Env

iron

men

tal

Env

iron

men

tal R

esea

rch

Res

earc

h Uni

tU

nit

Faculty ofPsychologyUniversity of Warsaw

Maria Lewicka

My home is my castle: But do peoplereally need gating?

Pra

cow

nia

Psy

chol

ogii Ś

rodo

wis

kow

ej

2

2004 - 400 gatedsettlements inWarsaw

Pra

cow

nia

Psy

chol

ogii Ś

rodo

wis

kow

ej

3

Marketing new apartments - Apartments for happy people

Pra

cow

nia

Psy

chol

ogii Ś

rodo

wis

kow

ej

4

Green Retreat – morethan an apartment

Green retreat inreality

Pra

cow

nia

Psy

chol

ogii Ś

rodo

wis

kow

ej

5

Pra

cow

nia

Psy

chol

ogii Ś

rodo

wis

kow

ej

6

Rezydencja nad Potokiem,

Residence guarded by twojackal-woolves

Pra

cow

nia

Psy

chol

ogii Ś

rodo

wis

kow

ej

7

Pra

cow

nia

Psy

chol

ogii Ś

rodo

wis

kow

ej

8

Gated playgrounds

Pra

cow

nia

Psy

chol

ogii Ś

rodo

wis

kow

ej

9

Marina Mokotów –city in a city

Pra

cow

nia

Psy

chol

ogii Ś

rodo

wis

kow

ej

10

Marina Mokotów

Pra

cow

nia

Psy

chol

ogii Ś

rodo

wis

kow

ej

11

Fences around old apartment houses ...

Pra

cow

nia

Psy

chol

ogii Ś

rodo

wis

kow

ej

12

Typical picture…

Pra

cow

nia

Psy

chol

ogii Ś

rodo

wis

kow

ej

13

Some would see an analogy….

Pra

cow

nia

Psy

chol

ogii Ś

rodo

wis

kow

ej

14

This of course is not only a Polishphenomenon …

Pra

cow

nia

Psy

chol

ogii Ś

rodo

wis

kow

ej

15

Pra

cow

nia

Psy

chol

ogii Ś

rodo

wis

kow

ej

16

Gated communities are everywhere

• In South Africa

• In the US

• In China

• In South America – e.g. Brasil

• In Great Britain (1000 communities)

• In Egypt and other Arab countries

• And many others

Pra

cow

nia

Psy

chol

ogii Ś

rodo

wis

kow

ej

17

Gated communities – the topic for interdiscipilinary studies

• Urban planning � privatization and fragmentation ofpublic space

• Sociology � social segregation

• Psychology � consequences for sense of security, level of social trust, social ties, place attachment andmutual stereotyping

Pra

cow

nia

Psy

chol

ogii Ś

rodo

wis

kow

ej

18

Gated communities: for and against

Leads to social segregationWay to reinstate social trust andneighborhood ties

Destroys urban tissueWay to revitalize devastated city areas

Often destroys neighborhood ties(anonymity, reliance on externalsecurity measures)

Increases objective security

No guarantee of security, dangermay come from within

Increases sense of security among residents

OpponentsProponents

Pra

cow

nia

Psy

chol

ogii Ś

rodo

wis

kow

ej

19

What can and what should not be fenced? Control, security and types of territioriesaccording to Oscar Newman

Pra

cow

nia

Psy

chol

ogii Ś

rodo

wis

kow

ej

20

Types of space/territories

• Private

� What belongs only to myself (my apartment, my room, my bed)

• Semiprivate

� What belongs to a certain community that uses the space (e.g. A stairwell ina house, yard in a house inhabited by several/ dozen families)

• Semipublic

� What belongs to a certain community but where people who do not belongto the community have a free access, too (e.g. a yard where a store orcoffee shop are located )

• Public

� Area accessible to everybody (city square, street, pub).

Pra

cow

nia

Psy

chol

ogii Ś

rodo

wis

kow

ej

21

Private Semiprivate Semipublic Public

Am

ou

nto

fcon

tro

l

Amount of control over four spaces

Pra

cow

nia

Psy

chol

ogii Ś

rodo

wis

kow

ej

22

Individual family houses: the greatest area under family control

Pra

cow

nia

Psy

chol

ogii Ś

rodo

wis

kow

ej

23

Walk-ups: control includes part of street

Pra

cow

nia

Psy

chol

ogii Ś

rodo

wis

kow

ej

24

High-rises: control over own apartment only

Pra

cow

nia

Psy

chol

ogii Ś

rodo

wis

kow

ej

25

Fence around private space isquite natural

Pra

cow

nia

Psy

chol

ogii Ś

rodo

wis

kow

ej

26

The same around thesemi-private space

Pra

cow

nia

Psy

chol

ogii Ś

rodo

wis

kow

ej

27

Semi-public or public spaceshould not be fenced

Pra

cow

nia

Psy

chol

ogii Ś

rodo

wis

kow

ej

28

Empirical studies: Do people really need fences?

Together with: Katarzyna Zaborska, Dominik Owczarek, RafałChabowski, Karol Mojkowski and a number of students

Pra

cow

nia

Psy

chol

ogii Ś

rodo

wis

kow

ej

29

0

1

2

3

4

5

6preference

secure neighborhood clean staircase

apartment quality friendly neighbors

gated settlement monitoring

guard

Housing preferences among people visitinghousing fair (Targi Mieszkaniowe)

Pra

cow

nia

Psy

chol

ogii Ś

rodo

wis

kow

ej

30

4,3 4,34,1 4,1

3,9 3,93,8 3,8 3,6 3,6 3,6 3,6 3,4 3,3 3,2 3,1 3,1 3,1 3,0 3,0 3,0 2,9 2,8 2,8

2,5 2,4

0,0

0,5

1,0

1,5

2,0

2,5

3,0

3,5

4,0

4,5

5,0

śre

dni w

ynik

w s

kali

1-5

Łatwy dojazd do pracy i do miasta Bezpiecznie w domu

Bezpieczna okolica Czysty, zadbany teren i klatka schodowa

Cisza i spokój, z dala od zgiełku miasta Dobra cena przy odsprzeda Ŝy

Estetyka budynku i ładna architektura Bezpieczne miejsca parkingowe

Prywatno ść Atrakcyjny widok z okna

Dobrze działaj ąca wspólnota mieszkaniowa Identyfikacja z okolic ą

śyczliwi s ąsiedzi Plac zabaw dla dzieci

Nowe, nieu Ŝywane mieszkanie Ogrodzony i zamkni ę ty teren

Miejsce gdzie mo Ŝna usi ąść i porozmawia ć Blisko ść centrum miasta

Łatwy dost ęp znajomych (bez legitymowania) 24-godz ochrona, obecno ść stra Ŝników

MoŜlwo ść wpływu na wygl ąd budynku i otoczenia Monitoring

MoŜliwo ść odizolowania si ę od ludzi z zewn ątrz Podobni s ąsiedzi (standard, styl Ŝycia)

Presti Ŝ miejsca Osiedle otwarte, bez barier dla ludzi z zewn ątrz

121 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

1

3

5

7

9

1

1

1

1

1

2

2

2

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

22

24

26

Pra

cow

nia

Psy

chol

ogii Ś

rodo

wis

kow

ej

31

Study 2007

Warsaw – gated and ungated settlements

Pra

cow

nia

Psy

chol

ogii Ś

rodo

wis

kow

ej

32

3. Ursus

1. Tarchomin4. Kabaty

2. Bielany

ClosedOpen

Closed

Open

ClosedOpen

Closed

Closed

Open

Open

Pra

cow

nia

Psy

chol

ogii Ś

rodo

wis

kow

ej

33

Factor analysis of rated criteria of good housing

Security, peace, clean,

goodneighbors,

privacy

Gated &guarded

Pra

cow

nia

Psy

chol

ogii Ś

rodo

wis

kow

ej

34

Alternative to gating: Secured by Design program

Pra

cow

nia

Psy

chol

ogii Ś

rodo

wis

kow

ej

35

Program Secured by Design

• Arranging space in the process of designing and making it „secure”

• Houses form compounds

• Lack of hiding places, special arrangement of small architecture andgreen parts.

• Minitoring with monitors in apartments

• Emphasis on community building and relations with neighbors

In Holland the „secured by design” program diminished n umber ofburglaries by 30% and sense of security increased by 70% .

Pra

cow

nia

Psy

chol

ogii Ś

rodo

wis

kow

ej

36

Low fence, open gates, parking outside theestate, stairwells open with wide entrances, monitoring, open space enabling observation, private gardens surrounded by low fences orhedges, emphasis on integration of neighbors

Wrocław, ul. Chabrowa, Siechnice – the firstSecured by Design project in Poland

Pra

cow

nia

Psy

chol

ogii Ś

rodo

wis

kow

ej

37

„Secured by Design” - Siechnice

Pra

cow

nia

Psy

chol

ogii Ś

rodo

wis

kow

ej

38

Open space, open stairwells.

Pra

cow

nia

Psy

chol

ogii Ś

rodo

wis

kow

ej

39

• Location of windows and blocks – area clearly seen; lightning,

• Monitoring systems (cameras) but no guard. Special chann eltransmits pictures of the area

• Integration of neighbors

Pra

cow

nia

Psy

chol

ogii Ś

rodo

wis

kow

ej

40

Comparing sense of security and quality of life inthree settlements (Wrocław)

Gated, Open, & Secured by design

Study by Katarzyna Zaborska (2010)

Pra

cow

nia

Psy

chol

ogii Ś

rodo

wis

kow

ej

41

Gated

Open

Secure by design

open

closed

SD

Wrocław

Pra

cow

nia

Psy

chol

ogii Ś

rodo

wis

kow

ej

42

Attitude toward gating

closed openSecure by

design

Pra

cow

nia

Psy

chol

ogii Ś

rodo

wis

kow

ej

43

Satisfaction from living in the present place

closed openSecure by

design

Pra

cow

nia

Psy

chol

ogii Ś

rodo

wis

kow

ej

44

Subjective sense of security

closedopen

Secure bydesign

Pra

cow

nia

Psy

chol

ogii Ś

rodo

wis

kow

ej

45

Sense of community

closedopen

Secure bydesign

Pra

cow

nia

Psy

chol

ogii Ś

rodo

wis

kow

ej

46

Number of neighbors with whom participantsinteract

closed openSecure by

design

Pra

cow

nia

Psy

chol

ogii Ś

rodo

wis

kow

ej

47

Trust in neigbors

closed openSecure by

design

Pra

cow

nia

Psy

chol

ogii Ś

rodo

wis

kow

ej

48

Level of activity on behalf of neighborhood

closed openSecure by

design

Pra

cow

nia

Psy

chol

ogii Ś

rodo

wis

kow

ej

49

Conclusion and comments

• More research is needed that would identify crucialpredictors of sense of security and satisfaction in SBD projects

• Some SBD projects lean towards physical barriers(gates, lack of access etc.)

• A danger that SBD will sell as another marketing product that will increase prices of houses andapartments

• Other alternatives? Other model examples?

Pra

cow

nia

Psy

chol

ogii Ś

rodo

wis

kow

ej

50

Pra

cow

nia

Psy

chol

ogii Ś

rodo

wis

kow

ej

51

How to change the building pattern?

demand supply

Social norm (it isnot „fashionable”to live in gatedplaces)

Role of media, education, discussions

Role of developersand legalregulations

Pra

cow

nia

Psy

chol

ogii Ś

rodo

wis

kow

ej

52