The Influence of Perceived Safety and Security on Walking
bookPart
In the current chapter we highlight two types of risk that are of importance for pedestrians: the risk of being involved in an accident and the risk of being victim of criminal offences, violence or threats. In most cases it is the latter type of risk that is of importance for pedestrians, and which influences their behaviour. From a theoretical perspective the perception of risk has traditionally been studied from a rational perspective, i.e. as a deliberate calculation of pros and cons in a given situation. Recently, theoretical developments have aimed at including feelings as an explanatory variable for risk perception. Due to methodological challenges, there is still little empirical support for the quite common-sense assumption that our feelings govern our way of making judgements of risk.
Although both anecdotal evidence and some single studies indicate so, the bulk of properly performed empirical research concludes that there is little relationship between perceived safety and security and the strategic decision to walk, in other words the modal choice situation. Apparently, there are other important elements of the perceived physical and social environment that essentially influence the decision to walk. Results also indicate that people express a higher degree of worry when they consider to walk than when they are actually on their way. Still, for some groups, and in some situations, feeling unsafe might be an influencing factor in people’s decision to walk or not.
There seem to be considerable national and regional differences in how perceived safety influences children’s opportunities for walking in everyday life. In some inner city areas, especially in large cities, fear of crime or fear of accidents might give considerable limitations to children’s independent mobility. In more rural areas and especially in Northern Europe, this seems to be a more marginal explanation.
Once the pedestrian has made the strategic decision to walk, perceived safety plays a larger role. Multivariate analyses have shown that when everything else is controlled for, pedestrians who are afraid of crime and threats tend to adapt their behaviour more, like choosing another route, than pedestrians who do not experience fear.
Although both anecdotal evidence and some single studies indicate so, the bulk of properly performed empirical research concludes that there is little relationship between perceived safety and security and the strategic decision to walk, in other words the modal choice situation. Apparently, there are other important elements of the perceived physical and social environment that essentially influence the decision to walk. Results also indicate that people express a higher degree of worry when they consider to walk than when they are actually on their way. Still, for some groups, and in some situations, feeling unsafe might be an influencing factor in people’s decision to walk or not.
There seem to be considerable national and regional differences in how perceived safety influences children’s opportunities for walking in everyday life. In some inner city areas, especially in large cities, fear of crime or fear of accidents might give considerable limitations to children’s independent mobility. In more rural areas and especially in Northern Europe, this seems to be a more marginal explanation.
Once the pedestrian has made the strategic decision to walk, perceived safety plays a larger role. Multivariate analyses have shown that when everything else is controlled for, pedestrians who are afraid of crime and threats tend to adapt their behaviour more, like choosing another route, than pedestrians who do not experience fear.
TNO Identifier
427390
Publisher
Cost
Article nr.
B.2.3
Source title
PQN Final Report – Part B: Documentation. B.2. Perceived Needs
Pages
49-70