How to balance Effective with acceptable
03rd January 2017
Prof Jon Coaffee, who spoke twice at the recent UK Security Expo 2016 in London.
It’s easy to have effective security, he said, by putting up bollards and gates everywhere, to stop things getting in; but this radically alters urban life, he said.
The 9-11 attacks saw a reactive approach; with fortress buildings and bollards and barriers, in a makeshift way, around buildings and public spaces. But calls came to integrate security with planning and design of the public realm, and to soften security features in the streetscape. Under the Labour Government of the 2000s, the Lord West review of counter-terrorism called for counter-terrorism (CT) to be embedded in design and planning of public places. In practice, that meant thinking about unobtrusive alternatives to visible security.
Coaffee questioned if CPTED (crime prevention through environmental design) was the right approach, because, he suggested, terrorist thinking had changed: “They don’t care if they get caught, because they may be blowing themselves up anyway,” and in that case CPTED is no use. While retrofitting security to a building or site is more expensive, and less effective, it’s difficult to determine the cost of designing in security, he said. Is it ten per cent of a building’s cost? That’s significant for a developer to add; hence it can be hard to make a business case for expensive counter-terrorism designed into the security of a building. Coaffee gave some London examples – Whitehall, Arsenal FC’s Emirates Stadium, and outside the Gherkin building – of how security, such as seats and balustrades, need not be ugly.
Coaffee pointed to a ‘trajectory’ in designing against terrorism, from a focus on visible security to a more recent move towards more invisible designs; although the recent terror attacks in Paris and Brussels have led to a re-emphasis on ‘hardened spaces’. The 2016 review for the Mayor of London by Lord Harris suggested a city where security and resilience is designed in, as part of the city’s fabric. While the official CPNI (Centre for the Protection of National Infrastructure) has a list of approved anti-terrorism products, they are mainly bollards and related planters, and very few are of the more unobtrusive style, Coaffee said.
Summing up about the future of CT design, he asked if it was even possible; and who should be responsible. Is it proportionate, and how visible; and what of that balance between effective and acceptable – and acceptable to whom.
In a separate talk on day two of the exhibition, pictured, he said we need a clearer understanding of how social media – which can be a force for good, and not, in a crisis such as a terror attack – can and cannot be used for public security. He pointed to legal, ethical and data protection issues. He summed up that the technology of urban security is fast-moving and the public is being enrolled in countering security: “We are all counter-terrorists.” But while it’s easy to say that everyone should work together, it’s actually difficult to put in place; what are the training needs, for example, especially to secure so-called ‘soft targets’?
Data protection date
16th December 2016
A keynote address will come from Christopher Docksey, Coordinating Director, the European Union’s Data Protection Supervisor. Other confirmed speakers include: David Cole, Managing Director, fast.MAP; Stewart Room, Partner, Global Head of Cyber Security and Data Protection Legal Services and Lead, UK Data Protection Practice, at the audit firm PwC; Yves Schwarzbart, Head of Policy and Regulatory Affairs, IAB UK and Toby Stevens, Director, Enterprise Privacy Group.
Areas for discussion say the event organisers Westminster eForum include:
Preparing for EU GDPR – assessing the impact on UK organisations and citizens, and discussing next steps for implementation;
Implications of Brexit – examining immediate and long-term effects of changes to the UK’s relationship with the EU on implementation and future policy;
International collaboration – looking at cross-jurisdiction data storage and the developing international landscape, including initiatives such as Privacy Shield’s implementation;
Future proofing – assessing how innovation in technologies such as M2M and AI might require regulatory thinking to develop and the implications for EU GDPR;
Commercial opportunities – latest on how businesses are adapting the way they utilise data for competitive service innovation in anticipation of the new regulatory environment; and
Personal data and privacy – best practice in effective communication, building trust, offering clear choices, and putting in place roles to meet new regulatory requirements.
For details visit http://www.professionalsecurity.co.uk/events/data-protection-seminar/