Skip to start of content

Conference Papers

Can surveillance cameras be successful in preventing crime and controlling anti-social behaviours?

Adrienne Isnard
Townsville City Council, Queensland

Presented at:
The Character, Impact and Prevention of Crime in Regional Australia
1-3 August, 2001
Jupiters Hotel, Townsville

Abstract

Whilst surveillance camera projects are being installed at an amazing rate around the world to address a wide range of crimes and in an effort to prevent crimes, the limited evaluations that have been conducted to date (and they are very few and even less of those are unbiased enough to be of any use) do not point to an overwhelming success of such projects to even adequately meet their goals.

Surveillance cameras may have a place as part of a holistic approach to crime prevention and can be particularly useful as part of a CPTED strategy to reduce in particular vandalism to public infrastructure in particular areas, but local governments need to put in place protocols to prevent the surveillance systems from being abused by operators. Also, where surveillance cameras are most effective needs to be considered.

This paper will set out cautions and highlight the pitfalls that must be considered before a surveillance camera project is embarked on. It has been argued that the cost of surveillance systems (which do not stop at purchasing and installing the hardware but must include the cost of monitoring and maintenance) far outweigh their ability to save money, prevent crime and improve public perceptions of safety. Such systems are open to abuse (voyerism and as a way to control particularly vulnerable members of our society who do not meet so-called society norms to name just two) and can be used as an excuse to reduce police numbers in key areas. Because of the political (but unjustified) popularity of surveillance cameras other, more cost and socially effective and acceptable strategies to combat particular crimes, are not getting the consideration they deserve.