The sustainable and the criminogenic: the case of new‐build housing projects in Britain

This paper discusses the crime‐specific problems that may arise with regard to potential solutions that have been provided to achieve the projected housing need of 4.4 million new homes by 2016. The development of “brownfield” land in this regard is briefly discussed and the urban‐rural housing dilemma raised. Central to this paper is the issue of the criminogenic capacity of new‐built housing designs, which, it is contended, has been largely ignored. The Social Exclusion Unit’s report entitled Bringing Britain Together: A National Strategy for Neighbourhood Renewal has highlighted the problems experienced on 3,000 run‐down neighbourhoods in England and it is posited that lessons can be learned by analysing why such designs failed. In recent years, the concept of “sustainable development” has been adopted enthusiastically by town planners, surveyors, urban designers and environmentalists. However, the social malaise of crime has been largely ignored within this concept. The creation of “unsustainable” housing estates such as those discussed in the above report, are testament to the potential problems that can arise in the design, siting and tenant‐allocation policies that may be applied to new‐build housing developments. Oscar Newman’s “defensible space” theory (1973) is discussed, with particular reference to two of his concepts that have not been extensively discussed within criminology, let alone within the echelons of town planning. The “image” and “geographical juxtaposition” of new‐build housing represent important elements to Newman’s theory, which has only been studied in relation to modifications to existing designs. New‐build developments provide the opportunity to evaluate empirically certain designs and contribute towards a broadening of our understanding of the criminogenic capacity of residential housing design.