The effectiveness of CCTV has been subjected to some critical evaluation recently in the form of some major research reports coming from the UK, including one commissioned by the Home Office reviewing past performance of town centre CCTV schemes. Some controversial findings have generated some fairly heated discussion in public forums in the UK, and by security experts in magazines and professional discussions. The central question is just how effective is CCTV and does it justify its high cost.
Part of the difficulty in establishing the effectiveness of CCTV relates to the lack of appropriate criteria to measure before and after effects. Alternatively, where criteria do exist there can be questions on how reliable these measures are, and whether they are affected by a number of other things besides the CCTV operations. This includes measures such as crime statistics. Peter Fry of the UK CCTV User Group, in a recent article in CCTV Today, notes that evaluations using statistical information on the effectiveness of CCTV can be misleading because of the use of inappropriate, outdated or simply inaccurate data. He emphasises that it is important to look at the whole context of CCTV and benefits for a variety of areas.
A major deterrent
The existence of cameras is seen to be a major deterrent in itself. Faced with the prospect of having their faces on camera, people have avoided committing crimes or showing behaviour that could lead to them being detected. Criminals have sometimes reacted to this by attempting to camouflage their behaviour, or to stretch the normal limits in order to create 'space' for themselves to blur the difference between normal and incident conditions or behaviour. Nevertheless, the deterrence factor does seem to have an appreciable impact on behaviour.
The detection of theft or other crimes, and the apprehension of people responsible for these must have a direct impact on crime levels. Criminals tend to repeat offences, and by catching them, one prevents the potential repeating of the offence a number of times in the future. Detection also sends a message to other people that crime can be detected and deters other people from committing similar actions. Publicity on detection rates can further enhance this. Improvements in morale of police and security employees due to successes are unlikely to be measured, but on their own probably have an appreciable value in motivating and simulating performance. Deployment of scarce resources such as police or security, and appropriate reaction to conditions are also enhanced by CCTV.
The potential for a successful prosecution through the use of video evidence has benefits both for streamlining internal company dismissal procedures, as well as enhancing the effectiveness of the criminal justice system. Whether the same level of successful prosecutions could be achieved without the hard evidence of CCTV material is doubtful. Indeed, the acknowledgement of guilt and the avoidance of lengthy prosecution processes after offenders have seen themselves on CCTV can reduce time spent on cases significantly. CCTV evidence has the potential to cut down on time, effort and level of failures in prosecution. It also gives management a stronger position in the event of labour issues over the dismissal or disciplining of personnel violating company practices or activity engaging in theft.
Unique advantages
CCTV also has unique advantages of being 'always on'. Constant monitoring of entry or access points, for example, gives a unique ability to track who could be linked to occurrences that no physical security would find impossible to replicate. Whether it is the potential to view people who may have been present with suspect articles at the scene prior to a bomb blast, to viewing people who have had access to offices where computer notebooks or cellphones are missing, CCTV provides the potential for post identification follow up that otherwise is unlikely to exist to any meaningful extent. Cases such as the Brixton bomber in London were solved as a direct result of CCTV information obtained during follow up investigation in the areas where the offence occurred.
CCTV also leads to the creation of a safer psychological climate for people in town centres and public spaces. This 'feel good' factor can lead to a more conducive business environment which promotes investment in an area, supports shopping patterns that create jobs, or leads to savings from theft which can be reinvested in further company growth prospects and possible job creation. Benefits from shopkeepers reinvesting in areas which have been protected by CCTV are common from Cape Town to areas of the UK.
Although CCTV has the potential to be effective, there is no guarantee that it will be unless it is installed, implemented and managed properly. Its success is not a consequence of cameras being placed in different locations around a city centre or industrial operation. Indeed, the UK reports indicate that some historical problems in implementation may be to blame for the apparent failure of CCTV to reduce crime rates in some town centres. The failure to do basic operations such as tape changes or maintaining faulty equipment shows itself in the failure to pick up who was responsible for a bomb blast in a restaurant in Cape Town. Inappropriate camera positioning or usage can lead to poor quality of evidence which can mean not just limitations in legal convictions, but even the inability to pick up the identity of perpetrators. Bank robbery situations where indistinguishable figures waving what looks like AK47s can be seen on tape and where there is no capacity for identification are still encountered.
Using inappropriate personnel who lack the essential skills to utilise the system effectively in detection, or have little or no training are other reasons CCTV can fail. Cameras need to be pointed to relevant areas and targets, incidents need to be noticed, and reaction needs to be followed through in a manner that leads to the apprehension of offenders. Relevant priorities need to be established for surveillance. It is almost pointless to inflate detection rates with people caught smoking dagga, while assault, theft, and hard drug dealing goes undetected. Equally, the highlighting of a couple of successful cases while excessive rates of crime continue shows a failure to leverage the CCTV technology effectively. The rest of the justice system also needs to support CCTV. Ultimately, however, CCTV effectiveness is dependent on the managers of operations and the future implementation, reputation, and viability of the technology falls on their shoulders.
Dr Craig Donald is an industrial psychologist and specialist in human factors in security and CCTV. He is the co-developer of the Surveillance and Monitoring Assessment Exercise (SAMAE) for the selection and placement of CCTV operators and presenter of the CCTV Surveillance Skills training course. He can be contacted on telephone: (011) 787 7811, fax: (011) 886 6815, or e-mail: [email protected]
© Technews Publishing (Pty) Ltd. | All Rights Reserved.
printer friendly version