COMMON GROUND
Tasmanian Fear of Crime Project Stage 2
Authors:
Lynne F. Lee, Project Officer, Tasmanian Fear of Crime Project
Janine Combes and Angela Marsh, Project Evaluators
To order any National Crime Prevention publications please contact:
Crime Prevention Branch
Australian Government Attorney-General's Department
Robert Garran Offices
National Circuit
BARTON ACT 2600
| Ph: | +61 2 6250 6711 |
| Fax: | +61 2 6273 0913 |
Publications are also available at http://www.crimeprevention.gov.au/
Common Ground - Tasmanian Fear of Crime Project Stage 2
Australian Government Attorney-General's Department, Canberra
© Commonwealth of Australia, October 2003
ISBN: 0 642 21154 X
The views expressed in this publication are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the view of the Commonwealth of Australia. Whilst all reasonable care has been taken in the preparation of this publication, no liability is assumed for any errors or omissions.
Publisher: Australian Government Attorney-General's Department
CONTENTS
Part A: Background to the Common Ground project
1.1 Introduction
1.2 Aims
1.3 Expected outcomes
1.3.1 Benefits to the Tasmanian community
1.3.2 Benefits to other jurisdictions
1.4 Project management
1.4.1 Three layers
1.5 Methodology and project design
1.5.1 Project stages
1.5.2 Methods used to collect data
1.5.3 Analysis and selection of strategies
1.5.4 Evaluation of the project
Part B: The Malls and Public Spaces Component
2.1 Auspicing body
2.2 Advisory groups involved in the project
2.3 Project aims
2.4 Methods used for collecting information
2.4.1 Survey
2.4.2 Focus groups
2.4.3 Interviews
2.5 Results of the survey
2.5.1 Frequency and main uses of public spaces
2.5.2 Main fears identified
2.5.3 Infrastructure factors
2.5.4 People perceived as possibly threatening
2.5.5 Direct and indirect experience of incidents causing harm or concern
2.6 Results of focus groups and interviews
2.6.1 Young people
2.6.2 Older people
2.6.3 Women
2.6.4 People from migrant, refugee, ethnic and Indigenous backgrounds
2.6.5 People with disabilities
2.6.6 Lesbians and gay people
2.6.7 Summary of results of focus groups
2.7 Strategies suggested by respondents
2.7.1 Risk minimisation strategies
2.7.2 Law and order and safety infrastructure
2.7.3 Community-oriented processes
2.7.4 Conclusion
3 Strategies arising from surveys, interviews and focus groups
3.1 Development of strategies
3.2 Implementation and outcomes of strategies
3.2.1 Media campaign
3.2.2 Disability awareness training for police recruits and serving officers
3.2.3 Safety awareness training for older people
3.3 Activities to continue beyond the life of the project
3.3.1 Tasmanian Crime Prevention and Community Safety Council (CP&CSC)
3.3.2 Hobart City Council
3.3.3 Glenorchy City Council
3.3.4 Metro Tasmania Pty Ltd
3.3.5 Tasmania Police
3.3.6 Tasmanians with Disabilities
Part C: The Youth Participation component
4.1 Auspicing bodies
4.2 Advisory groups involved in the project
4.3 Aim of the youth participation component of the project
4.4 Objectives of the youth participation project
4.5 Methods used for collecting information
4.5.1 Surveys
4.5.2 Consultations and focus groups
4.6 Results of surveys
4.6.1 Use of locations
4.6.2 Tensions between different space users
4.6 3 Problems with using spaces
4.6.4 Concerns with use of spaces
4.6.5 Suggestions for improving feelings of security in public spaces
4.6.6 Summary of the survey results
4.7 Results of consultations and focus groups
4.7.1 Tensions and concerns most commonly identified across the five sites
4.7.2 Inconsistency of application of laws
4.7.3 Negative youth image
4.7.4 Drugs and alcohol
4.7.5 Accessing the spaces by night
4.7.6 Specific location issues
4.7.7 Summary of the main issues identified by young people
5 Strategies arising from surveys, consultations and focus groups
5.1 Development of strategies
5.1.1 The need for more activities for young people in the targeted public spaces
5.1.2 Foster better relations between police and young people in the target areas
5.1.3 Promote a more positive image of young people
5.1.4 Bridge the gap between different groups in the community
5.1.5 Avoidance of public spaces at night
5.2 Implementation and outcomes of strategies
5.2.1 Rights and Responsibilities Card
5.2.2 Photospace Strategy
5.2.3 Photospace Activities Day
5.3 Recommended Activities to continue beyond the life of the Project
5.3.1 Rights and Responsibilities Card
5.3.2 Photospace information kit
5.3.3 Youth Consultative Committee
6 Issues emerging from implementation of the project
6.1 Issues relating to involvement of the Youth Consultative Committee
6.2 Issues relating to the Rights and Responsibilities Card
6.3 Issues relating to Photospace discussion groups
6.4 Media strategy
6.5 Strategies to come out of the Photospace discussion groups
7 Summary of youth participation component
7.1 How did the Youth Participation component measure up to the specific objectives established for this component?
8 Evaluation of the Common Ground project
8.1 Project Structure, Processes and Resourcing
8.1.1 Role delineation and decision-making
8.1.2 Different aims within the one overall project
8.1.3 Project staff skills, position descriptions and relationships between project staff
8.1.4 Project timeframes
8.1.5 Ongoing evaluation input
8.1.6 Scope of the project
8.1.7 Partnerships between agencies
8.1.8 Relationships between stakeholders
8.1.9 Capacity to consult broadly within the timeframe for the project
8.1.10 Resourcing the implementation of strategies
8.2 Evaluation of specific phases of the Project
8.2.1 Research and consultation phases
8.2.2 Strategy identification, development and implementation phases
8.3 Evaluation of specific strategies
8.3.1 Rights and Responsibilities Card
8.3.2 Photospace strategy
8.3.3 Media strategy - TV community service announcements
8.3.4 Disability awareness training for police recruits and serving police
8.3.5 Safety awareness sessions
8.3.6 Summary
8.4 Did the project achieve its aims?
8.5 Cost-effectiveness
8.6 Potential for continuing beyond the life of the project
8.7 Outcomes from the project
8.7.1 Outcomes for Steering Committee organisations
8.7.2 Outcomes for other stakeholders
8.7.3 Conclusions
8.8 Recommendations to other jurisdictions undertaking fear of crime projects
8.9 Recommendations for specific stakeholder groups
8.9.1 The National Crime Prevention Programmme (NCPP)
8.9.2 The Tasmanian Government
8.9.3 The Tasmanian department of police and public safety
8.9.4 Hobart City Council
8.9.5 Crime Prevention and Community Safety Council
8.9.6 Glenorchy City Council
8.9.7 Metro Tasmania Pty Ltd
Appendices: Common Ground Project
Part B. Malls and public spaces component
Part C Youth participation component
Executive summary
The Common Ground project was implemented in Tasmania during 1999 and 2000. At both national and state levels fear of crime has been identified as a priority issue. Common Ground was an initiative of the Tasmanian Crime Prevention and Community Safety Council in partnership with a number of key government and non-government agencies. This pilot project was funded by the Australian Government's National Crime Prevention Programme (NCPP).
Aims
The aims of the project were to:
- reduce fear of crime in selected public spaces in Southern Tasmania
- promote a more positive image of young people, and reduce people's fear of young people in selected public spaces in Tasmania, and
- develop a model project focusing on fear of crime in public spaces capable of being replicated and/or adapted for use in other Australian jurisdictions.
There were two inter-related components of the project - the Malls and Public Spaces Component and the Youth Participation Component. Each required strategies to address the project aims in relation to specific sites and the needs of various target groups within the broader community. The Malls and Public Spaces component was conducted over an 18-month period and the Youth Participation Component was implemented over a 12-month time frame.
Results of data collected
A range of methods was used to collect information, including interviews, focus groups and surveys. A highly consultative approach was used involving 684 people aged from 12 to more than 65 years. The participants described their experiences of the public spaces and provided valuable input into the development of strategies to overcome the issues identified.
The project found that, for the broader community, public space has multiple identifications and functions for different people. However, it also found that:
- fear of crime in the public open spaces studied in the cities of Hobart and Glenorchy is a significant concern for many people across all age groups
- fear of crime is a cause of people feeling negative towards public spaces and a reason to avoid these areas
- fear of crime is a problem that affects interactions and relationships between people of different ages and backgrounds in public spaces, thus highlighting the issue of public spaces as 'contested' spaces
- all age and target groups agreed that only a few people cause trouble in public spaces
- at night inadequate lighting increases feelings of vulnerability
- there is a perceived lack of safety features, such as safety zones and help points in public spaces
- negative views and media reporting affect how others see young people in public spaces
- many people felt anxious about assault, robbery, uncivil behaviour, young people in groups, verbal abuse, being asked for money and being fearful about saying 'no', and
- people feared harm from skateboards and impediments on footpaths.
The project also provided information about the following concerns of specific groups of people:
- significantly more women than men felt insecure in public spaces
- young people lack knowledge of their rights and responsibilities in public spaces, and
- many older people are concerned about young people congregating in large groups in public spaces.
Strategies to address fear of crime
The design and implementation of the strategies was facilitated by the earlier consultative process. A number of community-oriented project strategies were identified, developed and implemented by the two project components. As the project was concerned with perceptions of vulnerability and fear of crime, as opposed to the incidence of crime, the development of strategies focussed on addressing the main fears of target groups (eg assault, rowdiness, being asked for money) rather than the crimes that these people may have experienced. The strategy identification process also focussed on those people identified as feeling most vulnerable (eg older people, gays and lesbians, people with a disability) rather than those whom statistics indicate are most at risk.
Community members and members of key target groups involved in the project put forward a number of possible strategies to address fear of crime issues, including:
- creating opportunities for individuals to discuss and negotiate their rights in relation to public spaces in an ongoing way
- increased visibility/presence of police, and security personnel
- improved safety infrastructure and lighting and more activities to attract people
- a better understanding on the part of police of needs of target groups in public spaces
- more opportunities for interaction between young people and other community members;
- a need for programmes to assist older people to feel confident when using public spaces
- information that helps members of the public to know the rights of bus drivers to discipline passengers
- more late night buses to and from the city centres
- an increase in access to appropriate recreational facilities for young people, and
- fostering more positive media portrayals of young people.
Lessons learnt for other jurisdictions
The Common Ground project built upon its first-stage research in a way that is readily adaptable to other jurisdictions. All of the strategies developed by the Common Ground project could be used at other sites across Australia.
The Common Ground Project generated useful information about the type of community approaches that can be adopted to deal with fear of crime in small communities. It is important to create public spaces that support and assist the development of respectful relationships between different groups of people. The project has produced a set of principles and strategies to guide future work in this area. These are listed below.
Design of facilities and infrastructure
- Consider fear of crime concerns at the design stage for all public spaces.
- Take into account the diversity of needs of people who use public spaces by designing spaces that appeal to a range of user groups, and the inclusion of infrastructure that will meet the diverse needs of user groups.
- Recognise the potential impact of public space interactions and experiences on the behaviours and lifestyle of individuals (eg the impact on people's sense of vulnerability, feelings of victimisation and the impact on their enjoyment of public space).
- Develop facilities that are flexible and allow for both structured and unstructured activities to take place within public spaces.
- Include appropriate safety infrastructure at the design stage (eg good lighting, safety zones).
- Recognise that good street and safety infrastructure design can measurably increase people's sense of security and enhance their enjoyment of public spaces.
Planning
- Use a planning approach that acknowledges and acts upon the concept of public space as communal space and encourages social inclusion rather than exclusion.
- Consider the range of different socio-economic interests that have a stake in public spaces.
- Recognise the value of a community development approach in developing workable and lasting solutions to fear of crime issues.
- Recognise that the involvement of key user groups (eg young people, older people, people of low socio-economic status) in the planning and management of public spaces is essential.
- Adopt a 'safety first' planning approach that involves all components of the organisation, investigates the possible fear of crime issues in relation to a particular site and addresses them.
- Allocate resources to evaluate the impact of public space planning in relation to fear of crime (both anticipated and unanticipated outcomes).
Regulatory mechanisms
- Ensure the inclusion of community policing strategies as a central component.
- Strive for social regulation that is based on non-coercive mechanisms and includes informal mechanisms.
- Ensure that security features are visible but unobtrusive and involve 'people to people' contact.
- Involve the community in regulating what happens in public spaces.
Community education and information
- Use collaborative community education initiatives developed in partnership with media outlets.
- Provide information about possible ways of dealing with safety issues in public places as 'discussion starters' to ensure that discussions move beyond law enforcement and infrastructure issues.
Management of public open spaces
- Build opportunities for communication between public space users to build tolerance of difference and respect for each other and develop a shared understanding of how to use public open spaces (eg codes of conduct, hold forums and discussions between user groups).
- Build a sense of ownership and a new vision about how public spaces could be in our community rather than how they are currently viewed (eg as problem areas, areas to be avoided).
- Recognise the value of partnership approaches in the planning and management of public spaces.
- Create opportunities for partner agencies to work together on specific practical initiatives.
- Ensure that the managers of public spaces are accountable to other stakeholders in the community.
Management of projects addressing fear of crime
- Establish a simple, clear project management structure.
- Determine clear roles and responsibilities in relation to key stakeholders prior to project implementation.
- Ensure that strategies are selected and developed by target group representatives and other key operational groups.
- Limit the project documentation to one set of aims to ensure a cohesive approach across different components.
- Determine clear relationships between project staff.
- Clarify expectations and make sure that position descriptions match expectations.
- Where possible, use co-location of project staff.
- Establish an agreed project management position and delegate most operational matters to this position.
- Where possible, have the same time frame for all project components.
- Allow sufficient time for the effective implementation and monitoring of the impact of strategies.
- Involve evaluators in the early planning and development processes.
- Resource the project to be able to use a range of evaluation mechanisms.
- Limit the number of project sites to enable maximum impact and measurable outcomes.
- Balance the number of study sites across cities.
- If developing strategies that relate to the interactions between people in public places, assume that the outcomes will be applicable more broadly than just the study sites.
- Limit the number of target groups to maximise the capacity to achieve substantial impact from strategies from limited resources.
- Anticipate that a partnership between such different agencies will involve different perspectives.
- Discuss and plan how to run the partnership prior to the project commencing (eg hold a comprehensive planning day involving all key stakeholders, develop a formal agreement, identify roles).
- Develop consistent and agreed mechanisms for decision making and managing issues where partner agencies have different perspectives.
- Use existing consultative mechanisms to provide feedback about the project and to gain input on key issues.
- Establish an advisory group that is specific to the particular project and involves representatives of target groups and other key organisations.
- Allocate sufficient resources to enable the project to develop and implement a wide range of strategies.
- During the project development phase, set aside a pool of funds to be used for implementation of strategies, even though the strategies themselves have not yet been determined at this preliminary stage.
Did the Common Ground project achieve its aims?
The Common Ground project was very cost effective in meeting its aims. With a limited budget, the strategies implemented during the Common Ground project generated a number of tangible outcomes, many of which will continue beyond the life of this pilot project. The project was also able to bring together six major agencies in Tasmania to work on the issue of fear of crime over this period.
Raising awareness about the need to respond to fear of crime as a significant community issue
All of the agencies and groups involved in the Common Ground project have indicated that they now have a much greater understanding of fear of crime as it relates to the project sites in Tasmania. The Common Ground project has contributed to the planning processes of two local government bodies in Tasmania and a number of state government agencies.
The Common Ground project was successful in raising the level of awareness among some people of how we judge others and the assumptions that are made about young people, older people, gays and lesbians, people with disabilities and people from migrant, refugee, ethnic or Indigenous backgrounds. In some instances, the project had an impact on the way individuals view each other (eg how a group of older people view members of the Youth Consultative Committee or how a young person feels about a gay man). These are significant achievements in that, if they change the interactions between these individuals, it will make a difference to their experience of public spaces.
The project developed and implemented strategies that specifically addressed the image of young people within the broader community. It dealt with this issue by developing tools that enabled different age groups to examine how they judge and behave towards each other (eg the Photospace discussion groups and the TV advertisements).
The Common Ground project has demonstrated that this type of approach can promote a more positive image of young people as well as building links between age groups within the community. Such an approach could be applied on a much larger or more intensive scale to achieve significant outcomes in terms of how people interact within public open spaces.
The production of practical resource kits, training manuals, media campaign materials and information pamphlets
The Common Ground project developed and piloted five strategies, which resulted in the production of the following very useful resources:
- a Photospace kit to promote dialogue and interaction between older and younger community members
- the Rights and Responsibilities Card, which provides information for young people about their rights and obligations when using public spaces
- a disability awareness training programme for police (focusing on public space encounters and concerns)
- a safety awareness programme for older people which has a specific focus on the use of public space, and
- a series of community service media advertisements promoting positive interaction in public spaces.
These were developed in consultation with target groups and key stakeholders. The extent to which the strategies reduced fear of crime in the specific project sites is much harder to ascertain due to the limited time frame after implementation and a limited capacity to conduct large scale follow up. However, the available data shows that the project made a difference to some individuals by broadening their awareness and understanding of fear of crime and of other members of the community in which they live.
Building relationships between stakeholder groups
The project set out to deal with the issue of public spaces being shared environments. During the 18-month life of the project, it created a focus on fear of crime issues in the Tasmanian community. It is likely that this focus will continue over coming years as key stakeholders utilise the data and resources produced by this project to provide direction for their own planning processes.
The Common Ground project has generated new initiatives by local councils to address fear of crime issues. For example, Hobart City Council wishes to establish a networking project aimed at educating community groups about public space issues and develop more safety infrastructure in the central business district. Glenorchy Council will continue its redevelopment of a local crime prevention strategy as well as develop further mechanisms to support the involvement of young people in the decision-making processes in the city.
The City Heart Business Association has gained a greater understanding of fear of crime in relation to the Hobart CBD and can pursue policies that address the issues identified (eg promote the use of the city centre by a diverse range of groups at different times of the day).
The media outlets that participated in the media campaign now have a heightened awareness about fear of crime through developing and running the community service announcements in relation to this issue.
Commercial enterprises such as Metro Tasmania Pty Ltd will initiate new approaches to dealing with fear of crime as part of their daily business (eg supporting the training of security personnel in conflict resolution strategies).
Youth work agencies and young people will gain information about dealing with public space issues through the Rights and Responsibilities Card and future participation in Photospace discussion groups.
Practical strategies developed and implemented through the project have meant that key stakeholder groups have collaboratively responded to fear of crime issues in relation to specific sites. Police, the gay and lesbian community, young people, State government departments and local government bodies all worked collaboratively with a commercial television station to develop community service announcements about fear of crime. Victims of crime services, police and older persons organisations worked together to implement safety awareness training programmes. Young people worked with older people, police, disability groups and councils to conduct the Photospace discussion groups.
There is evidence that these improved linkages will continue over time and will thus support further joint initiatives. The Tasmanian Crime Prevention and Community Safety Council will support other agencies within Tasmania to develop projects that address fear of crime issues.
PART A: BACKGROUND TO THE COMMON GROUND PROJECT
1.1 Introduction
In 1995, the Tasmanian Government Parliamentary Committee on Public Safety and the Response to Crime commissioned an issues paper on crime prevention from Associate Professor Ken Polk, Institute of Criminology, University of Melbourne. In it, Professor Polk said: The nature of the crime problem in Tasmania seems to be as much about perceived fears of crime, and the feeling that the community is no longer the safe place that it once was, as it is about actual levels of offending.
Reflecting the directions set by this paper, in 1996 the Tasmanian Government released the Tasmanian Criminal Justice Strategy, which recognised that fear of crime has serious impacts upon the quality of life of many people.
In 1998, the Tasmanian Government established a Crime Prevention Council comprising community and departmental representatives. The Commonwealth's National Crime Prevention Programme (then known as the National Campaign Against Violence and Crime) provided funding for the Council in its first year of operation to establish a secretariat to provide administrative and research support to the Crime Prevention Council.
At the national level, fear of crime has been identified as a priority issue for research and action by the National Anti-Crime Strategy (NACS), the Criminology Research Council (CRC) and the Commonwealth Government's National Crime Prevention Programme (NCPP). In 1997-98, these key stakeholder groups developed Stage 1of the Fear of Crime Project. Stage 1 included a literature review, an audit of fear or crime reduction programmes and field work research undertaken in NSW and Tasmania.
The field work researched people's perceptions of crime in public spaces and on public transport systems, as well as media influence on people's attitudes to public spaces. The findings showed that, overall, it was places outside the home that made people more fearful, especially at night:
'For most people living in Hobart and nearby rural areas, the parks and the open-air city mall in the middle of the business district were identified as the places of most danger in terms of crime.'
The findings indicated that all respondents (including young people) considered young people, in particular, as a source of threat in public places:
'The Hobart young people's discussion group identified young unemployed men as engaging in criminal activities more than other groups.'
When asked how they thought 'dangerous places' could be made safer, Tasmanians mentioned:
'The placing of surveillance cameras and an increased police presence at the city mall (including the presence of a police information booth) as effective steps in reducing their fear of entering this area.'
The main findings from the Stage 1 research informed the design, aims and expected outcomes of the Common Ground project in the following areas:
- identification of key target groups
- involvement of young people as a sector
- identification of key sites, and
- the role of the media in influencing people's fear of crime.
1.2 Aims
The following aims provided the framework for both components of the Common Ground project.
- To develop a model project in Tasmania, applying the findings from the Stage 1 research, which focused on fear of crime in public spaces, that can be replicated and/or adapted for use in other Australian jurisdictions.
- To develop a project, which builds on existing and planned Tasmanian initiatives and projects, that will provide an ongoing emphasis on addressing fear of crime issues in the Tasmanian community.
- To develop a model for consultation with specific target groups about their fear of crime in specific public spaces in Tasmania.
- To develop and implement strategies, through consultation with the target groups, to reduce the target population's fear of crime in specific public spaces in Tasmania.
- To develop and implement strategies to promote a more positive image of young people, and to reduce people's fear of young people, particularly in specific public spaces in Tasmania.
1.3 Expected outcomes
The expected outcomes from the Common Ground Project were:
- a reduction in the fear of crime associated with malls and public spaces in Tasmania, through the implementation of strategies applying the findings from the Stage 1 research and consultation with key stakeholders and members of the target population
- a clearer understanding of the Stage 1 field work findings with respect to fear of crime in specific localities in Tasmania (eg transit malls) and specific target groups
- engagement of a wide cross-section of community members in the identification of issues, setting of priorities and the development, implementation and evaluation of strategies with respect to fear of crime in the target areas, with community members engaged including
- key stakeholders
- young people
- retailers
- local government, and
- interested community groups (eg public transport users, elderly people, gay and lesbian community, people from non-English speaking backgrounds, women) - engagement of stakeholders in a community development approach, bringing together disparate groups in the community to work towards a common goal (ie a reduction in fear of crime)
- fostering more collaborative partnership approaches to resolving issues relating to fear of crime
- fostering greater ownership amongst those participating in the target community, leading to wider acceptance of the outcomes and process.
1.3.1 Benefits to the Tasmanian community
At a local level, a number of expected outcomes from the project were identified. These included:
- identification of urban design features and other factors contributing to people's fear of crime
- engagement of the local community in the project
- a reduction in fear of crime among the target groups associated with specific localities (such as transit malls and other public spaces)
- promotion of a more positive image of youth among the wider Tasmanian community and a reduction in people's perception that young people are 'the problem' with respect to crime.
- positive interaction between young people and other members of the community
- fostering a greater sense of community cohesion among members of the target community.
- fostering a greater understanding between different groups in the target population of each other's perspective in relation to fear of crime and the use of public space.
1.3.2 Benefits to other jurisdictions
The project focused on fear of crime in relation to public spaces and the interactions between people within public spaces. These are issues that affect a large number of communities across Australia. It was therefore envisaged that the material collected during the Common Ground Project would be applicable to other communities across the country. A specific component of the evaluation requirement was that an assessment be made about how transferable the strategies would be to other locations.
The end result of the project was to be the development and documentation of a process of engaging the community at a local level in the identification of issues and the development of strategies relevant to fear of crime that could be applied to other jurisdictions.
1.4 Project management
1.4.1 Three layers
There were three layers of project management for the Common Ground Project. These are outlined below.
|
Level /Structure |
Role |
| 1. National Anti-Crime Strategy, Project Management Group (which included a Tasmanian representative) |
|
|
2. The Common Ground Steering Committee, made up of representatives from:
|
|
|
3. The Project auspicing bodies were:
|
|
The Tasmanian Crime Prevention and Community Safety Council
The Tasmanian Crime Prevention and Community Safety Council was established in 1998 by the State government to develop an integrated approach to crime prevention from a whole-of-government perspective. The Council comprises community and departmental representatives. The Youth Network of Tasmania is also represented on the Crime Prevention and Community Safety Council.
The Youth Network of Tasmania (YNOT)
YNOT is a youth sector peak body which involves young people and service providers in identifying youth issues and developing strategies and policies to address them. It facilitates the development of coordinating mechanisms across the youth sector.
1.5 Methodology and project design
The project consisted of two inter-related components:
- the Malls and Public Spaces component
- the Youth Participation component.
Five project sites were selected across Hobart and Glenorchy cities:
- Elizabeth Street Mall
- Hobart Bus Transit Mall
- Glenorchy Bus Transit Mall
- Franklin Square
- St David's Park
1.5.1 Project stages
The Common Ground Project was developed as a four-phase programme that included specific milestones. The key stages of the project were:
- background research and literature review
- consultation
- strategy planning
- implementation and evaluation
A wealth of information had been collected during Stage 1 of the National Fear of Crime Project. The Common Ground project background research primarily involved analysing local research and the Stage 1 results to determine how they might be used within this project. The local reports considered included:
- Glenorchy Safer Communities Report, 1999
- Youth Image Forums Report, Glenorchy Youth Task Force, 1988,
- Tolosa Street Bus Interchange User Questionnaire results, 1996
- Safety in Hobart CBD - A Social Research Report, 1997
- Report of the Hobart City Council Alcohol in the CBD Working Party, 1995
There were two levels of consultation. The main target groups for the project were:
- young people
- older people
- women
- gays and lesbians
- people with disabilities
- people from migrant/ethnic backgrounds
An initial round of consultation was conducted (March to May 1999) to enable groups to find out about the project, elicit support from key organisations and find out which other agencies would be valuable to contact. The second round of consultation (June to September 1999) used a focus group format to elicit specific information about the fears of particular groups and individuals in relation to the designated public spaces, the strategies they employed to make themselves feel safer, and what would make a difference to their level of concern.
A diverse range of organisations was contacted, including disability groups, migrant organisations, youth groups, Aboriginal organisations, gay and lesbian groups, women's groups, councils, transport agencies, business organisations, and State, Commonwealth and local government bodies.
1.5.2 Methods used to collect data
The project design incorporated a high level of consultation with stakeholder groups using a range of methods as outlined below.
| Method/ Tool | Purpose |
| Focus groups |
|
| Attending meetings of existing community groups |
|
| Individual stakeholder interviews |
|
|
Surveys: (1) General community survey |
Collect baseline data relating to:
|
1.5.3 Analysis and selection of strategies
Following the completion of data collection, a lengthy data analysis process was undertaken. Given the limited resourcing available for the project, this process took longer than was originally anticipated. This had an impact on the capacity of the Steering Committee to identify and develop strategies within the established time frame. The project stakeholder agencies contributed time and resources to assist with data entry tasks and the evaluation consultants took part in the analysis and presentation of data. Data was analysed using SAS software and cross-tabulations. Key themes and strategies were identified within the focus group data. This provided the backdrop for the development of strategies.
The following strategies were selected:
| The Malls and Public Spaces component | The Youth Participation component |
|
|
Strategies were selected using the following process:
- development of selection criteria
- a workshop with the Steering Committee and other key groups (eg members of the Youth Consultative Committee) to identify potential strategies
- further development of individual strategies
- development of a project plan for each strategy.
The project plan for each strategy identified the aim of the strategy, the process for implementing it (eg who would be involved, staffing requirements, other resources required) and the evaluation methods to be employed.
The criteria identified as important in selecting strategies were as outlined below. All strategies selected were to:
- address at least one project aim
- maximise community participation and ownership
- enhance community and stakeholder input and foster a multi-agency approach
- involve more than one target group, including people who avoided the public
- achieve a balance between the competing priorities of target groups by ensuring that issues addressed were a priority of the groups involved in implementation
- target times of day/night when space users were most anxious/fearful
- be capable of being evaluated
- be replicable
- be flexible and able to be modified for different groups/sites
- have at least an identifiable component that can be implemented within the project time frame.
Not all of the strategies selected at this planning stage were implemented during the Common Ground project. Some strategies required a longer development time and further resourcing than was available within this project to be implemented effectively. Other strategies were not fully developed, even though the initial implementation steps were undertaken, due to a lack of public interest in the proposal.
1.5.4 Evaluation of the project
Independent evaluators (Community Focus) were appointed to the project during its early stages and were involved in all phases of the project. The role of the evaluation consultants is outlined below.
- Advise on the optimum strategies to meet the needs of the identified target groups of the project and the wider community of users of public spaces.
- Significantly assist in achieving the aims of the project through the selection and application of the most appropriate consultation, implementation and monitoring techniques and methodologies.
- Provide expertise on developing appropriate performance indicators, methodology and evaluation tools.
- Undertake formative and summative evaluation for / of the project over its duration.
- Evaluate consultation methodologies to determine their effectiveness in encouraging the participation of community members and target groups to identify, monitor and evaluating strategies to reduce the fear of crime and violence.
- Analyse, explain and establish the degree of effectiveness of strategies or combinations of strategies trialled in the project in achieving the project aims.
- Identify effective practices and directions for policy that can be employed by all levels of government, police, private and non-government service providers for the purposes of implementing the strategies trialed in the project.
- Produce regular progress reports for the Steering Committee about problems encountered within the project and the results of data collection and analysis.
In addition, the consultants contributed to the final report of the project. The evaluation consultants attended the regular Steering Committee meetings throughout the project as well as meeting individually with project staff and other key stakeholders. They worked closely with project staff members and members of the Steering Committee to provide a substantial level of input throughout the 18 months.
A range of methods was used to conduct the evaluation, including:
- observation of project processes (eg Steering Committee meetings, special working groups, consultations, strategy implementation sessions)
- stakeholder interviews with members of the Steering Committee, target group and other key organisation representatives
- analysis of written feedback from participants involved in strategies
- follow-up interviews with participants of programmes/strategies.
The evaluation consultants developed a framework for ensuring that all key outcomes would be addressed. This is outlined below.
| Outcome to be evaluated | Methods |
| Reduction in the fear of crime associated with selected malls and public spaces in southern Tasmania. |
|
| A clearer understanding of the Stage 1 field work findings with respect to specific localities in Tasmania. |
|
| Engagement of a wide cross section of community members in the identification of issues, setting of priorities and development and implementation of strategies. |
|
| Engagement of community members in a community development approach/bringing together disparate groups within the community. |
|
| Fostering a more collaborative partnership approach to resolve issues relating to fear of crime. |
|
| Fostering a greater ownership amongst those participating in the target community leading to wider acceptance of the outcomes and process |
|
Pre-intervention and post-intervention surveys of the broader population were planned to ascertain whether the project would have an impact on perceptions of the public spaces and the fear of crime of users of the spaces. However, given the scope of the project, the time frame and the limited resourcing available, a decision was made to evaluate the impact of each individual strategy rather than conduct a second post-intervention survey. The original survey data fulfilled a vital role in furthering the understanding of the types of concerns individuals had in relation to the selected sites, as well as providing information about their methods of dealing with fear and suggested strategies for improving the sense of safety within the sites.
The evaluation consultants worked with project staff to develop specific evaluation methods for each strategy developed within the project. These are outlined below.
Safety Awareness for Older People
- Participants completed feedback sheets at the time of the programme
- The evaluators followed up participants two months after completion of the programme to ascertain the value and impact of the programme
Disability Awareness Training
- Evaluator observation of some parts of the programme
- Participant feedback sheets
- Follow-up of a sample of participants
Photospace Strategy
- Meeting with the Youth Consultative Group to discuss their involvement in and the value of the project
- Feedback provided by participants of the Photospace Discussion Groups
- Individual interviews with members of the discussion groups
Rights and Responsibilities Card
- Feedback from the Youth Consultative Group about experiences developing the card
- Preliminary feedback from organisations using the card
Activities day in Elizabeth Street Mall
- Interviews with key stakeholders about the value of the activities day and the processes involved in developing the strategy
- Feedback from young people involved in the day
The media strategy
- Survey data - impact and value of the community service announcements in relation to fear of crime
- Focus group data from schools and colleges
- Stakeholder interviews
Evaluation input was provided at key stages of the project, including during its early phases. Evaluation input was used to:
- determine project roles (facilitated discussions between key stakeholders about roles and functions within the Common Ground project)
- develop and implement the surveys (sampling techniques, question design, data collation methods, coding etc)
- conduct focus groups (design of questions, collation of data, analysis of key themes)
- analyse data (assisted with the analysis of key themes, presentation of data); and
- develop strategies (facilitated a strategy planning session with key stakeholders, provided input into the analysis of likely strategies).
Notes
- Fear of Crime, NCAVAC, Fieldwork Report, p.25
- Fear of Crime, NCAVAC Fieldwork Report, p.72
- Fear of Crime, NCAVAC Fieldwork Report, p.75
- See Appendix Part B Appendix (i) for a list of Steering Committee members.
- See appendix (ii) Part B and appendix (ii) Part C for further details regarding the questions asked in the general and the youth specific surveys.
PART B: THE MALLS AND PUBLIC SPACES COMPONENT
2.1 Auspicing body
The Malls and Public Spaces component was auspiced by the Tasmanian Crime Prevention and Community Safety Council.
2.2 Advisory groups involved in the project
The Malls and Public Spaces component had two specific advisory groups:
- the Hobart Community Police Liaison Group, and
- the Glenorchy Safer Communities Committee.
Their role was to:
- share information and experiences about the project sites as they related to issues of public safety and shared use
- advise on individuals and organisations to be consulted, and
- suggest and support strategies to address people's fears of crime and incivility in public spaces and encourage use of them.
In an advisory capacity, members of the main target groups were also involved in the project. These included:
- older people
- women
- gay and lesbian people
- people with disabilities
- people from migrant/ethnic backgrounds
The target groups were asked about their experiences using public spaces and consulted about how their fears might be addressed. The consultations formed the basis for developing, implementing and evaluating community-based strategies to address fear of crime.
2.3 Project aims
The aims of the Malls and Public Spaces component were as follows:
- to establish the level of fear held by the target groups concerning malls (transit and shopping) and public spaces, and whether high levels of fear were generally restricted to a particular group or groups
- to identify:
- what it was that people were fearful of (eg personal violence, harassment) and who people were fearful of (eg young people, 'different' people etc.) in the malls and public spaces
- any factors influencing people's fear of crime in malls and public spaces (eg direct/indirect experience of victimisation, media coverage of crime in these public spaces, the existence of popular myths that may circulate among members of the community about these places)
- any avoidance or adaptive strategies used by people to deal with their fear of crime associated with the malls and public spaces - to identify and implement strategies to:
- resolve any conflicts between young people's use of the malls and public spaces and other interests
- reduce people's fear of young people in the malls and public spaces and to promote a more positive image of young people
- meet the needs of young people using the malls and public spaces and promote positive experiences of joint use of public space by young people and the wider community
- reduce people's fear of crime associated with the malls and public spaces; and encourage people to access the malls and public spaces - to evaluate the effectiveness of a range of strategies to reduce people's fear of crime associated with the malls and public spaces.
2.4 Methods used for collecting information
As well as consultation with the main target groups, focus groups gathered information on levels of fear in the project sites from a broad range of people in the community Interviews were also conducted.
Focus groups and survey questions covered:
- demographic data
- feelings of safety or vulnerability in public spaces
- experiences of sites and likes and dislikes about them
- what or who people were fearful of in public spaces and why
- factors influencing perceptions of safety in the sites;
- suggestions to make people feel more secure at the sites.
2.4.1 Survey
A questionnaire was designed by the project officer, with assistance from the evaluation consultants, and a representative group of members from the Steering Committee. Information and findings from consultations with the main target groups informed many of the questions relating to fear of crime in pubic spaces. 6 For the Malls and Public Spaces component, the survey document was pre-tested and refined before it was administered face-to-face in the various project sites.
2.4.2 Focus groups
Focus group questions were designed to correspond to the survey questions so that information gathered from both would be compatible and inform a comprehensive pool of data for analysis.
2.4.3 Interviews
Interviews were held in various locations and were conducted one-to-one or in small groups. People taking part in the interviews were in a position to advise on concerns of fear of crime. The discussions covered:
- safety concerns and their impact on people's use of the sites
- possible strategies to reduce people's fear of crime
- problems between groups using public spaces, and
- the role of the interviewee's group or organisation in the project.
2.5 Results of the survey
2.5.1 Frequency and main uses of public spaces
In the Malls and Public Spaces survey, a majority of women and of men surveyed visited at least one of the sites once a week or more for shopping or doing business, transiting elsewhere or meeting other people.
The people surveyed were frequent users of the sites and therefore could be considered to be reasonably representative of the total population of site users and to be suitably qualified to provide information about their concerns.
2.5.2 Main fears identified
The main fears in public spaces were identified and ranked as set out in Table 1 below.
Table 1: Malls and public spaces key concerns/fears by day and by night in rank order
|
| ||
| Key concerns | ||
| Rank | Day | Night |
|
| ||
| 1 | Assault | Assault |
| 2 | Rowdiness | Robbery |
| 3 | Robbery | Verbal abuse |
| 4 | Hassled for money | Hassled for money |
| 5 | No responses | Rowdiness |
|
| ||
Assault
Assault included all forms of physical assault, from being spat on to physical and sexual assault. Public toilets were mentioned as places to avoid. That they were used for 'shooting up' and for bashings were given as reasons why people, women more so than men, avoided using them. Occasionally during the day, unprovoked physical assault was also a fear for young people in the context of school rivalries (government and private schools).
Gender difference
Men indicated feeling vulnerable to physical assault at night, especially if they are gay. Women, including lesbians, said they felt vulnerable around groups of men, particularly if the men had been drinking. This is consistent with research findings in Stage 1of the National Fear of Crime Project. 8
Female respondents' fear of physical assault by day, more so than at night, reflects the fact that most said they did not go out much at night, avoided public spaces at night and were more cautious at night.
Robbery
Robbery included bag snatching, theft from the person and mugging.
For older respondents who feared being assaulted, it was usually in the context of being robbed - having their bag snatched or being mugged. Their fear of robbery with assault was often associated with an image of young people wanting 'money for drugs' and using public spaces opportunistically for this purpose.
Gender difference
Overall, robbery attracted a higher female response.
Rowdy and uncivil behaviour
While many respondents did not object to behaviour which showed 'high spirits' as long as it was not prolonged, many people across all age groups, including parents of young children and people with disabilities, said that rowdy behaviour often made the sites feel unpleasant for them. Behaviours contributing to this included being loud, swearing, spitting, littering, standing on seats or sitting on the back of seats, shoving or moving around without looking to see if this affected other people, and moving in groups, making it difficult for other people to pass. Parents with young children reported occasionally having to contend with things being thrown at their children and hearing language they did not like or did not want their children to hear.
During the day, there was a perception at all the project sites that there was a risk of accidental physical harm from rowdy behaviour, such as being shoved by young people 'messing around' or being inadvertently hit or knocked down by skateboarders. This anxiety was strongest in older people and people with some physical weakness or disability that was not necessarily obvious to others. The finding that there was a heightened sense of physical vulnerability connected to gender and age is consistent with research findings in Stage 1 of the National Fear of Crime Project. 9
Anxiety about rowdy behaviour and young people in groups was most often associated with the mid to late afternoon period when students left school and there were larger numbers of them meeting friends at the bus malls or Elizabeth Mall.
Gender difference
Women were more likely to be concerned about rowdy behaviour than men. At night, young women were more concerned about rowdy behaviour than were young men.
The above findings support those of Stage 1 of the National Fear of Crime Project, which found that:
Frequent experiences of incivilities and harassment can also influence perceptions of risk and levels of fear. These experiences constitute a rational and realistic source of fear that is not accounted for in official statistics. 10
Verbal abuse
Verbal abuse included being sworn at or being subjected to homophobic or racist abuse. Adults were more concerned about it at night, particularly gay men and lesbians who felt it might lead to a physical assault.
Gender difference
Anxiety about verbal abuse, day or night, was of equal concern to both genders.
Hassling for money and cigarettes
Overall, being intimidated or hassled to give money or cigarettes was not a significant concern across any age group. For female respondents in the Malls and Public Spaces component survey, it was more of a concern at night than during the day. Being hassled for money and verbally abused were linked by many respondents, who felt they may be verbally abused if they refused a request or demand for money or cigarettes. At night, this fear often escalated into fear of physical assault.
Gender difference
Across all age groups at night, being hassled for money or cigarettes was more a cause of anxiety for females than males.
2.5.3 Infrastructure factors
Day
In the Malls and Pblic Spaces component survey, respondents were asked if they felt they were at risk of any of their fears happening to them at the sites and, if so, did they worry about it. During the day, except for St. David's Park, respondents said the risk of something happening to them was higher than their level of worry about it, especially respondents in Elizabeth Mall and Glenorchy Bus Mall. In St. David's Park, people worried a little more about the risk of something happening to them.
Respondents perceived the following infrastructure problems as adding to their sense of risk during the day:
- inconsistent police presence at the sites
- lack of safety features, and
- inadequate seating and waiting area at Hobart Bus Mall.
Respondents of all ages said that the lack, or inconsistency, of a police presence at all of the sites exacerbated their feelings of vulnerability.
While not all respondents agreed, a majority said they felt less safe at sites where there was no video surveillance or other safety features, as there are in Elizabeth Mall, which has video surveillance and a call button at the police booth.
During the day, the lack of adequate seating at the Hobart Bus Mall, and to a lesser extent at the Glenorchy Bus Mall, caused crowding in the late afternoon. Younger and older respondents said that even though security guards were present at the bus malls from mid to late afternoon and this had helped considerably to lessen feelings of vulnerability and to curb threatening behaviour, crowding created conditions conducive to robbery, intimidation and, on occasion, assault.
Night
Respondents mostly had a low to moderate concern for their safety during the day, but at night this was not the case. A significant number of respondents surveyed by the Malls and Public Spaces component who reported concerns, said the sites were unsafe at night.
Elizabeth Mall, Franklin Square and to a lesser extent Hobart Bus Mall were sites where survey respondents worried more for their safety. At Glenorchy Bus Mall and St. David's Park, respondents worried far less about their safety. However, the main reason for this was that respondents said they did not go to these two sites at night. Therefore, they said, they had no concrete reason to worry.
Across all age groups, respondent's said the following infrastructure deficiencies added to their sense of risk at night:
- too little police visibility and no bus mall security personnel in the evening
- lack of safety features and inadequate lighting
- no quickly accessible police point (station) for help in the inner Hobart CBD, and
- little natural surveillance.
Respondents of all ages said that all the sites were inadequately lit - that is, the level and type of lighting did not decrease their sense of vulnerability. In addition, a sense of isolation developed in the evening as businesses closed, with few or no activities happening and few people around.
Comments about there being little natural surveillance at night were linked to a perceived lack of activities to bring more people, and a diversity of people, regularly to the inner city areas of Hobart and Glenorchy. On Friday night, the Hobart City centre attracted young male drivers doing 'blockies'. This deterred others from using the inner city area. 11
2.5.4 People perceived as possibly threatening
In survey responses there was a perception across age groups that only a few people were responsible for crime and threats to people's safety. Those responsible were generally perceived as 'undesirable', young, adult males, especially in groups. This is consistent with research findings in Stage 1 of the National Fear of Crime Project 12 that 'undesirables' and drunken men made people of all ages, especially young women and many young men, gays and lesbians, feel fearful or anxious. Despite saying that groups of young people had not threatened them, younger and older respondents were often anxious around young people congregating in groups.
2.5.5 Direct and indirect experience of incidents causing harm or concern
Observing other people's behaviour
In the Malls and Public Spaces survey, directly observing behaviour and incidents that disturbed them had a significant impact on respondents' perceptions of public spaces being unsafe.
Indirect experience, hearing of other people's experiences and media reporting
Being told of other people's adverse or frightening experiences had a moderate influence on people's perceptions of the sites being unsafe, but this was considerably less of an influence than the experience of directly observing an incident.
Media reporting had little impact on people's perceptions of safety in public spaces. This is best understood by the explanation reported by many respondents, even as they read media reports of violent or frightening incidents or of an 'increase' in crime, that the impact on them was lessened by their belief that the media, print media especially, sensationalise incidents. This finding supports those of Stage 1 of the National Fear of Crime Project. 13 Most respondents compared media reports to their own experience of the public spaces, which mostly did not include them being harmed. Thus the impact of media on their perceptions was lessened.
However, even though the media had a credibility problem, respondents did say that the accumulation of negative media reports influenced their perceptions of specific places over time. This finding also supports those of Stage 1 of the National Fear of Crime Project. 14
Many respondents said that they felt the media stereotyped young people as the perpetrators of crime or as a threat to safety in public spaces. This had negative consequences for how people thought about young people in public spaces and about the spaces themselves. Older and younger people said that adults perpetrated crime and exhibited anti-social behaviour but this was not balanced in media reporting concerning young people.
2.6 Results of focus groups and interviews
2.6.1 Young people
Stereotypes and myths about young people and crime
Young people felt that the community in general ignored the fact that much serious crime was perpetrated by adults and that young people, not adults, were most often the victims of assault. According to police, young people often did not report crimes and violence perpetrated against them, especially by other youths.
Generational differences
Young people felt strongly that what they believed was normal behaviour for them was frowned upon by adults, and that older people exhibited disrespectful behaviour towards them. An example given concerned the lack of respect shown by security guards when speaking to young people at bus malls. When these issues were raised with older people, they agreed that generational differences in the understanding of acceptable behaviour for people in public spaces caused bad feelings between younger and older people.
Conditionality of the right of young people to use public spaces
Across focus groups, there was some difference and conflict in the function and meaning ascribed to public space (eg as commercial or recreational, communal, personal or even 'home' for some). In the project, it became clear that public space had multiple identifications and functions for different people. However, the right of young people to use the spaces, especially as recreational places, was often discussed by a minority of adults and retailers in terms of conditionalities. In particular, the conditions they spoke about concerned young people not 'congregating' in groups or not 'loitering'; that is, being in public spaces without the intention of buying goods or transiting to other places. These conditions were not made for any other members of the community and were seen by young people, and a number of adult respondents, as discriminatory.
2.6.2 Older people
Victims of opportunistic crimes and fear of crime at night
Older people considered themselves to be at risk of 'shove and grab' crimes, such as bag snatching. They believed that these kinds of crimes could result in injury, cause significant and ongoing stress and a loss of confidence in using public spaces. Older women without their own transport feared assault at night in public spaces or at bus stops, so tended not to go out. This restricted their access to recreational and entertainment activities and deprived bus services of potential passengers. Consequently, bus malls were frequented less, resulting in decreased natural surveillance, fewer people about and little activity that would promote feelings of security.
Concern for the well-being of young people
Generally, older people felt there was only a small number of young males who were 'thugs', 'in gangs' and 'troublemakers' and that youth generally got a 'bad name' because of those few who abused others. They expressed concern for the well-being of young people and a strong sentiment that the world had become a hard place for young people, especially with drugs and unemployment. Older people were also concerned for young people whom they felt were intimidated and even bashed by a small number of 'rough' young people. The aggressors were often characterised as unemployed youth, usually males, but occasionally females.
Anxiety about skateboards, being asked for money and 'rowdy' behaviour
Older people were worried about new regulations to be introduced in Tasmania regarding skateboarding on footpaths. For a minority, this translated into a more generalised negative feeling towards young people as a group, who were seen as getting 'whatever they wanted' despite the needs of other community members.
At shopping and bus malls and in the street, it was considered not uncommon for young people to ask for money. This unnerved older people as they were concerned about the young person's reaction if they said 'No'. At bus malls, older people were concerned about rowdy behaviour because they thought they might be accidentally harmed from being shoved or by tripping over bags on walkways. They also disliked hearing 'bad' language.
2.6.3 Women
Bag snatching, verbal abuse, assault, physical injury due to rowdy behaviour
Older women's daytime fears related to robbery (bag snatching), verbal abuse or accidental physical injury due to rowdy behaviour, of young males in particular. Younger women were anxious about verbal abuse, including sexist remarks and being hassled for money at bus malls. In order to deal with such possible threats they tended to stay in a group.
At night, for women of all ages, fears were of a more serious nature, such as sexual harassment or assault. Middle-aged and older women who had been verbally abused in public places, for example by men drinking on the footpath, had become wary of other people. They avoided eye contact, especially with men, and did not make casual conversation at bus stops.
Women who were consulted during this project were very wary of groups of men and, if possible, avoided waiting at bus malls or public spaces at night. Few women reported verbal or physical harassment or sexual assault in public spaces. One reason cited for this was that victims tended to think that others would blame them.
2.6.4 People from migrant, refugee, ethnic and Indigenous backgrounds
Anxiety about verbal abuse, rowdy behaviour, skateboards, groups, and being hassled for money
People from migrant, refugee, ethnic and Indigenous backgrounds who were consulted within this project said that they were wary of people in groups, especially young males in groups. They noted that they were afraid of being harassed for money, verbally abused or physically hurt, usually but not always unintentionally. Migrant and refugee people consulted during the project often felt that young people should be more 'disciplined'.
Lack of English language skills and confidence in language use, racism and sexism
Migrant and refugee women with poor English skills or little confidence in using their English skills felt less safe in public spaces than those with better English language skills. In terms of gender difference, people of migrant background reported little difference in the likelihood of being verbally abused or a victim of crime, but women recounted more incidents of physical harassment than did men. African or Asian people reported that they were often the recipients of racist and sexist remarks on buses and in public spaces. One Filipino long-term migrant said she had been the victim of racist remarks made to her, surprisingly, she said, from 'well dressed adults'. Asian and African women reported that they were occasionally physically harassed or assaulted. The main safety strategy adopted by this group was to travel in small groups.
2.6.5 People with disabilities
Victims of opportunistic crimes, rowdy behaviour, verbal abuse
People with disabilities consulted as part of this project noted that they were often targets for theft. Perpetrators checked to see how much money they had by asking for money for cigarettes and then snatched their purse or wallet.
Rowdy behaviour that could cause accidental injury was cited as a serious source of anxiety for people with disabilities. In particular, they feared being knocked down by skateboards and being further disabled. The also reported being intimidated by verbal abuse, and they feared this occurring in public spaces. As a result, people with disabilities would forgo rights such as claiming designated seats in buses because they feared how others would react.
This group commented that public toilets designated for people with disabilities, known to be used for 'shooting-up', were becoming increasingly unsafe.
People with intellectual disabilities noted that they found teenagers (12-18 years) and people over 60 years of age tended to feel the most uncomfortable around them. Young teenagers sometimes made fun of them, especially on buses, and older people could be critical of them being out in public. By contrast, those consulted found that bus drivers were almost always helpful.
The 1996 Port Arthur shooting in southern Tasmania had a considerable impact on the way people with intellectual disabilities were treated in Tasmania following the tragedy. People with intellectual disabilities and their support workers had become the targets of abusive language as people within the broader community have made connections between intellectual disability and potential threats of violence.
2.6.6 Lesbians and gay people
Hate abuse and assault
A serious issue identified by lesbian and gay people was verbal hate abuse. They reported that in the central city area on Friday and Saturday nights it was common for gay men attending a gay disco to suffer verbal abuse and, on occasion, physical intimidation or physical/sexual assault. Such assaults would also occur in public parks surrounding the CBD. This group reported avoiding Hobart bus malls because they feared being assaulted at such locations. The perpetrators were mostly men, usually in groups, and generally aged between 16 and 25 years.
Lesbians and gays reported the impact of hate abuse and oppressive behaviour as leading to feelings of alienation, suicide and lack of trust in others in public spaces. Gay activists noted that middle class, better educated gay men who had a politicised understanding of sexuality and more resources were generally more confident in dealing with attackers and in reporting incidents to authorities, than were working class men.
Lesbians felt strongly that they had more cause to be concerned about their well-being in public spaces than women in general. They recounted experiences of verbal abuse and physical assault and pointed out that, in public spaces, while heterosexual women would show they were disapproving of lesbians, men were more abusive. Lesbians and gays found that perpetrators operated on stereotypes of them as lacking power and not being a threat to them.
Amongst the many reasons gays rarely reported hate assaults was that they were unsure about what legally constituted an incident, particularly if it wasn't a violent attack. Lesbians and gays indicated that they couldn't assume that police or security guards would stand up for them if they had problems in public spaces.
In all the focus groups, lesbians and gays said that they always assessed the possible risks and continuously watched for possible adversity if using these public spaces. Risk minimisation was always necessary, which included not showing affection in public, monitoring who was around and avoiding parks at night.
In public spaces, avoidance and survival strategies were practised at a great personal cost. Lesbians and gays suggested that they survived by pretending the name calling didn't hurt or affect them. However, such behaviour denied them the ability to live their lives as openly and freely as heterosexuals, and tended to reinforce self-blaming responses.
2.6.7 Summary of results of focus groups
There was a marked gender difference in feelings of security in public spaces. More men than women expressed a sense of security because they said they could take care of themselves, particularly during the day.
At night, many people said they felt (or would feel) nervous at the project sites and generally avoided them. This was due mostly to the persistence of a word of mouth 'bad image' of the sites. Media reports of incidents that occurred in the inner city area also gave them feel a general sense of vulnerability in public spaces at night. The minority who did not avoid the sites at night were mostly young adult males and some women who used them regularly. Elizabeth Mall and the bus malls were avoided by adults and some young people in the mid to late afternoon period when these spaces were quite crowded with young people.
Overall findings are listed below.
- The most common response to adverse experiences or fears of public spaces was to avoid them. People felt that they could not do anything to moderate the behaviour of others which caused them concern.
- There was a common perception that it was only a few people who caused serious trouble at any of the sites, characterised as young adult males.
- According to women's services, few women reported verbal abuse, harassment and sexual assault in Hobart's public spaces.
- People of migrant/ethnic background, especially people from Asia and Africa had occasionally experienced racist verbal abuse, physical intimidation and harassment, women more so than men.
- Indigenous respondents felt they were harassed by people and authorities who did not want them in public parks. Some felt there was more open racism displayed in suburban streets than at the project sites. They believed that tensions would decrease if police had more cultural awareness training and practised better communication skills.
- Lesbians felt they might not get the same protection a heterosexual woman would if threatened in a public space and could not assume that authorities such as police or security guards would support them if they encountered problems in public spaces.
- Rowdy behaviour such as pushing and shoving, use of bad language, spitting and noisy people in groups made others feel anxious. Many people strongly disliked being 'asked' ('hassled') for money or cigarettes and felt insecure about saying no.
- There was a perception that there was no accessible police point for help in the Hobart CBD at night. This led to the common feeling that the city should be avoided at night, even if a person believed the risk of harm was low.
At all project sites, perceptions that lighting was inadequate made a significant contribution to feelings of vulnerability.
There was a consensus that media reporting and television programmes influenced perceptions of crime and heightened feelings of vulnerability in public spaces.
Factors identified by adults and young people as contributing to young people's difficulties included:
- unemployment
- lack of income and recreational facilities
- lack of purpose and appropriate emotional/social outlets
- lack of literacy/numeracy skills
- peer pressure
- drugs and a lack of services to manage substance addiction
- family breakdown
- violent television shows and movies and some music influences.
2.7 Strategies suggested by respondents
In surveys, focus groups and interviews, respondents were asked for suggestions to address their fears and concerns at the sites. Survey responses tended to focus on police presence and infrastructure issues. However, in consultations and focus groups the discussion was much broader. The responses are summarised below.
2.7.1 Risk minimisation strategies
Respondents suggested a number of risk minimisation, conflict avoidance and survival strategies. Examples of these were:
- invisibility and vigilance
- using humour with others, while noting who is in the vicinity and how close they are
- not walking around alone at night
- staying away from the malls and public parks at night
- not moving around or arriving at or leaving places alone
- using cabs.
2.7.2 Law and order and safety infrastructure
Police
- Increase police visibility, with foot patrols by day and night.
- Have plain clothes police at bus malls from the afternoon until late in the evening.
- Ensure that the Elizabeth St Mall police booth is manned at night.
- Have a manned police point in the city centre closer to the Hobart Bus Mall.
- Encourage reporting by lesbians and gays of hate motivated abuse and assault.
- Develop police communication skills and knowledge of the community.
Security
- Extend the time security personnel patrol the bus malls should be extended into the evening.
- Train security staff in conflict resolution and communication.
Safety features, city councils, Metro and police
- Make available, at all times and at all sites, emergency assistance features, such as surveillance cameras, push-button distress signals or telephones connected to police stations.
- Install adequate lighting at the sites and their amenities (eg toilets).
- Clearly mark borders between footpaths and roads in parks and at bus malls.
- Develop a system to enable private motor vehicle access to Glenorchy Bus Mall at night (eg as at the Eastlands bus mall) to increase natural surveillance.
- Redevelop Hobart Bus Mall with adequate shelter and seating to lessen crowding.
- Encourage Tasmania Police, Glenorchy City Council and community groups representing frequent users of buses to discuss a possible joint services information kiosk and safety point at the Glenorchy Bus Mall.
- Encourage local councils to develop codes of behaviour/management protocols for public spaces in a consultative process that includes young people.
Bus service - Metro
- Make known to the public the rights of bus drivers to discipline passengers (eg for verbal abuse).
- Train drivers to assert passengers' rights to be free of harassment (eg racism).
- Schedule more frequent bus services, late night hourly buses and night 'Doorstoppers', such as a service from Glenorchy to Hobart and return on at least two nights per week.
- Employ more inspectors in the bus system.
2.7.3 Community-oriented processes
- Encourage more interactions to bridge the 'generation gap', to build mutual respect and promote a more positive image of young people.
- Encourage police to develop a better understanding of the needs of people from the project target groups in relation to public spaces.
- Develop programmes for older people to feel more confident in public spaces.
- Build infrastructure in St David's Park, rated as the most under-utilised site, to attract a greater range of people over the day and into the evening.
Meeting the needs of young people
- Build better relations between young people, police and private security personnel.
- Build more entertainment and recreational facilities at the sites and under-age venues.
- Create employment opportunities and services.
- Employ more youth workers and services to deal with drugs and alcohol.
- Encourage Metro, city councils and the business sector to consult with young people when planning public open spaces.
Media
- Local government, police and non-government agencies to use the media to promote positive attitudes about people using public spaces.
Respondents' uncertainty about options to address fear of crime in public spaces
Many respondents could not suggest strategies to address their concerns or fears. There is a need for further discussion to develop strategies and to address the issues identified by the community. More information is required and work needed to empower all people to be able to contribute to their own safety in public spaces.
2.7.4 Conclusion
Differences of significance
In the Malls and Public Spaces component survey, females were more likely to have fears about assault, robbery and rowdy behaviour than males.
The fears and anxieties identified in the focus groups were similar to those cited by survey respondents. In addition, young people's concerns about intolerance and disrespectful behaviour shown towards them and for some, a generalised feeling that they were not welcome in public spaces, was made clear in the discussions. Amongst adults, older people, gay and lesbian people, people from migrant, ethnic and Indigenous backgrounds and people with disabilities, there was a more marked concern about verbal abuse and anti-social behaviour. Young people and people from the project target groups felt that their right to be in public spaces, to be safe in them and not be discriminated against needed to be more strongly asserted in society.
In terms of addressing fear of serious crime, such as assault and robbery, respondents' main suggestions were for increased and more diverse security infrastructure to be put in place by police, councils and Metro bus services.
Strategy planning and implementation should take into account those who felt the most vulnerable - that is, which was females across age groups, older people from all backgrounds, women especially, and people from target groups, particularly gay and lesbian people and people with a disability.
Notes
- See Appendix Part B Appendix (ii) for a copy of the survey for the Malls and Public Spaces component
- See Appendix Part B: Table 2b, for a breakdown of organisations and sectors from which interviewees were recruited.
- Summary Volume, Fear of Crime, NCAVAC, Attorney-General's Department, Canberra, page 8, 1998.
- Summary Volume, Fear of Crime, NCAVAC, Attorney-General's Department, Canberra, page 8, 1998.
- Summary Volume, Fear of Crime, NCAVAC, Attorney-General's Department, Canberra, page 8, 1998.
- 'Blockies' involve groups of young people in cars driving continuously round and round the inner city blocks.
- Summary Volume, Fear of Crime, NCAVAC, Attorney-General's Department, Canberra, page 8, 1998.
- Summary Volume, Fear of Crime, NCAVAC, Attorney-General's Department, Canberra, page 10, 1998.
- Summary Volume, Fear of Crime, NCAVAC, Attorney-General's Department, Canberra, page 10, 1998.
3 Strategies arising from surveys, interviews and focus groups
3.1 Development of strategies
In response to the findings of the consultation phase, possible strategies were presented to the Steering Committee in September 1999 . 15
Strategy suggestions for key stakeholders (police, Hobart and Glenorchy Councils and Tasmania Metro) that were beyond the project's scope are included in the report's recommendations.
The Committee developed a list of issues arising from the survey, interviews and focus groups. A number of selection criteria were also developed to guide the selection of strategies. These have been outlined in section 1.5.3 of the report.
3.2 Implementation and outcomes of strategies
Three possible strategies were discussed and outlined for development and implementation for the Malls and Public Spaces component. These strategies addressed the issues raised through the survey, consultations and focus groups. The three strategies were:
- a media campaign
- disability awareness training for police recruits and serving officers.
- safety awareness training for older people and people with disabilities.
3.2.1 Media campaign
The principal message to be conveyed to the community through the media campaign was that, Public spaces are for everyone.
This strategy used television, radio, cinema and print advertisements (ads) to raise awareness in the community that, through our behaviour, we can all contribute to the perception that public spaces are enjoyable and safe spaces for everyone to use.
A key finding of the consultations was a strong feeling that too few people practised respectful behaviour in public spaces and this could make them feel unsafe. The other impact of such behaviour was the perception that public spaces were unpleasant places which were to be avoided.
Respondents felt that respectful behaviour was built upon an understanding of public spaces as shared spaces and an acknowledgment that everyone has a right to be in them and a responsibility to contribute to making them feel safe and enjoyable. Respondents thought that respectful behaviour in public spaces required sensitivity to the diversity of people in the community and how different behaviours would affect them.
The strategy addressed the following issues: respectful behaviour; non-judgmental attitudes; everyone's right to use and be safe in public spaces; and individual responsibility in public spaces. These issues had been raised by all target groups, the general community and young people.
The strategy recognised that younger and older females and minority groups especially, tended to be more fearful for their safety than were others. It also acknowledged that most people who responded to the surveys and participated in the focus groups identified a higher fear of crime in the project sites at night. It sought to target and negate stereotyping of young people which had been identified by a significant number of people in the consultations as being both unjust and a cause of unnecessary fear in public spaces.
Aims of the Media Campaign Strategy
- To encourage community members to be aware of their behaviour in public spaces.
- To provide direction to the community on behaviours and attitudes which would create a perception that public spaces are safe and enjoyable environments for all community members to use.
Target group
For this strategy the target group was identified as the general community. The diversity of representation in the TV community service announcements and radio and print media ads was intended to ensure that they appealed to the various sectors of the general community.
Southern Cross Television (SCTV) produced five TV ads, HOFM produced three radio ads and TTT-FM radio station, Village Cinemas and the Mercury and Advocate newspapers sponsored the campaign. All ran ads for free or at a minimal cost as a community service.
Process
Scripts for TV and radio ads were developed by the project officer with the input of members of the Youth Consultative Committee, the Steering Committee, the evaluators, people from the project target groups and Southern Cross Television station (SCTV).
ABC television broadcast all the TV ads. City Heart Business Association Ltd contributed financially to the campaign.
Cinema
One TV ad was transferred from video tape to 35mm film by Cinevex Film Laboratories, Melbourne and run by Village Cinemas. The advertisement called The Bus was run for a month in Village Cinemas in Hobart and Launceston.
Radio
HOFM, Hobart, produced three 15-second ads, which were broadcast in 48 slots in prime time over a two-week period. TTT-FM, Hobart, had three sessions on talkback radio with young people from the Youth Consultative Committee discussing what public spaces meant to them, safety, behaviour and ways to share public spaces.
The Mercury and Advocate newspapers each produced and ran an advertisement. The Advocate contributed half the cost of printing its ad a poster that was placed on the bulkhead of some Metro buses in Hobart and Launceston.
Media, TV advertisements, themes and scenarios
Five separate 30-second ads were produced by SCTV. These were broadcast state-wide on SCTV for three months and on the ABC for one month.
Ad descriptions
Channel 31 in Melbourne, a community TV channel, broadcast the ad called Assault.
The TV ads were market tested with community members from a range of backgrounds and ages, and with the Steering Committee, the Tasmanian Minister for Police and Public Safety and the Tasmanian Commissioner of Police as Chair of the Crime Prevention and Community Safety Council (CP&CSC). The ads were endorsed by the CP&CSC.
Television
The themes of the TV ads were:
- respectful behaviour
- non-judgmental attitudes
- everyone's right to use and be safe in public spaces, and
- individual responsibility in public spaces.
The community service announcements started with the same music, scenes and voice-over: Public spaces are for all of us - what you do makes a difference, and finished with the voice-over: Whatever your age, gender, appearance, race or sexuality, public spaces are for all of us - what you do makes the difference'.
The following is a brief description of each advertisement. This has been included so that the evaluative feedback in relation to specific announcements can be understood.
Bus: Older woman on a bus doing a crossword, we hear her think, Words for young people? As some young people get on, two older people look at them and we hear them think druggie', criminals, we hear the older woman doing the crossword think, Me, thirty years ago. On the screen are the words 'We judge too much by appearances'.
Objective: to promote understanding and non-judgmental attitudes towards others in public spaces, especially people different from us.
Vox Pops: Excerpts from interviews with women and men of different ages.
Objective: to encourage people to reflect on their attitudes and behaviours which impact on people's sense of safety, enjoyment or inclusion in public spaces.
Assault: Young adult man says, I was walking home when three guys came up to me. A mate said I should've got a taxi or crossed the road, but why should I? They had the problem. They laid into me yelling 'Faggot!'. I'm not a faggot. I'm gay. Public spaces should be safe for everyone, it doesn't matter who you are. And they can be if we look out for each other and show some respect.
Objectives: to project the principle that everyone has a right to be in, and be safe in, public spaces, and that public safety is everyone's responsibility.
This ad was not shown during early viewing time as it was not considered suitable for young audiences. Therefore, young people taking part in the feedback interviews were not asked to rate this ad.
Steps: Older woman with a walking stick wants to go up some steps. Two young women are sitting on them near the hand rail. When they see her they smile and move over, she smiles and acknowledges their gesture.
Objective: to present a situation between younger and older people that is handled by both parties in a friendly way, to project an image of public spaces as being inclusive and to promote good feelings between people of different ages.
Respect: Three young people are sitting in Elizabeth Mall. Two older people walk by. A voice-over says, I feel respected in public places when..., followed by each person's thought: you speak to me in a friendly way, you make space for me to sit down, you smile at me instead of frowning, you say 'thanks', and, you move your bags so I won't trip over.
Objective: to give examples of behaviours that promote respectful behaviour in public spaces and enhance the feeling that they are pleasant and safe. This reflects a sentiment strongly expressed in the consultations.
Radio
1. Older man talking in a conversational style: Young people are boisterous, it doesn't mean they'll knock me over or rob me. I see a lot of young people about and I say g'day. They're OK. We should give them a chance. Voice-over says, Public spaces are for all of us - what you do makes a difference.
2. Young man: When we're hanging out with our friends we don't mean to make you feel anxious. We cannot meet in pubs or clubs like you can, so we meet in public spaces, they're for all of us. Voice-over: Public spaces are for all of us - what you do makes a difference.
3. Young people: You probably didn't know that our body piercing and hairstyles, and wearing caps everywhere, aren't meant to offend you, times change, don't judge us on appearances. Voice-over: Public spaces are for all of us - what you do makes a difference.
Community feedback from the media campaign
The project officer designed a questionnaire for written responses and ran discussions 16 about the TV ads with 136 people aged 11 to 19 years and 60 adults aged 20 to over 65 years, in Hobart and Glenorchy. Feedback was also sought from members of the Hobart City Council Disability Access Committee, Glenorchy City Council Disability Access Committee, the Friends of Community Health and the Glenorchy Safer Communities Committee.
The TV ads achieved their aims
Overall, the young people who participated in the evaluation discussions and filled out the questionnaire, and the adults who were interviewed for the questionnaire, thought that the ads were successful in achieving their aims.
Bus: The reasons given for liking the ad included that it had a strong message about not judging people on appearances and showed an older person who did not think 'all young people are druggies'. Young people thought the range of opinions shown was good and realistic. The humour and use of the everyday scene of getting on a bus were appreciated - people said they found it easy to identify with. The ad was recognised as showing a range of age groups and was something 'everyone can relate to'. Some young people said it showed that not all older people thought the same way about them.
Vox Pops: People over 20 years found the ad to be very effective as it showed a cross-section of ages and backgrounds and it dealt with feelings. Also, people were 'speaking for themselves' in this ad. For some viewers it highlighted how 'some people notice the little things'. It had appeal to a wide audience, was 'honest' and provided humour. The younger respondents, 11 to 13 years old, found the vox pops to be less effective. The ad featured people expressing their feelings about public spaces. It was more complex, contextualised and raised multiple issues about using public spaces.
Assault: The ad was considered by young adults to be very effective, especially by males from 14 to 19 years old. It rated lowest with the over 50-year-olds. Respondents found it clear in its message. They said that it highlighted an important issue and 'got people thinking'. Some young people thought it was sad while others said 'it made you think about your attitudes and views'. Many respondents said it was relevant to other types of assaults and it raised an important issue that should have more attention paid to it. Some older people considered issues of respect in public spaces to be more important.
Steps: The ad was seen as effective by the over 50-year-olds and made a particular impression on some young people, as it showed an older woman acknowledging what the young people had done. They noted that achieving respect was a two-way process. It was a powerful ad for some people because it used visuals rather than words to project a message. Some said it was useful because it showed a simple thing could make a difference. Small actions were considered important.
Respect: The ad made a particular impression on women and men over 50, males more so, and on the youngest age group. Their main comments centred on it being 'understandable' and promoting the importance of people being more caring towards each other. It rated lowest with the 14-19 year age group and, overall, attracted less specific comment than did the other ads.
In the over 50 age group, males said the most effective ads were Respect and Steps, followed by The Bus and Vox Pops. Older females said the opposite. The 11-13 year olds, males in the 14 to 19 age group and the over 50 age group found Steps and Respect to be more effective than did females in all age groups. These ads were very straightforward in the way they delivered their messages.
These results indicate that the strategy was successful among those surveyed in raising awareness about the issues relating to shared use of public space. Furthermore, respondents across all age groups noted that having a range of different community service advertisements enhanced the strategy's effectiveness. The fact that the ads were set in a local and familiar setting was particularly important in terms of impact. There was a high level of recognition of the themes promoted through the strategy on the part of those respondents who participated in the evaluation.
General comments from those surveyed
Respondents noted that future ads should include:
- young people in school uniform
- 11-13 year olds
- people more clearly from an ethnic background.
During the period of time that the ads ran, they became familiar to a broad range of people within the community. The ads sought to raise awareness rather than change behaviour or attitudes.
For some of the young people who provided feedback about the media strategy, the outcome was that they 'did not find the people they see in the Mall as scary now'.
This strategy would be transferable to other jurisdictions.
3.2.2 Disability awareness training for police recruits and serving officers
This strategy dealt with the concerns and fears of people with disabilities in public spaces and the perceived need for police to better understand and respond to the circumstances and situations people with disabilities encountered in public spaces. The strategy had two parts:
- training for police recruits
- training for serving police.
Each part is separately as they were run by different groups, based in different locations and involved some different materials.
Disability awareness training for recruits
This training involved a day of activities, information sharing and discussions with people with a range of disabilities to help recruits gain a greater understanding of the experiences of people with disabilities in public spaces and how they could better respond to them.
Aims
- To enhance police-community relations in public spaces.
- To facilitate conflict resolution in public spaces.
Target group
Police recruits
Process
Twenty recruits undertook a one-day training programme developed and run by members of Glenorchy City Council's (GCC) Access Committee. Materials were adapted from the GCC Disability Awareness Training Package, developed for GCC employees. The Manager of the GCC Volunteer Programme facilitated the training and Tasmania Police enthusiastically supported the training programme.
The day began with trainers and recruits introducing themselves. The trainers were people with a disability (sight, mobility, hearing, physical). This was followed by a session defining terms and discussing the Commonwealth's Disability Discrimination Act and the Tasmanian Anti-discrimination Act.
As part of the workshop, recruits were required to simulate a disability while accompanied to the central business district by the trainers to undertake specific tasks. Some recruits were put in wheelchairs; some were made to be sight or hearing impaired. After lunch, recruits reported back on their experience and discussed how their 'disability' had impacted on them personally and how it would impact on their work.
Feedback from recruits and trainers - disability awareness training
The project officer designed and implemented written evaluation questionnaires that were completed at the time of the training by the trainers and participants.
Questionnaires were answered by three female and two male trainers with an age range of 40 to 60 years. The types of disabilities represented were sight, hearing, speech and mobility.
Most trainers said the programme more than met their expectations. One mentioned that he anticipated some resistance from the recruits, but this did not occur. The trainers felt that the recruits were more aware, following the training programme, of the issues faced by people with disabilities in public spaces and how to respond to them.
The trainers said the programme would help to build police-community relations. It was felt that the open and friendly discussion between the recruits and trainers had helped to break down stereotypes.
The trainers also felt that they had gained a better understanding of how recruits dealt with situations in public spaces. However, the trainers expressed a need for more time for in-depth discussion, which could have taken place over an informal session during the lunch break.
Questionnaires were answered by 20 police recruits aged 19 to 35 years. The recruits noted the usefulness of the experiential activity. Police recruits felt that this training would help them in their work and, in particular, when they faced situations in public spaces which involved people with disabilities.
All recruits said the training would help them to be more broad-minded and more aware of people with disabilities and the problems they encountered. They also felt that they would be less likely to jump to conclusions, more aware of what they were required to do and more able to respond appropriately, confidently and therefore effectively.
A follow-up meeting was held with some recruits six weeks after the training programme. The information folder with contact numbers given out at the training was considered to be very useful 'on the job'.
Disability awareness training for serving police officers
This strategy sought to address the need identified in the consultations for people with disabilities and police officers to feel that police officers better understood, and could better respond to, circumstances and situations encountered in public spaces by people with disabilities.
The training involved a one-day workshop to explore the physical, communication and attitudinal barriers relating to people with disabilities.
It included a range of interactive activities involving discussion and experiential components.
Aims
- To help serving police officers to develop an awareness and a greater understanding of the meaning of:
- disability, its scope, complexity and diversity
- discrimination, attitudes and beliefs which impact upon behaviour and practices, linked to a greater understanding of discrimination within legislative frameworks
- To raise awareness of the issues people with disabilities face in public spaces
- To explore opportunities which could lead to improved outcomes for police and people with disabilities when accessing and using public open spaces
- To model a partnership process within the training format
- To develop an ongoing partnership between Tasmania Police and Tasmanians with Disabilities in the provision of further training.
Target group
Serving police officers.
Process
In four separate groups, 45 serving police officers took part in a one-day experiential training programme, organised and presented by Tasmanians with Disabilities in partnership with Hobart City Council. The training was facilitated by the Vice President of Tasmanians with Disabilities and the Community Development Officer from Hobart City Council, in conjunction with a panel of people with disabilities. The group developed the training materials. Tasmania Police enthusiastically supported the training programme.
The day began with introductions and small group discussions about what disability means, led by panel members, followed by a whole-group discussion. A speaker from the Tasmanian Anti-Discrimination Commission gave an overview of the Tasmanian Anti-Discrimination Act.
Following this there was a group session, led by the panel, who spoke about the issues they faced as individuals with disabilities and how this could relate to police officers in their work. In turn, police officers discussed their work and how people with disabilities could assist them with it.
Another session involved the police officers in an experiential activity, 'taking on' a disability and undertaking tasks in the city, accompanied by the trainers. This was followed by a de-briefing and a group activity that gave the officers an opportunity to apply some of the principles learned in the earlier sessions.
Feedback from serving officers and trainers
Questionnaires were answered by a total of seven trainers: three females and four males, aged 33 to 69 years. The type of disabilities represented were sight, sound, mobility and multiple sclerosis. A disability worker on the panel represented people with intellectual disabilities.
The trainers said the training had established links between police and disability groups as well as increased the police officers' knowledge of issues relating to people with disabilities. The trainers indicated that they hoped that this increased knowledge would mean that police would be more comfortable and confident in dealing with people with disabilities in situations in public spaces. The trainers identified a need to hold further discussions with police about some regulations and their enforcement, as well as a need for ongoing training at all levels of the police force.
Ques