The component interventionHeader has not been created yet or is not available for this content page type.

The component headerBackButton has not been created yet or is not available for this content page type.

General Overview

Type of stakeholder

EICS Framework

Region of Reference

Africa
Asia
Australia
Europe
North-America
South-America
World

Description

This intervention refers to improved lighting at and around public transport stops, stations, and waiting areas. Improved lighting is an effective way to enhance visibility. Good visibility (and therefore good lighting) is important, as it can reduce crime levels and fear of crime by allowing people to see their surroundings clearly, as well as deterring offenders from committing a crime. [2,5]

Surveys show that female passengers specifically are more anxious about their safety when there is poor lighting at stations/stops as well as en route to those stations/stops, especially when travelling at night. [3,6]

Facts/Illustrations/Case studies

An undated image of a well-lit train station in Houli, Taiwan. Source: https://www.leadray.com/en/2-2741-74255/product/Houli-train-station-30W-LED-Street-Light-id402289.html
A survey in Great Britain found that 93% of females were fearful while waiting on the train platform at night (due to low visibility) compared to only 53% of males. [5]

Types of Impact

To/from the stop/station/rank✓
Waiting for train/bus/paratransit✓
In the vehicle✓
At interchanges✓

Any form of improved lighting will be beneficial in public spaces, but the intervention specifically refers to increased surveillance in the public transport space and en route to public transport stops/stations.

Day-time travel✕
Night-time travel✓
Peak-time travel✓
Off peak-time travel✓

All travel time categories could be positively impacted by this intervention, especially those in times of darkness. This intervention could have a significant positive effect on night-time travel and off-peak time travel.

Bus✓
Train✓
Rideshare✓
4 wheelers informal✓
3 wheelers informal✓
2 wheelers informal✓
Cycling✕
Walking✕

All modes could potentially be impacted by this intervention.

Girls✓
Boys✓
Adult Women✓
Men✓
Elderly Women✓
LGBTQI+✓

All public transport users will be positively impacted by this intervention, there is no evidence of improved lighting projects benefitting particular user groups only. The literature does, however, reveal that women are more fearful than men when there is poor lighting.5 On the other hand, other studies have found that women continue to feel unsafe even when there is good lighting, so no clear hypothesis with regards to gender preference is available. [1]

Resources

Monetary Resource Requirements
Both capital costs and operational costs for this intervention are relatively low. Capital costs consist of the buying and installing of the lighting e.g., street lights, and operational costs consist of electricity costs and maintenance costs. Cost is dependent on the scale of implementation: the more lighting is implemented, the higher the costs.
Capital Cost Requirements Operational Cost Requirements
Non-Monetary Resource Requirements
Limited skills are needed to implement this intervention, as it only requires installation and maintenance, not constant operation. It also requires very little time or political will to implement.
Skills Time Political Will

SWOT Analysis

Quick to be implemented
Perceived to be effective
Relatively low skills required
Scalable to suit budget and need for the resource

As soon as implementation stops, the benefits stop i.e. if the lighting stops working, the benefits stop.
Not effective in parts of the transport system where the intervention is not physically present

Crime reduction

An unreliable power supply could render this intervention useless at times.
Fishbowl effect: when the stop/station is brightly lit but the surrounding environment is dark - poses a threat to passengers waiting, as they can't see out but they can be seen by potential offenders. [1]

Effectiveness

Several literature sources confidently indicate this to be an effective measure in improving public safety. A large number of studies reach the same conclusion with regard to effectiveness, so the level of confidence that this measure is effective is high. Female passengers largely perceive improved lighting to be an effective measure in improving their safety. [1-7] However, some female passengers have reported that they continue to feel unsafe when there is good lighting as they would prefer the physical presence of a security guard. [8]

Perception by (female) passengers
Perception by governing bodies
Level of confidence in these ratings

Implementation

Implementation of this intervention can happen quickly and be ramped up over time, depending on the available funds. The benefits ensue immediately upon implementation. Unfortunately, if the lighting malfunctions and stops working, the benefits also stop.

Implementation timeframe

0-1 year✓
1-3 years✕
>3 years✕

Timeframe to realise benefits

0-1 year✓
1-3 years✓
>3 years✕

Scale of Implementation

This intervention can be implemented at a local or city level.

National

Regional

City

Station or
Suburb

Ease of Implementation

This intervention is relatively easy to implement, although it requires skilled personnel. A potential barrier to implementation is access to a power supply, as electricity is needed for the lights to work.

List of References

Australia

1. Gardner, N., Cui, J. & Coiacetto, E. 2017. Harassment on public transport and its impacts on women’s travel behaviour. Australian Planner. 54(1):8–15. DOI: 10.1080/07293682.2017.1299189.

Europe

2. Gekoski A., Gray J., Horvath M., Edwards M. A.H., Emirali S., Adler, J. R. (2015) What Works’ in Reducing Sexual Harassment and Sexual Offences on Public Transport Nationally and Internationally: A Rapid Evidence Assessment, London: British Transport Police and Department for Transport. 2015.

3. Koskela, H. & Pain, R. 2000. Revisiting fear and place: Women’s fear of attack and the built environment. Geoforum. 31(2):269–280. DOI: 10.1016/S0016-7185(99)00033-0.

4. Cozens, P., Neale, R., Hillier, D. & Whitaker, J. 2004. Tackling Crime and Fear of Crime While Waiting at Britain’s Railway Stations. Journal of Public Transportation. 7(3):23–41. DOI: 10.5038/2375-0901.7.3.2.

North America

5. Yavuz, N. & Welch, E.W. 2010. Addressing fear of crime in public space: Gender differences in reaction to safety measures in train transit. Urban Studies. 47(12):2491–2515. DOI: 10.1177/0042098009359033.

6. Loukaitou-Sideris, A., Brozen, M., Pinski, M. & Ding, H. 2020. Documenting #MeToo in Public Transportation: Sexual Harassment Experiences of University Students in Los Angeles (September, 25). DOI: 10.1177/0739456X20960778.

7. Loukaitou-Sideris, A. 2014. Fear and safety in transit environments from the women’s perspective. Security Journal. 27(2):242–256. DOI: 10.1057/sj.2014.9.

8. Lane, J., Gover, A.R. & Dahod, S. 2009. Fear of violent crime among men and women on campus: The impact of perceived risk and fear of sexual assault. Violence and Victims. 24(2):172–192. DOI: 10.1891/0886-6708.24.2.172.

SHE CAN Tool