Gared Communities
Gated communities in England as a response to crime and disorder: context, effectiveness and implications
Sarah Blandy
Abstract
Gated communities, meaning residential developments which restrict access by non-residents and have a specifically collective legal framework, are a recent global phenomenon. The paper discusses aspects of neo-liberalism which may explain their growth: increasing fear of crime alongside commodification, the movement from community to individualism, and from informal to formal systems of social control. Research into gated communities in England has shown that residents’ motives are varied and complex. However, although security and fear of crime was an important issue, the major motivation for purchasers was maintenance of property values.
The paper concludes that gated communities are not an effective response to current issues of crime and disorder in terms of physical security and collective efficacy; nor do they assist in regenerating deprived areas, or tackling problems of disorder on large social rented estates. Indeed, any further growth in the collective fortification of affluent homes and retro-gating of social rented estates is likely to contribute to increased social divisiveness.
Keywords: Gated communities; fear of crime; residents’ motivations; social divisiveness; collective efficacy
Introduction
This paper is based on a national study of gated communities carried out for the ODPM New Horizons programme (Atkinson et al., 2004) and on a small-scale project funded by the British Academy, researching new purchasers in a suburban gated community (Blandy and Lister, 2005). It addresses the issues of why gated communities have emerged as a global phenomenon, and focuses on gated communities as a housing response to current issues of crime and disorder, questioning their effectiveness and bringing out the implications of the growth of this type of fortified housing development.
In this paper I will adopt the
Sarah Blandy
Abstract
Gated communities, meaning residential developments which restrict access by non-residents and have a specifically collective legal framework, are a recent global phenomenon. The paper discusses aspects of neo-liberalism which may explain their growth: increasing fear of crime alongside commodification, the movement from community to individualism, and from informal to formal systems of social control. Research into gated communities in England has shown that residents’ motives are varied and complex. However, although security and fear of crime was an important issue, the major motivation for purchasers was maintenance of property values.
The paper concludes that gated communities are not an effective response to current issues of crime and disorder in terms of physical security and collective efficacy; nor do they assist in regenerating deprived areas, or tackling problems of disorder on large social rented estates. Indeed, any further growth in the collective fortification of affluent homes and retro-gating of social rented estates is likely to contribute to increased social divisiveness.
Keywords: Gated communities; fear of crime; residents’ motivations; social divisiveness; collective efficacy
Introduction
This paper is based on a national study of gated communities carried out for the ODPM New Horizons programme (Atkinson et al., 2004) and on a small-scale project funded by the British Academy, researching new purchasers in a suburban gated community (Blandy and Lister, 2005). It addresses the issues of why gated communities have emerged as a global phenomenon, and focuses on gated communities as a housing response to current issues of crime and disorder, questioning their effectiveness and bringing out the implications of the growth of this type of fortified housing development.
In this paper I will adopt the
References: Atkinson, R., Blandy, S., Flint, J. and Lister, D. (2004) Gated Communities in England. London: Office of the Deputy Prime Minister. Blakely, E. J. and Snyder, M.G. (1998) Separate places: Crime and security in gated communities, in: Felson, M. and Peiser, R.B. (eds.), Reducing crime through real estate development and management, pp. 53-70. Washington, D.C: Urban Land Institute. Blandy, S. (2006) Gated communities in England: historical perspectives and current developments. GeoJournal, 66, 1-2, 15-26. Blandy, S. and Lister, D. (2005) Gated Communities: (Ne) gating community development? Housing Studies, 20, 2, 287-301. Blandy, S. and Parsons, D. (2003) Gated communities in England: rules and rhetoric of urban planning. Geographica Helvetica, 58, 4, 314-324. Blunkett, D. (2004) Decentralising Government: choice, communities and the role of local authorities. Speech to New Local Network annual conference, January 22, 2004. Crawford, A. (2003) Contractual Governance of Deviant Behaviour. Journal of Law and Society, 30, 4, 479-505. Crawford, A. (1998) Crime Prevention and Community Safety. London: Longman. Garland, D. (2001) The Culture of Control: Crime and Social Order in Contemporary Society. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Manzi, T. and Smith-Bowers, B. (2005) Gated Communities as Club Goods: Segregation or Social Cohesion? Housing Studies, 20, 2, 345-59. Newman, O. (1972) Defensible Space. New York: Macmillan. Office of the Deputy Prime Minister and the Home Office (2004) Safer Places: The Planning System and Crime Prevention. London: Her Majesty’s Stationery Office. Osborne, T. and Rose, N. (1999) Governing cities: notes on the spatialisation of virtue. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 17, 6, 737 – 760. Putnam, R.D. (2000) Bowling Alone: the collapse and revival of American community. New York: Simon and Schuster. Reich, R. B. (2000) The Future of Success: Working and Living in the New Economy. New York: Vintage. Rose, N. (2000) Government and Control. British Journal of Criminology, 40, 321-39. Rose, N. and Valverde, M. (1998) Governed by Law? Social and Legal Studies, 7, 4, 541-51. 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, 3, 281-291. Sennett, R. (1992) The uses of disorder: personal identity & city life. New York: W. W. Norton Urban Design Alliance (2003) Design for Cohesive Communities Wilson Doenges, G. (2000) An Explanation of Sense of Community and Fear of Crime in Gated Communities. Environment and Behaviour, 32, 5, 597-611. Wood, M. (2004) Perceptions and experiences of antisocial behaviour. Home Office Findings 252. London: Home Office. Young, J. (1999) The Exclusive Society: social exclusion, crime and difference in late modernity. London: Sage.