windows’ was an established principle within architecture, or at least within criminology. Structures built since the 1950s have been influenced not by beauty, but by ideology (Scruton, 2011). They are seen as attempts to throw off the yoke of colonialism, proudly deconstructing the ‘stuffy’ classical order. Throwing off the constraints of the classical to have an attempt of stylistic freedom. They view other forms of architecture as constrained, old fashioned, and an embodiment of ‘colonial ideals’ from a bygone age and subsequently not fit for the modern utopia they seek to create. But what they create is an oppressive utopia for crime alone. 

The attempt to re-clad these ugly, brutalist high-rise buildings, often with dangerous, combustible material, in order to make them seem more appealing over recent years only masks the real issue. Many people are apathetic to the contributions these projects have on our inner cities. They are usually designed by architects who will never have to live in them or look at them, but the effect they have on ordinary people’s lives is profound. Why should policy makers ask the most vulnerable citizens to live in these high-rise blocks when they would not do so themselves?

A lack of a cohesive, naturally occurring community atmosphere with the implementation of highrise, high-density structures dating from the late 1940s/1950s and onwards have set to reduce and dehumanise the individual to a level where they are unimportant or even irrelevant. These structures are all in pursuit of the architect and their Orwellian ambition. There is considerable evidence to attribute these new architectural trends. A soulless, atomising, ugly environment manifests itself within the behaviour of those who inhabit those same structures. Paul Stollard as well as the U.S. National Institute of Justice 1996 report have written substantially on the importance of crime prevention through environmental and housing design. However, little if any action has been taken, especially within inner-city areas where the problem is most acute. 

But if there was a serious attempt at dismantling these physical barricades to community success and prevention of crime, in the same manner as they were imposed, then there would be significant benefits on not only the community within but also the surrounding community cohesion. This has been evidenced in numerous studies, but the most long standing example showed that when this approach was trialled in Rochdale in the U.K., wherein the Council created greater ‘permeability’ into the Town Square, wherein the increase of  people on the street led to a 75 per cent decrease in all crime (Jacobs, 1961). 

This trend is also seen on a national scale too. For example, the City of Bath, classical and beautiful in its architectural style, has an overall crime rate of ‘low/very low’ with antisocial behaviour at 72 per cent the national average. Despite this, Bath remains a fairly affluent city, therefore comparing it with other towns can prove an obstacle. This contrasts with London boroughs, where the rate is over three times the national average (Plumplot, 2019). Evidently, one cannot compare these places on an even keel, however, there is much evidence that the deprivation brought about by decaying, ugly, brutalist projects in some London boroughs adds to the absence of community and therefore contributes to criminal activity. These large, unneighbourly, high density plots are one of the most prevalent reasons why crime rates are so high in inner cities (Yancey, 1971). Evidence suggests that grouping more than 12 apartments together in one single building with multiple entrances and exits gives rise to criminal gangs and detracts from neighbours identifying who lives in their own building, let alone their own community (Taylor & Harrell 1996).

Not only does a dreary built environment increase the risk of crime, it also has an impact on people’s ‘fear of crime’ (Stollard, 1990) - something which is often not mentioned – resulting in its impact being frequently overlooked. It has also become evident that the perception of becoming a victim of crime, due in part to the location one is in, has not only an impact on the individual but also on the local community. Therefore, this becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy for already deprived locations where people do not visit because of the perceived fear they will become a victim. So these people often refrain from moving to that area unless they have no other option. That results in residents of the area not taking pride or even liking where they live, letting the decay run on further. This is something that cannot be combated with CCTV and policing alone. In fact, an increase in policing may be taken as an affront to the community and, therefore, in accordance with logic, provokes some members of it to become hostile towards the police. 

It can be logically argued that there is evidence to back up the case that ugliness begets ugliness and, to follow on logically, beauty begets beauty. Architecture over the decades has shaped our society, meaning there must be action taken to prevent absence of community and a rise in criminal activity - something that has become ever more prevalent over the post-war decades. Although the destruction of historic buildings, as well as what can be termed a lack of effort placed into beautifying new ones, will not solve the issue, it is evident that there is a growing need to tackle crime from every angle, including this one.