Evaluating CCTV: Why the findings are inconsistent, inconclusive and ultimately irrelevant

Abstract

CCTV is widely acknowledged to be ubiquitous in British urban areas. However, despite its proliferation, there remains no concrete and certifiable evidence to suggest that it is the panacea to the myriad problems it has been introduced to tackle. The expansion of CCTV has continued unperturbed by the tentative, contradictory, and even negative evaluation findings it has often produced. Despite the reservations about the quality and methodological soundness of studies by those involved in its evaluation, and the inconsistency of results that were considered to be competently and professionally conducted, consecutive governments have continued to celebrate its supposed effectiveness. This article critiques the evaluation doctrine that has dominated CCTV evaluations and outlines how it has resulted in an approach that overlooks the qualitative impact of CCTV, ignores the possibility that individuals other than offenders may be affected by the camera's gaze; and presumes that the only significant impact of CCTV (and thereby worthy of evaluating) is on crime rates. The approach that has historically been taken to evaluate CCTV is just as important and illuminating as the inconclusiveness of the evaluations themselves. This article will outline why the findings from these evaluations are inconsistent, inconclusive and ultimately irrelevant.