NO CCTV - The case against - Reports

There are many studies that have found CCTV to be ineffective - below are a few:

Title	Author(s)	Key Findings	Publication Date
'Fortress Britain' high security, insecurity and the challenge of preventing harm [ Link ]	Anna Minton & Jody Aked / new economics foundation	[...] CCTV was already in place and not deterring the anti-social behaviour. Our study suggested that high security was offered as a technical response to a complex social problem, which would require a different kind of solution.	2013
Campbell Collaboration Report 'Effects of Closed Circuit Television Surveillance on Crime' [ Link ]	Welsh & Farrington / Home Office	[...] the evaluations of CCTV schemes in city and town centers and public housing measured a much larger range of crime types and only a small number of studies involved other interventions. These CCTV schemes, as well as those focused on public transport, did not have a significant effect on crime.	2008
Read No CCTV's article on the Campbell Collaboration report [ here ]
Why are fear and distrust spiralling in twenty-first century Britain? [ Link ]	Anna Minton / Joseph Rowntree Foundation	mounting evidence shows that private security and CCTV does not reduce fear of crime or actual crime and might in fact increase crime	2008
The Cambridge evaluation of the effects of CCTV on crime [ Link ]	Farrington, Bennett & Welsh	the Cambridge evaluation is consistent with prior research in showing no significant desirable effect of CCTV on crime in city centres.	2007
No CCTV Interim Report on Cowley Road CCTV proposals [ Link ]	No CCTV	Surveillance cameras clearly present a serious threat to privacy and civil liberties and the alleged trade-offs of safety or security are unproven and vastly outweighed by the risk of creating a police state.	2007
National CCTV Strategy [ Link ]	Home Office / ACPO	Anecdotal evidence suggests that over 80% of the CCTV footage supplied to the police is far from ideal, especially if it is being used for primary identification or identities are unknown and identification is being sought, for instance, by media release.	2007
Read Spy Blog's analysis of the document [ here ] The Register website has a worrying article that points out why the Home Office are saying cctv footage is ineffective [ here ]
Data on London crime figures vs. number of cameras [ Link ]	Members of London Assembly	In 2007 members of the London Assembly obtained information under the Freedom of Information Act that showed CCTV has little effect on solving crime. The statistics show that more CCTV cameras does not lead to a better crime clear-up rate. In fact, four out of five of the boroughs with the most cameras have a record of solving crime that is below average At that time London had over 10,000 council/police run cameras.	2007
The Evening Standard also had a report on the findings [ here ]
Assessing the impact of CCTV Home Office Study 292 [ Link ]	Martin Gill / Home Office	It would be easy to conclude from the information presented in this report that CCTV is not effective: the majority of the schemes evaluated did not reduce crime and even where there was a reduction this was mostly not due to CCTV; nor did CCTV schemes make people feel safer, much less change their behaviour. Impulsive crimes (e.g. alcohol-related crimes) were less likely to be reduced than premeditated crime (e.g. theft of motor vehicles). Violence against the person rose and theft of motor vehicles fell in the target areas in accordance with national trends in recorded crime.	2005
Shoplifters on shoplifting University of Leicester [ Link ]	Hart, Gill, & Livingstone	One shoplifter articulated a perception shared by others, in that he had: "… never seen a camera jump off the wall and nick anyone."	2003
National evaluation of CCTV: early findings on scheme implementation – effective practice guide [ Link ]	Scarman Centre National CCTV Evaluation Team	Given the current paucity of evidence as to the cost effectiveness of CCTV as a crime prevention mechanism, it is reasonable that partnerships have not provided a great deal of evidence on this subject.	2003
Home Office Research Study 252 - Crime prevention effects of closed circuit television: a systematic review [ Link ]	Welsh & Farrington	It was found that CCTV had no effect on violent crimes (from five studies)	2002
To CCTV or not to CCTV? [ Link ]	nacro	Three-quarters of the Home Office Crime Prevention budget was spent on CCTV between 1996 and 1998, yet a comprehensive review has revealed the overall reduction in crime was only five per cent. A parallel systematic review carried out by the Home Office that looked at street lighting, however, found a highly significant reduction in crime of 20 per cent.	2002
Towns on Television: Closed Circuit TV Systems in British Towns and Cities Local Government Studies [ Link ]	Graham, Brooks & Heery	CCTV may actually undermine the natural surveillance in towns and communities . . . the result may be a further spiral of social fragmentation and atomization, which leads to more alienation and even more crime.	1999
Effect of closed circuit television on urban violence Violence Research Group, University of Wales, Cardiff [ Link ]	Sivarajasingam & Shepherd	If there had been a significant deterrent effect as a result of CCTV installation then a decline in police detection of violence rather than the noted increase would have occurred. This study provides no evidence of a deterrent effect.	1999
Read BBC News coverage of this study [ here ]
Closed Circuit Television in public places: its acceptability and perceived effectiveness Home Office Police Research Group [ Link ]	Honess & Charman	page 25; "public acceptance is based on limited, and partly inaccurateknowledge of the functions and capabilities of CCTV systems in public places." page 6: "a substantial number of respondents referred to television programmes such as 'CrimeWatch' as a source of their information about CCTV."	1992