In Defence of Walkability as a Crime Prevention Strategy

New Urbanist ideas promoting walkability have many purported economic, social, public health and environmental benefits. But they have been criticised by proponents of Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED), who have blamed street connectivity for facilitating target recognition; providing offenders with access and escape routes, and weakening informal surveillance by making it harder to distinguish locals from non-locals. This view has been corroborated by more recent evidence that has consistently found a positive association between different indexes of walkability and street crime. In this paper, we challenge the consensus portraying walkable neighbourhoods as criminogenic by highlighting two key issues – one methodological, the other substantive - that have been overlooked by CPTED and environmental criminology more broadly. First, the focus on crime counts which confounds crime risk with the number of human interactions in the physical world. Second, the recurring neglect of how walkable neighbourhoods reduce crime beyond their borders, something that becomes clear once motoring offences – the most common form of street crime – are brought within the analytic frame. Once we do this, we argue, it is apparent that - by indirectly promoting car dependency – crime prevention programmes such as Secured by Design inadvertently promote criminal harm. Finally, we explore the points of intersection between CPTED and walkability. Neighbourhoods can be made simultaneously more vibrant, sustainable and safe by reducing road - not street – connectivity, as proposed by urban regeneration strategies such as low traffic neighbourhoods.