Lighting, Safety & Crime

• What's the evidence for a lighting-crime link?
• What's the evidence against a lighting-crime link?
• How does lighting affect pedestrian safety?
• How does lighting affect driver safety?
• What are councils doing?
• Where can I find out more?

Many people believe that ‘more light = less crime’, but experts disagree about whether this is actually the case. The belief that 'more light = safer streets' is also widespread, but again the link between the two is not straightforward. The following section explores some common questions about the relationship between lighting, crime and public safety.

Criminologists Brandon Welsh and David Farrington argue that ‘Improved street lighting is an effective form of surveillance to reduce crime in public space…’ In this context ‘improved’ means that lighting has been altered to create brighter conditions - either by installing more lights or upgrading existing ones to achieve better performance.

This view appeared in the Home Office Research Study 251 (UK, 2002) and was restated in 2004. Welsh and Farrington's 2004 study compared two crime prevention interventions – improved street lighting and closed circuit television (CCTV) – finding that:

• improved street lighting and CCTV were equally effective in reducing crime overall
• improved street lighting was more effective than CCTV in reducing crime in city centers
• both were more effective in reducing property crimes than violent crimes
• both were more effective in reducing crime in Britain than in America.

Welsh and Farrington conclude that the results of their study ‘lend support for the continued use of CCTV and improved street lighting to reduce crime, but … suggest that they need to be targeted more narrowly on property crimes’.

Statistician Dr Paul Marchant argues that Welsh and Farrington’s conclusions are based on flawed statistical analysis. According to Marchant, ‘We just do not know what the effect of lighting is [on crime]. As far as is known, lighting may either increase or decrease crime.’ He argues that it is inappropriate to base public policy on an intervention that has not yet been proven effective and that further research is required.  

This comment is particularly pertinent to the Australia context, as there has been little research on the impacts of increased lighting on crime in Australia. Most research to date has been conducted in Britain and America, revealing that the impact of increased lighting on crime can vary quite significantly from country to country. Thus, before investing significant resources into increased lighting as a crime prevention measure, it is important to establish whaether it would actually be an effective intervention in Australia.

Some studies suggest that, regardless of whether lighting affects crime, it influences pedestrians' perception of the safety of the area being lit. That is, lighting makes people feel safer and hence more likely to use lit areas at night. This can be a good thing if the aim is to increase the numbers of people in an area, or a bad thing if the area is not actually safe.

The effects of reduced street lighting on road safety are currently being tested in the UK, where lights are being switched off on some rural roads. Buckinghamshire County Council, which is leading the trials, prepared the test sites by installing better signage, solar powered road studs, and improving the white-lining on the roads before switching off the lights.

Preliminary results suggest that switching off the lights improved road safety. In seven trial sites used in the first phase of the trial, there were a total of seven collisions between August and December 2006 when the lights were on. In contrast, there were only three collisions in total between August and December 2007 when the lights were off during the trial. Final results will not be available until 2009 or later, when the three-year trial winds up.

One theory about why reduced street lighting may reduce accidents in certain conditions is that the driver is more aware of oncoming headlights in a dark environment rather than in a lit environment. For more information about the Buckinghamshire trials, see the case study in On/Off Controls.

Launceston City Council, Tasmania released a document in December 2002, called ‘Launceston – Lighting for Crime Prevention’. The report found that while lighting contributed to public safety and crime prevention, had a high amenity value and made the City a pleasant place to be, it alone couldn’t be considered responsible for any marked improvement in the reduction of crime. That is, lighting was most effective as part of an integrated crime prevention strategy.

Adelaide City Council in South Australia deliberately choose not to light certain parks in order to discourage their use at night. They also have a 'White Lighting Policy' as the colour of light.

In Victoria, the City of Melbourne and a number of other councils also have White Lighting Policies.

In addition, in 2005 the Victorian Government published a document entitled 'Safer Design Guidelines for Victoria' to facilitate the planning of safer urban environments. The Guidelines outline ten design elements which contribute to increased community safety, one of which is lighting. Since all Victorian planning schemes have been amended to require consideration of safety in the design of new proposals, councils will need to refer to this document in relation to public lighting in new developments.  

Given the controversy surrounding the relationship between lighting levels and crime, a detailed bibliography is provided to assist readers to draw their own conclusions based on available evidence.

Abernethy, Ian. (Australia, 2002) Launceston - Lighting for Crime Prevention.

Farrington, D. and Welsh, B. (UK, 2002) Home Office Research Study 251, Effects of Improved Street Lighting on Crime: a Systematic Review.

Farrington, D. and Welsh, B. (UK, 2004) 'Surveillance for Crime Preventin in Public Space: Results and Policy Choices in Britain and America', Criminology and Public Policy, 3, (3) 2004, pp 497-526.

Marchant P. (UK, 2004) ‘A Demonstration that the Claim that Brighter Lighting Reduces Crime is Unfounded’, British Journal of Criminology, 44, (3) May 2004, pp.441-447.

Marchant P. (UK, 2005) ‘What Works? A Critical Note on the Evaluation of Crime Reduction Initiatives’, Crime Prevention and Community Safety 7 (2) 7-13.

Marchant P. (UK, 2006) Presentation, 6th European Dark Skies Symposium, Portsmouth, UK.

Pease, K. (UK, 1999) Lighting and Crime. Rugby: Institution of Lighting Engineers.

Safer Design Guidelines for Victoria. Victorian Government, Department of Sustainability and Environment, June 2005. Provides advice to developers, councils and communities about designing for safer urban environments. Victorian Councils must have regard to the guidelines when assessing an application. Includes a lighting section.