The relationship between urban socio-spatial structure, (in)security and residential well-being

The relationship between urban socio-spatial structure, (in)security and residential well-being

Márton BerkiResearch assistant,

Kodolányi János University of Applied Sciences

[email protected]

TÁMOP-4.2.2. A-11/1/KONV-2012-0069

Hungarian agglomerations surveyed

• Budapest• Debrecen• Szeged• Miskolc• Pécs• Győr• Nyíregyháza• Kecskemét• Székesfehérvár

• Questionnaire survey, carried out in January-February 2014• Total sample size (cities + agglomerations): N = 5.000

Debreceni

NyíregyháziMiskolci

Szegedi

Pécsi

Székesfehérvári

Győri

Kecskeméti

Budapesti Debreceni

NyíregyháziMiskolci

Szegedi

Pécsi

Székesfehérvári

Győri

Kecskeméti

Budapesti

Types of residential areas surveyed

• Historical inner city (city centre)• Inner residential belt (high status)• Inner residential belt (low status)• Housing estates (high status)• Housing estates (low status)• Detached houses (high status)• Detached houses (low status)• Rural character (high status)• Rural character (low status)• Villas (the highest status)• Gated communities• Recreation areas• Slum housing, blighted areas

Types of residential areas surveyed

• Historical inner city (city centre)• Inner residential belt (high status)• Inner residential belt (low status)• Housing estates (high status)• Housing estates (low status)• Detached houses (high status) Size of the subsample • Detached houses (low status) (with the cities only):• Rural character (high status) n = 3.000• Rural character (low status)• Villas (the highest status)• Gated communities• Recreation areas• Slum housing, blighted areas

Stiglitz-Sen-Fitoussi Report (2009)

• According to Stiglitz et al. (2009), well-being is multi-dimensional:

• Material living standards (income, consumption and wealth)• Health• Education• Personal activities including work• Political voice and governance• Social connections and relationships• Environment (present and future conditions)• Insecurity, of an economic as well as a physical nature

Stiglitz-Sen-Fitoussi Report (2009)

• According to Stiglitz et al. (2009), well-being is multi-dimensional:

• Material living standards (income, consumption and wealth)• Health• Education• Personal activities including work• Political voice and governance• Social connections and relationships• Environment (present and future conditions)• Insecurity, of an economic as well as a physical nature ↓

THE CONNECTION(S) BETWEENURBAN STRUCTURE AND (IN)SECURITY

Main theories of criminology

• Classical theory of criminology (Beccaria)• Positivist theory of criminology (Lombroso, Guerry, Quetelet)• Individual trait theory (Glueck–Glueck, Mednick, Caspi, Moffitt)• Social disorganization theory (Shaw–McKay, Sampson, Bursik–Grasmick)• Differential association & social learning & subcultural theory

(Sutherland–Cressey, Sykes–Matza, Akers, Wolfgang–Ferracuti, Anderson)• Anomie & institutional-anomie theory (Merton, Messner–Rosenfeld)• Strain & general strain theory (Cohen, Cloward–Ohlin, Agnew)• Rational choice theory (Stafford–Warr, Patternoster, Cornish–Clarke, Matsueda)• Routine activities theory (Cohen–Felson)• Developmental life course theory (Moffitt, Sampson–Laub)• Critical theory of criminology (Bonger, Quinney, Greenberg, Currie, Colvin)• Broken windows theory (Wilson–Kelling)

(…)

Questions related to (in)security

• Is there a security alarm system in your household? (yes / no)

• Have you, or any other member of your household ever beenthe victim of a home burglary or physical assault? (yes / no)

• How safe do you think it is to walk in your neighbourhood after dark?(4 = very safe / 3 = rather safe / 2 = rather unsafe / 1 = unsafe)

• How serious do you perceive the following problems around your home?(burglaries, theft / physical assaults / organised crime / financial crimes)(5 = very serious / 1 = not serious)

• Is there a security alarm system in your household? (yes / no)

• Have you, or any other member of your household ever beenthe victim of a home burglary or physical assault? (yes / no)

• How safe do you think it is to walk in your neighbourhood after dark?(4 = very safe / 3 = rather safe / 2 = rather unsafe / 1 = unsafe)

• How serious do you perceive the following problems around your home?(burglaries, theft / physical assaults / organised crime / financial crimes)(5 = very serious / 1 = not serious)

Hard (objective) data vs. soft (subjective) perceptions

Questions related to (in)security

Slum housing, blighted areas

Housing estates (low status)

Rural character (low status)

Detached houses (low status)

Historical inner city (city centre)

Inner residential belt (low status)

Rural character (high status)

Housing estates (high status)

Inner residential belt (high status)

Recreation areas

Detached houses (high status)

Gated communities

Villas (the highest status)

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50%

2.8%

4.3%

6.1%

8.3%

10.6%

12.3%

17.2%

18.1%

20.4%

21.6%

26.5%

29.4%

39.6%

There is a security alarm system installedwithin the household of the respondent

(Only ‘yes’ answers are shown.)






Gated communities

Recreation areas







0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30%

25.6%

22.7%

21.2%

16.3%

14.8%

11.1%

9.0%

7.5%

7.2%

6.9%

6.3%

4.9%

4.3%

Any member of the respondent’s household hasalready been the victim of a home burglary or physical assault

(Only ‘yes’ answers are shown.)










Gated communities


Recreation areas


1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00

2.21

2.34

2.34

2.44

2.59

2.71

2.82

2.83

2.88

3.01

3.04

3.07

3.14

How safe do you think it is to walkin your neighbourhood after dark?

1 = unsafe, 2 = rather unsafe,3 = rather safe, 4 = very safe

Organised crime




Recreation areas

Gated communities









1 2 3 4 5

2.15

2.23

2.33

2.53

2.54

2.57

3.08

3.27

3.28

3.55

3.56

3.63

3.79

Gated communities



Recreation areas










1 2 3 4 5

1.74

1.85

2.04

2.19

2.24

2.25

2.89

3.03

3.03

3.06

3.16

3.36

3.49

Gated communities



Recreation areas










1 2 3 4 5

1.73

1.84

2.14

2.23

2.27

2.81

2.95

2.97

3.13

3.15

3.16

3.45

3.54



Recreation areas

Gated communities










1 2 3 4 5

1.88

2.15

2.35

2.52

2.54

2.95

2.98

3.02

3.09

3.15

3.24

3.51

3.52

Financial crimes

Burglaries, theft Physical assaults


Gated communities


Recreation areas










1 2 3 4 5

Burglaries, theftPhysical assaultsOrganised crimeFinancial crimes

1 = not serious5 = very serious

How serious do you perceive the following problems around your home?

Summary, conclusions

• Obviously, Hungarian cities can not be conceptualised as homogeneous areas, nor in terms of (in)security, neither concerning their residents’ perceptions of (in)security

• As for ‘hard’ (yes/no) questions, a more or less ‘expected’ spatial hierarchy has been revealed:higher status areas ↔ lower rates of criminalitylower status areas ↔ higher rates of criminality

• On the other hand, ‘softer’ questions aimed at personal perceptions shed light on a more unusual spatial hierarchyof urban (in)security


Source: Sýkora (2009)


• Obviously, Hungarian cities can not be conceptualised as homogeneous areas, nor in terms of (in)security, neither concerning their residents’ perceptions of (in)security

• As for ‘hard’ (yes/no) questions, a more or less ‘expected’ spatial hierarchy has been revealed:higher status areas ↔ lower rates of criminalitylower status areas ↔ higher rates of criminality

• On the other hand, ‘softer’ questions aimed at personal perceptions shed light on a more unusual spatial hierarchyof urban (in)security

Thank you for your attention!

• Text• Text• Text

The relationship between urban socio-spatial structure, (in)security and residential well-being

Márton BerkiResearch assistant,

Kodolányi János University of Applied Sciences

[email protected]

TÁMOP-4.2.2. A-11/1/KONV-2012-0069

The relationship between urban socio-spatial structure, (in)security and residential well-being

Documents

Transcript of The relationship between urban socio-spatial structure, (in)security and residential well-being