Review of: "Evaluating Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) Principles in Educational Institutions: Occupant Insights (original) (raw)

The study focuses on a surveyed assessment of Indian educational institutions according to the principles of Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) theory. Educational institutions are therefore viewed from the perspective of how much safe they are and/or can be considered for the people studying in them. CPTED is a theory that focuses on modifying the physical environment to reduce opportunities for crime and enhance community safety. It emphasizes the role of urban design, architecture, and land use planning in deterring criminal behavior. R. Jeffery (1970s) prominent scholars in the field of CPTED because has enhanced together with Ron Clarke the fact that SCP (Situational Crime Prevention) interventions must be tailored to specific types of crimes or criminal activities. Literature examples include i. installing security cameras, ii. improving lighting in crime-prone areas, or iii. using access control measures to restrict entry to certain places. This means that CPTED strategies can be more effective in reducing crime, when combined with other community-based approaches, such as law enforcement efforts and social programs. The authors mentioned in this paper enhanced PMH (Place Management Hypothesis), it focuses on the management and maintenance of public spaces to prevent disorder and crime. It emphasizes the role of place managers, such as property owners, landlords, and community organizations, in creating safe and well-maintained environments. Finally, Rational Choice Perspective (RCP), the Routine Activity Approach (RAA), and the Crime Pattern Theory (CPT), often all grounded in the Rational Choice Theory (RCT), suggest that potential offenders make decisions based on the perceived benefits and risks of engaging in criminal behaviour other than on the specific circumstances of the situation (Smith & Clarke, 2012). The social-ecological model promoted by the authors in their conclusions acknowledges that violence prevention is not solely about addressing individual behaviours or isolated incidents. It recognizes the importance of creating a campus environment that promotes safety and well-being by addressing these multiple interconnected factors. This model recognizes that violence and negative behaviours within a campus environment are influenced by a complex interplay of various factors, such as: Physical factors: These include the physical layout and design of the campus. This can encompass factors like lighting, building security, access control, and the overall environmental design. By modifying these physical elements, campuses can reduce opportunities for violence and enhance safety. Social factors: The social environment within a campus, including the relationships and interactions among individuals,