Theory of broken windows.
I was walking home when noticed this mirror on the side of the road. “I hope no one will break it before it’s gone”,- I thought and continued my day. The next morning, however, I faced an unpleasant reality. The mirror was smashed several times. The day after that I noticed a cigarette butt in one of its holes. And this morning passing through MOK, one of my most favorite specialty coffee shops in Brussels, I couldn’t not to pay attention to the enormous crack in the window that was absent a day earlier. It all happened within one week. How weird I thought… can it be somehow connected?
There exists a very interesting and unique theory called the broken windows theory. It’s a part of criminology that is also recognized in urbanism as it’s tightly connected to the urban environment. And I was lucky enough to observe it in real life in my own neighborhood.
Living in the area of the “new Dansaert” in Brussels is both exciting and challenging. With years, this neighborhood has transformed from a dangerous and ghostly looking region of the center to an eye-pleasing modern hipster district. Almost all repulsive stores and bars were replaced by distinctive conceptual boutiques and buffets. But it’s not that easy to change the public and it’s behavior that has strengthened throughout decades. Thus, the number one priority for the municipality is to preserve the “new” and safer order of things. One of the ways to do that is to keep the neighborhood clean and neat. If this rule is not followed the theory of broken windows will kick in and will show once again the compulsory character of these preventive actions.
The broken windows theory holds that visible indicators of disorder, such as vandalism, loitering, public drinking, jaywalking, and broken windows, create an urban environment that promotes even more crime and civil disorder. Even though this proposition has met criticism and was pointed to the lack of clear causal relationship between the absence of order and crime, it still is very fascinating to note this correlation.
In a typical urban environment, social norms and monitoring are not clearly known. As a result, individuals will look for certain signs and signals that provide both insight into the social standards of the area as well as the risk of getting caught violating those rules.
Those who support this theory argue that area’s general appearance is one of those indicators. An ordered habitat, one that is safe, sends the message that it is routinely monitored and criminal acts are not tolerated.
On the contrary, a disordered environment, one that contains visible acts of lawlessness, sends the message that this neighborhood isn’t routinely monitored and individuals would be more likely to get away with committing a crime.
This way, in neighborhoods that do have a strong sense of social cohesion among its residents, the “broken windows” are fixed, giving these areas a sense of control over their communities. By fixing these windows, undesired individuals and behaviors are removed, allowing civilians to feel safer (Herbert&Brown,2006).
According to Wilson & Kelling’s (1982) broken windows theory, physical and social disorders exercise a causal effect on criminal behavior. Disruption does so directly, as it signals to criminals community indifference to crime, and indirectly, as disorder vandalizes informal social control. Disengaged from the neighborhood, fearful inhabitants increasingly feel that combatting crime is the duty of others. Ironically, indications of local disorganization produce fear of crime in residents because they deem a causal effect of disorder on crime. Eventually, as crime increases, occupants with sufficient resources begin to leave the neighborhood, taking their capital with them, which sabotages both community resources and the capacity for informal social control (Wilson & Kelling 1982).
This indirect effect is a neighborhood-level causal mechanism: Dense disruption causes residents to withdraw, eroding neighborhood control, which fosters crime.
These two pathways form feedback loops, creating a cascading effect of crime spreading across physical spaces. As Wilson & Kelling (1982) note, one broken window (signaling indifference) is often followed by another until all windows appear to be fractured.
So application of the theory can lead to better and safer cities?
Well, it does not only have the bright side..
Broken windows policing has sometimes become associated with fanaticism, which has led to critics suggesting that it encourages discriminatory behaviour. (Case study: New York police department adopting the BWT).
A central statement is that the notion of disorder is vague, and offers the police broad discretion to decide what disturbance will lead to discrimination. In the article of Dorothy Roberts, Foreword: Race, Vagueness, and the Social Meaning of Order Maintenance and Policing, she says that broken windows theory in practice leads to the criminalization of disenfranchised communities of color. She underscores the dangers of vaguely written ordinances that allow for law enforcers to determine who engages in disorderly acts, which, in turn, produce a racially skewed outcome in crime statistics.
Besides, a common criticism of broken windows policing is the argument that it criminalizes the poor and homeless. That is because the material signs that indicate a neighborhood with the disturbance, according to who is targeted by the broken windows policing, correlate with the socio-economic conditions of its residents. Many legal but untidy acts are often targeted in public settings and never in private. Therefore, those without access to an individual space are frequently criminalized.
According to Bruce D. Johnson, Andrew Golub, and James McCabe, the application of the broken windows theory in policing and policymaking can result in expansion projects that reduce physical disorder but promote undesired gentrification. Often, when a city is changed in this way, the development of an area can cause the cost of living to rise higher than residents can afford, which forces low-income individuals out of the neighborhood. As the space changes, the middle and upper classes begin to move into the area, resulting in the gentrification of urban, poor areas. The local residents are affected negatively by such an application of the broken windows theory and end up evicted from their homes as if their presence indirectly contributed to the issue of physical disorder in the community.
Bibliography:
Charlotte Ruhl, Marketing Associate Analyst B.A. “Broken Windows Theory of Criminology.” Simply Psychology, 8 Feb. 2023, www.simplypsychology.org/broken-windows-theory.html.
Dorothy E. Roberts, The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology (1973-)
Vol. 89, No. 3 (Spring, 1999), pp. 775-836 (62 pages)
Published By: Northwestern University Pritzker School of Law
Daniel O’Brien. “How Broken Windows DO -and Do Not- Matter.” Scholars Strategy Network, scholars.org/contribution/how-broken-windows-do-and-do-not-matter. Accessed 17 June 2023.
Lanfear, Charles C, et al. “Broken Windows, Informal Social Control, and Crime: Assessing Causality in Empirical Studies.” Annual Review of Criminology, Jan. 2020, www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8059646/.
“Broken Windows Theory.” Wikipedia, 4 June 2023, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broken_windows_theory#:~:text=In%20criminology%2C%20the%20broken%20windows,and%20disorder%2C%20including%20serious%20crimes.
Cover source: http://pictures.4ever.eu/buildings/old-window-199756