This survey investigates the potential correlation between the level or increase in surveillance in New York City’s outdoor parks and the corresponding crime rates. It aims to identify which parks in the city appear to have the highest levels of surveillance and examine whether these parks have experienced significant changes in crime rates over time.
The anti-surveillance activism in NYC has been driven by civil rights groups and community activists advocating for transparency and oversight regarding the New York City Police Department’s (NYPD) use of advanced surveillance technologies. Although safety concerns in public spaces might arise from broader issues, this study seeks to determine if the implementation of surveillance technology has affected public safety in specific areas like parks.
Initially, it is important to review the origins of surveillance history. Doing so will provide a meaningful context for examining the rest of the data historically.
Next, it makes sense to combine available data to understand how the variables interact and reflect the current reality. The relevant variables and necessary datasets will also be introduced and discussed below.
To effectively visualize the information, maps are the most suitable tool. The objective is to create a thematic map that includes various spatial categories, such as categorical choropleths, which can be used as either a top or bottom layer. This map will also illustrate data about parks, camera locations, and crime cases. Additionally, supplementary visualizations such as graphs may be utilized to strengthen the arguments.
The survey utilizes three different datasets from various sources:
– Parks properties dataset: Sourced from NYC Open Data, downloaded in GeoJson format, and used as a base map for all parks across the five boroughs of New York City. It is important to note that cemeteries and playgrounds are not classified as parks in the dataset.
– NYC Parks crime statistics dataset: Provided by the NYPD, containing data from 2014 to 2023. Notably, this dataset lacks information for Central Park, and thus, this survey excludes crime statistics for Central Park.
The surveillance camera dataset consists of two separate spreadsheets in CSV format. These spreadsheets include geographical data for camera locations at intersections and are part of crowdsourced data collected and processed by Amnesty International in 2022.
As outlined in the dataset’s methodology manual, Open Street Map (OSM) and GIS software were utilized to create a geospatial dataset of intersections with panoramic views. Due to the task’s specifics, volunteers or decoders could only tag cameras detected within the panoramic view, resulting in the dataset lacking markers for cameras situated outside the intersections.
After reviewing the crime statistics data for NYC Parks from the NYPD website, it is clear that crime has not increased significantly between 2015 and 2024 as shown in the histogram below. .
A Special Report by the New York Civil Liberties Union in 2006 reveals that a study conducted in 1998 identified 2,397 surveillance cameras visible from street level in Manhattan. The report states that seven years later, the same number of cameras were found in just Greenwich Village and SoHo.
At this stage, drawing a meaningful connection between the significant rise in surveillance cameras since at least 2005 and the crime rate in NYC parks is challenging due to the lack of statistical data on park crimes for the year 2005. Besides, based on report… crime rate was significantly decreasing in the city since 90s ( Siegel, Loren, Robert A. Perry, and Margaret Hunt Gram 5).
To gain a clearer perspective, the interactive map below provides insight into how surveillance presence could affect crime rates in NYC parks. Users can select individual parks as choropleths to explore data, including crime statistics categorized by type. Additionally, the map indicates nearby intersections with surveillance cameras. However, it does not offer details about surveillance within park boundaries.
Indeed, establishing a completely reliable link between past and present variables is challenging, particularly due to limited data on certain variables from the past period. For instance, there is no data available to assess the intensity of the growing surveillance across the city. However, this limitation could serve as a foundation for future research, potentially expanding the scope of inquiry.
This study may prove valuable for community purposes or could serve as a launching point for further research in social sciences, including areas such as social welfare, privacy rights, or governance.
In summary, drawing definitive conclusions based on the current research is challenging. The survey would benefit from improved data analysis and preprocessing of datasets to yield more insightful findings. For instance, accurately mapping all cameras and categorizing them by ownership could provide a better understanding of how private and public spaces interact and the potential risks for average citizens traversing the city.
Studies on the impact of surveillance on outdoor crime rates are limited and do not necessarily establish its validity. Moving forward, the study would benefit from enhanced geocoding practices for capturing, analyzing, and visualizing geographical data. Additionally, exploring better methods to visualize the combination of categorical and numerical data beyond simple bar charts would be constructive. Improving user interactivity for more efficient analysis should also be considered for future enhancements.
Works Cited
Amnesty International. “Decode Surveillance NYC: Methodology”. © Amnesty International, 2022.
Siegel, Loren, Robert A. Perry, and Margaret Hunt Gram. “Who’s Watching? Video Camera Surveillance in New York City and the Need for Public Oversight”. Special Report by the New York Civil Liberties Union, 2006.
