TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABSTRACT............................................................................................................ i

DEDICATIONS...................................................................................................... ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS..................................................................................... iii

LIST OF FIGURES............................................................................................... iv

LIST OF TABLES..................................................................................................v

Chapter 1 Introduction...........................................Error! Bookmark not defined.

1.1 Problem.......................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.

1.2 Background.................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.

1.3 Scope and Objectives.................................Error! Bookmark not defined.

1.4 Document Overview....................................Error! Bookmark not defined.

Chapter 2 Literature Review..................................Error! Bookmark not defined.

2.1 Second Level Heading................................Error! Bookmark not defined.

2.1.1 Third Level Heading.............................Error! Bookmark not defined.

Chapter 3 Methodology and Implementation.........Error! Bookmark not defined.

3.1 Methodology................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.

3.2 Implementation............................................Error! Bookmark not defined.

Chapter 4 Results..................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.

Chapter 5 Conclusions and Future Work...............Error! Bookmark not defined.

5.1 Conclusions.................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.

5.2 Future Work.................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.

REFERENCES......................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.

Appendix A Users Manual.....................................Error! Bookmark not defined.

A.1 Overview.....................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.

A.1.1 First Topic............................................Error! Bookmark not defined.

A.1.2 Second Topic.......................................Error! Bookmark not defined.

Appendix B MS Word Styles..................................Error! Bookmark not defined.

B.1 General Styles............................................Error! Bookmark not defined.

B.1.1 Thesis section......................................Error! Bookmark not defined.

B.2 Chapter Heading Styles..............................Error! Bookmark not defined.

B.2.1 Thesis Chapter....................................Error! Bookmark not defined.

B.2.2 Thesis header 2...................................Error! Bookmark not defined.

B.2.3 Thesis header 3...................................Error! Bookmark not defined.

B.3 Appendix Heading Styles............................Error! Bookmark not defined.

B.3.1 Thesis Appendix..................................Error! Bookmark not defined.

B.3.2 Thesis appendix header 2...................Error! Bookmark not defined.

B.3.3 Thesis appendix header 3...................Error! Bookmark not defined.

B.4 Text Styles..................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.

B.4.1 Thesis quote........................................Error! Bookmark not defined.

B.4.2 Thesis code.........................................Error! Bookmark not defined.

B.4.3 Thesis caption.....................................Error! Bookmark not defined.

B.4.4 Thesis figure........................................Error! Bookmark not defined.

B.4.5 Thesis reference..................................Error! Bookmark not defined.

B.5 Title Page Styles.........................................Error! Bookmark not defined.

B.5.1 Thesis title...........................................Error! Bookmark not defined.

B.5.2 Thesis name........................................Error! Bookmark not defined.

B.5.3 Thesis title page...................................Error! Bookmark not defined.

B.5.4 Thesis Title Page + Right....................Error! Bookmark not defined.

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Simulator Deployment Overview............Error! Bookmark not defined.

LIST OF TABLES

Figure 1. Simulator Deployment Overview............Error! Bookmark not defined.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

List of figures & tables

Dedication

Acknowledgement

Preface

Abstract

The Project

Client’s Brief

CHAPTER 1

CRIME & PUNISHMENT - A PERSPECTIVE

1.1 Abstract

1.2 Research Questions

1.3 Research Objectives

1.4 What is Crime &Punishment?

1.5 Concept of Punishment in Islam

1.6 Concept of Punishment in International Law

1.7 Purpose of Punishment

1.8 Conclusion

CHAPTER 2

JUVENILE DELIQUENCY & THE PRISON

2.1 Abstract

2.2 Research Questions

2.3 Research Objectives

2.4 Juvenile Delinquency: Theories of Causation

2.5 Fundamentals: Common factors influencing juvenile

behaviour

CHAPTER 3

REFORMING HUMAN BEHAVIOUR THROUGH ARCHITECTURE

3.1 Abstract

3.2 Research Questions

3.3 Research Objectives

3.4 Regulatory Architecture

3.5 Personal Space & Territoriality in Architecture

3.6 Disciplining Spaces

3.7 Biased Spaces

3.8 Architectural Strategies for Crime Prevention

3.9 Conclusion

CHAPTER 4

PRISON - DESIGN

4.1 Abstract

4.2 Research Questions

4.3 Research Objectives

4.4 Prison Layouts: Types

4.5 Prison Design: Surveillance Types & Strategies

4.6 Prison Design: International Law & Standards

4.7 Prison Design: Local Law & local Standards

4.8 Case Studies: Local & International

4.9 Comparison: International & Local

Prisons

CHAPTER 5

SITE ANALYSIS

5.1 The Site Methodology

5.2 Macro level Analysis

5.3 Meso level Analysis

5.4 Micro level Analysis

5.5 Conclusion

CHAPTER 6

ARCHITECTS BRIEF

6.1 Abstract

6.2 Aims & Objectives

6.3 Design Objectives

6.4 Project Description: Building types & functional systems

6.5 Design framework proposal

6.6 Design proposal

6.7 Conceptual proposal

6.8 Design outcome

CHAPTER 7

CASE STUDIES

7.1 The crisis

7.2 International prison design standards

7.3 Local prison design standards

7.4 Case Study

REFERENCES

LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES

(Empty)

DEDICATION

(Empty)

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

(Empty)

PREFACE

There is a vital relationship that exists between the physical plant of an institution

such a Juvenile Reform School and its administration. The design, programming and

planning of the physical plant eventually determines the efficiency and flexibility with

which the Administrative faculty can carry out the various related duties such as

juvenile reformation with effectiveness.

Not until recently it has been recognised that there is a close relationship between

the architecture of a Juvenile reform school and how much it is responsible for

increasing or decreasing the effectiveness with which the reform and rehabilitation

work is carried out upon its residents. Both the administrative attitudes and the

resident’s responses are deeply conditioned by the physical surrounding and the

condition of the environment which the reform school administration operates and

the residents spend a very critical part of their lives.

There is a very thin line between what kind of environment produces a positive or a

negative attitude or behaviour pattern in the residents of such institution. If the

architecture of the school is not entirely designed to prevent escape with poor

security or surveillance, then it’s most likely that the Administration will succumb to

more or less the habits and patterns of purely a jail type abusive administration that

use force as the tool to supress rather than reform.

Similarly if the residents are mentally abused or dejected by forbidding and

repressive surroundings, they can then hardly be expected to respond to any

reformative or rehabilitative procedures and interventions. They might go into a state

of helpless or even rebellion. So it’s a balancing act with the Architect has to perform

with utmost care and sensitivity.

Architects, designers, psychologist criminologists and a number other related

professionals have recognised that the environment, architectural programming and

the physical plant of a Juvenile reforms school as a major contributing factor to the

successful operation of such an institution. There is no other factor which has single

handedly devasted and hampered the working and the eventual outcome which a

reform school is meant to produce. The lack of insight and interest in prison design

has provided us with inhumane, ineffective and inefficient prison design models. As a

result the success of rehabilitative and reformative procedures is practically

impossible.

This persistence of archaic and punitive patterns of prison architecture has not only

impeded the progress of rehabilitative programmes for adults but has also held back

any advances in dealing with juvenile offenders.There is no chance or possibility of

achieving any breakthrough success in reformative and rehabilitative procedures

which such institutions aim to apply until the norm is changed. The norm which

considers the design and the correctional methods as the only tool of achieving the

desired goal which is reform. It is only until is realised that the architectural

environment can have a positive, stimulating influence upon inmates, by means of

confronting them with environmental conditions that they may have never have

experienced or been conscious of. This hypothesis supports the view that an

architectural environment that stimulates, if you like, the higher senses, makes

concepts such as education, motivation and integration easier to engender. A

repressive environment kindles rebellion and stifles creativity. An awareness of

nature and the discovery of new horizons inspire hope and a desire for change. And

these are my conviction to produce as design which actually acts as a tool which

aids in the rehabilitation and reformation of the residents most effectively, rather than

doing the exact opposite.

ABSTRACT

How to deal with juvenile delinquency is an issue in which there are diverging views.

The restoration of law and order is a common political slogan, but at the time many

people who deal with youth offenders are coming to believe in a different philosophy,

that youth offenders should not be seen as lawbreakers in need of punishment and

deterrence, but as children with social and psychological problems in need of

treatment by social workers and other professionals.

THE PROJECT

The project is an initiative presented by the Government of Punjab,Pakistan to

design the first Pakistan Juvenile Reform School, on a government proposed

site,which is based on the modern concept of rehabilitation and reformation.This

project is to meet the international Juvenile Reform School design standards.

CLIENT’S BRIEF

Client: Government of Punjab.

The client’s requirement is to design a youth detention facility that focuses on

rehabilitation of juvenile prisoners and the interrelationship between a prisoner and

their environment. This facility must be self-sufficient, train prisoners in life (school

education) and labour skills (vocational training).The building should be a modern

marvel of architectural innovation. Furthermore it should actually be a new model to

previous obsolete design models of prison design, which have existed in Pakistan

over the period of 60 years. Finally it should abide by international standards of

prison architecture and design.

The design will focus on the functional core of a Juvenile Reform facility.

Designing an environment which is “transactional” investigating the closeness

or the relationship between a person and their prison environment.

Designing to improve lives of people (juveniles) in the prison environment.

The faculty is meant, not to necessarily to prevent crime but to create a place

of holding for youth offenders, at the same time rehabilitating and educating

the youth for the period which they are remanded.

The design should be adaptable and seen as a model for future youth

correctional facilities.

CHAPTER 1

CRIME & PUNISHMENT - A PERSPECTIVE

RESEARCH ASPECT 1

1.1 ABSTRACT

The concept of punishment — its definition — and its practical application and

justification during the past half-century have shown a marked drift away from efforts

to reform and rehabilitate offenders in favour of retribution and incarceration.

Punishment in its very conception is now acknowledged to be an inherently

retributive practice, whatever may be the further role of retribution as a (or the)

justification or goal of punishment. A liberal justification of punishment would proceed

by showing that society needs the threat and the practice of punishment, because

the goal of social order cannot be achieved otherwise and because it is unfair to

expect victims of criminal aggression to bear the cost of their victimization.

Constraints on the use of threatened punishments (such as due process of law) are

of course necessary, given the ways in which authority and power can be abused.

Such a justification involves both deontological 1as well as consequentialist

consideration

1.2 RESEARCH QUESTIONS

What is the concept of punishment?

What is the concept of crime?

1 Deontological ethics or deontology (from Greek δέον, deon, "obligation, duty"; and -λογία, -logia) is an approach to ethics that judges the morality of an action based on the action's adherence to a rule or rules.

1.3 RESEARCH OBJECTIVES

To understand what is the concept of crime and punishment in International and

Islamic law. This will aid me in developing the basis of my approach towards the

reform school design and program.

1.4 WHAT IS CRIME AND PUNISHMENT?

PUNISHMENT:

Punishment is a response to behaviours that are deemed

unacceptable by an individual or a group (such as parents, an organization,

and/or society).  Some say it is intended to correct the problematic behaviour,

while others would argue that punishment is enacted upon an offending

individual simply as a means by which to retaliate against his or her offending

actions.

In the context of the criminal justice system (which I am assuming you are

interested in since this question is posted under crime), punishment refers to

the state's compensatory actions against an individual who breaks a law

(based on the evidence associated with a particular case).  Punishments can

range from light to severe depending on the severity of the crime committed

and the number and severity of offenses the individual has committed in the

past.

CRIME:

Crime is the breach of rules or laws for which some governing authority

(via mechanisms such as legal systems) can ultimately prescribe a conviction.

Individual human societies may each define crime and crimes differently.

While every crime violates the law, not every violation of the law counts as a

crime; for example: breaches of contract and of other civil law may rank as

"offences" or as "infractions". Modern societies generally regard crimes as

offenses against the public or the state, distinguished from torts (offenses

against private parties that can give rise to a civil cause of action).

1.5 CONCEPT OF PUNISHMENT - ISLAM

Punishment has always played an integral part in the concept of justice. We all know

or at least expect that if you do something wrong you are subject to punishment in

some way or another. This is only fair. Humankind is charged with the responsibility

for the choices they make. This is because they are created with the freedom of

choice and granted the moral sense of right and wrong. Accordingly, one is not to be

punished for the actions of others, or for acts done under duress or because of

insanity. All people are equal and innocent until proven guilty: only then punishment

is considered.

Islam considers crime an act of injustice towards society, a sin against oneself and a

transgression 2against Allah. Punishment is not atonement nor does it erase the sin.

A sin is only forgiven through repentance3. However, crime is an act of inflicting harm

upon society that cannot be forgiven by repentance alone.

The object of all penal systems is to punish the offender and protect society from

reoccurrence of the crime. Punishment serves as an educational purpose, as well as

a form of crime deterrent and prevention and the system used must achieve this aim.

However, if societies were to rely only upon their systems of punishment, they would

fail miserably. An environment of healthy morality and faith must be the norm, where

to do right is encouraged by all and to do wrong is discouraged and found difficult. In

fact, encouraging right and forbidding wrong is a foremost duty in Islam.

Most penal systems in today's societies are based and dependent on the current

social sentiment. In Islamic law, punishment is based upon divine revelation. There

is no leeway for sentiment or possibility of change. These laws were established by

the Creator who is Infinitely Wise and Merciful, Who knows the true affairs of the

world better than humankind. To seek justice without recourse to divine help would

be tragic, as all other sources of knowledge and theories are flawed by human

2 A violation of a law, command, or duty.3 Remorse or contrition for past conduct or sin.

imperfection.

Justice is the ruling spirit of Islamic law, which is known as the Shari`ah. One of the

main reasons for which the Prophets (peace be upon them all) were sent was to

guide mankind to justice.

In this connection, Allah, Most High, says, (We sent our messengers with clear signs

and sent down with them the Book and the Balance so that men may conduct

themselves with justice. ) (Al-Hadid 57: 25) and [O you who believe, be upholders of

justice, witnessing for Allah alone. ) (An-Nisaa' 4: 135)

There are basically three categories of punishments in Shari`ah:

The first is Hadd, which includes divinely prescribed forms of fixed punishment

based upon the Qur'an and Sunnah. These are punishments set to preserve the

public interest; they cannot be lightened nor made heavier, nor can the offender be

pardoned. They instill a deep feeling of abhorrence in the society towards the crime

for which the offender has been punished. Such crimes include drinking alcohol,

armed robbery, theft, illicit sexual relations, apostasy, and slanderous accusations of

promiscuity.

The second form is called Qisas, which is the punishment for homicide and assault.

Whenever a person causes physical harm or death to another, the injured or family

of the deceased has the right to retaliation. A unique aspect of Qisas, is that the

victim's family has the option to insist upon the punishment, accept monetary

recompense, or forgive the offender, which could even avert capital punishment.

This leaves the door open to compassion and forgiveness. Settlements are therefore

encouraged outside of court, as a judge must exact the punishment.

All other crimes fall into the third category, Ta`zir, which is a discretionary

punishment decided by the court.

1.6 CONCEPT OF PUNISHMENT – INTERNATIONAL LAW

Punishment is not an exclusive province of the law. Parents punish their children,

and members of private associations punish their wayward fellows. Like most

concepts, "punishment" has no rigid boundaries. One useful way to understand its

central aspects and uncertain borderlines is to identify the features of typical

instances of punishment, and to inquire how far their absence would lead one to say

that something other than punishment is taking place.

Typical and atypical 4instances. In typical cases of punishment, persons who

possess authority impose designedly unpleasant consequences upon, and express

their condemnation of, other persons who are capable of choice and who have

breached established standards of behavior.

Responsible agents. Punishment is a practice that is performed by, and directed at,

agents who are responsible in some sense. God and humans can punish; hurricanes

cannot. People, but not faulty television sets, are fit subjects of punishment. A higher

level of capacity is required to impose punishment than is minimally necessary to

make one subject to it. To be subject to it, one need have only sufficient mental

control over one's actions to refrain from disfavored behavior, a degree of control

that quite small children and some animals possess. To punish, one must be able

consciously to inflict harmful consequences because of a wrong that has been

committed.

Unpleasant consequences. Punishment involves designedly harmful consequences

that most people would wish to avoid. Medical treatment and other forms of therapy

may also be painful, but their unpleasantness is an unfortunate contingent fact;

pleasing or painless substitutes, if available, would be preferred. Unpleasantness is,

on the other hand, part of the basic nature of punishment; if the response to those

who break rules was to give them something they wanted, such as more money, one

would not consider the response to be punishment, even if the aim were to reduce

future violations.

Condemnation. The unpleasant consequences of punishment are usually preceded

by a judgment of condemnation; the subject of punishment is explicitly blamed for

committing a wrong. The close link between punishment and condemnation is

attenuated in some instances. When a teacher punishes an entire class because

one child has been naughty, he may not be condemning the other members of the

4 Not representative of a type, group, or class

class. The teacher's choice of collective punishment will reflect his belief either that

the group as a whole is capable of constraining the actions of its members or that

one student will hesitate to be the source of mischief for his classmates; but the

teacher need not suppose that all the other members of the class are actually partly

responsible for the particular naughty act. A similar analysis applies to vicarious

punishment. Punishing one person for the sins of another may serve a purpose even

if the victim of punishment is not condemned for the specific wrong.

For certain violations of law, condemnation may be wholly absent, except in the most

formal sense. Some actions may be deemed antisocial and worth discouraging by

unpleasant consequences even if no one really blames the persons who perform

them. This is perhaps exemplified by the attitude American society now takes toward

most parking violations. For a different reason, a reflective judgment of

condemnation may be absent when very young children are punished. Parents may

evince anger and impose simple penalties in the belief that this is the most effective

way to teach acceptable behavior. They may thus treat their children as

blameworthy, even though they doubt that the children are experienced enough

actually to merit blame for performing the offending actions.

Condemnation 5is not in itself usually considered punishment. If members of a

society regarded a formal condemnation as extremely shameful, one might think of

that as a possible punishment in itself rather than merely a complement of more

substantial consequences; this discussion will adopt the common assumption that

punishment involves more than condemnation.

Authority. Punishment is imposed by people who have authority to do so—authority

conferred by legal rule, associational standard, or social morality. A father can

punish his own small children, but he cannot punish a neighbor's child unless the

neighbor has given him power to do that. Only public officials can punish a thief for

breaking the law. Authority may be conceived in a somewhat extended sense,

whereby one can speak of a person's being punished by the community when his

offensive behavior is met by the negative informal reactions of its members.

5 the act of condemning.

Standards. Punishment ordinarily follows some breach of established rules of

behavior; the notion that people should have fair warning as to what behavior is

punishable, and to what degree, is now an established principle of most legal

systems. Yet, especially in informal family settings, people may be punished for

doing things that they should have realized were wrong, even though they were not

warned in advance about that specific sort of behavior. Even then, one can usually

point to some relevant, more general standard that the children have been taught,

such as taking care of family property, not harming brothers and sisters, and not

disturbing parents. Many legal systems also contain some standards of misbehavior

that are quite open-ended. Much more extraordinary is punishment of persons for

actions they had no reason to suppose were wrong at the time they committed them.

Misperceptions. The assumption thus far has been that those who impose

punishment, and the community at large, perceive circumstances as they really are.

However, people may be woefully mistaken about critical facts. An innocent person

may be punished because he is thought guilty, or all epileptics may be punished in

the belief that having that disease evidences extreme moral fault. Misperceptions

may also occur because of conscious manipulations by those aware of the actual

facts. If officials successfully persuade others that a woman they know to be

innocent is guilty, her condemnation and imprisonment will, in the public perception,

constitute genuine punishment. Whether the knowledgeable officials should regard

this as an instance of (unjust) punishment or something else is debatable. The

crucial inquiry, in any event, is not whether what follows such deviations from the

bases for imposing punishment can accurately be called punishment, but whether

deviations of this sort can ever be morally justified, a matter analyzed below.

Legal punishment and the criminal law. Parts of the civil law authorize punitive

consequences, but in advanced legal systems, legal punishment is linked to the

criminal law. That law consists of prohibitions of antisocial behavior backed by

serious sanctions. Not every criminal conviction is necessarily followed by

punishment—alternative dispositions 6are often possible—but a set of mandatory

6 the predominant or prevailing tendency of one's spirits; natural mental and emotional outlook or mood;

characteristic attitude: a girl with a pleasant disposition.

rules that did not provide for punishing of violators would not be part of the criminal

law. The meaning and possible justifications of legal punishment are, therefore, very

closely related to the meaning and possible justifications of the criminal law.

1.7 PURPOSE OF PUNISHMENT

There are five possible purposes to the punishment of criminals:

1. Incapacitation: A felon in prison cannot commit crimes while imprisoned. An

executed felon cannot commit a crime ever again.

2. Deterrence: The threat of punishment deters people from

engaging in illegal acts. 3. Restitution: The felon is required to take some

action to at least partially return the victim to the status quo ante.

4. Retribution: The felon harmed

society; therefore society (or the direct victims) is entitled to inflict harm in return.

5. Rehabilitation: The punishment changes the felon in order to make him a better

citizen afterwards. (The punishment can include mandatory vocational training,

counseling, drug treatment, etc.)

In order for a punishment to be justified, it must satisfy at least

one of these criteria. (There may be reasons to oppose a punishment even if it does

satisfy these criteria, so this is a necessary, but not a sufficient, condition.)

1.8 CONCLUSION

Punishment is circumstantial. Different forms of punishment are effective for various

forms of crime. There are cases in which retribution, prevention/deterrence, and

rehabilitation are all suitable. A legal system is necessary in our society and the

maintenance of this system requires punishment. However, the main focus of all

punishment should be to improve society as a whole. But in the case of Juvenile

offenders reformation and rehabilitation will be the main constituents of my design

concept.

CHAPTER 2

JUVENILE DELIQUENCY & THE PRISON

RESEARCH ASPECT 2

2.1 WHAT IS JUVENILE DELIQUENCY

Juvenile crime is the broad-based term given to juveniles who commit crimes.

Juveniles are defined as those people who haven’t reached adulthood or maturity.

Delinquency can be defined as the committing of those things considered

crimes by the state, although delinquent can also mean abandoned. Thus juvenile

delinquency can cover anything from small crime — a student who cuts school

repeatedly is delinquent--to very serious crimes like felony theft and murder.

Many theories have been advanced to explain the cause of juvenile

delinquency. Some are quite sophisticated, whereas others are

predicated on rather basic “instinctive” conclusions that may or

may not have a basis in fact.

From the time of the first civil communities, every society has declared

certain modes of behaviour to be unacceptable or criminal in nature.

Early customs and laws mandated compliance and punishment for the

greater good of the group, city, or nation. In the modern era, the codification

of norms of behaviour is universal, and within contemporary societies the

designation of some behaviours as criminal is fairly uncomplicated by definition:

Most people have an instinctive understanding that criminal deviance

involves egregiously 7(outrageously bad) illegal acts for which perpetrators

can be punished. A less instinctive—and more technical—definition requires

that these acts involve:

A positive or negative act in violation of penal law; an offense against

the State. . . . An act committed or omitted in violation of a public law.

. . . Crimes are those wrongs which the government notices as injurious

to the public, and punishes in what is called a “criminal proceeding,”

in its own name. . . . A crime may be defined to be any act done

in violation of those duties which an individual owes to the community,

and for the breach of which the law has provided that the

offender shall make satisfaction to the public.

It is important to state that the concept of juvenile delinquency is a relatively

modern development, as is the notion of juvenile justice.

7 Conspicuously bad or offensive.

2.2 RESEARCH QUESTIONS

Why juveniles engage in criminal deviance?

Is such behaviour a matter of individual choice?

Can our understanding of biology and psychology explain delinquency?

To what extent do environmental factors influence juvenile deviance?

(This investigation is important, because policies whether for Architectural design of

related facilities or other aspects, derived from these theories

have not only sought to isolate juvenile offenders but have also tried to manage

the root causes of their behaviour in various case-studies all over the world. Thus,

punishments, rehabilitative techniques, detentions, and other controls have been

designed to target the accepted explanatory factors.)

KEYWORDS

Juvenile crimes, Socio-economic factors, Attitude towards crime, Offense, Juvenile

delinquency, Family disruption, Sexual abuse, Abandonment, Delinquents,

Probation, Juvenile Courts, Age of Criminal Responsibility, Borstal Institution,

Imprisonment, Alternative dispositions. Child Sexual Abuse, Pakistan, Scientific

Knowledge Base, Policy, Interventions, prevention. Street Children, Government,

Poverty, Abuse, Problems,

Research.

2.3 RESEARCH OBJECTIVES

Investigate the causes of delinquency,through,several historical theoretical

models—from ancient explanations through the modern era.

Understand present theory of Juvenile Delinquency by the investigation of

contemporary contexts and the past. (This is necessary because we

consistently build new insight upon previous constructs.)

Tracing the historical roots of Juvenile delinquency.

2.4 JUVENILE DELIQUENCY : THEORIES OF CAUSATION8

Although many theories have been propounded (put forward for consideration)

to explain juvenile deviance—a number of which are discussed in this

chapter—no single theory has been universally accepted by experts. Many

theories have been designed to explain particular aspects of deviance (and

have reasonably done so) but were not designed to explain all aspects of

deviance (and have not done so). I will only focus on the basic theories of the

causation of delinquency.

2.5 FUNDAMENTALS: COMMON FACTORS INFLUENCING

JUVENILE BEHAVIOUR

Juveniles who live in unstable homes and social environments are deemed

to be at-risk children because of their vulnerability to detrimental influences.

Depending on the type and degree of these influences, unstable environments

can induce antisocial behaviour in children, often resulting in criminally

deviant 9behaviour later in life. Juvenile deviance is influenced by a

number of factors. Among these are family, socioeconomic class, and educational

experiences.

Family

Family background is one of the most potent influences on juvenile

development. Norms, values, models of behavior, and other imprints

emanate from the family unit, and these factors create an internalized “blueprint”

for the child’s personality, beliefs, and attitudes. It is within the

family unit that children receive most of their information about how to

8 the action of causing or producing.9 deviating or departing from the norm; characterized by deviation: deviant social behavior.

interact with other people and society. Healthy and nurturing families

instruct members on how to interact using functional norms of behavior,

whereas unhealthy family environments instruct members on how to interact

using dysfunctional 10norms. Thus, dysfunctional families transfer dysfunctional

norms to their children.

When antisocial and criminal norms exist within families, lay persons

and experts agree that this can lead to one readily observable outcome:

Criminal dysfunctional and deviant behaviors run in some families. For

example, an association exists between marital instability and delinquency,

so that the manifestations of a discordant marital environment—such as

stress, estrangement, coldness, and unhealthy boundaries—produce a

disproportionately

high incidence of delinquent behavior in children who

grow up in these environments. Families that disintegrate into divorce can

also exhibit a higher incidence of delinquency if the resulting arrangement

continues to promote intra-family dysfunction. This certainly does not

mean that all single-parent homes are likely to produce dysfunctional

children; the key is whether the family unit is healthy. Discord and divorce

in two-parent households are much more disruptive than stable, loving

one-parent households.

Socioeconomic Class

Past conventional wisdom held that children from

poor and working-class backgrounds—that is, youths born into the “dangerous

classes”9—are much more likely to engage in delinquent behavior.

The historical analysis illustrates how juvenile

reform efforts such as the Child-Saving Movement focused their attentions

on urban poor and working-class youths, many of whom were children of

immigrants. Even as late as the 1950s and early 1960s, experts argued that

class background was a significant explanatory variable for delinquent

propensities. This presumption has since been vigorously challenged, as

statistical data began to indicate during the 1960s that delinquency is also

10 a consequence of a social practice or behavior pattern that undermines the stability of a social system.

quite common among middle-class youths.

Reasons for middle-class delinquency include parental pressure, peer

pressure, uncertainty for the future, experimentation with intoxicating substances,

experimenting with alternative lifestyles, and strong youth subcultures.

Having considered (and accepted) the observation that middle-class

delinquency is a significant problem, one must also keep in mind that theorists

continue to identify certain dysfunctional norms among very poor

urban subcultures. Research on the inner-city underclass has found that

large numbers of the urban poor are caught in a chronic generational cycle

of poverty, low educational achievement, teenage parenthood, unemployment,

and welfare dependence. Underclass theorists argue that antisocial

behaviors have become entrenched norms within chronically impoverished

inner-city environments, so that delinquency and criminality are now

endemic 11facts of life.

Educational Experiences.

Educational experiences are, in many ways, a

coequal influence on juvenile development, along with family and socioeconomic

factors, because school environments can shape many youths’ sense

of opportunity and self-worth. For example, school dropouts and poor academic

performers exhibit a higher incidence of delinquency and crime than

graduates and academic achievers.

Academic achievement is considered to be one of the principal steppingstones

toward success in society. In an ideal environment, opportunities

for education, mentoring, and encouragement to excel should be

equally available for all children. Unfortunately, educational opportunities

are not equally available to all youths for a number of reasons. Socioeconomic

and demographic factors can also have an impact on educational

opportunities and performance, so that poor children often experience

a very different educational environment in comparison to middle-class

children. This is particularly apparent in inner-city, underclass environments,

where educational achievement is frequently not a strong norm of

11 natural to or characteristic of a specific people or place

behavior. For example, norms of behavior on school grounds can be problematic

depending on whether socially accepted values are instilled for

academic competition, deportment, and study habits. Underachievement in

school can also be exacerbated by teachers’ perceptions and expectations

based on appearance, gender, race, and socioeconomic class.

Learning by Experiencing

It is a truism that every person’s future behavior is conditioned by past

experiences. In other words, we learn from lifetime events and base our decisions,

perceptions, and conduct on these events. According to conditioning

theorists, these experiences—or environmental stimuli—underlie socially

acceptable behavior, as well as delinquency and criminality.

The pioneer behind conditioning theory is Ivan Pavlov, a Russian physiologist

who conducted behavioural experiments on dogs during the late nineteenth

and early twentieth centuries. The basic attributes of his experiments

were stimulus–response and reward–punishment. His laboratory dogs were

stimulated to respond with certain behaviors. Pavlov’s methods were remarkably

simple: The dogs were rewarded when they responded correctly, and

punished when the responded incorrectly. Pavlov’s most famous experiment

involved conditioning dogs to salivate at the ring of a bell. He initially rang

a bell each time the dogs were fed (which stimulated them to salivate), and

eventually simply rang the bell without food. The result was that the dogs

were stimulated to salivate even though no food was given. Extrapolating

these observations to human behavior, Pavlov’s experiments theoretically

demonstrate that behavior is predicated on lifetime stimuli.

During the latter half of the twentieth century, B. F. Skinner and other

researchers promoted behavioural psychology. Their underlying theory of

stimulus–response added to the progression of conditioning theory. Many

Behaviourists concluded that human criminals and delinquents could be

conditioned to continue their behaviour in a manner similar to Pavlov’s dogs.

According to this school, environmental stimuli operate either as punishers

or reinforces. Criminals and delinquents are stimulated (reinforced) by their

environment to continue acting out defiantly until they are punished in

some manner. Therefore, when offenders are repeatedly rewarded for their

deviance and receive no punishment for breaking the law, they are likely to

continue until the authorities catch them.

Society and Causation

The foregoing theories of causation have focused on the personal idiosyncrasies

of individuals to explain delinquency and crime. These personal

attributes—such as an individual’s physical or psychological makeup—have

been used by researchers and practitioners to formulate theories of deviance

and to design policies to deal with lawbreakers. However, one commonality

is that all of these theories look at the personal (internal) attributes of

people. In the alternative, and using an external approach, sociologists have

examined the role of societal factors to explain human behaviour.

Sociologists study interrelationships between individuals, socioeconomic

groups, social processes, and societal structures. They have long examined

the association between societal factors and criminal causation, focusing

on the effects of society on individual and collective behaviour. Sociological

theories are not strongly deterministic, in that they tend to explain predispositions12

toward criminal deviance, and they therefore allow for some

degree of free will.

Several elements are commonly present in sociological explanations of delinquency

and crime:

• Socioeconomic conditions and pressures shape individual and collective

behavior.

• Inequality and deprivation are associated with delinquency and

criminality.

• Sub cultural norms are often at odds with accepted norms of society,

creating tensions that can result in sub cultural conflict with the greater

society.

• Delinquency and crime are associated with underclass conditions such

as poverty, neighbourhood degeneration, low educational achievement,

inadequate housing, and family dysfunction.

12 the fact or condition of being predisposed

Psychological theories of causation apply research and theory of psychology to

criminology. As new understandings of the human psyche are proposed,

psychologists have had an important explanatory impact on theories of causation.

Although psychological theories are not strongly deterministic, they do provide

insight on predispositions for deviant behavior.

Differential Association

Edwin Sutherland described the theory of differential association in his

1939 book, Principles of Criminology. Differential association is a process

of social learning, in which criminals and law-abiding people learn their

behavior from associations with others. People imitate or otherwise internalize

the quality of these associations. Delinquency (and criminality) are learned

behaviors that are acquired from interacting with others who participate in

criminal lifestyles, so that the difference between offenders and no offenders

lies in individual choices. In other words, offenders and no offenders strive for

similar goals, but they choose different avenues to achieve those goals. These

choices are based on the lessons they take from exposure to certain kinds of

life experiences. In particular, those with strong attachments to delinquents

are more likely to become delinquents, and people who grow up in criminal

milieus will adopt deviant values that can result in delinquency and crime.

Although differential association theory has been criticized for relying

on variables that are difficult to operationalize, it remains a potent and influential

approach to explaining delinquency and crime. Its appeal is perhaps

grounded in its proposition that all persons possess the same learning

processes, which are developed through communicating and interacting

with groups of people. The difference between criminals and noncriminal

is that they base their choices on different lessons learned from their different

experiences. Norms and values are similarly learned, but some people

internalize deviant norms and values.

Conflict

Conflict theories of causation hypothesize that social tensions and conflicts

are indelible features of society. Conflicts arise between dominant

groups and “subordinate” classes, races, genders, political groups, ethnic

groups, and other defined outsiders in society. The fundamental

characteristic of these tensions is that they often pit the haves against the

have-nots, with the latter being labelled as criminals or insurgents 13during

these conflicts. Because such tensions are indelible, they can at best be controlled

by social institutions rather than completely eradicated. In practice,

this means that the have-nots must be coerced to obey the laws and rules of

those in power.

From this perspective, laws and rules are simply instruments of control

used by ruling elites to maintain control of key institutions, and thereby shut

out others who might challenge the authority of the elites. The focus of conflict

theories is on the entire economic and political system, and the socioeconomic

tensions theoretically created by this system.

CHAPTER 3

RESEARCH ASPECT 3

REGULATING HUMAN BEHAVIOUR THROUGH

ARCHITECTURE

3.1 ABSTRACT

A remerging concept in recent legal scholarship is the idea that architecture serves

as a regulatory 14force (Katyal, 2002). This means architecture can be substituted or

used in conjunction with traditional regulatory mechanisms, such as the law or social

norms. The notion of regulation refers to how architecture can influence and affect

behaviour. Scholars from architecture, geography, urban planning, sociology,

anthropology, and law have found that architecture can regulate us in a many ways.

However, there is not a clear conception of the different ways that architecture

13 a person who rises in forcible opposition to lawful authority, esp. a person who engages in armed resistance to a government or to the execution of its laws; rebel.14 to control or direct by a rule, principle, method

regulates. This paper remedies this by categorizing the different ways in which

architecture regulates us.

This paper synthesizes the existing scholarship into three categories. These three

categories provide a simple and effective way to think about architecture operates.

This approach is preferable to wide ranging literature reviews within sociology and

anthropology(Gieryn, 2000; Lawrence & Low, 1990). Instead, this article focuses on

three categories for how architecture regulates us. They revolve around

communication, interaction, and biases. First, architecture can play a communicative

role by expressing cultural or symbolic meanings. Second, the architecture can affect

how people interact. Third, architecture can be biased and treat certain social groups

or values more favourably. We acknowledge that the vast majority of architectural

features do not fit cleanly within one category, but often have aspects from several

categories

3.2 RESEARCH QUESTIONS

Does Architecture regulate human behaviour?

How does architecture serve as a regulatory force?

Can the built environment regulate human behaviour?

What are the different ways in which architecture regulates its inhabitants? \

How can architecture reduce crime?

Can architecture inject morals and ethics in criminals?

KEYWORDS

Regulate, Mechanism, Reform, Disciplining Spaces, Criminal Behavior, Crime

Prevention, Surveillance

3.3 RESEARCH OBJECTIVE

The goal of this research is to summarize and categorize and understand how

architecture serves as a regulatory force. In sum, the goal of this analysis is to allow

myself to better analyse and elucidate 15how architecture regulates. Which I will

eventually use as a major aspect for designing my Juvenile reform School.

3.4 REGULATORY ARCHITECTURE COMMUNICATING

THROUGH CULTURAL AND SYMBOLIC VALUES IN

BUILDINGS

Architecture can play a communicative role by expressing meaning through

the built environment. A variety of cultural or symbolic values can be expressed

through choices in materials, colors, forms, sizes, furnishings, and landscaping for a

building (Rapoport, 1990).

Consider the design of banks that are constructed to express the values of security,

trust, and reliability. This is accomplished with techniques such as the use of marble

and grand spaces that provide a monumental feeling that the bank will not

disappear. The structure and makeup of a school communicates whether it is a

welcoming environment. Research has shown that children, parents, and teachers

all feel that a clean, well maintained building with student artwork and suitable colors

on the walls contribute to a welcoming environment (Maxwell, 2000). In this case the

physical makeup has an impact on creating a social environment conducive to

learning. Moreover, research has shown that the communicate effects of the physical

environment including, classroom density, noise, furniture arrangement,

temperature, and lighting can affect student performance (Ahrentzen, Jue,

&Skorpanich, 1982).

Buildings can also represent and communicate socio-cultural

traditions and personal identity. For example, consider the role of decorative patterns

of the Al-Alkhalaf in SaudiArabia (Abu-Ghazzeh, 2001) or the Islamic influence on

the PETRONAS twin towers with the floor pattern based on an eight point star.

Another example can be found in Bourdieu’s sociological research on the Berbers of

15 make something easier to understand. to make something easier to understand by giving more information

Algeria. He argued that their buildings not only serve a functional purpose, but also

as Gieryn explains, the buildings express a “set of symbolic opposition and

hierarchies that order the societal divisions” (2002). Bourdieu found the allocation of

spaces in a Kabyle house corresponds to basic dichotomies in the Berber

cosmogony (Bourdieu, 1990).Interestingly, the communicative role was recognized

by an outsider such as Bourdieu, but was not obvious and realized by the Berber

builders. While Bourdieu analysis of the Kabyle house is obviously not translatable to

every building in a society, it still shows how buildings serve a symbolic function

(Duncan, 1981).

Another similar analysis examines the architecture of American courtrooms and

courthouses. Rosenbloom concludes that while the architecture of courtrooms is

consistent with social ideology put forth by the Constitution, the same cannot be said

for courthouses (1998).

Courthouse exteriors traditionally were built in classical styles such as Greek

revival. However, a number of federal courthouses have instead been built in a

modern style. Rosenbloom argues that this architectural style communicates a

different view of the legal system. The modern corporate exterior provides a

perception of law as efficient, predictable, and stable, while masking negative

perceptions about the legal system’s efficiency and legitimacy. Thus, the examples

of the modern corporate courthouse style and the Kabyle house show how

architecture expresses cultural or symbolic values.

The communicative properties of buildings do not always express their true

meaning. Instead, designers can manipulate the symbolic and cultural values for

other purposes. A prominent example of this in contemporary society can be found in

Gottdiener’s study of themed environments (1997). Despite the variety of themes

found in the media, only a few of these are actually used by architects. Almost all

buildings rely on the stock themes of the tropical paradise, the American “wild west”,

classical civilization, nostalgia, Arabian fantasy, and the urban motif. Gottdiener

argues that designers use these themed environments in shopping malls to disguise

the primary purpose of generating profits. In this theming process, malls avoid

fundamental issues involving religion, class, and politics. This is disheartening,

because malls have a significant role in society as public spaces where the

community interacts. As a result, Gottdiener argues these themed malls reflect a

simulation of public life.

The communicative properties of buildings can also be analyzed from a

ritualistic perspective. This aspect emphasizes how the meanings of buildings are

created and activated through individuals and societal interactions. For example, the

sociologist Durkheim describes the two variations of the Navajo House Blessing

Ceremony for private buildings and public buildings. The ceremony blessed the new

building so that its inhabitants would be graced with peace, harmony, good luck, and

general well-being (Frisbee, 1968). Similar cultural and religious rituals exist today as

well as more secular rituals of ground breaking and ribbon cutting ceremonies.

These ceremonies all strive to create positive communicative meanings in buildings.

THE SOCIAL ORDERING 16OF SPACES

Architecture can influence how people interact with each other through the

social ordering of space. This influence can be minimal by encouraging mingling or

informal interaction through placement of objects in the interior of buildings, such as

water coolers. At the other extreme, architecture, such as that of a prison, can serve

to restrict movements of individuals and their ability to interact with others, and

effectively dominate individuals.

The legal system has long recognized how the built environment affects social

interaction. The predominant trend in the United States has been to create specific

geographic areas for specific functions, such as separating residential homes from

industries.

My discussion of social ordering proceeds by examining the minimal influence

exercised by architecture to the more substantial role played by architecture in social

ordering. First, I consider how architecture can affect informal social interaction. This

then leads me to consider the stronger role that architecture plays on our

conceptions of personal space and territoriality. Finally, I discuss how architecture

can serve to dominate and discipline people.

16 way things are arranged

SOCIAL INTERACTION

Our built environment can be structured to encourage or discourage social

interactions. A simple example of this is that hallways tend to discourage social

interaction, while circular rooms tend to encourage social interaction (Osmond,

1957). It is well recognized that elements such as common stairwells, the placement

of water coolers, and front porches can all facilitate social interaction. A prominent

example of how architects can facilitate social interaction is found in the creation of

open space plazas within New York City. Since 1961, the city typically bargains with

developers to create plazas. Many of the early plazas tended to be vast underutilized

spaces. Whyte began to study the properties of successful plazas and found that

successful plazas had plenty of sitting places and included other features such as

fountains, food stands, and activities to watch (Whyte, 1988). The city then

incorporated Whyte’s proposals when bargaining with developers. The result was the

creation of new plazas that were popular places for enjoyable social interaction

(Gifford, 2002).

The same principles of influencing social interaction, but on a larger scale,

can be seen in the “New Urbanist” movement. This movement counters the current

trend of American suburbs, which feature sprawl 17as well as the separation of

functions through zoning. (Ross, 1999) The New Urbanist movement seeks to create

cities and neighborhoods that encourage social interaction and civic engagement

with the goal of developing stronger communities (Katz, 1993).

The interaction is created by creating compact neighborhoods with a mixture

of activities and buildings (Talen, 2002). Descriptions of life in these small

pedestrian-oriented towns can be found in Kuntsler’s account of Seaside, Florida

and Ross’s chronicles of his time in Celebration, Florida (Kuntsler, 1993; Ross,

1999). The rationale behind New Urbanists is supported by Putnam’s research,

which shows that suburban sprawl is a significant contributor to civic disengagement

(2000). This has led scholars, such as Frug, to argue that the New Urbanist 18ideas,

17 a part of a town or city that starts to spread into the countryside in a way that is ugly and not carefully planned18

if implemented by changes in local land use ordinances, could create better

communities (1996).

3.5 PERSONAL SPACE & TERRITORIALITY

Our built environment can affect social ordering by interacting with our

perceptions of personal space and territory. We illustrate how our perceptions can

affect social ordering with two examples. First, we consider the relationship between

privacy and architecture. The second example explains how architecture and the

perceptions of territoriality can be used to reduce crime.

Privacy is often considered a process of exclusion, where we try to be alone

or get away from others. These ideas are readily incorporated into the design of

buildings by creating areas of solitude. For example, by the creation of individual

offices instead of using open-plan cubicles. However, the environmental

psychologist, Irwin Altman, argues that this design will not truly meet our privacy

needs. Instead, he argues that privacy is a process whereby a person sometimes

wants to be separated and at other times wants to be in contact with other people

(Altman, 1975). Consequently, designing spaces that permit little interaction will not

provide privacy. So instead of having a room set aside for solitude, Altman argues

for building environments that are responsive and able to meet our changing privacy

needs. This allows an easy alteration for either getting together with people or for

creating separation.

Territoriality considers how people exert control over a specific space. This

can occur through a number of ways from symbols, such as a personalized pinup

calendar in male work areas, or the use of formal barriers such as fences and gates.

One notable use of territoriality has been to reduce crime. Oscar Newman argued

that a significant reason for why crime occurred in public housing was because the

residents could not express territoriality 19by marking out and defending their

property in large, high-rise style buildings. Newman argued that buildings needed to

be designed with “defensible space” that reduces anonymity, increases surveillance,

19 having a tendency to appropriate an area or territory and to protect that area or territory against intruders of the same species, particularly other males

and reduces possible escape routes (1972). This change is partially manifested in

the shift towards low-rise public housing. Today, the concept of defensible space is

part of a larger movement to reduce crime through architectural measures (Clarke,

1997; Jeffery, 1971; Taylor, 2002).

3.6 DISCIPLINING SPACES

The design of buildings can also order social interaction by effectively

dominating and controlling people. For example, the design of prisons is purposefully

built to allow the use of techniques of surveillance, segregation, and classification.

These techniques allow for the exercising of power over inmates thereby disciplining

them. The use of buildings to discipline behavior is used in a variety of buildings

going beyond prisons, such as hospitals, schools, shopping malls, and theme parks.

My discussion first considers Michel Foucault’s analysis of disciplinary technologies.

Next, I will discuss Markus’s historical architectural research on how buildings shape

society.

Michel Foucault emphasized the important of surveillance in disciplining

people. Hiswork was inspired by Jeremy Betham’s panopticon, which sought to

reform prisoners. The panopticon was a tower that allowed an observer at the middle

of the tower to view prisoners in cells at the edge of the tower. An important

component of the panopticon was that it was possible for a guard to view the

prisoners, but the prisoners could not tell if they were being watched. A prisoner in

the panopticon would feel as if they were always being watched. This feeling of

being watched was the result of the architectural setup. (Foucault, 1979) An

important point here is that when architecture disciplines, “it does not matter who

exercises power. Any individual, taken almost at random, can operate the machine.”

(Foucault, 1979, 202) Betham’s panopticon held external control over its prisoners,

while coercing internal moral reform through surveillance (Markus, 1993).

Foucault’s analysis found that the ideal of the panopticon is reflected in other

forms of architecture from hospitals, asylums, military camps, and schools. The

essential element was the use of architecture with a theme of continuous

surveillance and the feeling of general visibility.

The promise of the panopticon was that it could “transform individuals: to act

on those it shelters, to provide a hold on their conduct, to carry the effects of power

right to them, to make it possible to know them, to alter them” (Foucault, 1979). The

result is that architecture can serve as a regulatory mechanism that “contributes to

the maintenance of power of one group over another and functions as a mechanism

for coding their reciprocal 20relationships at a level that includes the movement of the

body in space as well as its surveillance” (Lawrence & Low,1990).

The architectural power of surveillance is widely recognized to affect behavior.

A common use of surveillance is to deter crime as well as catch offenders. The

modern day exemplar of surveillance is the city of London, which uses thousands of

cameras in an attempt to deter and combat crime (Rosen, 2001). The architectural

power of surveillance also affects specific social groups. Goodman argues that

homosexuals in South Africa “move through public spaces under the eye of a social

gaze, they must also consider the implications of visibly deviating from prescribed

norms” (Goodman, 2001). In this case, surveillance is a combination of social norms

and law. Through this public gaze, gays and lesbians are made to feel as criminal

wrongdoers. This public gaze is partially countered through the creation of gay bars

that provide a safe haven for socializing.

The idea that buildings have power has also intrigued the architectural scholar

ThomasMarkus. He has written an excellent descriptive history of buildings around

the Enlightenment that shows how buildings shape people. He discusses in detail

how the architecture of schools, hospitals, prisons, hotels, and public baths are

designed to discipline people. (Markus, 1993)

The disciplining occurs through surveillance and architectural manipulation

that reflect other philosophies.

In discussing schools, Markus begins by noting that educators recognized the

power of architecture. For them, the design of the building was as powerful as the

content of theirteachings. Numerous handbooks provided details on both teaching

20 done according to an arrangement by which you do something for someone who does the same thing for you

methods as well asillustrating details of schoolrooms, furniture, and equipment. The

design of schoolrooms often favored various theories of pedagogy in handling

interactions between students and monitoring by other students and teachers. For

example, schools varied from designs where a monitor would sit at a desk or for

every few aisles. Other changes included layouts in a U-shape to prevent students

from making eye contact with children from other classes in rooms with multiple

classes. While Markus’ research focused on buildings in the Enlightment, his

analysis is still very relevant today. New school designs nowadays reflect new

teaching methods. For example, consider the ‘open plan,’ in which class space is not

concretely divided but intended to provide flexibility in teaching and activities. The

lack of walls also eases the surveillance of students by teachers and of teachers by

their colleagues (Markus, 1993).

In sum, Markus provides us with significant detail on how buildings affect our

freedom. Specifically, how buildings can control the spatial ability of actors as well as

define a set of rules that govern their interaction—define the locations, the paths of

movement, their visual paths, their programmed encounters, and place limits on

chance encounters. The building and other actors determines who does what,

where, with whom, when and observed by whom. While I focused on prisons and

schools, this analysis of how architecture disciplines can also be extended to other

buildings such as shopping malls, casinos, theme parks, and hospitals.

3.7 BIASED SPACES

Architecture can also affect people through embedded biases. The biases are

manifested by architectural characteristics that favor a particular people or certain

values over others.

Simply put, architecture is not neutral, but social and political. As a result,

architecture can serve to maintain and reproduce social values and classifications

through exclusion and segregation.

For example until recently the urban environment discriminated those with

physical disability and limited their mobility. This limited their access to other people,

employment, and fundamentally, to knowledge. Over the last fifty years, society has

recognized this built-in bias and has required itself to reshape the built environment

to ensure disabled people can better participate in society (Welch & Palames, 1995).

The recognition of the role of architecture was first formalized and examined in a

1965 amendment of the Rehabilitation Act. This led to the Architectural Barriers Act

of 1968 which mandated that buildings designed, constructed, altered, or leased with

federal funds must comply with standards for accessibility. In 1975, Congress

passed the Education for All Handicapped Children Act. This required public schools

to treat children with disabilities in the least restrictive environment and involved the

removal of barriers. In 1986, the Air Carriers Act expanded the removal of

architectural barriers to air travel. This culminated in the 1990 passage of the

American with Disabilities Act, which required employers, businesses open to the

public, government services and telecommunication carriers to ensure accessibility

largely through architectural modification.

As a result of these laws, the architecture of the built environment has been

reshaped (Dunlap, 1997). These changes include ramps and curbcuts to foster the

mobility of those in wheelchairs.

Other changes include the use of lever handles, instead of

doorknobs, and adding raised markings on elevator controls for the visually impaired.

The final example of biases built into architecture

is that of fire safety (Lai, 1988). Thevalue of fire safety has been incorporated into

buildings in London for almost a thousand years.

The Assize of Buildings was an early building code in 1189 that placed

requirements on buildings to prevent the spread of fire. By the fourteenth century,

building code regulations required roofs to be covered with tile, lead, or stone. To

this day, building regulations still incorporate the value of fire safety into the design of

buildings. These regulations affect where buildings are located, the materials used in

their construction, the interior design, and the incorporation of fire detectors and

sprinklers. Similarly, other biases are built into buildings such as concern for public

safety, preventing nuisances, or maintaining sanitation. Both these examples

illustrate how biases are embedded 21into architecture.

21 fix something firmly in surface or object. to fix something firmly in a surface or object

CASE STUDIES

These case-studies present how Architects and designers are using architecture and

design to actually impact human behavior, cognition and decision making, using a

number of techniques.

DESIGN PRINCIPLES

Fast food restaurants use hard

chairs that quickly grow

uncomfortable so that customers

rapidly turn over

Elevator designers place the numerals and floor indicator lights over people’s heads

so that they avoid eye contact and feel less crowded

Supermarkets have narrow aisles so that customers cannot easily talk to each other

and must focus on the products instead

(We’ve also seen the opposite effect cited, i.e. using wider aisles to cause customers

to spend longer in a particular aisle – clearly, both effects could be employed in

different product areas within the same supermarket, to suit whatever strategy the

retailer has. There are plenty of other tricks too.)

3.8 ARCHITECTURAL STRATEGIES FOR CRIME

CONTROL

Design should:

Create opportunities for natural surveillance by residents, neighbours and

bystanders;

In still a sense of territor iality so that residents develop proprietary attitudes and

outsiders feel deterred from entering a private space;

Build communities and avoid social isolation;

Protect targets of crime.

Before expanding on the practical and legal application of each of these

mechanisms, we must consider that all these mechanisms work in synergy… natural

surveillance is most effective when social isolation is minimized and when design

delays the perpetration of crime, there can be conflicts and any strategy needs to be

developed within the context of the community in which it is going to be applied:

Effective design requires input by the community. Without such input, security

features are likely to be resented, taken down or evaded (consider the

’security’ doors propped open on campuses today.

(This issue of ‘resentment’ or even ‘inconvenience’ is, I feel, going to be a significant

factor in my own studies of environmentally beneficial behaviour-changing products;

we shall see.)

NATURAL SURVEILLANCE

The idea of natural surveillance is to create situations where areas are overlooked by

neighbours, other residents and so on, with the effect being both a crime deterrent (if

the criminal knows he is being watched, or might be watched, he may decide against

the crime) and to improve the effectiveness of solving the crime afterwards

(someone will have seen what happened).If we cite Jane Jacobs‘ argument that

diversity of use can be an important way of bringing about natural surveillance –

preferably with different activities occurring throughout the day, to ensure that there

is always a population there to keep any eye on things. However, short of this kind of

deliberate diversity planning, there are specific techniques that can be used on

individual buildings and their surroundings to increase natural surveillance; It is

suggested that the addition of windows facing onto public spaces, ensuring sight

lines down corridors and alleyways, positioning windows so that neighbours can

watch each other’s houses, bringing parking areas in front of stores rather than out

of sight behind them, and making sure hallways and lobbies are clearly visible to

passers-by. An example is of redesigning the layout of a school’s grounds to

increase the opportunity for natural surveillance:

Images from Katyal, N. K. “Architecture as Crime Control”, Yale Law Journal,

March 2002, Vol 111, Issue 5.

[In the first image] the informal areas are blocked form sight and far from

school grounds. Because no central place for congregation exists, students

are spread over the grounds, and there is insufficient density for monitoring.

The four open entrances and exits facilitate access to the school and escape.

…

[In the second image,] through the designation of formal gathering areas,

other places become subtly off-limits to students. Indeed, those who are

present in such areas are likely to attract suspicion…. the formal gathering

areas are naturally surveilled by building users… [And] are long and thin,

running alongside the school windows and two hedges preventing students

from going further away. Moreover, the west entrance, which had the least

potential for surveillance, has been closed…

Lighting can also be a major method of increasing natural surveillance:

First, it helps anyone viewing a situation to see it more clearly and thereby

deters some crimes by increasing the powers of perception of those watching.

Second, it encourages people to be in the area in the first place because the greater

visibility creates a sense of security. The more eyes on the street, the more visibility

constrain crime.

TERRITORIALITY

Territoriality – also much of the focus of defensible space– “both provides an

incentive for residents to take care of and monitor an area and subtly deters

offenders by warning them that they are about to enter a private space.” Some

examples are:

“An entrance raised by a few inches” is “a successful symbolic barrier… people

are aware of minor graduations of elevation and may refrain from entry if they sense

a gradual incline”. (Elevation can also lead to reverence/respect, either directly – e.g.

steps leading up to a courthouse – or indirectly, causing a visitor to bow his/her head

on approach)

Monuments and markers can also demarcate 22the transition from public space

into private space… A study of burglaries in Salt Lake City… revealed that houses

with nameplates had lower rates of intrusion than those without them.

one rather simple way is to place two buildings in an ‘L’ formation with a fence that

completes the triangle. Children can play in the open space, and adults can look out

of their windows at their children.

another case study includes these diagrams from “a group of British architects”:

22 decide limits or borders of something. to decide the limits of something, especially the borde

In the first, a series of buildings lacks a common entrance, and pedestrians cut

through the property. The addition of a simple overhead arch, however, creates a

sense of private space:

Images originally from Stollard, P. Crime Prevention Through Housing

BUILDING COMMUNITY

The third main mechanism, building community, is also heavily interlinked with the

idea of defensible space. The aim here is to encourage a sense of community, by

creating spaces which cause people to interact, or even reducing the number of

dwellings in each individual set so that people are more likely to recognise and come

to know their neighbours – something many architects have instinctively tried to do

anyway over the past 20 years or so, though not always explicitly with crime

reduction in mind:

…even the placement of seats and benches can bring people together or divide

them, creating what architects call, respectively, socio-petal and socio-fugal spaces.

Some architects self-consciously create socio-fugal spaces by, for example,

designing chairs in airports that make it difficult for people to talk to each other.

Practically, ‘building community’ would necessarily appear to be slightly more

nebulous than some of the other mechanisms, but even techniques such as

encouraging people to spend more time in communal areas such as a laundry (and

hence potentially interact more) can be important here.

STRENGTHENING TARGETS

There are a number of simple examples of target hardening or strengthening given

below:

Placing deadbolts lower on door frames.

(Presumably to make kicking they open more difficult)

Having doors in vulnerable locations swing outward.

Raising fire escapes to put them out of easy reach.

Reducing the size of letter-box openings.

If a robber can stand on top of a trash bin and reach a second-floor window, the

bin should be placed far from the window.

Prickly shrubs placed outside of windows can also deter crime.

A duct that spews hot air can be placed near a ground-floor window to deter entry.

Smells can also be strategically harnessed either to induce people to come

outside or keep them away.

The FBI building is built on stilts to minimize damage in the event of a bomb

detonation at street level.

To decrease the likelihood of presidential assassination, a stretch of Pennsylvania

Avenue in front of the White House was barricaded and closed to car traffic.

Interestingly we should make a point that where potential crime targets can be

strengthened without making it overly obvious that this has been done, the benefits

may be greater:

Modern technology permits targets to be hardened in ways that are not obvious to

the public. Strong plastics, graffiti-resistant paint, and doors with steel cores are a

few examples. These allow architects to disguise their efforts at strengthening

targets and thus avoid sending a message that crime is rampant.

…

Some forms of target hardening are suboptimal in that visibility evinces a fear of

crime that can cause damage to the fabric of a community and even increase crime

rates.

Subtle architecture that gently reinforces law-abiding norms 23and prevents a degree

of intrusion is to be preferred to explicit and awkward physical barricades that reflect

the feeling that a community is under siege. Cheap wire fences do not express a

belief in the power of law or norms; rather, they reflect the opposite. The same can

be said for ugly iron bars on windows, which express the terror of crime as

powerfully as does any sign or published crime statistic.

…

A whole host of architectural strategies – such as the placement of doors and

windows, creation of semi-public congregation spaces, street layout alterations, park

redesign, and many more – sidestep creating an architecture dominated by the

expression of fear. Indeed, cheap barricades often substitute for these subtler

measures. Viewed this way, gated communities is a by-product of public

disregard of architecture, not a sustainable solution to crime.

OTHER ASPECTS

One point is – a corollary 24of the above – the concept of architectural solutions as

entities which subtly reinforce or embody norms (desirable ones, from the point of

view of law enforcement) rather than necessarily enforce them in totality:

23 something usual or expected. something that is usual or expected24 something automatically true if other thing true. something that will also be true if a particular idea or statement is true, or something that will also exist if a particular situation exists

Even the best social codes are quite useless if it is impossible to observe whether

people comply with them. Architecture, by facilitating interaction and monitoring by

members of a community, permits social norms to have greater impact. In this way,

the power of architecture to influence social norms can even eclipse that of law, for

law faces obvious difficulties when it attempts to regulate social interaction directly.

Architecture can prevent crimes even when criminals believe the probability of

enforcement is low… one feature of social norms strategies is that they are often

self-enforcing.

I think this is a crucial point, and is applicable in other ‘architectures of control’

techniques outside of the built environment and the specific issues of crime.

Psychological evidence shows that criminals decode environmental ‘cues’ to assess

the likelihood of success of a given criminal act… the design of a meeting table

influences who will speak and when, and who is perceived to have a position of

authority. It is therefore no great shock that the eight months of negotiation that

preceded the 1969 Paris Peace Talks largely centred on what the physical space of

the negotiating table would be. It is said that Machiavelli designed a political meeting

chamber with a ceiling that looked as if it were about to collapse, reasoning that it

would induce politicians to vote quickly and leave.

…

Winston Churchill… went so far as to claim that the shape of the House [of

Commons] was essential to the two-party system and that its small size was critical

for ‘free debate’:

…

“The party system is much favoured by the oblong form of chamber… the act of

crossing the floor is one which requires serious consideration. I am well informed on

this matter, for I have accomplished that difficult process, not only once but twice.”

Significant points are also made is about displacement (or “geographic substitution”)

of crime: do architectural measures (especially target hardening and obvious

surveillance, we might assume) not simply move crime elsewhere? (We’ve

discussed this before when looking at blue lighting in public toilets.)It is argued that,

while some displacement will, of course, occur, this is not always direct substitution.

Locally-based criminals may not have knowledge of other areas (i.e. the certainty

that these will not be hardened or surveilled targets), or indeed, where crime is

opportunistic, the “costs” imposed by travelling elsewhere to commit it are too high.

Equally:

Many devices, such as steel-reinforced doors, strong plastics, and the like are not

discernible until a criminal has invested some energy and time. These forms of

precaution will thus increase expected perpetration cost and deter offenders without

risking substantial displacement.

Also, the fact that increased police presence (for example) in a crime ‘hot-spot’ may

also lead to crime displacement, is generally not seen as a reason for not increasing

that presence: some targets simply are more desirable to protect than others, and

where architectural measures allow police to concentrate elsewhere, this may even

be an advantage.

MORE SPECIFIC EXAMPLES

Aside from the analysis, there are a great many architectures of control and

persuasion examples, and while they are somewhat disparate in how I present them

here, they are all worth noting from my point of view, and I hope interesting. Apart

from those I’ve already quoted above, some of the other notable examples and

observations are:

…the feeling of being crowded correlates with aggression. Architects can

alleviate the sensation of crowding by adding windows that allow for natural

light, by using rectangular rooms (which are perceived to be larger than

square ones), and by employing light-colored paints. When people perceive

more space, they tend to become less hostile.

While the results should not be overemphasized, psychologists have found

results showing that various colours affect behaviour and emotions. The most

consistent such finding is that red induces a higher level of arousal than do

cool colours like green and blue. Another study indicated that people walked

faster down a hallway painted red or orange than down one painted in cooler

colours. After experimenting with hundreds of shade, Professor Schauss

identified a certain shade of pink, Baker-Miller, as the most successful colour

to mediate aggression… prisoners in Baker-Miller pink cells were found to be

les abusive than those in magnolia-colored cells.

Studies show that people who sit at right angles from each other at a table are

six times more likely to engage in conversation than those who sit across from

each other.

(Referencing Edward T Hall, The Hidden Dimension , 1966).

For some existing housing projects, the government could pass regulations

requiring retrofitting 25to prevent crime. Small private or semiprivate lawns

near entrances can encourage feelings of territoriality; strong lighting can

enhance visibility; staining and glazing can increase contrast; and buildings

refaced with a diversity of pleasing finishes can reflect individuality and

territoriality. Large open spaces can be subdivided to encourage natural

surveillance.

Edward I enacted the Statute of Winchester, a code designed to prevent the

concealment of robbers… [which included a] provision [which] directly

regulated environmental design to reduce crime… highways had to be

enlarged and bushes had to be cleared for 200 feet on either side of the

highway.

…certain buildings [being strategically placed in an area] such as churches,

may reduce the crime rate because they create feelings of guilt or shame in

potential perpetrators and because the absence of crime against such

structures furthers visible social order.

Crimes that directly interfere with natural surveillance should… be singled out

for special penalties. Destroying the lighting around a building is one obvious

example. Another would be attempts by criminals to bring smoke-belching

trucks onto a street before robbing an establishment.

3.9 CONCLUSION

This part of the report succinctly shows the many ways in which architecture

regulates. The typology provided should allow me as an Architect to better

understand and elucidate how architecture may affect people. This is a much-

25 change machine or building by adding new things. to change or improve something such as a machine or a building by adding new parts, equipment, or features to it

needed step to simplify the diversity of ways for analysing and discussing how

architecture regulates. Additionally, this categorization is a first step in developing a

theoretical approach that captures how architecture regulates. .

In this sense, a public (i.e. governmental) commitment to use of architectural

strategies in this way would make the process much more transparent than

individual private developers adopting ad hoc measures, and, with sensible analysis

of each case, could assist local law enforcement and engage communities in

reinforcing ‘desirable’ norms and ‘designing away’ some aspects of their

problems .None of this should be mistaken for architectural determinism or its

derivative belief that good buildings alone will end crime. These hopes of ’salvation

by bricks’ are illusory. But our rejection of this extreme should not lead us to the

opposite extreme view, which holds that physical settings are irrelevant to human

beliefs and action. Architecture influences behaviour; it does not determine it.

CHAPTER 4

PRISON - DESIGN

4.1 THE PRISON

A prison is a place in which people are physically confined and, usually, deprived of

a range of personal freedoms. Other terms are penitentiary, correctional facility, and

jail (or gaol), although in the United States "jail" and "prison" refer to different

subtypes of correctional facility. Jails are conventionally institutions which form part

of the criminal justice system of a county and house both inmates awaiting trial and

convicted misdemeanants. Prisons form part of the criminal justice system of a state

and only house convicted felons, usually for longer periods of time than jails.

Imprisonment or incarceration is a legal penalty that may be imposed by the state for

the commission of a crime. A criminal

suspect who has been charged with or is likely to be charged with criminal offense

may be held on remand in prison if he is denied or unable to meet conditions of bail,

or is unable or unwilling to post bail. A criminal defendant may also be held in prison

while awaiting trial or a trial verdict. If found guilty, a defendant will be convicted and

may receive a custodial sentence requiring imprisonment.

As well as convicted or suspected criminals, prisons may

be used for internment of those not charged with a crime. Prisons may also be used

as a tool of political repression to detain political prisoners, prisoners of conscience,

and "enemies of the state", particularly by authoritarian regimes. In times of war or

conflict, prisoners of war may also be detained in prisons. A prison system is the

organizational arrangement of the provision and operation of prisons, and depending

on their nature, may invoke a corrections system. Although people have been

imprisoned throughout history, they have also regularly been able to perform prison

escapes.

4.2 RESEARCH QUESTIONS

What are the basic elements of an effective Prison design?

What are the various prison surveillance types?

What are the types and layouts of prisons?

What are international and local Prison design standards?

4.3 RESEARCH OBJECTIVES

Understand the operations and workings of prisons.

Find out advantages and disadvantages of various prison models.

Find out the most effective surveillance methods in prisons.

4.4 PRISON LAYOUT TYPES

Throughout the history of prison construction, there have been basically four models

of prisons. The layouts are the radial design, the telephone-pole design, the

courtyard style, and the campus style.

RADIAL

The radial design looks a lot like an asterisk26. This is a linear design with cells

aligned in rows down the cell blocks. In the radial design, the cell blocks and

program buildings extend from a central hub. This design has not been copied in

prisons built over the past 75 years. This is probably because that all the inmate

traffic and movement comes to one point in the prison. This congestion in the prison

presents a dangerous situation, particularly in high-security prisons.

TELEPHONE POLE

The telephone-pole design is another linear style. This was used extensively

between the 1920s and 1970s. Inmates and staff move along a main corridor down

the center or the pole, and the cell blocks and program buildings extend from that

corridor. It was popular mostly because it was easy to erect barred grills across the

"pole," and close them to isolate smaller groups of offenders in case of a riot or

disturbance. These telephone-pole designed prisons were designed specifically to

control prison violence. They were built like fortresses that appeared to be quite

secure. Unfortunately, on the inside there were many hard-to-monitor corners and

other places that were ideal for stabbings, beatings and other forms of violence.

CAMPUS

Campus style prisons have been used more recently. This style was first initiated by

the Federal Bureau of Prisons (FBP). The first of these designs included the

buildings being separated and spread out over several acres within the secure

perimeter. It was believed that forcing inmates to move from one building to another,

walking outside instead of within a corridor, has a positive effect on the environment

of the prison. Also, with the decentralized location of the buildings, there is little

inmate congestion as they move through the prison. This decreases the likelihood of

dangerous tension. The campus style prisons remain very popular today, as

institutions adapt the design to best fit their purpose.

COURTYARD

The last common model of prison design is known as the courtyard design. This

model was developed to take advantage of the benefits available from both the

26 symbol *. the symbol *. In a piece of writing, an asterisk is used after a word or phrase to show that more information is given in a footnote .

telephone-pole and campus designs. With the courtyard style, buildings are attached

to a corridor that runs around the prison, leaving a courtyard in the middle. The

corridor can be used for inmate movement during much of the day, allowing prison

administrators to contain and isolate inmates in the corridor by closing grills across it.

The recreation yard is in the middle of the courtyard. This style is often used in high-

security institutions.

4.5 INCARCERATION 27SURVEILLANCE TYPES

One of the main aspects of prison design is prisoner surveillance. There are a total

off three basic categories of surveillance types employed in a prison.

LINEAR/SURVEILLANCE

The Linear / Surveillance prison design, depicted above, places staff in a central

control area (marked above by the gold star) with cells located down hallways

branching out from the main control area.

As shown above, the Linear / Surveillance prison

design provides Intermittent Supervision of inmates28, with structural blind spots in

every single cell.

27 put someone in prison. to put someone in prison28 someone who is kept in an institution. someone who is kept in a prison, mental hospital , or other institution

PODULAR/REMOTE SURVEILLANCE

The Podular 29/ Remote Surveillance prison design, depicted above, places staff in

an enclosed central control area (marked above by the gold star) with some cells

facing the control center.

As shown above, the Podular / Remote Surveillance prison design provides

Intermittent Supervision of inmates, with structural blind spots in every single cell.

LINEAR SURVEILLANCE

29 Shape of a pod.

The Podular / Direct Supervision prison design, depicted above, places staff in the

day room area (marked above by the gold star) with some cells facing the control

center and others adjacent to the control center.

As shown above, the Podular / Direct Supervision

prison design provides Intermittent Supervision of inmates, with structural blind spots

in every single cell.

CHAPTER 5

SITE ANALYSIS

5.1 INTRODUCTION

5.2 SITE SELECTION METHODOLOGY

5.3 MACRO LEVEL ANALYSIS

5.4 MESO LEVEL ANALYSIS

5.5 MICRO LEVEL ANALYSIS

5.6 CONCLUSION

CHAPTER 6

ARCHITECT’S BRIEF

6.1 ABSTRACT

“Architecture is conceived, designed, realised and built in response to an existing

set of conditions. It may be purely functional in nature, or may also reflect in varying

degrees the social, political and economic climate. The act of creating architecture is

a problem-solving or design process itself.”

(Ching D.K.1996.)

Any prison design has to accommodate certain pragmatic technical requirements

that relate to a complex series of security issues and regulate every aspect of prison

activity. These specifications form the basis for every prison design.

The project takes is ideological starting point from the hypothesis that the

architectural environment can have a positive, stimulating influence upon inmates, by

means of confronting them with environmental conditions that they may have never

have experienced or been conscious of. This hypothesis supports the view that an

architectural environment that stimulates, if you like, the higher senses, makes

concepts such as education, motivation and integration easier to engender. A

repressive environment kindles rebellion and stifles creativity. An awareness of

nature and the discovery of new horizons inspire hope and a desire for change.

These positive stimulants are integrated into the scheme in the form of nature and

light. The site and its topographical 30and botanical characteristics are assimilated

into the language of the building so as to interface with its direct environment.

Gabion walls provide security, dignity and authority and massing. The clear,

Highveld light is brought into the spaces to inspire positivity, just to state a few

examples.

6.2 AIMS & OBJECTIVES

The design will focus on the functional core of a youth prison facility.

Designing an environment which is “transactional” investigating the closeness

or the relationship between a person and their prison environment.

Designing to improve lives of people (juveniles) in the prison environment.

The faculty is meant, not to necessarily to prevent crime but to create a place

of holding for youth offenders, a t the same time rehabilitating and educating

the youth for the period which they are remanded.

The design should be adaptable and seen as a model for future youth

correctional facilities.

30 features of particular area of land. the features of a particular area of land, for example hills, rivers, and roads

6.3 DESIGN OBJECTIVES

The structure and site are to be designed via an organic, hierarchical process, as

follows:

Security - focal advantage and lines of clear vision to all areas: linear,

horizontal spaces.

Movement - the hierarchical functions of movement through threshold and

holding areas into communal spaces relating to:

o Inmates

o Visitors

o Staff

o Combination of all three

Sustainability of services - heating, cooling& ventilation, lighting inspires the

choice of material and technical development. Good day lighting assists in

security and lifts the spirit. Artificial light sources, low energy, high

performance. Rock bins and a roof –stack ventilates and cool.

Environmental Interface - bringing the outside in, the application of natural

daylight, allowing exterior of the building to recede into the landscape. The

traditional materials of prison security, bars and cages are substituted with

stone and glass. This is a youth facility. Imprisonment without exclusion.

Exclusion breeds revolt. Punched metal screens. Articulated slot openings.

Glass screens.

Site design - the organic relationship between different buildings, each

characterized by its own function, the school will stand in a central position at

the highest point on the site. An ever-present symbol of hope; the key to a

new life.

Integrating the landscape around the proposed designed facility, not only just

designing the buildings but also the spaces in between.

Designing the prison as a peri-urban island that is cut off and removed from

the rest of the society and its surroundings as a security measure yet once

inside one can feel the connection with the outside and strive towards

freedom and the only way one can reach out is through self- improvement and

rehabilitation31.

Designing the building in such a way that one is always reminded of their

surrounding landscape.

Creating spaces which investigate:

- Physical Orders of solids/voids, interior/exterior and the systems

and organization of space, structure, enclosure and machines.

- Sensory perceptions and recognition of the physical elements by

experiencing them sequential in time such as

Approach/Departure, entry/egress, movement through the order

of spaces, functioning of and activities within spaces, qualities of

light, colour, texture, views and sounds.

- Conceptual order. The comprehension of the ordered or

disordered relationships among a building’s elements and their

systems and responding to the meaning they evoke. Through

images, patterns, signs, symbols and the context (form, space

and functions) of the buildings.

6.4 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: BUILDING TYPES &

FUNCTIONAL SYSTEMS

The overall detailed outline of the functional requirements as well as building types

associated to the project will vary depending on the scope and size of the project

which I haven’t determined exactly at the moment e.g. whether it will be 50 bed

facility or over 150 bed facility.

Since juveniles in secure detention do not leave the facility except in special

circumstances, secure residential facilities typically provide a full range of services

and spaces to care for the health, well being and management of residents. These

include:

Administrative offices

31 help someone have normal life again. to help someone who has been sick or in prison to return to a healthy, independent, and useful life

Staff lockers/break areas

Intake/admissions

Visitation

Education

Indoor and outdoor recreation

Religious services

Food services/dining

Medical services

Laundry services

Maintenance

Resident housing and related activities

BASIC FACILITY BREAK-UP

HOUSING RESIDENTIAL PROGRAMS ADMINISTRATION

Housing Units Academic/Vocational Education Facility Administration

offices

Housing

Support

Treatment Services Staff

Recreation Areas Admission

Visiting Areas

RESIDENTIAL

SERVICES

CENTRAL SUPPORT

Medical Maintenance & Storage

Dining

Laundry

Food Prep.

Further consideration in functional components may include:

Entrances Signage Security

Barriers

Grab Bars Visiting

Areas

Lighting

Acoustics Mobility

Aids

Medical

Isolation

Cells

Toilets Locations of

Access -

Cells

FUNCTIONAL SYSTEMS

`STAFF INMATE VISITOR

MAIN GATE MAIN GATE MAIN GATE

PREPROCESSING PREPROCESSING PREPROCESSING

ADMINISTRATION -OFFICE

-STAFF

ABULTION

S

ADMISSIONS -ARRIVAL

-STRIP

SEARCH

-EVALUTAION

-NEW

CLOTHES

VISITOR

S

CENTRE

- ARRIVAL

- STRIP

SEARCH

FACILITY SEGREGATION

HOUSING

UNITS

A

.EDUCATIONA

L

B.WORKERS

C.SKILL

DEVELOPMEN

T

D.ISOLATION

E.PRE-

RELEASE

6.5 DESIGN FRAMEWORK/PROPOSAL

The proposed design can be divided into eight sub-areas:

o The urban design framework 32of the entire prison facility.

o The security entrance buildings.

o The visitors centre.

32 ideas used for forming decisions and judgments. a set of principles, ideas, etc. that you use when you are forming your decisions and judgments

6.6 DESIGN PROPOSAL

The above three points combine to form the overall experience of the entire facility.

All three groups of people interact in these areas; the staff, inmates and the visitors.

o The Administration facility.

o The Admissions facility.

o The Vocational education centre.

o The Academic education centre.

o The Housing Unit.

6.7 CONCEPTUAL PROPOSAL

The above five points are a conceptual proposal for the rest of the youth detention

facility. Although distinguishable, these areas interact and overlap in an attempt to

achieve: a “transactional” approach towards a site design.

6.8 DESIGN OUTCOME (BASIC)

Improving the effectiveness of rehabilitation and quality of life in a youth

prison facility.

Providing spaces which are “transactional33” and investigate the closeness or

the relationship between a person and their environment.

Building the character and perceptions of the prison facility.

33 The act of transacting or the fact of being transacted.

CHAPTER 7

CASE STUDIES

7.1 THE CRISIS

A recent Human Rights Commission of Pakistan report expresses concern over

deteriorating conditions in Pakistani jails. According to the report, 4,651 prisoners

were housed in Lahore camp jail, which has a capacity for 1,050 individuals. Indeed,

overcrowding remains one of the most crucial issues faced by inmates in jails across

the country. As a result, prisoners are required to sleep on the floor and unhygienic

conditions give rise to infectious disease like TB and scabies. Jail accommodation

moreover is not suited to weather conditions in the country. In winter the prison

barracks and cells are extremely cold and in summer prisoner suffocate in the heat.

These problems exist because little effort has been made to recognize the

fundamental rights of prisoners. This is the same for Juvenile wards in these

jails./juvenile detention facilities all over the country.

7.2 INTERNATIONAL PRISON DESIGN STANDARDS

U.N. RULES FOR THE PROTECTION OF JUVENILES DEPRIVED OF THEIR

LIBERTY

o Children should be provided a physical environment designed with the aim of

rehabilitation and with regard to their need for:

Privacy

Sensory stimuli,

Opportunities for association with peers

Participation in sports,

Physical exercise

Leisure time activities.

o Every juvenile should be provided with separate and clean bedding, and a

sufficient quantity of nutritious and hygienically-prepared food.

o Juveniles of compulsory school age have the right to an education suited to

their needs and abilities, and designed to prepare them for their return to

society.

o The Rules also state the provision of preventive and remedial medical care,

including mental health care.

o All juveniles have the right to vocational training likely to prepare them for

future employment.

THE U.N. STANDARD MINIMUM RULES FOR THE TREATMENT OF PRISONERS

The detention facilities should provide prisoners with:

o Separate beds Clean bedding.

o Adequate sanitary and bathing installations.

o Well-prepared, nutritious meals.

The detention facilities should provide prisoners with:

o Separate beds Clean bedding.

o Adequate sanitary and bathing installations.

o Well-prepared, nutritious meals.

Young prisoners should additionally receive:

o Physical training.

o Recreational training.

o (With adequate space, installations, and equipment)

o Vocational training in useful trades.

7.3 LOCAL PRISON DESIGN STANDARDS

PAKISTAN PRISON RULES-JAIL MANUAL

o One cell will be occupied by one prisoner only.

o The rules mandate the separation of children and adults.

o The engagement of children in "sustained work“.

o Provision of recreational facilities. For convicts, it requires classes in:

Reading,

Writing,

Arithmetic,Religious instruction for Muslim children

o Vocational training

o “Careful individual attention" for all juveniles.

o Careful arrangements for their future after discharge.

o Strict cleanliness for the whole prison.

o Adequate Sanitary facilities.

o Well-equipped Health care facilities.

REFORMATORY SCHOOLS ACT,1897

Every school so established or used as a reform school must provide:

o Sufficient means of separating the inmates at night.

o Proper sanitary arrangements, water supply food clothing and bedding

for the youthful offenders detained therein.

o The means of giving the youthful offenders industrial training.An

infirmary or proper place for the reception of such youthful offenders

when sick.

o Physical drill, gymnastics, indoor and outdoor games and training in

scouting shall be provided for all inmates; instructions in first aid and

sanitation be regularly imparted; and a spacious playground be

provided in jails.- Pakistan Jail Manual

7.4 CASE STUDY

REFERENCES

Abu-Ghazzeh, T. M. (2001). The Art of Architectural Decoration in the Traditional

Houses of Al-Alkhalaf, Saudi Arabia. Journal of Architectural and Planning Research,

18(2), 156-177.

Ahrentzen, S., Jue, G. M., & Skorpanich, M. A. (1982). School Environments

and Stress. In G.Evans (Ed.), Environmental stress (pp. 224-255). New York:

Cambridge UniversityPress.

Altman, I. (1975). The Environment and Social Behavior. Monterey, CA: Wadsworth.

Bankst, T. L. (1991). Toilets as a Feminist Issue: A True Story. Berkeley Women*s

Law Journal,6(Part 2), 263 -289.

Berman vs. Parker 384 US 326 1954).

Bourdieu, P. (1990). The Logic of Practice (Richard Nice ed.). Stanford, CA: Stanford

University.

City of Renton v. Playtime Theaters 475 U.S. 441 1986).

Clarke, R. (1997). Situational Crime Prevention. Albany: Harrow and Heston.

Costonis, J. J. (1989). Icons and Aliens: Law, Aesthetics, and Environmental

Change. Urbana,IL: University of Illinois.

Duncan, J. S. (Ed.). (1981). Housing and Identity. London: Croom Helm.

Dunlap, D. W. (1997). Architecture in the Age of Accessibility. New York Times, p.

June 1.

Foucault, M. (1979). Discipline and Punishment. New York: Vintage Books.

Franck, K. A. (2002). Women and the Environment. In R. B. Bechtel & A. Churchman

(Eds.),

Handbook of Environmental Psychology (pp. 347-362). New York: John Wiley &

Sons.

Frisbee, C. J. (1968). The Navajo House Blessing Ceremonial. El Palacio, 75, 26-35.

Frug, J. (1996). The Geography of Community. Stanford Law Review, 48(1047-

1108).

Gieryn, T. F. (2000). A Space for Place in Sociology. Annual Review of Sociology,

26, 463-496.

Gieryn, T. F. (2002). What Buildings Do. Theory & Society, 31, 35-74.

Gifford, R. (2002). Making a Difference: Some Ways Environmental Psychology Has

Improved the World. In R. B. Bechtel & A. Churchman (Eds.), Handbook of

Environmental

Psychology (pp. 323-346). New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Goodman, R. (2001). Beyond the Enforcement Principle: Sodomy Laws, Social

Norms, and Social Panoptics. California Law Review, 89, 643-740.

Gottdiener, M. (1997). The Theming of America: Dreams, Visions, and Commercial

Spaces.

Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

Hayden, D. (2002). Redesigning the American Dream: The Future of Housing, Work,

and Family. New York: W. W. Norton & Company.

Jeffery, C. R. (1971). Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design. Beverly

Hills, CA:Sage.

Katyal, N. K. (2002). Architecture as Crime Control. Yale Law Journal, 111, 1039-

1139.

Katz, P. (1993). The New Urbanism: Toward an Architecture of Community. New

York:

McGraw-Hill.

Kuntsler, J. H. (1993). The Geography of Nowhere. New York: Simon & Schuster.

Lai, R. T.-y. (1988). Law in Urban Design and Planning. New York: Van Nostrand

Reinhold.

Lasker, S. (2002). Sex and the City: Zoning "Pornography Peddlers and Live Nude

Shows".

UCLA Law Review, 49(1139-1185).

Lawrence, D. L., & Low, S. M. (1990). The Built Environment and Spatial Form.

Annual Review of Anthropology, 19, 453-505.

Lessig, L. (1999). Code and Other Laws of Cyberspace. New York: Basic Books.

Markus, T. A. (1993). Buildings & Power: Freedom and Control in the Origin of

Modern Building Types. London: Routledge.

Maxwell, L. E. (2000). A Safe and Welcoming School: What Students, Teachers, and

ParentsThink. Journal of Architectural and Planning Research, 17(4), 271-282.

Miranda vs. Arizona 384 US 436 1966).

Newman, O. (1972). Defensible Space. New York: Macmillan.

Osmond, H. (1957). Function as the Basis of Psychiatric Ward Design. Mental

Hospitals, 8, 23-30.

Pultar, M. (1997). A Conceptual Framework for Values in the Built Environment. In

M. Gray(Ed.), Evolving Environmental Ideals: Changing Ways of Life, Values and

Design Practices (pp. 261-267). Stockholm: Royal Institute of Technology.

Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American

Community. New York: Simon & Schuster.

Rapoport, A. (1990). The Meaning of the Built Environment: A Nonverbal

Communication Approach. Tucson, AZ: University of Arizona Press.

Regan, K. (1990). You Can't Build That Here: The Constitutionality of Aesthetic

Zoning.

Fordham Law Review, 58, 1013-1030.

Rosen, J. (2001, Oct. 7). Being Watched: A Cautionary Tale for a New Age of

Surveillance.

New York Times Magazine.Rosenbloom, J. D. (1998). Social Ideology as Seen

Through Courtroom and CourthouseArchitecture. Columbia Journal of Law & Arts,

22, 463.

Ross, A. (1999). The Celebration Chronicles: The Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of

PropertyValue in Disney's New Town. New York: Ballantine Books.

Spain, D. (1992). Gendered Spaces. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina

Press.

Stamps, A. E., & Nasar, J. L. (1997). Design Review and Public Preferences: Effects

ofGeographical Location, Public Consensus, Sensation Seeking, and Architectural

Styles.

Journal of Environmental Psychology, 17, 11-32.

Talen, E. (2002). The Social Goals of New Urbanism. Housing Policy Debate, 13(1),

165-188.

Tappendorf, J. A. (2002). Architectural Design Regulations: What Can a Municipality

Do To Protect Against Unattractive, Inappropriate, and Just Plain Ugly Structures.

UrbanLawyer, 34, 961-969.

Taylor, R. (2002). Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED): Yes,

No,Maybe, Unknowable, and All of the Above. In R. B. Bechtel & A. Churchman

(Eds.),

Handbook of Environmental Psychology (pp. 413-426). New York: John Wiley &

Sons.Village of Euclid Ohio v. Ambler Realty Co 272 U.S. 365 1926).

Wajcman, J. (1991). Feminism Confronts Technology. University Park: Penn State

Press.

Weisman, L. K. (1992). Discrimination by Design: A Feminist Critique of the Man-

Made Environment. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.

Welch, P., & Palames, C. (1995). A Brief History of Disability Rights Legislation in

the United

States. In P. Welch (Ed.), Strategies for Teaching Universal Design (pp. 5-12).

Boston:Adaptive Environments Center.

Whyte, W. H. (1988). City: Rediscovering the Center. New York: Doubleday.

Winick, R. (1992). Copyright Protection for Architecture After the Architectural Works

Copyright Protection Act of 1990. Duke Law Journal, 41, 1598-1647.