SafoMeter - Assessing Safety in Public Spaces: The urban area of Prishtina
This is a modal window.
The media could not be loaded, either because the server or network failed or because the format is not supported.
Formal Metadata
| Title |
| |
| Title of Series | ||
| Number of Parts | 266 | |
| Author | ||
| License | CC Attribution 3.0 Germany: You are free to use, adapt and copy, distribute and transmit the work or content in adapted or unchanged form for any legal purpose as long as the work is attributed to the author in the manner specified by the author or licensor. | |
| Identifiers | 10.5446/66535 (DOI) | |
| Publisher | ||
| Release Date | ||
| Language |
Content Metadata
| Subject Area | ||
| Genre | ||
| Abstract |
|
FOSS4G Prizren Kosovo 202369 / 266
10
17
23
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
52
53
80
84
85
91
110
116
129
148
164
167
169
173
174
181
182
183
186
187
199
202
204
206
209
215
241
248
265
00:00
Asynchronous Transfer ModeMereologyMathematical analysisComputer architectureState observerGeometrySpacetimeInformationOcean currentComputer animation
00:46
Software frameworkPressure volume diagramData typePerformance appraisalPhysical systemSoftware frameworkMathematicsGroup actionFocus (optics)Different (Kate Ryan album)SpacetimeRow (database)Computer animation
01:49
Price indexSpacetimeSoftware frameworkPhysical systemMetrePerformance appraisalInformation securityPerspective (visual)Regulator genePhysicalismLecture/ConferenceMeeting/Interview
03:10
Software frameworkPressure volume diagramDivision (mathematics)Multi-agent systemPrice indexEquals signObservational studyPerspective (visual)Software frameworkCoefficient of determinationUniform resource locatorDistanceCASE <Informatik>NumberGenderMereologyPrice indexBuildingSpacetimePhysicalismLatent heatObject (grammar)Position operatorPresentation of a groupVariety (linguistics)MathematicsBit rateWeightOrder (biology)Information privacyMultiplication signCondition numberLecture/ConferenceMeeting/InterviewComputer animation
09:47
Software frameworkGoodness of fitCASE <Informatik>PlanningAreaType theorySinc functionObservational studyComputer animation
10:46
Level (video gaming)Different (Kate Ryan album)Element (mathematics)SpacetimeMathematical analysisQuantumField (computer science)HexagonDistanceNegative numberFrequencyMappingMetreArchaeological field surveyNeighbourhood (graph theory)Position operatorPrice indexWell-formed formulaElement (mathematics)PhysicalismPhase transitionCorrespondence (mathematics)Point (geometry)AreaComputer animation
12:48
Price indexPrice indexResultantWeightEqualiser (mathematics)AreaFunctional (mathematics)Level (video gaming)Musical ensembleLecture/ConferenceMeeting/Interview
13:18
Metropolitan area networkLimit (category theory)Multiplication signPole (complex analysis)Square numberCoefficient of determinationNeighbourhood (graph theory)DistanceAreaPrice indexPhysicalismGene clusterDifferential (mechanical device)Mixed realityCASE <Informatik>MereologyAxiom of choicePresentation of a groupSpacetimeGraph coloringComputer animation
18:01
Price indexResultantMusical ensemblePrice indexAnalytic continuationAreaArithmetic mean
18:53
CASE <Informatik>Multiplication signGroup actionArchaeological field surveyFrequencyVector potentialLimit (category theory)Dependent and independent variablesCoefficient of determinationSpacetimeObject (grammar)MetreResultantCountingPopulation densityAreaNatural numberPrice indexGenderNeighbourhood (graph theory)Online helpMereologyComputer animation
21:32
Limit (category theory)MereologyAnalytic continuationPresentation of a groupComputing platformComputer animation
22:07
Computer animation
Transcript: English(auto-generated)
00:08
Hi everyone, I'm going to apologize in advance for my voice. It's almost gone by now, so I hope you will be able to understand what I'm saying. Today I'm presenting a research that we did together with Doneka
00:24
as part of a research in the institution where we work at Space Syntax. I am Greisa, my background is in architecture and urban planning with specialization in geo information science and earth observation. Quite a long title. Currently I do spatial analysis and I lead an NGO here in Kosovo.
00:47
With the changes that we're seeing in our cities, as they change they also keep facing everybody with more and more problems of which we're recording.
01:09
As we see changes we're also seeing more and more problems of which we identified safety being one of the biggest problems with which we're trying to work.
01:22
Our aim in this research and also what we do in the NGO is to try and make use of public spaces as more as we can and to do that we are set on assessing, on researching a framework that would assess safety in public spaces for different user groups
01:44
focusing always on more marginalized groups and our main focus is to make safe public spaces for women. Through this research we're using an index-based evaluation system by combining different indicators that are either physical aspects
02:04
of a public space or perceived safety of users of a public space. As I said we're doing all this because we do believe that the use of public spaces should not be evaluated
02:22
as it's currently being at least in Kosovo but also further as a space that provides physical aspects and allows you to use it. We are more focusing on the aspect that if public space could be perceived as not safe subjectively then there is no use of it
02:48
or you could easily say that it is not safe even though it can have the physical aspect regulated. In this aspect for us gender plays a very specific role
03:01
in determining this feeling of security or insecurity in a public space and as I said with the Safemeter framework we are trying to ensure that we capture the women's perspective in a public space and in evaluating how safe a public space might be or not.
03:23
The framework of our study of our methodology is being built into mediating indicators that assess both objective safety and look into the physical aspect of a public space and also feeling and perception as a subjective safety indicator.
03:46
In this all the data being collected and analyzed it is gender desegregated so we are taking into consideration the gender of the user or the surveyed person in this case
04:01
always into analyzing this. Into the objective indicators we are looking into four indicators. The public lighting as an urban fabric of the public spaces, cameras in public spaces, proximity to public institutions
04:24
and the presence of stray dogs in public spaces. We do have a big problem with stray dogs so the indicators are quite location specific for the case of Kosovo especially Pristina and should be looked more carefully
04:46
in using the framework in another location maybe. While for the subjective indicators we are looking into perceptions and we are looking into harassment or perceived harassment, fear of harassment in public spaces,
05:03
theft, perception of diversity in a public space and also the fear from physical threats of a public space. To go more into each indicator what we are looking because we are creating an index to evaluate a public space
05:22
we are looking at their impact on what their impact would be in the whole index. The presence of lighting or lighting poles in a public space are of course taken as a positive indicator for the index.
05:45
We assume that the public space that has more lighting makes people feel safer. The presence of cameras that are directed at public spaces even though some people might argue about the data privacy
06:04
and the ethics of it. For the case of Pristina, for the case of Kosovo we are taking the presence of cameras that are directed to public spaces as a positive indicator for the index. Since lately in Kosovo in the last years
06:21
we've had a lot of cases of harassment in public spaces and other things and cameras have been the only evidence in order to solve some cases be that public cameras in public spaces or private cameras.
06:46
The presence or the proximity to public institutions is also considered as a positive indicator for the index considering that these institutions, these buildings in Kosovo are usually well secured.
07:02
There's usually guards around them, there's lightening and in case of an emergency they seem approachable in different times of the day. And as I mentioned, stray dogs is a very big problem in Kosovo especially these last 3 to 4 years
07:22
and especially in Pristina they are part of our streets our public space is sometimes in quite big amount of numbers up to 20 in a small public space. And they can be aggressive we've had a lot of cases of aggressions
07:43
so in this regard the stray dogs as an indicator is adapted as a negative impact on the index later on. When looking at the subjective indicators perception of harassment
08:01
of course it is considered as a negative indicator for the index seeing that fear of harassment might stop somebody from wanting to use public space as is perception and fear of the risk of being a victim in a public space
08:26
and also physical threats are seen as a negative indicator that would negatively impact the index. On the opposite, diversity and sense of a person being included in a public space
08:45
a public space having a variety of users is taken into the index as a positive indicator. All these indicators are compiled into an index
09:01
that rates public space from 0 to 10 with 10 being the safest and of course on the opposite 0 being the least safe public space to be used. In this regard when calculating the index
09:23
both objective indicators and subjective indicators take the same weight with which we are trying to see if giving an equal importance to both the physical aspect but also the perception of people can bring up a change and would help in making better place-based
09:42
but also user-based policies to improve the condition of the public spaces. The data, so the framework is first tested in Pristina in the urban area of Pristina as you might know Pristina is the capital city of Kosovo
10:02
it counts of around 300,000 inhabitants of which 80% are living in the urban area since it's the capital city it has a very heterogeneous type of planning
10:24
and users and everything it has different things going on culturally and politically and everything which makes it a very good case study for us to analyze
10:41
and assess how safe its public spaces are. The data collected for the research was done into two phases and two approaches of data collection we collected data on field for the physical elements of public spaces
11:04
and then separately we did a survey with users of public spaces for the subjective perceptions the data was collected for a period of three months that was how much it took us to cover the urban area of Pristina
11:22
it was done last year on 2022 from July, August and September and we used merging maps in mobile phones to collect data on field and later analyzed it in Quantum GIS all data for the eight indicators was collected as point
11:44
and then later on the index was calculated for a hexagonal grid we analyzed the neighborhoods of Pristina and tried to set a needed hexagon
12:06
that would cover at least one neighborhood that has at least one public space in it and that ended up being a hundred meter distance hexagon so that we can have at least one public space analyzed
12:22
to see within the neighborhood how safe a neighborhood can be based on that to calculate the indicator we first classified as I previously mentioned the indicators as positive or negative impact on the index
12:40
later on they were normalized and calculated with the corresponding formula for positive or negative indicator equal weight was given to the indicators and they were clustered into the final index
13:01
looking at the results this map presents the presence of lights in the whole urban area of Pristina in yellow you can see working functional lights in Pristina while in dark grey very blurred you can see the non-functional lights
13:25
Pristina is pretty well covered with lighting at least the urban area but as you can see there are quite some clusters in some neighborhoods where lighting doesn't work Pristina has had this problem for almost two years
13:40
it is a political problem, bureaucratic contractual problem and it's allowing some neighborhoods to be fully in the dark for almost two years now a hotspot of missing lightning is especially you're not going to be able to see here maybe but this
14:02
and that's the stadium of Pristina and other things not very good things happened there so the lack of lightning just makes it more and more unsafe area but basically throughout the whole Pristina
14:21
around one fourth of lightning poles are not working for almost two years now looking at the presence of cameras I apologize for my color choice in presentation it looks worse than it should there are around more than 7,000 cameras only in the urban area of Pristina
14:46
of which above 90% are privately owned as I said it is good to have public surveillance for some cases but in the case of Pristina even though priorly we were considering cameras
15:06
to be a positive indicator in helping us evaluate safety and feel safer but seeing that around 90% of the cameras in Pristina are privately owned it's making us question our own methodology
15:22
either way there is access to all these cameras police has access to the cameras and they can be used if needed the institutions and presence of institutions of proximity to them
15:41
to make a public space safer we counted of 25 institutions in urban area of Pristina and they are very clustered in the center only so it is playing almost non-existent role in the overall index while for the presence of dogs you can see that they are spread out
16:02
in almost every area of Pristina in lighter pink which you cannot differentiate here it is where one dog only was found while in darker pink which is what you can see it's where more than two dogs were found at that time
16:23
with dogs they move but mostly they stay in the same place so yeah that's coming at limitation I'm hurrying because of time for harassment you can see that they are spread out and in most areas that we surveyed users
16:41
they ended up having a perception of possible harassment happening in the public spaces and out of all the data that we collected women always answered yes in feeling fear of harassment
17:02
and the harasser was always a man perceived by them also for the question of perception of theft and fear of theft in public spaces we were surprised to see that even the main parts the main areas in the city of Pristina
17:22
are perceived as areas that theft can happen while for diversity we had quite some mixed answers and public squares and parks were as expected perceived as very diverse
17:41
while for physical threats also what corresponded with physical aspects people fear of physical threats in more used areas like some public squares in Pristina and as a reason it's always the infrastructure of the square
18:02
looking at the overall index and the overall results the highest value that we assessed so the highest results that we got was 5.57 out of 10 meaning that all the assessed areas in Pristina
18:22
so all the urban areas of Pristina scores very low on our safety index and even the areas that are scoring higher which is still in the middle they are very spread out and not clustered and there's no kind of continuation
18:44
so there's not even a street from beginning to the end that is being evaluated as a safe area based on the index in conclusion, Safemeter, it is an initiative that could assess safety in public spaces
19:05
by mixing both objective and subjective indicators the results were assessed in Pristina and they indicate that there is a very low safety rating for the urban area of Pristina
19:24
the Safemeter survey in Pristina resulted with women respondents feeling always threatened in public spaces and the majority of them responded that men are the potential portrayers of harassment
19:46
and that highlighted the gender nature of public space uses collecting spatial data and analyzing spatial data was crucial in assessing safety in public spaces
20:00
and will help for better interventions, place-based policy making and I'm going to go faster, I know we did account for some limitations which we're trying to improve on further research we're doing the data collected was just collected for a short period of time for three months
20:24
and in cases like lightening or something they improve and it's a very dynamic indicator so we need to be capturing data continuously the hexagonal grid, it represents a typical neighborhood of Pristina
20:42
but at the same time the neighborhoods in Pristina are very heterogeneous because it's a very dense city indicators like stray dogs also need more further research considering the nature of the indicator
21:01
and because we were surveying in public spaces we had a limitation that we couldn't survey individuals under 18 because we would need parental consent to do that in Kosovo and for us a very important target group to look into safety would be the age 10 to 18
21:28
so we couldn't do this in the first part next we are, like this is apart from the research but we're working next on to solve the limitation
21:40
is that we're building an online platform that presents all the data collected but also has the possibility of people reporting so we're going into crowdfunding of data to have that continuation of data collection and also be able to get data from individuals under 18
22:06
thank you and I'm open to questions