Urban Video Surveillance as a Tool to Improve Security in Public Spaces

Abstract

Video surveillance is an integral part of the contemporary world. Its use increases the sense of security but also generates certain risks. Laws do not always clearly and comprehensively define the rules for installing and using video surveillance and different rules are adopted in different countries to address these issues. This article presents an analysis of statistical data concerning urban video surveillance as a tool to improve the security of public spaces in the city of Katowice using the example of the operation of the Katowice Smart Surveillance and Analysis System. By presenting the operation of video surveillance in two different time periods, it was possible to assess the effectiveness of urban video surveillance for the security of public spaces in terms of particularly onerous crimes. The technical and organizational solutions applied, as in the case of the Katowice Smart Surveillance and Analysis System, made it possible to assess the impact of the operation of the system on offenses and the number of legal proceedings.

1. Introduction

The issue of the high quality of public spaces has become an important subject of discussion in recent years. The development of concepts focused on shaping safe spaces took place in the 1960s when the concentration of research on shaping a safe housing environment took place. Several years of works of researchers have contributed to the creation of the Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) [1]. Its essence is the assumption that proper design and development of the built environment can lead to a reduction in crime levels, an increase in the sense of security and an improvement in the quality of life [2]. Public space, in socioeconomic terms, is defined as “a good that is shared and deliberately shaped by people, in accordance with social principles and values - serving the needs of local and supralocal communities. The public nature of a space is determined by its collective use” [3]. Forming attractive and accessible public spaces requires different actions, including ones intended to enhance the sense and level of security expressed among others by crime rates. Crime is a social phenomenon whose source is seen in unemployment, pathologies, and economic inequality [4]. An increase in population density increases the intensity of the threat, due to greater anonymity and weaker interpersonal ties [5]. It is necessary to take action to reduce urban crime, aimed at the so-called crime triangle: place, victim, and perpetrator [6]. The place, as a part of the crime triangle, can have certain characteristics that may facilitate or impede the perpetration of a crime.

Video surveillance cameras are nowadays an inseparable part of the world around us. No one is surprised anymore by the presence of cameras in public and private spaces, even though this fact has significant legal and social consequences. Its rise can be traced to Great Britain, where three quarters of the Home Office budget was allocated to CCTV-related projects from 1996 to 1998 [7]. Data from the United Kingdom indicate the use of over 4.2 million cameras, or one camera per 14 citizens [8]. Painter and Tilley argued that CCTV’s rise in Britain was a result of the “surface plausibility” of the measure and of the political benefits officials expected from “being seen to be doing something visible to widespread concerns over crime” [9]. In the past decade, cities throughout the United States have likewise made substantial investments in CCTV. According to the most recent estimates, 49% of local police departments in the United States report using CCTV, with usage increasing to 87% for agencies serving jurisdictions with populations of 250,000 or more [10].

Video surveillance, by processing images of people, interferes with the privacy of individuals which is protected by law, because the use of video surveillance records may involve, among other things, processing of personal data. It is not only about observation and recording of images, but also about their transmission in networks, analysis, storage and archiving of storage devices, and destruction of the recording or the entire storage device.

The use of video surveillance brings about a number of other risks, which may both concern violations of law and be associated with a change in the sense of security or a change in the awareness of responsibility for public security and order. Negative phenomena may include the so-called crime relocation, which consists of the fact that in the immediate vicinity of the cameras illegal behavior is undertaken less frequently, even though the perpetrators do not give up on it and direct their criminal activity to other unsurveilled places. Changes in the awareness of the local community resulting from the apparent sense of security in the places covered by video surveillance are also dangerous, as the sense of security in areas where cameras are located may not always be reasonable [11]. Another threat is the blurring of responsibility, whereby direct witnesses to an incident may not react, believing that someone obliged to act is watching the incident on a monitor and, as a result, will take appropriate action.

The emerging legal and social dilemmas are justified inasmuch as the regulations currently in force in Poland do not clearly and comprehensively regulate the rules of installation and use of video surveillance. The model functioning in Poland is a “distributed model” where regulations providing legal basis for installation and use of video surveillance systems can be found in many normative acts. None of the laws regulate the entire area of use of video surveillance in a comprehensive manner.

As for international regulations that concern the functioning of video surveillance, there are two other legislative models: one without any relevant laws and one where there is a single act that regulates the use of video surveillance. Most common is the distributed model, which, apart from Poland, is in place, e.g., in Great Britain, which is considered to be the cradle of global video surveillance. Selected issues related to the functioning of video surveillance are regulated there indirectly, among others by the Data Protection Act, the Criminal Procedures and Investigations Act, the Criminal Law Act, and the Crime and Disorder Act. Additionally, in June 2013, another version of the British Surveillance Camera Code of Practice was published. This document followed the adoption by the United Kingdom’s Parliament of the Protection of Freedoms Act.

In Spain, which is one of the precursors to the creation and use of video surveillance on a large scale [12], as a means to improve public security and order, there is a single piece of legislation that governs the functioning of video surveillance. The law that regulates the use of video cameras in public places by security forces and authorities was adopted on 4 August 1997 and two years later the legislation process was completed with a royal decree (RD-596/1999). The law, among other things, divided spaces with video surveillance into open and closed public spaces, while giving only the police the power to conduct video surveillance in open public spaces. The act also sets out the prerequisites for the possibility of using video surveillance in public spaces, i.e., to increase security, to improve the comfort of use of public spaces, and to prevent crime.

Video surveillance systems can perform many different functions, which is due to the complex nature of the image captured by cameras, which consist of events and their sequences, spaces, people, material objects, and their dynamic changes in time and space. According to the application of video surveillance, there are three basic functions of video surveillance in the field of public security and order: protection and prevention, detection, and collection of evidence.

The first function involves deterrence of potential perpetrators of crimes and misdemeanors. It is based on the belief that people are rational and calculate risks involved in their actions, and because of the presence of a camera they will give up on their criminal plans. The detection function, through the recording of events and all types of behavior, enables the detection of specific offenses and immediate response of authorized agencies. Therefore, it points to the possibility of ascertaining the occurrence of an event that can be considered as an offense and recording the behavior of persons participating in such an event and the way the perpetrators acted. The evidence collection function, on the other hand, indicates the possibility to attempt to identify groups or individual persons and material objects based on a recorded image from the place of an event recorded by a video surveillance system.

The privatization of urban space, as Wakefield noted, “has undeniably promoted a massive increase in the extent to which citizens are subject to constant surveillance within the public realm” [13]. Moreover, the improved security enabled by new technologies [14] facilitates a radical extension of surveillance by both public institutions and the private sector. According to Farmer and Mann, in the future “surveillance will become so ubiquitous, networked, and searchable that unmonitored public space will effectively cease to exist” [15]. Nemeth and Hollander, on the other hand, claim that public spaces are no longer places of open, democratic expression and relative anonymity, and are “seen as potential targets of terror attacks and as such must be protected by any (and all) means necessary” [16]. Lasher believes that privacy in public places is not to be expected [17], as confirmed by rulings of the U.S. Supreme Court in which it has repeatedly stated that seeking privacy in public streets is not justified.

In research on the use of video surveillance, the concept of smart urban planning often appears as “the interweaving of information technology, surveillance, monitoring, and data collection with different aspects of urban, infrastructure, services, and experience management” [18]; “in other words, smart urbanism can be defined as a way of combining all areas and fields surrounding urban development and planning with an allegedly smart way of managing all relevant information and data for the optimal functioning of cities and regions” [19]. There is also a number of other interpretations of the smart city phenomenon. According to Fernandez, a smart city becomes a reality when people are able to handle open technologies to build their own public infrastructure to monitor the environment or to provide a social network of wireless connections. The promises of a smart city only make sense if citizens become creators and accumulate resources for their neighborhoods [20].

2. Materials and Methods

The objective of this study was to present urban video surveillance as a tool to improve the security of public spaces, based on the example of the operation of the Katowice Smart Surveillance and Analysis System, as the most technologically advanced monitoring system in Poland. At the same time for comparison, based on the adopted research assumptions, the impact of monitoring on public space safety in the largest city in Poland was presented, i.e., in Gorzow Wielkopolski. The chosen objective influenced the formulation of the following research problem: How the use of urban video surveillance can be used as a tool to improve the security of public spaces. The acquired knowledge and the results of preliminary research on the problem allowed for the formulation of the following working hypothesis: City surveillance is one of the effective tools used by qualified entities to ensure the security of public space. City surveillance in Katowice is an effective tool used for public safety and order. This concerns both the protective and preventive sphere, the detection function and the probative function. In the areas covered by city monitoring, an increase in the number of discovered crimes and offenses can be noted. It is also possible to identify the perpetrators.

Such formulation of the research problem made it possible to examine areas of knowledge, the study of which was necessary to present the value of urban video surveillance in actions aimed to improve the security of public spaces.

The assumed goal and the adopted research problem determined the selection of theoretical and empirical research methods. Three comprehensive search strategies were used to locate studies meeting the criteria for this review: searches of electronic bibliographic databases, using relevant keywords, manual searches of CCTV evaluation study bibliographies and manual searches of other CCTV study bibliographies. We conducted manual searches of the following theoretical articles, policy essays, qualitative studies, and literature reviews. An analysis of statistical data played a key role in the research process. Analytic techniques were used to assess the effectiveness of video surveillance in preventing crime. A comparable measure of effect size and an estimation of its variance are needed in each evaluation [21]. In the case of CCTV evaluations, the measure of effect size had to be based on indicators of crime dynamics as well as the effectiveness of detectability of perpetrators of crimes. The adopted research methodology assumed comparison of statistical data in the so-called 7 categories of particularly onerous crimes in the breakthrough periods from the point of view of development of urban video surveillance in the city of Katowice, Warsaw and Gorzow Wielkopolski. Data for the period covering the establishment of the urban video surveillance system and the year after the start of its operation were analyzed.

Due to the fact that the first urban video surveillance system in Katowice was established in 2001 and was upgraded between 2015–2017, which resulted in the creation of the Katowice Smart Surveillance and Analysis System, the statistical results achieved by the Municipal Police Headquarters in Katowice in the periods 2001/2002 and 2016/2017 were compared. The area subject to analysis was the number of conducted preparatory proceedings in the so-called 7 categories of particularly onerous crimes, on the basis of which the changes in the crime rates in the indicated periods were determined. Another area that was analyzed was the effectiveness of detection of the perpetrators of crimes from the 7 particularly onerous categories. The results obtained were compared with the national trends present at that time, in terms of both changing crime rates and the effectiveness of detection of the perpetrators.

3. Katowice Smart Surveillance and Analysis System

The urban video surveillance system in Katowice has been in operation since 2001. At that time 16 analog cameras were installed, which transmitted the signal to the Municipal Police Headquarters in Katowice, which was also the initiator of the undertaking. The legal basis for its launch was Resolution no. XXIV/310/2000 of the Katowice City Council of 19 June 2000 on the adoption of the “Framework Program for the Improvement of Security of Katowice’s Residents for the years 2000–2002.” In 2006, the Municipal Rescue Center was established, which comprised the Video Surveillance Observation Center, manned by the officers on duty of the Katowice Municipal Police. At the same time, the video surveillance system has been enlarged by adding more cameras: five in the Paderewski residential district and 61 within the Katowice section of the Intercity Road (cameras in the road lane, in underground passages, and in the tunnel under the General Ziętek’s Traffic Circle). Six years later, more cameras were installed: four digital cameras at Mariacka Street, 10 digital cameras in the Nikiszowiec residential district, and 11 digital cameras in the area of the Basilicas in Panewniki. The last stage of development of the urban video surveillance system, before it took the form that is the subject of the study, was the installation of four additional digital cameras at Mariacka Street in 2014. In the years 2015–2017, the existing urban video surveillance system was upgraded, which resulted in the creation of the Katowice Smart Surveillance and Analysis System (KSSAS). The upgrade included replacement of analog cameras with digital cameras; construction of new camera points, road points, and a data center; upgrade of the operating room, the system, and the configuration of the systems responsible for analyzing and recording video materials, and a platform for handling alarms from the surveillance system. Additionally, the system has been developed in an ongoing manner and additional camera points have been launched.

The location of cameras is based on an analysis of the security status of a given part of the city and the costs related to the installation of a camera point, carried out by the police, the Municipal Guard, and the Katowice City Hall. It should be noted that the residents of the local community take an active part in identifying new locations for cameras by sending requests to cover specific areas with the video surveillance system. These requests are then analyzed by the Katowice Municipal Guard officers in terms of security in the suggested area, as well as by the City Hall employees in terms of investment costs. Furthermore, the residents of the city, within the so-called civic budget, can influence the development of the video surveillance system by installing cameras in the locations they recommend.

The Crisis Management and Surveillance Section (CMSS), which is a part of the structure of the Crisis Management Department of the City Hall in Katowice, is responsible for the maintenance and coordination of the KSSAS. The section employs six people whose duties include taking care of the proper functioning of the technical infrastructure of the system, reporting problems to be fixed by its supplier, solving problems related to the operation of the KSSAS platform components in an ongoing manner, and close cooperation with the entities that use the system.

The operators of the video surveillance system are police officers, Municipal Guard officers, and employees of security companies, whose access to the cameras is limited. The building where the Observation Center of the KSSAS is now located was built in 2005 for the Municipal Rescue Center (MRC) in Katowice. The building is equipped with, among other things, an air-conditioning and ventilation unit, additional air-conditioning, a power generator set, and a water pumping room. In the years 2015–2016, as part of the implementation of the KSSAS, the room where the Municipal Rescue Center used to operate was upgraded and adapted for the launch of the observation center, including construction of a raised floor, installation of a video wall, installation of operator stations, and separation of zones for Fire Brigade duty officers. Moreover, a new server room was built, and the electrical and telecommunication systems were upgraded. Currently, the head office of the system is located in the building of the Katowice City Hall, while additional observation centers are located in the Municipal Police Headquarters in Katowice (for the entire system) and in Nikiszowiec and the Basilica in Panewniki (for these locations).

In the Observation Center of the City Hall in Katowice, apart from stations for the video surveillance operators, there are also stations for officers on duty of the Municipal Guard. If the system or an operator detects an event, the operator provides information directly to the duty officer of the Municipal Guard, who takes actions to respond to the event. On the other hand, if the event is noticed by officers of the Katowice Municipal Police Headquarters, then actions are taken according to police procedures. In the Observation Center, officers of the State Fire Brigade (SFB) also work in a separate zone. If an event handled by the State Fire Brigade takes place in the vicinity of a video surveillance camera, the State Fire Brigade officer can view the event at the Municipal Guard station or on the main video wall.

The Katowice Smart Surveillance and Analysis System has been considered to be the most modern in Poland. Its modernity was determined primarily by its advanced software, which used such components as:

• The LPR (Milestone) vehicle License Plate number Recognition system;
• The IBM IVA (Intelligent Video Analytics) system—an advanced video analytics component that recognizes specific situations, e.g., a person lying on the ground, an object left in place, a crowd of people;
• The IBM IOC (Intelligent Operations Center) application—an operating system that supports the IBM IVA component.

The software enables automatic documentation of the operators’ work by automatically generating reports, system logs, and interventions.

4. Results

In the years 2001/2002, an increase of 0.2% in the number of preparatory proceedings conducted in all seven categories was noted in the area of responsibility of the Municipal Police Headquarters in Katowice. Moreover, an increase in the number of conducted proceedings was noted in the following categories of crimes: robberies—10.6%, damage to health—0.3%, and damage to property—8.6%. As far as nationwide trends are concerned, there was a decrease in the number of preparatory proceedings in all seven categories (2.4%), with a simultaneous increase in the following categories: brawl, battery (1%), damage to health (4.3%), theft of property (0.1%), and damage to property (0.07%). As an analysis of the aforementioned data indicates, the trend in Katowice corresponded to the national trends, indicating an increase in crime in some of the seven categories of particularly onerous crimes. However, in the case of the total number of crimes, the result was worse for the Katowice Municipal Police Headquarters. Therefore, it is impossible to conclude that there is a correlation between the launching of the urban video surveillance system in Katowice and a reduction in particularly onerous crimes. A similar situation can be observed with regard to the effectiveness of detection of perpetrators of particularly onerous crimes. In the same period, the Katowice Municipal Police Headquarters reported a decrease in the detection rates in all seven categories by 2%. In addition, there was a decrease in the detection rate in the following categories: robbery crime (by 2.1%), theft with burglary (by 6.3%) and damage to property (by 2.6%). On the other hand, nationwide trends indicated a decrease in the effectiveness of detection in all seven categories (by 0.7%), including: 2.1% for robberies, 0.4% for brawls and batteries, 0.8% for burglaries, 1.5% for damage to property, and 0.2% for vehicle theft. It can therefore be concluded that the results do not warrant a link between the launching of the urban video surveillance system and an improvement of the detection function.

The next stage of the study was an analysis of statistical data for the years 2016/2017, which was one year after the start of the operation of the Katowice Smart Surveillance and Analysis System. In the period covered by the analysis, the Katowice Municipal Police Headquarters recorded noticeable decreases in the number of preparatory proceedings in the seven categories of particularly onerous crimes (27% for all categories, including 24.9% for robberies, 20.2% for brawls and batteries, 16.1% for burglaries, 20.3% for theft of property, 16.4% for damage to property, and 31.4% for vehicle theft. Only in the damage to health category an increase of 16.4% was observed.

In the analyzed period, the nationwide trend also indicated a reduction in the number of crimes classified as particularly onerous (13.1% for all seven categories). In the individual categories, the percentage decrease in the number of preparatory proceedings was as follows: 21.2% for robberies, 9.2% for brawls and batteries, 1.1% for damage to health, 14.1 for burglaries, 14.4% for theft of property, 8.3% for damage to property, and 12.5% for vehicle theft.

In conclusion, the results from the Katowice Municipal Police Headquarters relating to crime reduction coincide with the positive nationwide downward trend, whereby, if one takes into account the changes in the individual categories (with the exception of the damage to health category), there were fewer preparatory proceedings in Katowice than in the entire country. It can be assumed that the implementation of the Katowice Smart Surveillance and Analysis System had an impact on reducing the number of conducted preparatory proceedings in seven categories of particularly onerous crimes. This also confirms the impact of the video surveillance system on the proper implementation of the preventive function in the public spaces of Katowice.

As for the detection of perpetrators of particularly onerous crimes in 2016/2017, the Katowice Municipal Police Headquarters recorded a 7.9% increase in all seven categories. At the same time, an improvement in the results was recorded in all categories (robberies—an increase of 11.8%, brawls and batteries—an increase of 7.5%, damage to health—an increase of 2.3%, burglary—an increase of 4%, theft of property—an increase of 5.6%, damage to property—an increase of 12.9%, and vehicle theft—an increase of 1.5%). The national trend also indicated an increase in the effectiveness of detection of perpetrators in all categories of particularly onerous crimes (all seven categories—an increase of 2.8%). The increase in the detection rates for each category of crime was the following: 4.4% for robberies, 2% for brawls and batteries, 1.5% for damage to health, 2% for burglaries, 2.4% for theft of property, 2.1% for damage to property, and 3.6% for vehicle theft. The summary of statistical results for particular periods in Katowice is presented in

Table 1. The summary of statistical results for particular periods in Katowice.

	Categories of Crimes
	Year	(1)	(2)	(3)	(4)	(5)	(6)	(7)	(8)	Balance
Number of preparatory proceedings	2001	732	143	288	5822	6442	1116	946	15,489	100.2%
	2002	810	134	289	5795	6433	1212	862	15,535
	2016	153	84	238	876	2351	702	341	4404	83%
	2017	115	67	277	735	1875	587	234	3656
The effectiveness of detection of the perpetrators (%)	2001	50.2	62	89.5	17.1	11.8	18.5	4.5	18.6	98%
	2002	48.1	72.4	90	10.8	13	15.9	7.5	16.6
	2016	48.5	64.3	76	27.2	20.9	20.8	16.3	25.8	92.1%
	2017	60.3	71.8	78.3	31.2	26.5	33.7	17.8	33.7

Legend of categories of crimes: (1) robberies; (2) brawl, battery; (3) damage to health; (4) burglaries; (5) theft of property; (6) damage to property; (7) vehicle theft; (8) all 7 categories.

.

Similarly, as in the case of preparatory proceedings, also with regard to detection of the perpetrators of particularly onerous crimes, the trends for Katowice coincided with the national trends. Similarly, in the area of responsibility of the Katowice Municipal Police Headquarters, the increase in effectiveness was much greater, compared to the national results, except for the vehicle theft category. The results of the study presented herein can confirm the influence of the Katowice Smart Surveillance and Analysis System on the effectiveness of the detection process.

The urban video surveillance system in Warsaw has been in operation since 2003. In the years 2003/2004, there was an increase in the number of preparatory proceedings in almost all seven categories in the area of responsibility of the Capital Police Headquarters in Warsaw: total number of crimes (by 9.2%), brawl, battery (by 4.1%), burglaries (by 2.9%), damage to health (by 7.2%), theft of property (by 18.5%), vehicle theft (by 5.6%) and damage to property (by 15.3%). As far as nationwide trends are concerned, there was an increase in the number of preparatory proceedings in only three categories: brawl, battery, burglaries and theft with burglary. Therefore, the Warsaw results were worse than the national indicators. When it comes to detecting perpetrators of particularly burdensome crimes, the Warsaw Metropolitan Police Headquarters recorded an increase in almost all seven categories. The national trend also indicated an increase in the effectiveness of detecting the perpetrators of particularly burdensome crimes.

The urban video surveillance system in Gorzow Wielkopolski has been in operation since 2003. The largest modernization combined with an increase in the number of camera points was carried out in 2005. Therefore, the period 2005/2006 was analyzed. In the years 2005/2006, there was an increase in the number of preparatory proceedings in only three categories: brawl, battery (by 3.4%) and theft of property (1.4%). In the analyzed period, the nationwide trend also indicated a reduction in the number of crimes classified as particularly onerous. As an analysis of the aforementioned data indicates, the trend in Gorzow corresponded to the national trends, indicating an increase in crime in some of the seven categories of particularly onerous crimes. Therefore, it is impossible to conclude that there is a correlation between the launching of the urban video surveillance system in Gorzow Wielkopolski and a reduction in particularly onerous crimes. As for the detection of perpetrators of particularly onerous crimes in 2005/2006, the Gorzow Municipal Police Headquarters recorded a 6.8% increase in all seven categories. The national trend also indicated an increase in the effectiveness of the detection of perpetrators in all categories of particularly onerous crimes.

Bearing in mind the convergence, both in the area of the number of preparatory proceedings and the effectiveness of detection activities, one can put forward the thesis that the construction and operation of the city monitoring system in the first year of use, both in the case of monitoring in Warsaw and in Gorzow did not have an influence on the improvement of results in the areas analyzed. Compared to Katowice, the reason for this may be technically and organizationally weaker solutions operating in Warsaw and Gorzow Wielkopolski.

5. Discussion

Many scientific studies have been carried out on the use of both public and private surveillance of public spaces. The key objectives of the studies that have been carried out are, among others, to answer the question of whether the entity responsible for video surveillance, whether public or private, is entitled to control the common social space, and to assess the impact of installed cameras on crime rates in a given area. As Eck [22] and Welsh et al. [23] emphasize, despite the improvement in the quality of research projects in recent years, the overall scope of research on CCTV use is considered to be methodologically weak. CCTV use assessments often did not cover control areas, which does not correspond to the minimum project scope needed to investigate causality [24]. Of note is the publication of D. Farrington and K. Painter [25], whose main objective is to determine how researchers should carry out high-quality assessments of the impact of CCTV on crime rates by identifying five methodological quality criteria.

In the 1990s, the Home Office Police Research Group (PRG) [26] from the UK conducted research into how the police use CCTV systems to influence criminal and antisocial behavior using the example of several downtown areas, as well as into the impact of camera systems on overall crime rates for different types of crimes. An analysis was conducted on the operation of a camera system in three English cities: Newcastle, Birmingham, and King’s Lynn. The implications of this study for good practice in the use of CCTV were the following:

• Camera systems should be fully integrated into police command strategies and be used to support decisions on assignment of officers to the patrol service and to coordinate responses to incidents;
• A high degree of camera coverage is required to achieve the best possible result in the fight against crime;
• In connection with crimes of a personal nature, such as robberies, in a given area, care should be taken to ensure that these crimes are not transferred to neighboring areas where the surveillance system is not in place;
• The functioning of surveillance and any successes in its use should be adequately publicized, both to reduce fear of crime and to discourage potential criminals. It should be stressed that numerous studies indicate that informing the public about the functioning of video surveillance in a given area within the framework of the undertaken crime prevention initiatives can have a significant impact on crime rates [27]; Berry and Carter [28]; Laycock [29]. The police entities involved in this study confirmed that they had established numerous relationships with local and even national media to promote the effectiveness of local CCTV systems.

The systematic reviews and analyses conducted by Welsh and Farrington [30,31] provide an overview of the collective knowledge about CCTV. The results of systematic reviews suggest that CCTV works better in well-defined conditions (especially in car parks) than in public places and has the greatest impact on car crime, without having any impact on violent crimes. In addition, in a study on the CCTV system in San Francisco, King, Mulligan, and Raphael [32] did not find any significant impact on violent crimes, as well as drug crimes, vandalism, or prostitution. Cameron et al. [33] analyzed CCTV systems in two separate areas of Los Angeles. In this case, too, the systems had no measurable impact on violent crimes and crimes against property, or on the rate of detention for offenses committed. Lim and Wilcox [34], on the other hand, in their study conducted in Cincinnati, found that CCTV had little impact on crime in public places in the city, although there was a reduction in the number of robberies and burglaries in residential areas. The so-called zero effects have also been identified in studies conducted outside the United States. Gerell’s [35] study shows that the implementation of a CCTV system did not reduce the number of nighttime attacks in Malmö, Sweden.

Although the studies discussed above indicate that the installed cameras have a limited impact on the level of security in public spaces, there are some publications that demonstrated some positive effects. Ratcliffe, Taniguchi, and Taylor [36] found that CCTV cameras in Philadelphia resulted in a 13% reduction in overall crime. In the study conducted by Caplan, Kennedy, and Petrossian [37] on the functioning of the first 73 cameras installed in Newark, they measured the impact of CCTV on three types of crimes: auto theft, theft from autos, and shootings. The results indicate a reduction in the rate of auto theft. La Vigne et al. [38] analyzed seven CCTV systems in three US cities: Baltimore (four systems), Chicago (two systems), and Washington (one system). Significant reductions in crime rates were observed in three systems in Baltimore and one in Chicago. McLean, Worden, and Kim [39], on the other hand, in their studies of the CCTV system in Schenectady found that the installed cameras resulted in a significant reduction in violent crimes.

In 2017 [40], reviewed seven randomized and natural experiments of CCTV, finding crime reductions between 24% and 28% in public streets and urban subway stations, but no effect in parking facilities or suburban subway stations. The findings diverged somewhat from those of Welsh and Farrington. Smaller effect sizes associated with quasi-experiments, varying study settings, and differing integration with police practices as contextual factors may explain this difference. Recent research findings show support for Alexandrie’s argument that integration with police practices may determine the effects of CCTV [41].

The latest research carried out in 2019 by Pisa et al. reveals that CCTV was associated with significant reductions in both vehicle crime and property crime in general, with no significant effects observed for violent crime. The opinion of Piza et al., “Public safety agencies combatting violent crime problems may need to consider whether resources would be better allocated toward other crime prevention measures” [42].

During discussions related to monitoring systems, it should be emphasized that actively monitored CCTV systems require a greater commitment of resources than do passive systems. This is especially the case if agencies wish to maintain current levels of active monitoring as CCTV systems expand—because high camera-to-operator ratios can negatively affect active monitoring practices [43]. In turn Idrees, Shah, and Surette [44] recently explored the potential benefits that Computer Vision Technology (CVT) can provide to CCTV interventions. CVT applies mathematical algorithms to each frame of CCTV footage for the purpose of automating the detection of crime-related events. Upon detection of an image of concern, CVT alerts the CCTV operator. Within a CVT-assisted CCTV scheme, the primary role of the human operator is shifted from manually mining video footage in search of criminal behavior to a supervisory role emphasizing assessment of detected images and response decision making. According to Norris and McCahill, this may bolster the efficiency of active CCTV monitoring.

6. Conclusions

Although video surveillance systems operate in most of the world’s metropolises, as well as in towns with much smaller populations, there are still few systematic assessments of these systems and little information on the way cameras influence crime in public spaces is available. Installation of cameras to suppress criminal and antisocial behavior is an example of what Brantingham and Faust [45] refer to as primary crime prevention and Clarke [46] calls situational crime prevention. When cameras are installed for the first time in an area, they usually have a strong deterrent effect on many potential criminals, which may explain the reduction in the crime rates in the initial period of operation of the video surveillance system. However, the impact of cameras on crime may start to fade in the long run. In order to maintain positive trends, it is therefore necessary to systematically assess the impact of cameras on the level of security in public spaces and to adapt the existing solutions to new challenges and threats in this regard.

As the results of the presented research show, the functioning of monitoring systems is associated with a significant or moderate decrease in crime. The greatest effects in this regard can be seen in car parks, but evidence of a significant reduction in crime in other areas, especially in residential areas, has also been shown. It should also be noted that monitoring systems, including active monitoring, have a greater impact on improving security than passive systems. At the same time, treating monitoring as one of many tools used to prevent and reduce crime resulted in its far greater effects in the fight against crime than the approach in which monitoring is considered a “golden mean” to improve security in a public space.

The Katowice Smart Surveillance and Analysis System is currently one of the most modern urban video surveillance systems in Poland. The use of advanced video analysis increases its effectiveness so as to improve the security of public spaces in terms of the disclosure of criminal acts and identification of their perpetrators.

According to the study, the establishment and operation of the urban video surveillance system in Katowice in the years 2001/2002 did not have a major impact on the reduction in the number of crimes classified as particularly onerous. Therefore, the preventive function of video surveillance did not play a significant role in this case. The results of the study are similar with regards to the detection function of video surveillance, because in this case, too, the system did not improve the effectiveness of detection of the perpetrators of particularly onerous crimes. The situation is different when it comes to the analysis of data for the years 2016–2017, i.e., the period when the Katowice Smart Surveillance and Analysis System (KSSAS) was launched in the city. Although there was a nationwide downward trend in all seven categories of particularly onerous crimes, in the area under the responsibility of the Katowice Municipal Police Headquarters there was a much greater decrease in the number of proceedings. Similar correlations were in place with regard to the effectiveness of detection of the perpetrators of particularly onerous crimes. In this case, too, the results in Katowice were in line with the positive nationwide trend, with much better indicators achieved. Therefore, it can be argued that the operation of an urban video surveillance system, through both its preventive and its detective functions, increases the security of public spaces. The technical and organizational solutions applied, as in the case of the Katowice Smart Surveillance and Analysis System, are of great importance for the effectiveness of the urban video surveillance system used to enhance the security of public spaces.

The results of the review of the impact of Katowice Smart Surveillance and Analysis System (KISMiA) on public space security support the continued use of monitoring systems to prevent and reduce crime, and also allow for a better understanding of the mechanisms affecting its effectiveness. It is particularly important that monitoring systems do not constitute an independent means of preventing and reducing crime detached from other tools to improve the safety of public spaces. It is therefore necessary to systematically expand the range of cameras, both in public and private spaces with the use of new technologies, which will undoubtedly contribute to improvement in the quality of life of the residents and of public spaces and for reducing negative social and economic consequences of undesirable events.

Finally, researchers should expand the focus of CCTV evaluations to include more outcome measures than crime prevention. Although crime prevention is obviously an important consideration, police departments also invest in CCTV for its ability to detect and identify offenders for investigatory purposes [47]. Despite this potential benefit of the technology, a body of research on the investigatory benefits of CCTV has yet to develop.