Header banner MUST have an alt or title

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

EICS Framework


Region of Reference

  • AfricaAfrica
  • AsiaAsia
  • AustraliaAustralia
  • EuropeEurope
  • North-AmericaNorth-America
  • South-AmericaSouth-America
  • WorldWorld


This intervention refers to limiting access to public transit stops/stations for homeless people and loiterers through appropriate access control. Increased homelessness and lack of shelters have led to homeless people using transit stops, stations, and vehicles as places to sleep and find shelter. [4]

The presence of the homeless and of loiterers in the public transit space increases the fear of crime for users and, therefore, limiting their access will increase their feeling of safety. [2,3] Access control measures such as ticket gates, turnstiles, and other barriers are appropriate tools to limit the access of those without tickets. [1]

Types of Impact

Area Impacted

  • To/from the stop/station/rank
  • Waiting for train/bus/paratransit
  • In the vehicle
  • At interchanges
This intervention would impact areas such as stations and stops, as well as transport interchanges. Access control could also be implemented on vehicles to prevent passengers without tickets using the service.

Time of Day of Impact

  • Day-time travel
  • Night-time travel
  • Peak-time travel
  • Off peak-time travel
All travel time categories could be positively impacted by this intervention.

Mode Impacted

  • Bus
  • Train
  • Rideshare
  • 4 wheelers informal
  • 3 wheelers informal
  • 2 wheelers informal
  • Cycling
  • Walking
Modes with formal infrastructure and the ability to control boarding/alighting of passengers will be impacted, such as train stations and bus stops.

Demographic impacted

  • Girls
  • Boys
  • Adult Women
  • Men
  • Elderly Women
All public transport users could be positively impacted by this intervention, as access control protects all passengers. However, literature shows that women and the elderly experience a significant increase in fear of crime due to public transit loiterers, so this intervention will have a greater positive impact on them. [2,3]

SWOT Analysis

  • Prevents loiterers from entering public transit spaces, which increases the feeling of safety of passengers.

  • Reduces the potential for crime, as only passengers can enter the space.

  • Scalable to suit budget and need

  • As soon as implementation stops, the benefits stop

  • Not effective in parts of the transport system where the intervention is not physically present

  • To improve the safety of the station or stop.


Literature shows that females have an increased fear of crime when people loiter in public transit stations/stops. [2,3] Since this intervention prevents that from happening, it should be perceived positively by female passengers, as well as governing bodies who want to keep their stations/stops safe. As there is a small amount of literature to support this, confidence in these ratings is moderate.

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


Implementation of this intervention is quick. The benefits ensue immediately once the intervention has been implemented. Unfortunately, if the intervention ends, so do the benefits.

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 station or suburb level.

Station or

Ease of Implementation

This intervention is relatively easy to implement.

List of References

North America

North America

2. Felson, M., Belanger, M.E., Bichler, G.M., Bruzinski, C.D., Campbell, G.S., Fried, C.L., Grofik, K.C., Mazur, I.S., et al. 1996. Redesigning hell: preventing crime and disorder at the Port Authority Bus Terminal. Preventing Mass Transit Crime. 5–92.

3. Kooi, B. 2015. Security Concerns at Hot-Spot Bus Stop Locations. Journal of Applied Security Research. 10(3):277–307. DOI: 10.1080/19361610.2015.1038762.

4. Ding, H., Loukaitou-Sideris, A. & Wasserman, J.L. 2021. Homelessness on public transit: A review of problems and responses. Transport Reviews. DOI: 10.1080/01441647.2021.1923583.