Practice Profile: Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) Surveillance

Public surveillance systems include a network of cameras and components for monitoring, recording, and transmitting video images. Public surveillance cameras are designed to reduce both property and personal crime. This practice is rated Promising for reducing overall crime, property crime, and vehicle crime, and rated No Effects for impacting violent crime.

Practice Goals/Components

Closed circuit television (CCTV) surveillance is a form of situational crime prevention designed to prevent both personal and property crime and can be used in place of, or in addition to, police. Public surveillance cameras monitor, record, and transmit images of a specific area of interest and are either monitored remotely by security personnel or preprogramed to scan the specified area (La Vigne et al. 2011). It is believed that the increased surveillance provided by CCTV will reduce crime and increase arrest, without displacing crime to other nearby areas where CCTV is not in use (Ratcliffe 2009).

Target Areas

CCTV cameras are placed in areas where they are thought to be most effective, which typically includes highly populated towns, city centers, car parks, or various other high-crime areas (Welsh and Farrington 2008). Given that the placement of these cameras is very important, the crime patterns in areas of interest are typically studied for periods of time to identify crime hotspots where cameras could potentially be placed. In numerous cases, Geographic Information Systems technology is used to precisely evaluate crime patterns for camera placement; however, the placement of cameras can also be the result of input from police officers and other criminal justice stakeholders (La Vigne et al. 2011).

Practice Theory

CCTV surveillance is grounded in the criminology theory that suggests people inclined to commit a crime are less likely to do so if they believe they are being watched or have a greater risk of being apprehended. This is also known as the rational choice theory (La Vigne et al. 2011). CCTV is also grounded in situational crime prevention strategy, which argues that opportunities to offend can be reduced by altering a variety of mechanisms such as increasing the risk of being apprehended, increasing the effort to commit the crime, decreasing rewards from crime commission, and reducing provocations that give rise to criminal opportunities (La Vigne et al. 2011). This means that the person must be aware of the added surveillance for it to achieve its desired effect.

Further, proponents of public surveillance systems also believe that such systems have the ability to increase perceptions of safety among citizens, as well as encourage citizens to use public spaces they know are guarded by surveillance (La Vigne et al. 2011). Through increasing the number of citizens using public spaces, more individuals can potentially serve as witnesses to crimes, presenting the possibility of greater crime reduction.

As described by Cornish and Clarke (2003), CCTV is a form of “formal surveillance,” meaning that not only does CCTV have the ability to take the place of police or security officers but CCTV can also enhance officers’ capabilities (Welsh and Farrington 2008). In addition to functioning as a deterrent, cameras can alert police of crimes as they happen, which can enable officers to respond quickly and efficiently (La Vigne et al. 2011).  On a larger scale, the use of CCTV also presents the possibility of aiding in the criminal justice system, as video footage of a crime may help in investigations and prosecutions (La Vigne et al. 2011).

Subgroup Analysis

Piza and colleagues (2019) conducted subgroup analyses on the effect of CCTV by setting and type of monitoring. In car parks, there was a statistically significant 37-percent reduction of crime in treatment areas, compared with control areas. Residential treatment areas experienced a statistically significant 12-percent reduction of crime, compared with control areas. However, there were no statistically significant crime reductions found for housing, city/town centers, public transport, and other areas. In addition, the researchers categorized the monitoring style of the CCTV interventions as either active or passive. Active CCTV systems alert police or security officials to potential crime as it takes place, whereas passive systems simply record crime. Active monitoring was associated with a statistically significant reduction in crime; however, passive monitoring showed nonsignificant effects on crime.

These sources were used in the development of the practice profile:

These sources were used in the development of the practice profile:

Following are CrimeSolutions-rated programs that are related to this practice:

CCTV in Philadelphia (Pa.)

CCTV in Redton, England

CCTV in Gillingham, England

CCTV in Five English Cities

Public Surveillance Cameras (Baltimore, Maryland)

Police-Monitored CCTV Cameras in Newark, N.J.

Milwaukee’s (Wis.) Closed-Circuit Television Camera Program

Project Green Light Detroit

Why might a practice's outcome ratings differ from the ratings of specific programs encompassed by that practice?