Preventing residential burglary requires more than just installing alarms and sturdy locks; it demands a deep understanding of how an offender actually thinks, observes, and interacts with the built environment. To support this analytical approach to crime prevention, EUNWA has published Anatomy of theft, a white paper dedicated to decoding the psychological and environmental factors that drive residential crime.

Rather than simply listing physical security measures, the document explores into the mechanics of the crime itself, translating advanced criminological research into accessible, actionable insights for Neighbourhood Watch coordinators and security experts.

The cognitive limits of the burglar

It is a common misconception to view offenders as meticulous planners who calculate every possible variable before breaking into a home. The reality is quite different. The white paper explores the concept of the "bounded offender"—individuals who must make rapid, tactical decisions whilst constrained by limited time, high stress, and incomplete information. Understanding this bounded rationality is crucial, as it explains why certain environmental deterrents are highly effective, whilst others are completely ignored in the heat of the moment.

The tipping point: the threshold of decision

Building upon the concept of bounded rationality, a core focus of the analysis is the "tipping point". When an offender evaluates a potential target, they unconsciously but continuously weigh the perceived risks against the potential rewards. The tipping point represents that critical threshold where a specific environmental variable—an unexpected line of sight from a neighbour's window, a change in lighting, or the psychological deterrent of an active Neighbourhood Watch zone—shifts the balance entirely. The white paper details how offenders reach this psychological breaking point, demonstrating that effective crime prevention is essentially the art of manipulating the environment to trigger this tipping point as early as possible, forcing the intruder to abandon the attempt.

When aesthetics compromise security

One of the most critical topics covered in the analysis is the intersection of urban design, landscaping, and security, and how these factors directly influence the offender's tipping point. The text highlights a frequent, yet often overlooked, paradox: features that significantly enhance the visual appeal of a property may inadvertently provide substantial tactical advantages to an intruder. High, dense hedges, decorative but opaque fencing, and atmospheric low-level lighting can create blind spots. These elements offer perfect concealment, effectively neutralising the natural surveillance provided by the street and giving the offender the confidence to proceed rather than walk away.

By sharing these specific insights, Anatomy of theft aims to equip local networks with a sharper, more scientific lens through which to evaluate their own communities. Understanding exactly how a vulnerability is perceived from the outside looking in is the most effective way to eliminate it, helping us to design and maintain safer, more resilient neighbourhoods across Europe.

Download the white paper: English | Italiano | Deutsch | Português

Community safety is one of the foundations of democratic life. People can only feel truly free when they are able to move through their neighbourhoods without fear, use public spaces, take part in community life and feel that they belong.

For this reason, safety cannot be reduced to a matter of law enforcement alone. Nor can it be addressed only through emergency measures, slogans or ever-tighter rules. The ability to live in a city or town, to move through it safely and to participate in public life is closely linked to freedom, wellbeing and social cohesion.

Any discussion about community safety and democracy must start from a simple point: fear is real, but it does not always correspond to a concrete risk of becoming a victim of crime. People may feel unsafe for many reasons: neglected public spaces, isolation, loneliness, economic insecurity, lack of services, tensions between social groups, or a distant and difficult relationship with public institutions.

A responsible approach to safety does not dismiss these fears. At the same time, it avoids oversimplifying them or directing them against particular groups or categories of people. It takes them seriously, listens to them, seeks to understand them and turns them, where possible, into cooperation.

From this perspective, safety is not an individual right to be asserted at the expense of other people’s freedoms. It is a public good. It grows when trust grows; when people know one another; when places are cared for; and when the quality of everyday coexistence improves.

For EUNWA, this point is essential. Neighbourhood Watch is at its best when it is not understood as a form of diffuse social control or organised suspicion, but as an expression of active citizenship, cooperation and mutual care. Its contribution lies in strengthening attentive citizens, supportive communities, trust-based relationships with local authorities and the ability to prevent problems from the ground up.

An alert community is not a fearful community. It is a community that knows its local area, recognises vulnerabilities, reports concerns, supports people who may be at risk and works with public institutions.

In a democratic society, safety works best when protection, freedom and shared responsibility are held together. Law enforcement agencies play an essential role in upholding the law, tackling crime and protecting citizens. Their work, however, becomes more effective when it is supported by strong social networks, local services, associations, schools, families, volunteers, local administrations and responsible citizens.

Control and prevention are not alternatives. They can reinforce one another, especially when they operate within a clear framework of roles, responsibilities and cooperation.

Prevention, however, is often less visible than enforcement. A patrol, an arrest or a new legal provision can have an immediate impact on public debate. An educational project, a mediation process, a sports activity for young people, support for victims or a neighbourhood network may produce quieter results, but often more lasting ones.

This is particularly important when it comes to young people. A democratic society should not automatically treat young people in public spaces as a public order problem. Instead, it should look for places, languages and tools that include them. Where sport, culture, training, listening, opportunities and positive relationships are available, the risk that hardship and marginalisation will lead to isolation, conflict or harmful behaviour is reduced. Where public space is experienced only as a place of prohibition, exclusion or suspicion, conflict is more likely to grow.

The same applies to cultural and religious diversity. European cities and towns are increasingly plural. This diversity can give rise to misunderstandings and tensions, but it can also become a resource for coexistence when it is supported by dialogue, mediation and institutional responsibility.

Community safety can therefore be understood as a complex public good, connected to prevention, urban regeneration and social cohesion. No city or town can face today’s challenges alone: European cooperation, the exchange of good practices and communities of learning are strategic resources.

Technology, too, must be placed within a balanced vision of security. CCTV, data collection, digital platforms and artificial intelligence can help prevent risks and coordinate responses, but only if they are used with transparency, proportionality, respect for privacy and democratic oversight. Technology cannot replace trust. It can only support trust when it is understandable, properly regulated and clearly directed towards the common good.

The European dimension is crucial. Contemporary security challenges do not stop at administrative borders: organised crime, online fraud, radicalisation, disinformation, hatred, gender-based violence, social vulnerability and climate-related risks cut across cities, regions and states. This is why multi-level security governance is needed, connecting the European Union, national governments, local authorities, law enforcement agencies and civil society.

Recent European strategies have broadened the concept of security beyond enforcement alone, placing greater emphasis on resilience, coordination between policy areas and the participation of society as a whole. In this context, neighbourhood networks can make a concrete contribution to community safety: they can help identify early signs of vulnerability, support victims, prevent fraud and predatory crime, strengthen dialogue between citizens and institutions, share practical knowledge and encourage responsible behaviour.

This contribution, however, must remain within a clear framework: no substitution of public authorities, no private justice, and no stigmatisation of groups or individuals. The value of civic networks lies in cooperation, not opposition; in prevention, not suspicion; in trust, not fear.

A form of safety that brings protection and freedom together strengthens the quality of democratic life. It does not arise only from institutional action, but also from the quality of relationships between citizens, local communities and public authorities.

A safe community is not a closed community. It is a community that knows how to observe, listen, prevent and cooperate. It is a community in which citizens are not fearful bystanders, but active participants in a shared responsibility.

In this interview, EUNWA speaks with Rosie Palmer CEO of Muintir na Tíre, the Irish organisation behind the Community Alert programme. The conversation explores Ireland’s distinctive trilateral model, built on cooperation between local communities, Muintir na Tíre and An Garda Síochána, and highlights how rural safety is strengthened not only through crime prevention, but also through care, neighbourliness and social connection.

From practical farm security and community signage to digital innovation through the Cairde app, the interview offers valuable insights into how trusted local networks can make communities more resilient. It also underlines a principle that is central to EUNWA’s mission across Europe: safer communities are built through trust, participation and collective action.

Rosie, Ireland's Community Alert operates on a unique trilateral partnership between the community, Muintir na Tíre, and An Garda Síochána. How do you maintain the balance between being a grassroots, independent organisation and working so closely with the national police?

Muintir na Tíre was founded on the fundamental community development principles of self-help, self-reliance and neighbourliness, and our work continues to remain true to those. Our role today in the delivery of Community Alert demonstrates our ethos’ in how we support communities to identify their own needs and empower them to build safer, more caring and connected communities where people want to live, work, socialise and grow old in.

We recognise, however, that fundamental to the success of Community Alert is the high trust relationship between our police service and the general public. Having a programme, like Community Alert, creates another opportunity for that trusting relationship to be sustained and grown. Additionally, many of our police service in rural Ireland are also the very community people that promote community safety at a local level. For example, many retired Gardaí become Community Alert leaders or take up Community Development roles or volunteer positions within their communities e.g. coaching sports teams.

Of note are the recent changes taking place in our models of Community Policing including the establishment of the Policing & Community Safety Authority Ireland.

The foundation of NOCS: The National Office for Community Safety also marked a change in the traditional idea of “policing”. For many years, at a Local Authority level, the “Joint Policing Committees” created a ‘them and us’ model with regards to crime prevention and community safety. However, NOCS has recently replaced these with LCSPs: ‘Local Community Safety Partnerships’, which have shifted the responsibility away from solely the Gardaí and onto everyone in the community. Muintir Na Tire has representatives sitting on over 20 LCSPs.

Our trilateral partnership works because our communities provide local knowledge, Muintir na Tíre provides the national structure and support and An Garda Síochána provides professional policing expertise. And each partner recognises that none of us can achieve the same outcomes alone. By maintaining clear roles and ensuring that each partner understands and respects the role of the others, while working collaboratively, we have created a model that has endured for more than forty years and continues to earn the trust of communities across Ireland.

Community Alert was never designed to be an extension of policing or with the intention to replace policing. Rather, it was established to empower communities to take an active role in their own safety while having a system where they can officially and efficiently work with us and the Gardaí.

From a Community Development perspective, our starting point is always the needs and priorities identified by local people themselves. Community Alert groups are run by volunteers who understand the unique circumstances of their own areas. They decide what issues are most important locally, whether that is crime prevention, supporting older people, tackling isolation, improving communication or responding to emerging challenges, or indeed a combination of all of these.

Ultimately, the partnership works because there is a shared objective but different responsibilities.

Unlike many traditional Neighbourhood Watch schemes, Community Alert places a huge emphasis on social care, such as visiting older neighbours and the Seniors Alert Scheme. Why do you believe this holistic approach is so vital for true rural safety?

In Muintir, we believe that “safety” is about much more than preventing crime and, as such, approach the delivery of Community Alert as a three-part programme: Crime Prevention, Community Safety and Care.

Ireland currently reports the highest levels of loneliness in Europe: The Loneliest Nation in Europe? Ireland as a Case Study, and Implications for Policy - Public Policy. We recognise that the experience of loneliness and associated isolation can be just as damaging as being a victim of criminal activity. A person who is disconnected from their neighbours is often more vulnerable to scams, theft and poor health outcomes.

Initiatives such as the Seniors Alert Scheme: Seniors Alert Scheme Pobal | SAS | Personal Alarms for the Elderly Ireland, our pilot “Community Support Register” project: Muintir na Tíre Community Support Register - YouTube demonstrate the desire for our groups to do more outside of the traditional “crime prevention” role.

In our view, the safest communities are not necessarily those that are heavily policed, or the ones with locked gates and high fences. Rather, they are the communities with the strongest relationships and with neighbourliness to the fore. When people are connected and cared for, they become more resilient to all kinds of challenges.

Muintir Na Tíre sits on the Loneliness Taskforce Loneliness Taskforce 2024 political briefing - and in 2026 we plan to initiate an Oireachtas Committee (Parliamentary Committee) on Loneliness and launch Ireland’s first Loneliness Strategy.

Our research shows that opportunistic burglars generally choose the path of least resistance; they do not want to work hard or waste time. We advocate for a 'layered defence'—multiple minor obstacles rather than a single fortress wall. How does Muintir na Tíre advise rural residents, particularly farmers with open land and outbuildings, to implement practical, layered security without compromising their daily operations?

Yes – Rural crime is generally opportunity crime, and we actively teach the 10 principles of crime prevention to our Community Alert groups.

In order to grow our knowledge on Crime Prevention measures, our team undertook Crime Prevention for Practitioners training in 2025 delivered by Build Secure and certified by GBS: Short certificate courses in Ireland | Galway Business School – this involved learning about the 10 principles of crime prevention and how to visually audit an area; town, village, community space, from the point of view of security and crime prevention and make recommendations for changing the space.

This training encouraged us to apply to the Department of Agriculture to avail of their Farm Safety Funding to devise a series of farm walks and a practical guide to empower farmers and farm families to assess and improve their on-farm security. Details of the initiative and the booklet can be found here: Your Farm Security Handbook - Muintir Na Tire. We recognise that farmers are generally time poor and reluctant to invest in their on-farm security (unless they had been a victim of crime) and therefore, the aim of this project was to identify free or cheap ways for farmers to improve security that would not take too much time.

Our Property Branding service is also attractive to farmers and rural dwellers, and we undertake this in Farm Yards, Marts and local villages regularly. We use a state-of-the-art laser branding machine to brand expensive property from phones to trailers with the owner's Driving Licence number which acts as a deterrent to would-be thieves in the first instance and improves the chance of reunification if recovered by Gardaí. A member of the Gardaí can identify any citizen from their driver’s licence number using their mobility device.

Muintir Na Tíre has also been successful in accessing the Department of Justice Community Safety Fund to research and develop a “Community Safety Toolkit” – a suite of training aimed at training community safety champions across the country. Champions will be empowered to assess and identify community safety needs and enable their communities to become safer. We have recently hired a retired Garda Sergeant with over 30 years’ experience in Community Policing and expertise in the emerging area of CPTED - Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design, to deliver this project.

Muintir Na Tíre is one of the founding members of the National Rural Safety Forum and together with other partners, we launched the 2025/2027 Rural Safety Plan in September 2025. Under the pillars of Community Safety & Engagement, Property Crime, Roads Policing and Animal & Wildlife Crime, member organisations of the Forum and relevant stakeholders have committed to 18 actions which will be achieved through 53 sub-actions.

Criminological reviews highlight that visible signs of an alert community—such as targeted signage or active WhatsApp networks—act as massive cognitive disruptors for offenders, forcing them to abandon their target. In isolated rural areas, where neighbours might be miles apart, what specific environmental signals or visible deterrents have proven most effective in communicating to a burglar that the area is actively protected?

We know from crime prevention principles that a maintained garden or tended to hedge can act as a crime deterrent because it shows that someone is looking after where they live. Likewise, we believe one of the most powerful messages a community can send is showing that people are paying attention, they are looking after their area and they care.

Our signage remains highly effective because it immediately signals that residents are connected to a wider network and maintain regular communication with each other and with An Garda Síochána. Equally important are active local communication systems, whether through text alerts or our Cairde app which allows real time communication.

In rural areas, where houses may be separated by considerable distances, offenders often assume they can operate unnoticed. Visible signs of community organisation challenge that assumption. They create uncertainty for the offender and increase the perceived risk of being observed, identified, or reported.

Our Property Branding and signage service, as mentioned above, also acts as a visible deterrent.

Where our Community Alert programme is operational, the message is simple: this community knows what is happening, shares information quickly and looks out for one another.

Muintir na Tíre has driven significant technological innovation with the launch of the 'Cairde' app. How have you managed the challenge of introducing digital tools to rural demographics, ensuring that older or vulnerable residents are not left behind?

I believe that in this apparent age of “connectedness” we have, in fact, never been more disconnected from each other.

When developing the Cairde app, we recognised that our communities include people with varying levels of digital confidence. Therefore, we focused on:

• Simplicity – no action should take more than 3 button presses, and our portal is user-friendly.
• Accessibility – we promote the use of the app to anyone with a smartphone; however, we will always continue to provide the text alert service to those who do not have one.
• Training – we provide 1:1 training on the app and have recruited youth volunteers (Foróige) to engage with older people to assist them in downloading and utilising the app.

We worked closely with volunteers, local coordinators and community groups to ensure the technology was easy to use and supported by people on the ground.

Importantly, we do not view digital tools as a replacement for traditional communication methods: the app complements existing community networks rather than replacing them.

The goal is to ensure that everyone benefits from faster communication and better access to information, regardless of age or technical ability.

Across Europe, we are mapping the impact of highly mobile, organised criminal groups (sometimes referred to as 'criminal tourism') that target specific areas rapidly before moving on. Does rural Ireland experience this phenomenon of fast-moving, non-localised theft, and how does the rapid communication within your network, perhaps aided by the Cairde app, help authorities intercept them?

Ireland is small and easily traversable and, as such, is susceptible to incidents involving highly mobile offenders who target particular areas and move quickly between locations. This presents a significant challenge because traditional geographic boundaries become less relevant.

The greatest strength of Community Alert is the speed at which information can travel through trusted networks. When suspicious activity is observed and reported promptly, communities can alert one another and share information with An Garda Síochána in real time.

Tools such as the Cairde app strengthen this capability by enabling timely and accurate communication and the recording of live locations, while ensuring that information is shared responsibly.

The quicker communities and law enforcement can build a picture of emerging activity, the greater the opportunity to prevent further incidents and support investigations.

One such example of “travelling” crime relates to the illegal hunting of the protected Hare in Ireland. We recently embarked on a project, working with all those affected to tackle this scourge across rural Ireland and identified a multi-stakeholder plan to tackle such practices.

With over 1,250 active groups across the country, volunteer retention is clearly one of your strengths. In an era where many civic associations suffer from 'volunteer fatigue', what is your secret to keeping local communities engaged over the long term?

In truth, the numbers of Community Alert groups have declined since Covid, and the impact is still being felt. Since coming on board with Muintir I’ve been working with our 5 Community Alert Development Officers (CADOs) to put in place a RAG (Red, Amber, Green) list of all Community Alert groups across the country. Red meaning dormant or disbanded, Amber needing support and Green doing well. This has helped us to identify those groups who need support most and allowed us to best allocate resources among those groups.

Our network of CADOs and head office support function is fundamental to the success of Community Alert and how we keep groups engaged. Having someone groups can call for support, information and advice is crucial for our volunteers.

People remain involved when they can see that their efforts make a genuine difference to their community. Community Alert volunteers regularly witness the positive outcomes of their work, whether that is helping an older neighbour feel safer, organising a local initiative or contributing to crime prevention efforts.

We also recognise that volunteering has changed. I like to think of the Elizabeth Andrew quote: “Volunteers don’t necessarily have the time, but they do have the heart” – We recognise that volunteers may have less time available than previous generations, so flexibility and support are increasingly important. Our role is to provide volunteers with practical resources, training, recognition and opportunities to contribute in ways that suit their circumstances.

We’ve recently started a project to collect information about volunteer work being done by community groups so we can share information on what works well for our groups - Community Group Projects & Activities - Muintir Na Tire

Above all, we recognise that the success of Community Alert is in its ownership by the community. Volunteers are not delivering for an unknown entity - they are strengthening their own community.

As Muintir na Tíre connects with the EUNWA network, what is the main lesson or best practice that you believe the rest of Europe can learn from the Irish rural model? And conversely, what are you hoping to discover from other European nations?

The greatest strength of Community Alert is the same as Muintir’s founding ethos’: self-help, self-reliance and neighbourliness. Community safety is most effective when local people are active participants rather than passive recipients of services.

Ireland’s experience demonstrates that strong partnerships between communities, voluntary organisations and the police service have, over decades, produced sustainable outcomes.

The integration of crime prevention, community safety and care is something we are particularly proud of. Additionally, our Memorandum of Understanding with the Department of Justice serves to cement the partnership with An Garda Síochána.

At the same time, there is much we can, and have learned from our European colleagues. Our involvement in the European network is an opportunity to share experiences, learn from one another and strengthen community safety across Europe.

While our communities may differ, the fundamental principle remains the same: safer communities are built through trust, participation and collective action.

We are grateful to Rosie Palmer and Muintir na Tíre for this valuable conversation and for offering such a clear and inspiring example of how community safety can be strengthened through trust, care, participation and partnership.

Transforming passive presence into situational intelligence.

We live in an age often defined by a "fortress mentality". Our cities and buildings are increasingly saturated with the tools of security: high-definition CCTV, access control systems, and monolithic physical barriers. Yet, despite unprecedented investment in this hardware, the results are often ambiguous, and crime rates do not always fall in correlation with surveillance density.

Why? Because we have often overlooked the most sophisticated and adaptable resource we have: the human community.

A paradigm shift: from Hardware to Humanware

In our new White Paper, "The Ecology of Security: The Capable Guardian as the Cornerstone of Crime Prevention" , we argue that true security is not a product you buy, but a quality you cultivate.

The paper revisits "Routine Activity Theory" to redefine the concept of the Capable Guardian. Too often, we view a guardian as a passive entity—a security guard at a desk or a camera lens. Our central thesis is that the true capability of a guardian is not physical; it is an intellectual and perceptual skill. It is the ability to interpret context.

What you will find in the White Paper

By downloading the full document, you will explore:

• The anatomy of the Guardian: Why simply "seeing" is not enough, and how to transform passive presence into active vigilance.
• Lessons from Nature and Cyber-Security: What the human immune system and cyber-security analysts can teach us about threat detection (Spoiler: it is always about distinguishing "normality" from "anomaly").
• The synergy of guardians: How to make residents (informal guardians), law enforcement (formal guardians), and technology (mechanical guardians) work in concert.
• Practical strategies: How to design neighbourhoods that foster natural surveillance and how to train citizens to read their environment without descending into paranoia or vigilantism.

Security is a shared responsibility. It is the quiet vigilance of a neighbour, the professional integrity of a network administrator, and the awareness of a community that knows how to look after itself.

Download White Paper "The Ecology of Security" (PDF)

As reported by Prof. Battistelli in 2013¹ , "from the 80s of the twentieth century a significant change in the concept of safety has taken place. The traditional concept of public safety has turned into the more specific notion of urban security. However, the question arises as to whether the new definition can be considered a replacement for the previous one: it certainly constitutes a radical extension. In itself, in fact, urban security includes the 'necessary' characteristics of public safety but, at the same time, it includes more specific characteristics". 

The paradigm of urban security promises to pursue the development of the opportunities and the rights of most of the people that are part of it (in some cases even non-native). Urban security includes not only the protection of a society from threats, but also the satisfaction of its most advanced needs, extending the realisation of this objective to both private and public agencies (Battistelli 2013). Private agencies, consequently, seek to settle themselves into a new area of society with the aim of privately performing protection and security functions while maintaining a very strong link with public authorities (e.g., law enforcement, ministries).

In this regard, Italy has always maintained a prudential attitude towards the sharing of any data on crime, making it the exclusive prerogative of the Public Security Authorities. Centro Elaborazione Dati Interforze (CED)² is part of this framework. Instituted by Article 8 of Law /1/4/1981, no. 121 for the purpose of coordinating the collection, classification, analysis, and evaluation of information on the protection of law and order, public security and the prevention and repression of crime (Art. 1, para 1, Legislative Decree 18/5/2018, no. 51), it was subsequently incorporated in 2001 within the new Sistema Di Indagine (SDI)³ platform. The latter is, to all intents and purposes, the largest public database (on crime, offences, and urban decay) in Italy to date.

The SDI platform is constantly enriched with a great deal of data relating to unlawful episodes, potential offenders, subjects, persons, property and much more. In other words, 'quantitative' information is integrated (e.g. geographical distribution of criminal events, episodes of urban decay and offences) with 'qualitative' information⁴.  

Within this enormous database (SDI) also the geo-localized⁵ data on episodes of crime, generated by the tabularization of the complaints received by the competent authorities, are naturally conveyed. This geo-referenced collection has a specific objective: to put the Police Forces in the condition of being able to carry out urban risk analyses finalized to the understanding of the principal critical areas on which to activate mitigating/contrasting/preventive actions. Such geo-localized data, if rendered devoid of any sensitive information, could have an undoubted value also for Associations, Third Sector Organisations, Foundations, private citizens, and companies, as part of the social fabric.

This is in line with the United Nations (2018)⁶ report on the urbanization processes that the world, especially the western world, will face by 2050. In fact, it is expected that 68% of the world's population will live in urban-metropolitan contexts, increasing the vertical and horizontal growth of our cities. Such densification will be accompanied by an unequally rapid increase in the number of the Police Forces involved in the control of the above-mentioned urban spaces. This gap will inevitably imply an increasing assumption of responsibility by all the stakeholders (public and private) of our society, who will become an integral part of the process in the field of 'participatory urban security'. In other words, each of us will be called upon to contribute so that cities can maintain adequate levels of safety, inclusion, and balance.

It is within this framework that one of the greatest challenges of the future will be played out, and in order not to lose it, it will be essential to focus on a radical change in the area of 'open data' on crime and urban decay. In fact, if this change doesn’t happen, how could public/private stakeholders identify streets or urban micro-areas where there may be 'pockets' of crime on which it is essential to intervene with operations of contrast, mitigation, and risk prevention? It would not be possible, or at least it would be extremely complex.

The idea of a synergy between the police, citizens, businesses, and any other stakeholder (part of the social structure) can concretely lead to tangible and measurable benefits. In these countries, in fact, the concept of 'open data' in the field of security (and not only) was legitimised years ago, making our country, unfortunately, still rather behind the standards across the border. For example, although updated in 2017, the Open Data Barometer⁷ relegated Italy to a less than optimal position in terms of open data in Europe (see Figure 1).

Fig. 1 - Data accessibility in Italy by category (year 2017) - comparison with UK

Comparing Italy to the UK for example, two countries that could be defined - on some level - at the extremes of the same spectrum, it emerges that in the field of crime data-transparency Italy presents an overall score (on a scale ranging from 0 to 100) of 40.00 against the UK's 90.00, here are some more specific numbers (see fig. 2):

• Open data on crime and decay: UK (90.00) VS Italy (40.00)
• Mapped data, WEB GIS: UK (100.00) VS Italy (50.00)

Fig. 2 - Comparison of open data between the UK and Italy (year 2017) - topic 'Crime Statistics'

In addition, there is a government platform called 'Open Data - Police UK⁸', through which any citizen/entity in the world can freely download all geo-localised crime data up to date (see figure 3).

Fig. 3 - Government platform 'Open Data - Police UK'

Continuing the comparison on an European level, Italy, compared to Germany, presents an overall score of 40.00 vs. 80.00, below some more specific numbers (see fig. 4):

• Open data on crime and degradation: Germany (80.00) VS Italy (40.00)
• Mapped data, WEB GIS: Germany (100.00) VS Italy (50.00)

Fig. 4 - Open data comparison between Germany and Italy (year 2017)

Again, Italy, compared to France, has an overall score of 40.00 versus 95.00, here are some more specific numbers (see fig. 5):

• Open data on Offences and Degradation: France (95.00) VS Italy (40.00)
• Mapped data, WEB GIS: France (70.00) VS Italy (50.00)

Fig. 5 - Open data comparison between France and Italy (year 2017)

In light of the above, a question arises: what kind of consequences can this difference generate directly, or indirectly?

The lack of accessible geo-localised data on urban crime means that many intervention policies (both private and public) are not yet data-driven on this issue but rely only and exclusively on qualitative variables (equally important but insufficient if not integrated with numerical-quantitative ones).

On the other hand, how could a Public Administration, a Foundation, an Association or even a group of aware and pro-active citizens plan an urban requalification intervention if the (geo-localised) data on episodes of crime and degradation are not accessible? Everything becomes extremely more complex and potentially ineffective, hence the need to overturn the paradigm of participatory urban security.

This change does not presuppose, obviously, an access to the entire data bank of the SDI, insofar as it is inapplicable, dangerous and, above all, ethically unjust (given the high presence of sensitive data and material). It is rather intended to mean the possibility for private citizens, companies, public administrations and all the organisations of the Third sector, to access only the geo-localized data (deprived of any sensitive information) on criminality and urban decay. Below is an example of 'information fields' that - although not affecting sensitive/personal data - could make a given crime/degradation event usable in urban risk analysis:

• Event category (e.g., robbery, theft, violent crime, counterfeiting, drug dealing, etc.)
• Sub-category of event (e.g., Commercial Robbery, Residential Theft, etc.)
• Date of event (e.g., 01/01/2021)
• Time of the event (e.g., between 8:00 and 12:00)
• Address (e.g., Via Rossi 1, 00000, Rome)
• Latitude and Longitude (fundamental for the geo-localization of the event)

Of course, along with a hypothetical greater sharing of data on crime and urban decay by the Public Safety Authorities, it is necessary to encourage an increasingly substantial activism on the part of citizens. The latter, in fact, are called upon to contribute with information and data which, unfortunately, are often not available to Law Enforcement Agencies.

In this regard, back in 2004⁹, Dr Maurizio Fiasco - through an interesting article published on the State Police website - quoted "The average number of reported cases is 34% and is partly influenced by the fact that attempted crimes don’t get reported (only one in four is followed by a report to the authorities). While it may seem obvious that citizens report almost all car thefts (94%), the high percentage of robberies that remain unreported is cause for reflection: 50.4% of those committed and 68.9% of those attempted. Why such a low tendency? The hypotheses are based on the balance between the costs and benefits of contacting the police and the seriousness of the consequences of the crime. It is also influenced by whether contact between the perpetrator and the victim has taken place or not. A burglary committed while the victim is absent from home has different emotional repercussions from a robbery during which the offended party has run into the aggressor. In other words, in case of events affecting one individual, such as assaults and robberies, the most frequent motivation for reporting is to inform the police (43.2% if they met the offender and 35% if they didn’t) or to prevent the perpetrator from repeating the crime (50.3% if they met the offender and 17.3% if they didn’t). On the other hand, these motivations were scarcely reported for pickpocketing and theft of personal belongings.

This reflection, although outdated, is still deeply relevant considering what was pointed out in the ISTAT (Italian National Statistical Institute)¹⁰ year-end report 2020, that "The data concerning the police force survey do not represent a complete picture of crime". This aspect is, in some ways, extremely invalidating as it could prevent the Public Safety Authorities from implementing effective crime fighting and containment measures. However, even though the number of reports is still relatively low today (especially for certain types of crime), it must be said that citizens have been able to build a dense network of platforms, especially digital ones, capable of collecting very significant amounts of data on crime/degradation. In other words, it could be said that blogs/forums/social networks/security websites have become the digital noticeboard where citizens tend to crystallise the results of their HUMINT¹¹ activities.

Therefore, it is evident that citizens are very willing to 'share information for the protection of common/public spaces', but it is also necessary to put them in a position where they can convey the same data to the competent authorities. Training, information, and dissemination activities can be an excellent tool to make citizens increasingly aware of the need to systematise the data/reports they collect in order to share them with the police, as well as to increasingly digitalise the reporting procedures. In this sense, the Mine Crime project that we coordinated aims to harmonise the collection of data reported through multiple digital platforms, systematising them in a single database and transforming them into risk indices to support mitigation activities by companies, law enforcement agencies, public stakeholders, and citizens.

In conclusion, it is only through the overall sharing of data, information, and useful materials on urban security that the public, by integrating with the private sector (an essential component of modern society), will be able to face the great challenges that the 'security of the near future' will inexorably pose to us. We have excellent examples of countries that could serve as models of 'good practices'. There is nothing left to do but start now.

Giacomo Salvanelli - Mine Crime CEO

[1] https://doi.org/10.4000/qds.425

[2] https://www.poliziadistato.it/articolo/banca-dati-per-le-forze-di-polizia-1

[3] https://www.carabinieri.it/media---comunicazione/rassegna-dell-arma/la-rassegna/anno-2012/n-1---gennaio-marzo/studi

[4] Criminal proceedings, secret or classified - Art. 144 and 329 - and, therefore, accessible only to Officials of the Judicial Police assigned to the "Services" of the Judicial Police provided for by Art. 56, Code of Criminal Procedure, to the D.I.A., to the Central Direction for the anti-drug services and to the central Offices of the State Police or of the Carabinieri deputized to fight terrorism.

[5] Geolocation: identification of the geographic position of people, events, vehicles or objects that are stationary or moving

[6] https://www.un.org/development/desa/en/news/population/2018-revision-of-world-urbanization-prospects.html

[7] https://opendatabarometer.org/?_year=2017&indicator=ODB

[8] https://data.police.uk/

[9] https://poliziamoderna.poliziadistato.it/articolo/56c49118a17f6125389515

[10] https://www.istat.it/it/archivio/244848

[11] http://www.osservatorioanalitico.com/?p=8888