Impotance of Cctv

The
Importance
of
CCTV

CHAPTER I
The Problem and its Background

Introduction
CCTV, Closed Circuit TeleVision, is a TV system that does not broadcast TV signals to public but transmits them over to limited monitor(s). CCTV system usually utilizes CCD video cameras (to produce the video), cable or wireless transmitters/receivers or Internet (to transmit the video), and monitors (to see the video). CCTV system is not only applied to the security and surveillance purpose but also to the other fields like laboratory in schools or in private companies, even to production lines in factories. As the application of CCTV system increased, the CCTV industry has developed variety of CCTV equipment like Time Lapse VCRs, combiners, infrared illuminators, Pan/Tilt, etc. The most recent development is web camera server which uses the Internet for remote surveillance.
Closed-circuit television (CCTV) cameras can produce images or recordings for surveillance [1] purposes, and can be either video cameras, or digital stills cameras. Marie Van Brittan Brown was the inventor of the CCTV camera.
Video cameras are either analogue or digital, which means that they work on the basis of sending analogue or digital signals to a storage device such as a video tape recorder or desktop computer or laptop computer.
Analogue can record straight to video tape recorders which is able to record analogue signals as pictures. If the analogue signals are recorded to tape, then the tape must run at a very slow speed in order to operate continuously. This is because in order to allow a three hour tape to run for 24 hours, it must be set to run on a time lapse basis which is usually about four frames a second. In one second, the camera scene can change dramatically. A person for example can have walked a distance of 1 meter, and therefore if the distance is divided into four parts, i.e. four frames or "snapshots" in time, then each frame invariably looks like a blur, unless the subject keeps relatively still. Analogue signals can also be converted into a digital signal to enable the recordings to be stored on a PC as digital recordings. In that case the analogue video camera must be plugged directly into a video capture card in the computer, and the card then converts the analogue signal to digital. These cards are relatively cheap, but inevitably the resulting digital signals are compressed 5:1 (MPEG compression) in order for the video recordings to be saved on a continuous basis. Another way to store recordings on a non-analogue media is through the use of a digital video recorder (DVR). Such a device is similar in functionality to a PC with a capture card and appropriate video recording software. Unlike PCs, most DVRs designed for CCTV purposes are embedded devices that require less maintenance and simpler setup than a PC-based solution, for a medium to large number of analogue cameras. Some DVRs also allow digital broadcasting of the video signal, thus acting like a network camera. If a device does allow broadcasting of the video, but does not record it, then it's called a video server. These devices effectively turn any analogue camera (or any analogue video signal) into a network TV.
Digital cameras do not require a video capture card because they work using a digital signal which can be saved directly to a computer. The signal is compressed 5:1, but DVD quality can be achieved with more compression (MPEG-2 is standard for DVD-video, and has a higher compression ratio than 5:1, with a slightly lower video quality than 5:1 at best, and is adjustable for the amount of space to be taken up versus the quality of picture needed or desired). The highest picture quality of DVD is only slightly lower than the quality of basic 5:1-compression DV. Saving uncompressed digital recordings takes up an enormous amount of hard drive space, and a few hours of uncompressed video could quickly fill up a hard drive. Holiday uncompressed recordings may look fine but one could not run uncompressed quality recordings on a continuous basis. Motion detection is therefore sometimes used as a work around solution to record in uncompressed quality. However, in any situation where standard-definition video cameras are used, the quality is going to be poor because the maximum pixel resolution of the image chips in most of these devices is 320,000 pixels (analogue quality is measured in TV lines but the results are the same); they generally capture horizontal and vertical fields of lines and blend them together to make a single frame; the maximum frame rate is normally 30 frames per second. That said, multi-megapixel IP-CCTV cameras are coming on the market. Still quite expensive, but they can capture video images at resolutions of 1, 2, 3, 5 and even up to 11 Mpix. Unlike with analogue cameras, details such as number plates are easily readable. At 11 Mpix, forensic quality images are made where each hand on a person can be distinguished. Because of the much higher resolutions available with these types of cameras, they can be set up to cover a wide area where normally several analogue cameras would have been needed.
IP cameras or network cameras are analogue or digital video cameras, plus an embedded video server having an IP address, capable of streaming the video (and sometimes, even audio). Because network cameras are embedded devices, and do not need to output an analogue signal, resolutions higher than CCTV analogue cameras are possible. A typical analogue CCTV camera has a PAL (768×576 pixels) or NTSC (720×480 pixels), whereas network cameras may have VGA (640×480 pixels), SVGA (800×600 pixels) or quad-VGA (1280×960 pixels, also referred to as "megapixel") resolutions. An analogue or digital camera connected to a video server acts as a network camera, but the image size is restricted to that of the video standard of the camera. However, optics (lenses and image sensors), not video resolution, are the components that determine the image quality. Network cameras can be used for very cheap surveillance solutions (requiring one network camera, some Ethernet cabling, and one PC), or to replace entire CCTV installations (cameras become network cameras, tape recorders become DVRs, and CCTV monitors become computers with TFT screens and specialised software. Digital video manufacturers claim that turning CCTV installations into digital video installations is inherently better). There continues to be much debate over the merits and price-for-performance of Network cameras as compared to analogue cameras. Many in the CCTV industry claim that many analog cameras can outperform network cameras at a lower price.
Digital still cameras. These cameras can be purchased in any high street shop and can take excellent pictures in most situations. The pixel resolution of the current models have easily reached 7 million pixels (7-mega pixels). Some point and shoot models like those produced by Canon or Nikon boast resolutions in excess of 10 million pixels. At these resolutions, and with high shutter speeds like 1/125th of a second, it is possible to take jpg pictures on a continuous or motion detection basis that will capture not only anyone running past the camera scene, but even the faces of those driving past. These cameras can be plugged into the USB port of any computer (most of them now have USB capability) and pictures can be taken of any camera scene. All that is necessary is for the camera to be mounted on a wall bracket and pointed in the desired direction. Modern digital still cameras can take 500 kb snapshots in the space of 1 second, and these snapshots are then automatically downloaded by the camera software straight to the computer for storage as timed and dated JPEG files. The images themselves don't need to stay on the computer for long. If the computer is connected to the Internet, then the images can automatically be uploaded to any other computer anywhere in the world, as and when the pictures are taken. The user does not need to lift a finger except to simply plug the camera in and point it in the desired direction. The direction could just as easily be the street outside a house, or the entrance to a bank or underground station. Digital still cameras are now being made with in-built wireless connectivity, so that no USB cable is required; images are simply transmitted wirelessly through walls or ceilings to the computer.

Background of the Study
It is crucial to take security seriously in this day and age. It is not just businesses and commercial pro- perties that need good security but it is our homes too. With crime increasing and burglaries very com-mon place, it is very important to consider the available security options and choose one that is the best fit for you.

One of the most popular and cost effective ways of providing security in the home and place of work is with CCTV cameras and equipment. CCTV cameras can act as a very successful deterrent to thieves and burglars, certainly making them think twice at the very least. The technology behind security equipment these days is incredibly advanced, and it is even possible to hook the cameras up to an ordinary television or computer to watch the footage. Prevent Crime If you're worried about crime, cameras can not only catch criminals in the act, but the very presence of CCTV systems can make a would-be criminal think twice about any wrong-doing. Think about it, if you planned rob or vandalize a store or office, would you want to do it if you knew you were being recorded?

Prevent Employee Theft
If you suspects one of your employees of wrong-doing but don't know where to begin to try to get to the bottom of things, a camera can be a very helpful tool. This is especially true if you own an establishment where cash is exchanged. Cameras posted near cash registers or other places where employees are often stationed, not only can show you if an employee is stealing, but may even deter an employee from committing a crime if they know you're watching. Be a useful piece of evidence
If a crime is committed in or around your business and the person accused of committing the crime was caught on camera, you've got an extra piece of evidence for a court case. Jurors and judges can watch footage or view photos from your security cameras and establish that the person on trial did indeed commit the crime. Not only will you be preventing the same person from causing you more trouble in the future, you'll be helping out your entire community. Help law enforcement solve crime
When someone commits a crime and is caught on camera, police and other law enforcement officials can use the footage to release video or photos to the public via various media outlets. Having a picture of the suspect can make a world of difference when it comes to making an arrest and getting dangerous criminal off the street. Keep an eye on children and elderly folks
With a CCTV system at home, you can monitor the safety of your children and elderly folks while you are away. Besides, you can keep an eye on your maid and make sure nothing out of the ordinary is going on. Keep an eye on things
If you can't be at the office all the time but like to know what's going on, a security camera can help do just that. You can keep an eye on things from your home computer with a few quick clicks of your mouse and make sure your business is running smoothly and nothing out of the ordinary is going on. Protecting your staff
CCTV can protect your staff physically against violence from customers. At the same time, it can also protect them against false accusations - perhaps coming from colleagues or even from client and customers. Encourage good behaviour
Having a CCTV camera inside offices may help in creating discipline among the employees. For bosses, who want their presence felt so that efficiency at work is optimized, a camera hovering the employees will give the same effect. Monitoring high-risk area
Cameras may be placed in high-risk areas inside a factory. Such areas may include those in which fires can possibly break out. A camera in place there will lessen potential damages because emergency measures can be made immediately. Cameras may also be placed in areas where accidents can happen. This is important so that life-saving measures can be employed promptly. Increase customer’s confidence
Banks and shops equipped with CCTV cameras give the customers a sense of security and safety. The customers feel secure and this enhances the customers' confidence.

Statement of the Problem

Both scenarios above show that CCTV implementation in this country still has a problem and need to be addressed carefully. Despite our action to spent money for CCTV installation, we still have to find the solution for a secure framework in implementing CCTV system. Definitely, besides considering the cost, we also need to look into at the best operational requirements and it mechanism to run the system. By referring to best example for Nurins’s case, to get the most out of CCTV in terms of detection, we will need to ensure the following factors:(i) 1. The cameras are active and the recording medium is recording, whether on tape or hard disk.(ii) 2. The images meet the standards required by the objectives, if we want the images to be used as evidence in legal proceedings then they have to be of acceptable quality.(iii) 3. The cameras have to be focused on the incident concerned. So if we are protecting a specific entrance or boundary, the camera can be static and not monitored, to record someone in its field of vision. The problem though is that an incident cannot be detected or recorded if It occurs out of the camera range. If you are covering an area with a lot of movement of people you will want to be able to identify the incident and the operator ensure they capture the relevant details on camera.

4. We will need to be able to identify areas of concern, and have procedures in place for analysing the information and acting on the information gathered.

Hypothesis
The Hypothesis pursued and tested in this study was 1. There is no significant between the Security personnel officer and the Video Surveillance Security System.

Significant of the study This study serves as a major part of the course requirement as it has developed their skills in terms of self-esteem, time management, practicality, strategic planning and patience. Hence, they are able to obtain the necessary information on time and reporting it in the most presentable manner they can. This study can be effective tool for reference to the importance of CCTV.

CHAPTER II
Review of Related Literature
Foreign Literature
CCTV: Literature Review and Bibliography
By
Wade Deisman
University of Ottawa

Research and Evaluation Branch
Community, Contract and Aboriginal Policing Services Directorate
Royal Canadian Mounted Police
Ottawa
Table of Contents
Executive Summary
Introduction
Overview Aim and Objectives Terms of Reference Scope Method
Description of the Literature CCTV and the Theory of Deterrence CCTV and Crime CCTV and Criminal justice CCTV and Fear of Crime Legality, Policy Formation and the Regulation of CCTV
Open Questions – Further Research
Conclusions

Executive Summary
Faced with the demand that they develop more efficacious security measures and find morecost-effective crime prevention strategies, law enforcement agencies around the globe are, nowmore than ever, turning toward technological systems to enhance operational capacities, extendtheir reach and reduce costs. In this context, CCTV surveillance systems have been adopted for use in public spaces in many countries. While these systems were originally embraced for their deterrent effect on crime and touted for their salutary effects on public fear, the fact is that no body of scientific evidence actually existed at the time they were adopted that could either support or refute claims to such effects. Today, the situation is different: there is a significant body of research on CCTV, though it must be acknowledged that the literature is still in its nascency and hence, that many questions are left unanswered. Notwithstanding this caveat, it is quite clear that there is a need for an independent assessment of the record of evidence in order to determine what we know about the effects of CCTV. This review is a response to that need and describes what we know about the impact of CCTV on crime and crime prevention; on the criminal justice system more generally; and, on the public's feeling of safety.
The review shows that the effects of CCTV on crime are both quite variable and fairly unpredictable. Deterrence effects of CCTV are not constant over time and they vary across crime categories. For example, CCTV systems appear to have the least effect upon public disorder offences. The magnitude of deterrence effects appears to depend on location: the greatest effect appears to occur in car parks. Furthermore, the cameras do not need to be operational for deterrence effects to be observed. The deterrence effects of CCTV are highest when it is used in conjunction with other crime reduction measures and when tailored to the local setting. Finally, while deterrence effects have been shown before the cameras are operational, continuing publicity is required to maintain the effects.
The studies describe a number of aspects of CCTV at the level of operations that are problematic in terms of the broader aims and constraints placed on the criminal justice system. To be more specific: CCTV monitoring is discriminatory and the use of CCTV systems raises a plethora of profiling issues. In addition, contrary to common supposition, there is no simple correspondence between the discovery of a criminal activity and the resulting deployment and arrest. Furthermore, there is little evidence to support/contradict claims of increased conviction rates. Finally, a paucity of research on impact of CCTV in criminal justice proceedings. Finally, the research on the impact of CCTV in the public sphere shows that CCTV generally increases feelings of safety and that it also reduces fear of victimization. While the public is generally supportive of CCTV are not concerned about the impact of CCTV on privacy, some evidence suggests there are concerns about profiling.

Introduction
In the course of their evolution, western societies have developed and employed a diverse array of technologies to facilitate and co-ordinate activities, to produce and distribute goods, and to organize and administer their affairs. Modern societies have consequently come to be characterized by considerable technological complexity. Automated surveillance systems and remote monitoring devices now constitute an integral part of the prevailing technological infrastructure, enabling modes of transportation, education, government and commerce that would otherwise be unthinkable. CCTV systems, in particular, have increasingly become part of these larger infrastructures and are now ubiquitous in many urban centers. Until the mid-eighties, the deployment of CCTV systems had largely been limited to private spaces (Hempel 2001). The appearance of these systems in settings typically considered ‘public’ is a more recent phenomenon; and, it is one which occurred with considerable alacrity in many countries. A diverse array of aims and objectives has motivated the introduction of CCTV into public spaces including: public safety, deterrence, enhanced detection and increased response times. In the contemporary context, the predominant uses of CCTV in public spaces are in the management of risks, traffic jams; fire, accidents and crime prevention (Hempel 2001).Some have welcomed the appearance of CCTV in the public sphere. Indeed, enthusiasts of such systems cite a wide variety of direct and spin-off benefits including: a safer environment, reduced fear, raised property values, lower insurance premiums, enhanced visitor experience, true community partnerships, and a common community purpose. Others, however, are far less sanguine. Privacy advocates worry that the proliferation of such systems in public space will lead to the disappearance of privacy. Libertarians, on both the Left and Right, have seen such systems as another step toward an Orwellian system of centralized state social control. Human rights advocates contend that such systems may intensify an already problematic proclivity toward racial and ethnic profiling in law enforcement and argue that they are an affront to privacy. Questions from other quarters have been more utilitarian, but no less trenchant: many worry that the cameras merely displace, rather than suppress, criminal activity. Still others suspect that the effects of the systems will dissipate after a couple of years
.Because initial discussions about the effects of CCTV occurred largely in the absence of scientific evidence that could support or refute the claims, early debates over CCTV seldom progressed beyond mere imputation and conjecture. With the development of a growing body of scientific research on CCTV, however, the effects of such systems are beginning to be known and the case for or against CCTV can now be more clearly assessed. Such a task is particularly a propos in the Canadian context: in the wake of the events of 9/11, there is mounting pressure to step-up surveillance and increase the monitoring of public spaces. Ultimately, of course, decisions about whether to deploy CCTV systems on a wider scale cannot be based solely on the evidence about their efficacy in relation to intended objectives: a more extensive set of normative issues must also be considered and questions about the desirability of such systems must be grounded in a broader conception of quality of life. This is a broader task, however, and one that stands beyond the scope of the current study. Overview
Aim and Objectives
Effective decision making at the level of policy formation depends upon an adequate stock of valid and reliable factual information about the potential effects associated with a given initiative, instrument or program. At the broadest level, the aim of this review is to give a clear sense of what can reliably be believed to be true about the effects of CCTV systems based on the existing evidence, to link these findings to a wider set of questions and considerations at the level of policy, and to highlight outstanding issues and areas where further research is needed.

The specific objectives of this review follow closely from this broader aim. To be more precise, the objectives of the review are threefold: (1) to survey the existing research on CCTV systems,(2) to assess the findings presented in existing studies in relation to questions of reliability and validity; and finally, (3) to organize findings about CCTV in four areas:
CCTV & Crime
Findings about the effects of CCTV systems on crime, including: evidence of deterrence, displacement and/or diffusion effects across crime categories; evidence of differential effects according to crime category.

CCTV & Justice
Findings about the effects of CCTV systems in the Criminal Justice system, including: evidence of effect on detection levels; evidence of effect on response times; evidence of effect on apprehension rates; evidence of effect on conviction rates.

CCTV& Public
Findings about the effect of CCTV on the public, including: evidence of effects of CCTV’s on feelings of safety in public; evidence of the effects of CCTV’s on fear of victimization.
CCTV & Policy
What approaches have various governments taken to the CCTV question? What kinds of regulatory schemes have been put in place?

Terms of Reference
CCTV
In this study, CCTV, or Closed Circuit Television, refers to electronic monitoring systems which make use of video cameras, connected by means of a ‘closed’ (or non-broadcast) circuit, to capture, collect, record, and/or relay visual information about the event-status of a given space over time. The broad sweep of this definition is attractive for our purposes in so far as it allows us to bring together for consideration a wide range of studies which have queried the effects of various CCTV systems. However, it needs to be emphasized that the CCTV systems addressed in each of the studies under consideration were, in certain respects, unique. Hence, allowances must be made for the fact that the impact of CCTV systems will vary with the technical capacities (i.e. pan, tilt, zoom, multiplexing, etc) , operational characteristics (i.e. 24 hour monitoring, staffing etc) and actual physical configuration of each system (i.e. # of cameras, lighting in the area etc.). It also needs to be understood that these systems are not static – they can be modified, upgraded, etc. There is also some evidence to suggest that the effect of a given system will be influenced by the approach taken to its installation: if a high profile, public campaign accompanies installation the effects are often more dramatic.

Surveillance
In this study is broadly defined as the observation of persons, vehicles, or activity taking place at some given location for the purpose of obtaining information regarding the activities and identities of the persons (Lyon 1997; Taylor 1999). Direct surveillance is taken to involves the physical presence and senses of a human surveillant, whereas electronic surveillance (of which CCTV is only one type) involves mediation and, typically (though not necessarily) distance from the object or context observed. Further distinctions can be drawn between different types of surveillance: visual, auditory, and olfactory.

Scope
Sources consulted in the initial data compilation search stage included scholarly contacts, online databases of scholarly journals, World Wide Web search engines, and the electronic catalogue of holdings at both Carleton University and the University of Ottawa. The search produced a wide range of materials. These materials were subsequently divided into primary and secondary categories according to considerations of source, reliability and validity. Materials from scholarly journals and government publications were assigned to the primary category and annotated. Secondary sources including newspapers, magazine articles, and web sites were indexed for the purposes of reference.
In the process of surveying the literature, studies which raised normative issues or ethical concerns about the social and political ramifications associated with the use of CCTV in public spaces were noted and referenced for subsequent consideration. The primary focus of this review is on work which presents theoretical accounts and empirical findings about the effects of CCTV on potential perpetrators, on criminal justice processes and outcomes, and on the public.

Method
The characteristics of the literature review as a method of research are well documented. The literature review does not contribute any new empirical evidence, and hence cannot go beyond what the literature itself says. Its strength lies in the fact that it assesses the strengths and shortcomings existing evidence in a comprehensive and critical fashion. Hence, the findings as advanced by each study examined here are not treated holus-bolus. Rather the studies were reviewed in order to weigh the reliability of their procedures and assess the validity of their conclusions in terms of a larger set of criterion.

That much said, some common shortcomings shared by almost all studies of CCTV at the level of research design and methodology identified by Armitage (2002) include: * inadequate pre and post CCTV time periods in which data are collected * no account taken of seasonal variations * no control areas for comparison * little discussion of displacement or diffusion of benefits * size of the sample was not specified * lack of independent evaluation
For the purposes of this review, the primary literature was the central focus. At the initial analysis stage, the material was broken down into sixteen thematic areas serviceable to the objectives of the review. Some key thematic categories in relation to CCTV are: crime prevention, theoretical and conceptual issues, public and community sentiment/response, the policing relationship, and policy issues.

Description of the Literature
The research on CCTV is, in many respects, still at an embryonic stage of development. Very little of our existing knowledge about CCTV is sufficient to answer questions at the level of cause and effect. While the literature is of a sufficient breadth to allow for an exploration of the central issues raised by CCTV systems, many questions about the impact of CCTV can only be addressed inferentially. Significant primary research is needed in a variety of areas, and a much larger body of experimental or quasi-experimental research will have to develop before it will be possible to talk definitively about the effect of CCTV systems. Second, significant variances in the social and cultural attitudes toward CCTV need to be acknowledged. Public attitudes toward CCTV have a great impact on the degree to which such systems are accepted and effective. The bulk of research has been conducted in the UK because that is where CCTV systems are most prolific.

CCTV and the Theory of Deterrence
The promise of CCTV lies in the expectation of deterrence. Deterrence approaches, and of crime prevention strategies in particular, aim to put into place practices or conditions that ‘convince criminals to desist from criminal activities, delay their actions, or avoid a particular target’(Siegel 1992:133). These approaches are premised on a number of behavioural expectations – and some submerged assumptions about the cognitive processes, motivational impulses, and empirical experiences of potential offenders. To the extent that efficacy of CCTV as a deterrence tactic depends, at least in part, on the degree to which these expectations and assumptions hold true, a reconstructive explication of the chain of expectations and assumptions is necessary. Hence, the deterrent effect of CCTV will obtain if: 1) A potential perpetrator enters a space monitored by CCTV and is either already aware of the fact of monitoring or somehow become aware of the fact. 2) The potential perpetrators either: a) already holds the belief that a crime committed in a space monitored by CCTV is more likely to be detected or b) the potential perpetrator somehow comes to that conclusion once they observe the cameras in operation. The submerged assumption here is that potential perpetrators are motivated to avoid detection. 3) The potential perpetrator either: a) already holds the belief that they are more likely to be identified if they commit a crime in a space monitored by CCTV or b)the potential perpetrator comes to that conclusion once they observe the cameras in operation. The submerged assumption here is that the potential perpetrators are motivated to avoid identification. 4) The potential perpetrators either: a) already hold the belief that they are more likely to be apprehended if they commit a crime in a space monitored by CCTV or b) to come to that conclusion once they observe the cameras in operation. The submerged assumption here is that the potential perpetrator is motivated to avoid apprehension. 5) The potential perpetrator engages in a calculation, in which s/he weighs the potential gains and against the following motivations: a) not to have their crime detected b) not to be identified c) not to be apprehended 6) The potential perpetrator concludes, as a result of this recalculation, that not having their crime detected, not being identified, not being apprehended or any combination outweighs the potential gains associated with going ahead and committing the crime anyway. 7) The potential perpetrator, in the face of this conclusion, makes the decision not to commit a crime. 8) The potential perpetrator abides by this decision. The submerged assumption is that the potential perpetrator is actually in control or him or her to the degree that s/he is capable of obeying reason rather than impulse.
To the extent that the assumptions or expectations do not obtain with respect to particular potential perpetrator, we can expect the probabilities to decline proportionally

CCTV and Crime
In assessing the findings about the effects of CCTV on crime, three caveats must be acknowledged. First, CCTV systems are often only one part of a larger crime control or prevention strategy, making it is impossible to determine whether observed changes in crime rates following installation are casually connected to, or even in any way a consequence of, CCTV coverage. While the problem of conflation militates against the validity of causal inference, we need not dismiss the data derived from such cases tout court . After all, in its naturalistic setting, CCTV will typically be employed in conjunction with a variety of other strategies. Second, we cannot forget that changes in crime rates may not be a reliable measure of changes in actual incidence. Third, as emphasized at the outset, there are methodological complications associated with comparing individual CCTV system because each system is different and so are the procedures for monitoring. That much said by way of qualification, the evidence about the effect of CCTV on crime is mixed, conflicting, and sometimes quite contradictory. The only thing the literature does show, quite unambiguously, is that CCTV systems do not have uniform effects across crime categories. It follows that, when investigating questions about prevention, crime cannot be operationalized as an omnibus. For the purposes of analysis, then, a more discrete set of categories that distinguishes between crime types will be employed.

Property Crime
Some studies suggest that CCTV is most effective in reducing property crime. Some reductionism the commission of certain types of property crime do appear to be correlated with CCTV coverage.
Car Crime as An Aggregate Category
In his study of six crime prevention initiatives, Tilly found that car parks with CCTV installed had lower rates of car crime (defined as an aggregate) as compared to both the period prior to installation and control group areas without CCTV (1993). Short and Ditton (1996) too, saw reductions in vehicle crime. Armitage also found significant decreases in car crime following installation. Finally, in his evaluation of the impact of the installation of CCTV within Doncaster city centre Shins also found a reduction in vehicle crime (1998).

Theft From Vehicles
While brown (1995) found that thefts from vehicles increased, Poyner (1992) found significant decreases in the level of thefts from vehicle was found to result from the use of CCTV.

Grand Theft Auto
Brown (1995) found a reduction in theft of vehicles, while the effect upon thft of vehicles was uncertain (1992a).

Burglary
Chatterton found that the use of CCTV in a sheltered housing scheme was effective in reducing burglary within (1994). Armitage also found diminishing burglary rates (1999). Short and Ditton (1996) found reduction in burglary rates in Airdrie. However, Squires (1998) and Skinns (1998). Did not. Brown found a “containment’ of burglary of shops offences coincided with the introduction of other measures (1995).

Stolen Goods
Armitage et al. found decreases in the handling stolen goods. No other research to date has addressed this issue.

Criminal Damage
Decreases in criminal damage (Armitage 1999; Squires 1999). Others found that criminal damage increased (Brown 1995). Skinns, criminal damage did not decline (1998). In another case, the impact of CCTV on rates of criminal damage to vehicles was uncertain. (Poyner 1992a). Poyner found that CCTV reduced vandalism on buses. (1992b). Grandmassion (1997) found no overall impact on the behaviour of offenders.

Shoplifting
In Airdrie Town Centre, Shot and Ditton (1996) found a reduction in shoplifting. Squires found a shoplifting remained constant (1998). Skinns found shoplifting did not decline (1998).

Arson
Short and Ditton (1996) found in reduction arson. In their study of Montreal’s underground subway network, Grandmassion (2997) found no overall impact on the behaviour of offenders. Controlling for kinds of crime or for specific areas made no difference.

Crimes Involving People
There is some evidence to support a positive effect of CCTV on crimes that involve people – but also contradictory findings.
Assault
In larger metropolitan districts, CCTV had less impact upon personal crime (Brown1995). Within smaller market towns, the number of assaults declined (Brown 1995).Violence in Burnley town centre underwent significant reductions in the area covered by CCTV (Armitage 1999). However, Skinns found that CCTV appeared to have no effect ton the personal crime offences such as assault (1998).

Robbery
Webb and Laycock found decreases in incidences of robbery in London Underground Stations that were smaller and less complex in their layout (Webb and Laycock 1992).The Ilford study revealed a reduction in robbery and theft from the person offences.
Drug Offences
Burnley underwent significant reductions in the area covered by CCTV (Armitage et al.
1999). Squires found no such reduction in drug-related offences (1998).

Displacement versus Diffusion
The presence of CCTV systems in one area may have consequences for proximate, and even non-proximate, areas which do not have coverage. Generally speaking, criminal activities may 1) be displaced to non-coverage areas 2) the benefits are diffused to surrounding areas (Armitage2002). There is insufficient data to form any clear conclusions about this issue.
There was no evidence of displacement and some evidence of a diffusion of benefits in the evaluation of CCTV in Burnley Town Centre. (Armitage 1999). Brown found evidence of a diffusion of benefits for property offences (1995). However, for personal crime (theft, robbery)he found evidence of geographical displacement to other areas of the city centre not covered(Brown 1995). Skinns found diffusion effects in the areas ‘buffering’ those covered by the CCTV, but there was a displacement of crime to outlying areas. (1998). An evaluation of two parking facilities found that an adjacent car park, which was not covered by the CCTV system, also showed reductions in crime. (Poyner 1992a). Poyner (1992b) also found evidence for a diffusion of benefits when studying the effects of video cameras fitted to buses.
The research does show that CCTV systems have a life cycle (Berry and Carter’s 1992).According to Brown (1995) the cameras need not even be operational to have deterrence effects. Burnley’s (1999) work suggests that even publicity of the plan to install CCTV’s can have a deterrence effect.
To the extent that the publicity surrounding a given initiative may exhaust itself, close monitoring is essential to continuing success (Armitage 2002). The length of time for which a particular initiative can reduce crime without the crime reduction effects ‘bottoming out’ has clear implications for those managing such initiatives. Several CCTV evaluations have revealed that the initial reductions in crime and disorder following the installation of CCTV can fade if publicity is not maintained (Norris 1997). For example, Webb and Laycock found that the effectiveness of CCTV within London Underground stations declined after approximately 12months (1992). Brown found that CCTV effects on vehicle crime and criminal damage began to diminish within eight months (1995). Tilly’s work suggests that the crime prevention benefits of CCTV begin to fade unless publicity relating to successes was maintained (1993). Similarly, in the Burnley Town Centre study, Armitage (1999) found a definite life cycle, after which the positive results began to fade.
CCTV and Criminal Justice
All in all, we have very little information about what impact CCTV has on the detection, arrest and conviction of offender. There seems to be little debate about the idea that CCTV increases detection rates. However, this claim proves quite difficult to substantiate. Few studies that have examined the relationship between CCTV and detection have used a control group. The claim that detection increases the likelihood of apprehension needs to be questioned.
Issues of admissibility need to be considered where CCTV evidence is introduced into court proceedings (Sharpe 2000). There are cases when the admission of such evidence may be seen as adverse to the rights of the accused. This is particularly likely to occur in cases where it can be shown that the collection of the evidence was the result of racial profiling or stereotyping. In point of fact, there is a growing body of evidence to suggest that CCTV operators do engage in racial and socio-economic profiling (Norris 2000). Norris and Armstrong argue that the target selection of CCTV operators can be massively discriminatory towards males, particularly Black males (1999). Those monitoring CCTV have been found to adopt police categories of suspicion when viewing the screens Ditton (1999).
When certain sections of the community are disproportionately monitored, this not only acts to portray an impression of criminality amongst these groups (certain acts are noticed whilst other groups may be carrying out the same acts unmonitored and unnoticed), it also conveys a message to these individuals that they are not trusted.
In the Canadian context, in particular, it needs to be remembered that the Supreme Court has opted for a high standard of exclusion in favor of protecting Charter rights – especially where the possibility of discrimination is at issue.

CCTV and Fear of Crime
The ways in which CCTV will affect public space is determined, to a larger degree, by public response to the presence of the cameras. Most studies show a considerable degree of public support for CCTV systems. For example, Tilley found that 67% of those interviewed 'did not mind' being observed by street cameras (1999). A full 79% of those interviewed thought they would make people feel less likely that they would become victims of crime (Tilley 1999). Other studies have shown that even those who are profiled by the cameras are supportive.

A number of researchers have found that CCTV reduced levels of fear of crime (Chatterton and Frenz 1994; Brown 1995; Mahalingham 1996; and Sarno 1996). Armitage suggests that the methodology utilized to ascertain fear of crime levels should be questioned before conclusions are made (2002). The installation of CCTV did not affect avoidance behaviour - the proportion of those avoid ‘dangerous’ part of the city. However, small reductions in fear of victimization were apparent (Tilley 1999). In Glasgow, Tilly found that 72% of all those interviewed believed CCTV cameras would prevent crime and disorder.

Legality, Policy Formation and the Regulation of CCTV
Legality
While there are a number of factors that must be considered in determining what kinds of policies and procedures should be in place to regulate the use of CCTV systems in public spaces, the more immediate priorities are legal in nature. To be more specific, the legality of the R.C.M.P’s use of CCTV in public spaces has recently been called into question by privacy oversight officials at both provincial and federal levels and a number of critical questions have been put to the Supreme Court.

The statement of claim submitted by the Privacy Commissioner of Canada to the Supreme Court of British Columbia identifies a number of problematic areas in relation to the use of CCTV systems in public spaces. For the purposes of this discussion, primary attention is given to the formidable legal questions raised in the Commissioner’s challenge, in principle, to very use of CCTV systems in public spaces. Pending the exploration of this basic issue, secondary attention is turned to those questions which deal with the operational procedures and para-technical aspects. The legal challenges to the use of CCTV draw on the Privacy Act and The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
In the first case, it is argued that continuous, non-selective monitoring is a violation of the Privacy Act and that the sophistication of the technology makes them a particularly privacy-invasive – requiring a higher standard of justification than other forms of intelligence gathering. This claim finds its basis in the Regina v. Wrong decision of the Supreme Court of Canada in1990, in which the Court held that “to permit unrestricted video surveillance by agents of the state would seriously diminish the degree of privacy we can reasonably expect to enjoy in a free society”.
With respect to the Charter, it is claimed that indiscriminate video surveillance in the absence of cause, even without continuous recording, breaches the fundamental privacy rights of all Canadians as protected by sections 2(d), 6, 7 and 8 of the Charter – Article 12 of the United Nations Universal declaration of Human rights and Article 17 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
In this later context, the Privacy Commissioner argues that Canadians retain the right of being lost in the Crowd – of going about their business without being systematically monitored by anyone, let alone the police. Further that there is a reasonable expectation of – and entitlement to – a degree of privacy – even in a public place. And finally – that the use of video surveillance by the R.C.M.P. infringes on the exercise of freedom of association, prevents the exercise of mobility rights, deprives Canadians of their liberty and security of person and constitutes unreasonable search and seizure.
The heart of the Privacy Commissioner’s legal challenge to the use of CCTV lies in his charge that the benefits purported to CCTV have not confirmed by research. Indeed, he also charges that CCTV displaces rather than reduces crime; that it does not reduce violent crime; that it drains other police resources and may reduce the number of police on the street. Hence – the sacrifice of Charter rights and freedoms yield greater safety or security.
In so far as the determination of the Supreme Court on the issue of principle is not yet forthcoming, it is appropriate to table this matter pending further jurisprudence. In the meantime, however, if it is determined that the use of CCTV systems by the State in public spaces is not, as a matter of principle, unconstitutional or illegal objectionable, there is still a formidable set of issues associated with the governance and regulation of CCTV systems so that their use does not run afoul of the law or the Charter. These were also addressed by the Privacy Commissioner and require unpacking and explanation.

Policy Issues
This section reviews some of the policy issues that arise as a result of operational concerns that have been expressed (by the Privacy Commissioner as well as other) about the use of CCTV, and subsequently examines the regulatory approaches adopted in the UK and Australia in order to suggest some principles that may be useful to frame the issues in the Canadian context. a. CCTV systems rely on the judgment of their operators. In the absence of formalized imperatives, that provide operators with specific and precise guidelines – there is a higher likelihood of profiling, stereotyping and discrimination. The policy formation process needs to consider the criteria which would determine who operators monitor, what is the maximum duration of monitoring is, what the minimum duration is, and what kinds of factors extend this duration In addition, in so far as continuous, non-selective recording poses a much higher privacy risk, criteria need to be established for determining when cameras are switched to record mode, how continuous the recording can be, etc. Further, procedures need to be established with respect to the rationale underlying monitoring. Logs need to be kept and there must be oversight mechanisms. Finally, provisions must be put into place for disciplinary measures or sanctions that might result in the event of an infection or violation of the provisions. b. With respects to the records created by the cameras there are several questions. First. What principles govern use and disclosure? Under what conditions should a person be granted access to a video record? Under what conditions might they be denied? How long are the records to be preserved? How are they to be disposed of? c. In the UK, the Data protection Act, the Human Rights Act and the Private Security Industry Act 2001 from the basic regulatory structure. Together, these acts make the following provisions for the use of CCTV systems. * Requires registration with statement of purpose * Establish compliance protocols * Sets out signage requirements: including the size and content of the message * Limits uses to original purpose * Requires that cameras be position so as not to capture unintended * Allows individuals access to the data * Binds public authorities to principles of respect for privacy * Sets standards for the collection and processing of images for use in court, the sharing of personal data by authorities, good practice for showing CCTV footage to witness for identification, and the regulation of targeted surveillance. * Requires private sector CCTV operators to be licensed.

Principles of Policy Formation and Process
From a social science perspective, we know very little about processes of policy formation in the literature. It is clear however, at least in the case of the UK, that a dense network of actors have been involved in the process of policy formation including: local authorities, police, media, civil liberties groups, retailers, proprietors, insurance companies, schools and the suppliers of CCTV systems. Indeed, one of the key benefits of CCTV is that it brings together these actors around a common purpose.
In addition to questions of legality, the UK Home Office has suggested a number of criteriaought to be considered to guide actors who are in the process of making decisions with respect tothe deployment of CCTV.
Proportionality
The perceived threat of crime or harm to the area must be sufficient to justify the installation of CCTV; the level of coverage should be in keeping with the level of crime; and, whether the presence of the system would disrupt the balance between public safety and the needs of the individual.

Accountability
There must be training procedures in place to ensure that the monitoring practices of CCTV users are governed by appropriate codes for practice and sets of procedures.

Balance
CCTV should not be over used. Other means of surveillance or social control may prove just as effective.

Open Questions - Further Research
1) While the previous discussion establishes that the verdict is not yet in on the effects of CCTV systems, it also suggests that it is simplistic to approach questions about the efficacy of CCTV systems in isolation. Indeed, it seems quite clear that a multivariate research designs which make allowances for the multi-dimensional character of security need to be employed.

2) The connection between objective states of security and safety and subjective feelings of safety and security needs to be explored in the context of CCTV.
3) Finally, there are question about whether improved training for those responsible for monitoring CCTV systems may go some way towards addressing the problems of profiling – or whether such tendencies are an inherent part of the activity we know as surveillance.

Recommendations for Further Research
1) The cost-effectiveness of CCTV in relation to other responses needs to be considered
2) The effectiveness of novel uses of targeted CCTV initiatives on victims and offenders needs to be examined
3) More research needs to be done on displacement to areas without CCTV. - The beneficial/detrimental impact of CCTV on neighbouring areas not covered by the cameras.
4) More detailed investigation must be conducted to determine what features make a particular scheme a success or a failure.

Conclusion
The growth of systems of surveillance needs to be understood both as a consequences of the increasing complexity of modern societies and as a particular epiphenomena of ‘liberal democratic’ forms of governing. Analyses of these phenomena have typically constructed the question in terms of finding an appropriate balance between human rights and security. However, the proliferation of CCTV systems may prove to poses a significant challenge to these countries cannot be treated in a uniform or homogenizing way. In the UK, the extent of CCTV coverage increased dramatically over the last decade and this despite the lack of substantive research evidence to suggest that CCTV works. What accounts for such an expansion? Critics of CCTV declaim the proliferation as the consequence of a combination of political expediency and the ‘apparent’ (as opposed to actual) efficacy of CCTV systems as crime prevention tools. Canada is at a cross-roads with respect to CCTV. In the wake of 9/11 and the new climate of fearfulness, the demand for more security has become ubiquitous. Is CCTV really the solution?

http://www.slideshare.net/cas123/thesis-my-documentation http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Closed-circuit_television_camera http://www.cctvconsult.com/pages/cctv.htm http://www.clvresources.com/Importance-Of-CCTV/ http://www.academia.edu/1279933/Secure_framework_for_implementing_close_circuit_television_CCTV_system_as_a_crime_prevention_tool_case_study_Malaysia_ http://www.academia.edu/357626/CCTV_Literature_Review_and_Bibliography Aim objective hypothesis conceptual teorical

I. The problem and its Background
Introduction
Background of the study
Statement of the Problem
Hypothesis
Conceptual Framework
Theoretical Framework
Scope and Limitation
Significance of the Study
Definition of Terms

II. Review of related Literature
Foreign Literature
Foreign Studies
Local Literature
Local Studies

III. Research Methodology
Research Design
Respondents
Sampling Techniques
Data Gathering Procedure

IV. Presentation, Analysis, and Interpretation of Data V. Summary of Findings, Conclusion, Recommnendation