The Impact of Global Conflicts on Local Crime Prevention Measures
Societal responses to macro-level global conflicts reflect their adverse and disproportionate impact on local crime prevention measures. Global conflict and the resulting protests during the last year have shaped new risks to local infrastructure. To mitigate these risks, infrastructure owners and operators should consider specific crime prevention measures, including crime prevention through environmental design (CPTED) requirements.
Security professionals may already be familiar with CPTED principles, including:
Natural surveillance. Increase visibility to deter criminal behavior by designing spaces so people can easily observe their surroundings.
Natural access control. Guide people’s movements through design to limit access to areas where they should not go. Use physical barriers to control entry points.
Territorial reinforcement. Define and establish a sense of ownership over spaces to encourage users to protect and care for them.
Maintenance. Ensure that properties are well-maintained to convey that an area is cared for, which can deter potential offenders.
Activity support. Promote legitimate activities and use of spaces to increase the presence of people and reduce opportunities for crime.
It is refreshing to see that many countries, states, industries, and organizations increasingly mandate the implementation of CPTED in capital works and infrastructure projects. Many security practitioners will also be familiar with security risk or vulnerability assessments in which petty crime is the predominant risk to the asset, resulting in basic security features like clear sight lines and enhanced maintenance.
Traditionally, such risk assessments may have overlooked ideological extremism as a genuine threat, but what we have witnessed over the past year are distant conflicts and hyper-partisanship leading to local safety and security issues.
Readers need only refer to Security Management’s January 2024 focus on extremism and political instability to understand the subtle but real shift in risks which have trickled from the battlefield to the front doors of institutions half a world away. CPTED has never been more important, as evidenced by the specific types of disruptions caused by geopolitical global conflict at the macro or state level.
A few of the many precursors for this paradigm shift on risk and CPTED include conflicts in Gaza and Ukraine, ongoing evidence of political interference by the Russian Foreign Intelligence Service (FIS RF), and intensified and weaponised partisanship around national elections. Furthermore, emboldened activities from issue-motivated groups and environment-related causes have resulted in a new wave of protest-style attacks and demonstrations. The resulting activities range from wide-scale and often violent protests, vandalism, attacks or blockades on supply chains, prolonged encampments, and graffiti attacks to name but a few local issues that have resulted from global conflicts. Furthermore, governments and infrastructure operators are increasingly dealing with misinformation via social media which has, on a number of occasions, caused violent protest.
Such consequences have disproportionately affected universities, places of mass gathering, cultural institutions, schools, and places of worship, demonstrating the need for secure and defensible spaces. As states and asset owner-operators grapple to deal with such issues—which are often broadly permissible through legally enshrined protections for peaceful protest or free speech—CPTED practices are uniquely positioned to be able to deter undesirable activity while being supported by operational responses.
Positive outcomes to these challenges are possible and achievable with sound application of CPTED principles, which factor in a credible threat and risk profile based on social, environmental, and human factors applicable to the space, institution, and owner/operator threat profile.
The translation of global conflicts into local issues has meant that security practitioners and advisors, as well as owners and operators of affected institutions should not limit the scope of CPTED practice to mitigation of traditional criminal activity in their local area. Consideration of broader societal issues—including current and potential geopolitical, religious, and ideologically based disharmony—must be reviewed.
Where security professionals used to just regularly assess the adverse impact of high-risk neighbors, they now need to look further and consider the broader, global sociopolitical climate that may indirectly affect their organization.
Review Threat and Risk Assessment
While a periodic monitoring and review of an organization’s security risk and threat assessment is an integral part of its security posture, now may be the time to broaden the lens. Assess similar organizations, industries, sectors, or asset classes and determine what level of impact global conflict and the rise of issue-motivated violence has affected these commensurate organizations.
Global conflicts have been increasingly observed to precipitate crimes by or against effected populations leading to increased risks of attacks in local communities, religious or political groups, and targets of issue-motivated groups.
These conflicts also regularly inspire civil unrest in or against effected diaspora and protests in local communities, potentially resulting in violence and property damage. Organizations may need to evaluate their exposure to such issues and take steps to safeguard their facilities and personnel during periods of heightened tension. Global conflicts often highlight the vulnerabilities and insecurities within local communities, which can magnify the importance of crime prevention at the asset level, where a perception of safety and security is paramount.
Reassess Territorial Reinforcement
Displaced or migrating populations that coincide with global conflicts may precipitate local safety and security issues, both in displaced populations and those averse to their migration. Displaced individuals may settle in new areas where they are unfamiliar with the local environment or culture and may face challenges such as poverty, lack of social support, and discrimination. In such contexts, improved CPTED applications become crucial to create safe and secure living environments for both displaced individuals and host communities.
Review Partnerships
Global conflicts can fracture social cohesion and trust within communities, leading to increased social isolation and vulnerability to crime. CPTED interventions that focus on enhancing community engagement, fostering social connections, and promoting trust among residents can play a critical role in preventing crime and restoring a sense of security and belonging.
Consulting affected communities in the design and management of safety measures is paramount to achieving results and engaging with effected populations. Local knowledge can be invaluable in identifying potential risks and designing solutions that are culturally and contextually appropriate. Local councils or counties should increasingly consult with groups disproportionately represented in crime statistics—such as women in the context of nighttime safety—and involve them in the decision-making process. This process may have positive impacts on context-specific CPTED solutions while simultaneously giving affected communities a voice in the solutions targeted at safety and security.
Global conflicts often breed extremism and radicalization, which pose significant security challenges at the local level. Beyond the extreme examples of terrorism, CPTED approaches that address the physical and social aspects of the established environment can help deter protests and criminal activities by making potential targets appear less vulnerable. In this sense, CPTED is a great crime-agnostic treatment that can impress feelings of safety and security within communities and asset users while simultaneously deterring undesired behavior.
Review CPTED Controls
Excluding the most extreme of motivated adversaries, the unwanted or criminal activities noted above are ideally treated with targeted CPTED measures. While standard CPTED treatments, such as security lighting, will continue to apply, the specific measures below are intended to delay, deter, and prevent opportunistic crime associated with conflict-fuelled activities.
Landscape design. Principles in landscape design emphasize creating clear, well-defined boundaries by using physical barriers, signage, and strategic plantings to support territorial reinforcement and prevent unauthorized encampments or protests. Consider the creation of secondary boundaries with increased standoff from assets. By integrating elements like low fences, thorny shrubs, and maintained sightlines, landscape design can effectively delineate private spaces and discourage protests or illicit camps.
Urban elements. Reduce or eliminate loose materials, street furniture, or plants that can be used as projectiles to prevent vandalism and enhance safety. By designing environments with fixed, durable elements and minimizing potential hazards, CPTED principles help deter destructive behavior and maintain a secure, orderly public space.
Surface management. Emphasize the importance of reducing or eliminating graffiti-prone surfaces as a key strategy in enhancing urban safety. Select and maintain surfaces that are less susceptible to vandalism—such as using graffiti-resistant coatings, incorporating smooth and non-porous materials, or integrating artistic elements like murals that discourage defacement.
Clear boundaries. Use signage and physical markers to establish boundaries for different zones, such as protest areas versus restricted zones.
Emergency and access redundancy. Ensure that vulnerable populations have multiple egress points, while emergency services have clear and quick access to all areas.
Flexible design. In conflict zones, adaptability is crucial. Design spaces and infrastructure to be resilient and flexible, allowing for rapid adjustments to changing security conditions or threats. This includes modular designs that can be quickly reconfigured or reinforced as needed.
Safe zones and shelters. Create designated safe zones and shelters within conflict areas to protect civilians and provide refuge during heightened threat levels. These areas should be strategically located and well-defended to ensure their effectiveness.
Dialogue. Engage with the community to understand their concerns and preferences. Incorporating community feedback into design can help create environments that are supportive of a peaceful protest and less likely to be the site of violent activity.
Design for visibility. For affected organizations, creating open and visible spaces can help prevent ambushes and attacks. For instance, designing checkpoints, refugee camps, or humanitarian aid stations with clear sightlines and unobstructed views can enhance the ability of security personnel to monitor the area effectively.
As security professionals, we must remain aware of the threat landscape. Increasingly, remote conflicts have far-reaching consequences for local communities and asset owner-operators. By adapting CPTED principles to the specific needs resulting from global conflict, it is possible to enhance safety, reduce criminal activity, and support overall stability in other affected regions. The key is to integrate these principles into the broader context of conflict management and humanitarian efforts, ensuring that they complement other security and resilience strategies.
Maksym Szewczuk, CPP, PSP, is a security and risk manager for Bechtel corporation and 2024 winner of the OSPA Outstanding In-House Security Manager/Director-Australia. He holds a master’s degree in policing, intelligence, and counterterrorism and is a co-author of the Australian Standards Handbook HB-188 Base-building physical security handbook—Terrorism and extreme violence.
