Final National Report

Transcription

1 Crime Prevention Carousel Sharing Good Practice in Crime Prevention Final National Report Germany Max Planck Institute for Foreign and International Criminal Law Guenterstalstr Freiburg i. Br. Germany December 2006 Department of Criminology Tim Lukas Mark Enters Matthias Abraham Annika Melde Christopher Murphy Anne Wollenhaupt

2 2 / 111 0BTable of Content 1 INTRODUCTION 5 2 DESCRIPTION OF THE SITES Marzahn North Marzahn North as part of Marzahn-Hellersdorf Physical structure of Marzahn North Services in Marzahn North Gropiusstadt Gropiusstadt as part of Neukoelln Physical structure of the research area in the Gropiusstadt Services in the research area of the Gropiusstadt Socio-Demographics of the research areas in Marzahn North and the Gropiusstadt Inhabitants Ethnicity Age composition Unemployment and social situation Crime rate trends for Marzahn North and the Gropiusstadt Crime maps for Marzahn North and the Gropiusstadt Description of the relevant Police KOBs crime Theft Burglary Robbery Street crime Tackling social and physical problems in Marzahn North and the Gropiusstadt City Reconstruction East: Ahrensfelder Terraces Crime Prevention through physical measures Socially Integrative City : Neighbourhood management Crime prevention through social measures Crime prevention representatives A measure of community policing Concierge services A rediscovered measure of crime prevention Noise Police (Laermpolizei) A measure of neighbourhood improvement Physical refurbishment Measures to prevent vandalism 54

3 3 / REPORT ON QUANTITATIVE DATA Drawing of the sample Description of the sample Gender ratio Ethnicity Composition of age Living conditions in the two research areas Level of Fear of Crime in the research areas Summary Social cohesion Problems in the research areas Incivilities Crime Deficits Conclusions Development of problems during the last five years Incivilities Crime Deficits Measures to improve the situation in the research areas Prevention Repression Conclusions 73 4 REPORT ON QUALITATIVE DATA Objectives Crime and fear of crime Solution approaches Crime and built environment Success Acceptance Social Cohesion Future planning 90

4 4 / SITE VISIT REPORTS Objective description of the Gropiusstadt Objective description of Marzahn North Site visit report from Poland Gropiusstadt Marzahn North Site visit report from the UK Gropiusstadt Marzahn North Site visit report from Hungary Site visit report from The Netherlands LESSONS LEARNED LITERATURE 110

5 5 / 111 2B1 1BIntroduction Large housing estates in Germany usually suffer from a very negative image. Already confronted with vehement criticism shortly after their completion, these settlements and their residents have habitually been exposed to a pattern of long term depreciation and discrimination. Regarded as ghettos (Strubelt 2006) or breeding grounds for crime (Guratzsch 2002), outsiders traditionally associate these estates with drugs, crime, prostitution and ignorance (cf. Willinger 2006). Although such statements are far from the truth, in recent years large-scale housing estates have certainly been a talking point against the background of massive population shrinkage caused by declining birth rates and outward migration due to structural economic reasons. Moreover, the topicality of large housing estates in Germany results from the actual percentage of residential housing these settlements hold on the German housing market. According to the Report on large housing estates (Deutscher Bundestag 1994) 1.6 million dwellings of this type have been erected across Germany, meaning that five per cent of the entire housing stock in Germany is constructed of post-wwii large housing estates. However, the share is significantly higher in eastern than in western Germany: Whereas in western Germany only every sixtieth person lives in an estate with more than 2500 flats, this is every fourth person in the new federal states. The difference is even more obvious when comparing the settlements with more than 10,000 dwellings. In western Germany the share of residents living in these estates amounts to 0.4 per cent, in eastern Germany this figure runs to 12 per cent. Thus, although negative growth has characterised these settlements in recent years particularly in the new federal states they still form an important supply function on the overall German housing market. Therefore special emphasis is placed on the further development of large-scale housing in Germany. Since crime is generally not an especially noteworthy problem in these estates (albeit that they are often considered as a home for delinquents), several programmes were launched by the Federal Government and the states during the last years which were not aimed at creating crime-free neighbourhoods but rather at the physical revaluation and social stabilisation of these estates. Although a drawback of these programmes was their contribution to the already negative image of the settlements and a further promotion the spiral of stigmatisation, these programmes generally led to favourable developments in many of these housing estates: High turn-over rates decreased, building services were modernised, the surrounding areas have been upgraded and the infrastructural supply has been improved. However, this should not belie the fact that the residents frequently still suffer from a very poor social situation. Since crime rates are often highly related to poverty and unemployment, physical refurbishment remains inefficient if it is not possible to provide adequate perspectives for the residents. Thus, developing strategies for sustainable and safe neighbour-

6 6 / 111 hoods in large housing estates is a complex problem which can not be solved by using physical means only.

7 3B 7 / BDescription of the sites Within the overall project Crime Prevention Carousel (CPC) which aims to investigate crime prevention measures in Western and Eastern European large housing estates, the German section of the study serves as a focal point in comparing East and West against the background of historically different origins. On this note it seemed to be reasonable to conduct the examination in Berlin, a city providing a unique opportunity to examine East and West in one place. Correspondingly, it was one precondition for the study that the proposed research areas cover both parts of the formerly divided city. Further requirements concerned the high-rise construction of the sites as well as (crime preventive) measures that have already been established. According to these preconditions two particularly typical post- WWII estates have been chosen: The Gropiusstadt in West-Berlin and Marzahn North in East- Berlin. Although several urban problems are comparable between East and West (Herlyn/Hunger 1994, p. 295), both sites contrast with regard to design and construction of the housing estate as well as concerning the socio-demographic development of the neighbourhood in particular. 15B2.1 Marzahn North 41B2.1.1 Marzahn North as part of Marzahn-Hellersdorf The research area Marzahn North is part of the overall borough Marzahn-Hellersdorf which is located on Berlin s north-eastern border to the federal state of Brandenburg and which was formed in 2001 by merging the two former administrative entities of Marzahn and Hellersdorf (Figure 2.1). The entire borough consists of five former villages that were suburbanised in 1920 when Greater Berlin was established (Figure 2.2): Biesdorf and Mahlsdorf are characterised by small family houses, whereas Kaulsdorf, Marzahn and Hellersdorf, which are mainly composed of prefabricated panel buildings, form the largest agglomeration of industrially produced housing in central Europe. Marzahn-Hellersdorf encompasses an area of km² and houses, as at the end of 2005, about 250,400 inhabitants, of whom more than 70% are living in the large housing estates on 50% of the total expanse of the borough (State Office for Statistics Berlin, in the following: StaLa Berlin). The new estates were originally founded as the major extension of the GDR s capital. Given the slow-going reconstruction process after WWII the creation of living space was the ultimate ambition of the political leadership of the GDR. At the same time, the creation of equal living conditions was the ideological doctrine. In this regard, large scale housing developments promised to cover several aspects: The abolition of housing shortage on the one hand and the enforcement

8 8 / 111 of ideological ideals on the other. Thus, the establishment of large housing estates in the GDR was primarily a politically motivated step (Hannemann 1998, p. 92). Marzahn was built according to the modernist urban concept of separated urban functions from 1977 to 1989 and ultimately provided 58,500 dwellings. Embedded into large green spaces it was envisaged that the open building structure would follow the idea of vertical garden cities as described by Le Corbusier. However, in reality the architectural design of the entire estate was rather uninspired and monotonous. Since architects in the GDR predominantly lost their power over design in Figure 2.1: Map of Berlin with highlighted Marzahn-Hellersdorf the mass-housing sector during the late 1950s, the responsibility for the realisation of new housing estates mainly belonged to East-Berlin s state owned building combines. Liberty, although limited, was conceded only in terms of urban design. By way of contrast, the Hellersdorf estate had a (relatively) differentiated settlement design due to a differentiated selection of building types (Stadtbuero Hunger 2003). Begun in 1985, the district was erected following the concept of a self contained new town, organised to produce smaller independent neighbourhoods and aimed to promote identification with the area as well as to provide classical urban structures in industrialised building. The construction lasted until 1992, thus until beyond reunification. Although Figure 2.2: Districts in Marzahn-Hellersdorf West-German perception categorised the once acclaimed East-German housing areas as monofunctional dormitory-towns, putting both their functionality as well as their technical quality into doubt, the Hellersdorf estate benefited from post-unification funding while it was nearing completion. The further development was estimated to be necessary for the provision of housing and urban development in East-Berlin, and

9 9 / 111 because it provided an important psychological and political factor within the process of unification (Schuemer-Strucksberg 1994). Since 1991, Marzahn-Hellersdorf has thus been a target-area for several urban renewal programmes aiming at the urbanisation and revitalisation of the large housing estates. The borough was involved into ambitious projects, such as the ExWoSt-programme ( Experimental Housing and Urban Development-programme ), the Healthy Cities association and the Sustainable Cities Project of the EXPO In 1999, the research area Marzahn North-West was designated as a target-area of the Socially Integrative City programme and thus became a neighbourhood 1 management F F district (see chapter 2.6.2). The latest important attempt to further develop the district s urban and life quality was the project Ahrensfelder Terraces which was realised by the housing company WBG Marzahn within the framework of the City Reconstruction East programme (see chapter 2.6.1). Figure 2.3: Aerial picture of Marzahn North- West Figure 2.4: Map of Marzahn North-West with highlighted research area Marzahn North Given its peripheral situation in the extreme north of Marzahn-Hellersdorf, the research area Marzahn North looks rather isolated (Figures 2.3 and 2.4): In the north and east it borders onto the federal state of Brandenburg with its small villages Ahrensfelde and Eiche, to the south the site is physically separated from the rest of the estate by a green corridor along the Seelgrabenstream. In the west the urban rail track (S-Bahn) towards Ahrensfelde constitutes a physical boundary against the western part of the overall area Marzahn North-West. The site stretches over 1.2 km in length and 1.3 km in width, covering ha in total. Its distance to the eastern city centre (Alexander Square) constitutes approximately 12 km. The area is structured by the thoroughfare named Havemannstraße, the tram-line along Borkheider and Schorfheider Straße and the in lying recreation area named Clara-Zetkin-Park. Via Maerkische Allee (federal road 158), which serves as an access road for the entire quarter, the 1 Neighbourhood management is Berlin s instrument to implement the Districts with Special Development Needs the Socially Integrative City" programme which aims to counteract the widening socio-spatial rifts in the cities (see chapter 2.6.2).

10 10 / 111 district is well linked to East-Berlin s city centre as well as the surrounding areas. Whereas the district is well developed with public transport in a north-south-direction (S-Bahn, Tram), eastwest-connections and the linkage to neighbouring boroughs are only provided by busses. 42B2.1.2 Physical structure of Marzahn North Source: Marzahn North was built from 1984 to as the last phase of construction of the entire Marzahn panel estate. In the past the area had a very limited individual character. The built environment predominantly consisted of six to eleven storey blocks fabricated with precast concrete slabs. Due to the low quality of the building material towards the end of the GDR, Marzahn North was one of the first areas in Berlin that needed to benefit from the urban rehabilitation programmes decreed for the East-German large housing estates. Today, the buildings are for the most part completely or at least partially renovated. This Figure 2.5: Road map of Marzahn North includes the modernisation of the technical infrastructure as well as the refurbishment of the facades: e.g., balconies were added and lift systems have been installed (Pictures 2.1 and 2.2). As a pilot scheme for further undertakings in other areas in Berlin, Marzahn North contains the regeneration project Ahrensfelder Terraces (Picture 2.3), where several old eleven storey tower blocks have been demolished or down-sized by varying amounts in order to create a less uniform profile of the entire neighbourhood (see chapter 2.4.1). Picture 2.1: Later attached balconies Picture 2.2: Later installed lift systems Picture 2.3: View of Ahrensfelder Terraces

11 11 / 111 However, apart from the Ahrensfelder Terraces the area is predominantly composed of uniform ten or eleven storey buildings, dominating the urban design of Marzahn North and offering housing in a very limited number of standardised types of panel blocks. The residential areas, which are arranged to the north and south of Havemann Straße were built up using the GDR s last generation of industrially pre-cast concrete panels, the so called WBS 70 ( Wohnungsbauserie 70 ), a residential building series which was spread across the whole country. Due to 2 the area s rehabilitation most of these buildings are nowadays colourfully paintedf F; however others still lack optical attraction and appear to date in the typical colours of the GDR s prefabricated panel buildings: light and dark grey. The vast majority of the tower blocks in the area are owned by the housing company WBG Marzahn, which was founded as a legally independent entity after reunification and since 2002 exists in the broader context of the larger municipal housing company DEGEWO. Smaller parts of the estate belong to the Berlin-Brandenburg housing co-operative or were bought up by single owners as well as by private housing companies. Private individual flat-ownership had been conceptualised by the large housing companies due to their legal obligation to sell off 15 per cent of their stock. But apart from a few dwellings that were reconstructed within the context of the Ahrensfelder Terraces, there has been no real interest in private ownership of single flats. The rents are not remarkably different from average eastern inner-city rents. However, for tenants who have lived in the estate since it was built, the rents have risen noticeably (Knorr- Siedow/Droste 2003, p. 97). Picture 2.4: View of old tower blocks at Woerlitzer Street Picture 2.5: Refurbished playground in the area of the Ahrensfelder terraces Due to the open building structure of the research area, extensive greenery surrounds the single tower blocks and constitutes spacious backyards including playgrounds and sporting areas. 2 The neighbourhood management therefore campaigns for the district using the slogan Marzahn North- West Der Stadtteil mit Farbe (Marzahn NorthWest The Colourful District)

12 12 / 111 Continuously up-graded under the co-ordination of the neighbourhood management these sometimes constitute a strong contrast to the, as yet, non-redeveloped buildings. It is to be feared that similar effects will arise from the planned refurbishment of the Clara-Zetkin-Park and the hope remains that the surrounding tower blocks, which have hitherto been rather neglected, will be redeveloped in the near future. Thus, the overall re-designing of the public space is still under way. Up to now, the neighbourhood management, with the participation of the involved target-groups, has successfully redesigned the Ahrensfelder Square and several schoolyards in the area. Environmental measures have been carried out at Havemann Square as well as in Eiche- and Seelgrabenpark. 43B2.1.3 Services in Marzahn North Consistently regarded as a problem in recent years, the fields of health care and commercial infrastructure in Marzahn North have, in the meantime, been significantly improved. Nowadays, the area provides several dispersed facilities offering retail trade (district centre at Havemann Straße, Zu den Eichen at Borkheider Straße and shops run by Russian-migrants). However, very large and new commercial centres, which were built in close quarters (i.e. East-Berlin s biggest shopping mall Eastgate ), provide a huge variety of offerings, although at the same time they also exert massive economic pressure on the smaller neighbourhood centres. The high fluctuation of shops affecting the shopping centres in Havemann and Borkheider Straße could be an effect of this development. With regard to health care infrastructure, the situation has significantly improved over the last years. While in 1999, social research about Marzahn North highlighted the insufficient medical care supply compared to the inner-city standards, the circumstances have bettered themselves remarkably in the ensuing years.. Above the Berlin average of 2.0, there were 2.2 medical practitioners for 1,000 inhabitants in 2004 in Marzahn North-WestF F; a very high standard both in 3 Berlin as well as by way of European comparison. Whereas the health care infrastructure was improved, the supply of childcare, primary and secondary schools has currently been scaled down due to the shrinkage of the population as a consequence of outward migration and declining birth-rates. So far, one schoolhouse and four daycare facilities for children have been already demolished.f F Further demolitions in the future will 4 concern one schoolhouse, two day-care centres and one multi-purpose building (one of each already vacant). These constructions have mainly been reused in recent years, that is, day-care centres for example were oftentimes utilised as youth clubs or additional school buildings. Thus, it is due to the development of a well differentiated system of municipal welfare agencies and 3 Not including dentists and psychotherapists (Source: Own calculations, Senate of Berlin 2006). 4 As of the end of 2005 there are still eight day-care centres and eight schools, but no grammar-school (all data including the western part of Marzahn North-West).

13 13 / 111 NGOs that the youth infrastructure has been recently improved. Further threats however come from the dramatic budgetary position of Berlin which endangers the existence of several leisure facilities for children and juveniles. Apart from the youth infrastructure additional problems also arise as a result of the aging population. Even though Marzahn North is still one of the youngest districts in Marzahn-Hellersdorf, leisure facilities for elderly people are lacking. Taking into account this demographic perspective, the district has intensified its social planning with regard to the older generation.

14 14 / B2.2 Gropiusstadt 44B2.2.1 Gropiusstadt as part of Neukoelln The research area in the Gropiusstadt is part of the overall borough Neukoelln which is located in the south-east of Berlin, bordering the neighbouring boroughs of Tempelhof-Schoeneberg to the west and Friedrichshain-Kreuzberg to the north as well as the East Berlin borough of Treptow-Koepenick and the federal state of Brandenburg to the south (Figure 2.6). The entire borough encompasses an area of km². Originally Neukoelln was made up of the city of Neukoelln in the north and the villages Britz, Buck and Rudow in the south (Figure 2.7). Until 1912, Neukoelln carried the name Rixdorf which was changed due to a negative image associated with the name. The northern part of the borough was predominantly built after the turn of the century when, due to migration caused by the industrial urban development, the request for housing increased dramatically. Meeting this request, the first typical Berlin Figure 2.6: Map of Berlin with highlighted Neukoelln tenements ( Mietskasernen ) were built in the 1860s. These served as accommodation for hundreds of workers in a very small space - a dormitory town. The dwellings were characterised by their very cramped conditions. Nevertheless, in 1912, 250,000 inhabitants lived in the former city of Rixdorf. When in 1920 the southern parts were affiliated to the municipality, the process of urbanisation extended into these areas and Neukoelln became one of the biggest districts of Berlin. In order to improve the living conditions and the rather bad image of a working class district, two considerable housing projects were realised during the 1960s: In the northern part of Neukoelln, the old and insufficiently equipped housing stock was replaced by public housing devel- Figure 2.7: Districts in Neukoelln opments and in the south the large housing estate of the Gropiusstadt was constructed. Source: Source:

15 15 / 111 From 1987 until 1995, the number of inhabitants in Neukoelln increased, as in all boroughs of Berlin (about thousand inhabitants in 1995). Since then the population has declined, though Neukoelln remains the most populous borough in Berlin with 302,127 inhabitants at the end of B2.2.2 Physical structure of the research area in the Gropiusstadt While other sites of complex house building in East-Berlin only emerged in the 1970s and 80s, the Gropiusstadt was erected from 1962 to Plans for the construction of the large housing estate - due to the neighbouring districts formerly named Britz-Buckow-Rudow (BBR) - were actually made midway through the 1950s as part of the policy of societal modernisation, which was aimed at uprooting the established Berlin working-class milieus. The rebuilding process after World War II got under way and, in accordance with the Charter of Athens, quarters characterised by old building stocks were to be provided with Light, Air and Sun ( Licht, Luft und Sonne ). Therefore, it was considered necessary to built new living space for thousands of residents who still lived in the old buildings, which were set to be demolished.f 5 Starting from considerations to expand the large 6 residential estate in BritzF F in a southward direction, the idea emerged to erect the new estate on an area which was located on the southern border of Berlin and thus far characterised by agriculture. As of May 1958, the first properties were purchased from private and ecclesiastical ownership. In 1960, Walter Gropius and The Architects Collaborative (TAC) took charge of the urban design framework of the new estate. Gropius Picture 2.6: View of the research area in Gropiusstadt wanted to combine various elements of traditional city life with contemporary modern methods of urban development. Reminiscent of Bruno Taut s Horseshoe estate and following the urban model of structured and dispersed cities, the conception was arranged for circular structures and a few high-rise buildings embedded into areas for one-family houses and residential quarters of manageable size. Large green spaces 5 Thus, many of the first residents of the Gropiusstadt were moved to this southern area from the northern Red Wedding, a district traditionally considered under communist influence, while inhabitants of the southern renewal areas in Neukoelln were later moved to the large housing estate Maerkisches Viertel, which was built only a few years later than the Gropiusstadt in the northern borough of Reinickendorf. The accompanied loss of social relations was regarded to be without any significance (cf. Tessin, W. / Knoor, T. / Pust, C., Birlem, T. 1983). 6 The large housing estate Britz was constructed from 1925 to 1933 as one of the first projects of social housing in Germany. Due to its central building, which was designed by the famous architect Bruno Taut, it is usually called Horseshoe Development.

16 16 / 111 Figure 2.10: So called Principe-plan as at September 1, 1961 (Wils Ebert) were intended to disperse the housing development and should serve as local recreation areas for the residents. However, during the planning process, many of Gropius original intentions were modified due to economic and political reasons.f F According to the con- 7 temporary urban model of urbanity through density ( Urbanitaet durch Dichte ) and against the background of the so called car adopted city ( autogerechte Stadt ) the housing stock was remarkably Figure 2.8: First development plan as at May 19, 1960 (TAC) increased and several parking lots were added. As a result, the buildings that were erected were much higher and the estate was more densely populated than was originally planned by Gropius. Figures 2.8 to 2.10 point out the development of the area and reveal the major changes which primarily led to the current appearance of the Gropiusstadt. The Gropiusstadt covers about ha and nowadays houses 36,120 inhabitants. Whereas the Gro- Figure 2.9: Second development plan as at April 10, 1961 (TAC) 8 piusstadt constitutes its own district of NeukoellnF F (Figure 2.9), the actual research area is explicitly smaller. It is located between Lipschitzallee in the east, Fritz-Erler-Allee in the north, Zwickauer Damm in the west and the railroad track in the south and encompasses an area of ha (Figures 2.11 and 2.12). Its distance to the western city centre (Wittenberg Square) constitutes approximately km (linear distance). Arranged along a curved green corridor which spans the U-Bahn line, the residential areas have been structured for small neighbourhood units. As compared to the uniformed build environment in Marzahn North the physical structure of the Gropiusstadt covers a huge variety of buildings ranging from one storey bungalow houses and three storey blocks to high-rise buildings with up to 31 storeys. The eastern part of the research area shows a higher density and is generally constructed higher than the western part, which is 7 Regarding the development and planning process of the Gropiusstadt, cf. Federbusch, K. (1997), Bandel, H. / Machule, D. (1974) and Becker, H. / Keim, D. (1977). 8 In accordance with the 40 th anniversary of the laying of the foundation stone in 2002, the responsible local authority constituted Gropiusstadt as an individual district within the borough of Neukoelln alongside the districts of Neukoelln, Britz, Buckow and Rudow.

17 17 / 111 rather more characterised by the green spaces that Gropius originally envisaged. The buildings are arranged due to the position of the sun; diagonal arrangements as Gropius allowed for in order to disperse the built environment were ultimately avoided. Eight or more storey blocks were predominately built towards the fringe of the estate. However, due to their effect on orientation several height-dominating buildings have been erected at strategically locations in the centre, such as U-Bahn stations, crossroads or shopping centres. These sub-centres are linked to the residential areas via a continuous system of footpaths, which is clearly separated from other types of traffic infrastructure. The single neighbourhoods are surrounded by loop-like streets which are connected to smaller access roads that lead into the particular housing areas. Source: StaLa Berlin Figure 2.11: Road map of the research area Figure 2.12: Map of the research area Whereas the north-western part of the entire district consists predominately of parallel and rightangled building structures, the research area features a more differentiated ensemble of ground plans. Originally starting from the concept of simple lines the physical structure in the area mirrors the overall development into a more varied build environment. Despite its scale and density, the estate shows a dispersed structure which is further intensified by the use of colourful or plastically details at the edges or in the pedestal zones of the buildings. According to contemporary stylistic devices, concrete slabs showing a rough surface have been fixed to the front and side walls in order to create a differentiated structure. Picture 2.7: View of the Gropius-House Picture 2.8: View of the Ideal high-rise

18 18 / 111 Exemplified on the Gropius-House and the Ideal high-rise (both located at Wildmeisterdamm) these stylistic devices can be impressively shown. At the curved Gropius-House (Picture 2.7), the top levels are arranged for maisonette dwellings which reach for two floors and correspond in height to the loggias at the back side as well as to the half-round balconies at the front side of the building. The Ideal high-rise (Picture 2.8), which is the highest residential building, not only in the Gropiusstadt but in the entirety of Berlin (89 meters), is non linear in design with parts of the structure, such as loggias or unequally constructed oriels, jutting out and giving the facades a dispersed and singular impression. The Ideal high-rise is one of only few buildings in the case study area which is not owned by 9 the housing company DEGEWO.F F Whereas the housing company GEHAG actually holds the largest stock of buildings in the entire Gropiusstadt (but more or less in the north-western part), the research area, due to its tenure structure, is usually called DEGEWO-territory. Private ownership plays only a minor role in this area. An exception however constitutes the estate along the Lenzelpfad which is architecturally characterised by one storey bungalows and the holding of private property. Picture 2.9: Entrance to the green corridor at Lipschitzallee Picture 2.10: Entrance to the green corridor at Zwickauer Damm One of the main objections formulated by the residents after the completion of the Gropiusstadt regarded the insufficient incorporation of greenery. Even though nature had time enough to develop over the last thirty years, the housing companies as well as the municipality in cooperation with an advisory board of residents established several measures aimed at the revaluation of the green and open spaces. Besides several physical measures that have been 9 The ideal high-rise is owned by the housing cooperative IDEAL, which was founded in 1907 as the response to the misery and needs of the workers living in Rixdorf at that time. The high-rise is the only building owned by IDEAL e.g. in the Gropiusstadt.

19 19 / taken in the pastf F, the estate s landscaping today provides the impression of an extensive green environment, which is intensified by the access to the rural Brandenburgian vicinity since Due to a regular cultivation of the public parks the environment, although actually still being rather monotonous, gives the overall impression of being quite clean and well-kept (Pictures 2.9 and 2.10). The green corridor, actually more a footpath than a recreation area though providing several parks and football grounds, is appropriated by children and juveniles utilising the large greenery for games and playing. Nevertheless, at nightfall the area is perceived to as being particularly dangerous. Serving as a connecting path to cover the distance from the residential areas to the U-Bahn stations (and vice versa) the corridor is well used during daylight. Due to a lack of social infrastructure in the Gropiusstadt during the night (only a few pubs or bars exist in the area) the public life comes to a standstill shortly after the last shops have closed and accordingly leads to a situation where the streets and the greenery are only sparsely populated. As a result, social control in the public areas is heavily reduced and, in conjunctions with problems of insufficient lighting, the green spaces are turned into spaces of fear which are mostly avoided by the residents. 46B2.2.3 Services in the research area of the Gropiusstadt While the physical construction of the estate was rapidly completed, the development of the social infrastructure lagged far behind. In 1971, the recently established Haus der Mitte (which was closed in 2006) was the only youth centre within the entire area. That said, in the meantime the Gropiusstadt as a whole houses more day nurseries, schools and other facilities for children and adolescents than the neighbouring districts. The research area offers an above average service and includes several (adventure) playgrounds, youth clubs and schools, which also attract pupils from beyond the boundaries of the district. This has been made possible by a well developed transport connexion, which was as opposed to other large housing estates in Berlin provided right from the beginning of the erection of the estate. On the other hand, apart from the usual attractions within the area itself, the differentiated network of busses and the U-Bahn makes cultural activities and shopping facilities in the surrounding area well accessible for the residents of the research area. Thus, Berlin s largest shopping mall, the so called Gropiuspassagen, which was build in 1997 near the U-Bahn station Johannisthaler Chaussee beyond the research area, marks an important identification point for all residents of the Gropiusstadt and allures people from the research 10 Such as the redesign of the square at the Lipschitzallee serving as an entrance to the green corridor (Picture 2.9), the construction of a pavilion (which looks rather run-down nowadays) next to the Lipschitzallee within the green corridor, planting vegetation on the parking lots or the rearranged square around the U-Bahn station Wutzkyallee (for other examples cf. Federbusch, K. 1997, pp ).

20 20 / 111 area as well. Since publicity constitutes only a minor significance in the entire Gropiusstadt, the Gropiuspassagen are of particular importance regarding the self-image of the residents. On the other hand, the shopping centre creates problems. Due to the more than 180 shops, coffee bars, fast food restaurants and department stores, noise and pollution in the surrounding area seem to be unavoidable. Furthermore, the Gropiuspassagen attract children and adolescents which like to spend their leisure-time in the premises of the shopping mall. However, the centre management and private security firms, anxious to guarantee an undisturbed shopping experience, move large groups of juveniles along. At the weekends the discotheque Fun, which is located in the Gropiuspassagen, is secured by an intensified police presence and migrant juveniles primarily from Turkish or Arabian backgrounds are sometimes refused entrance to the club. Apart from the Gropiuspassagen which supply the long-term needs, daily retail in the research area is predominately provided near the U-Bahn stations Wutzkyallee and Zwickauer Damm. Due to the underlying contemporary architectural model of separated urban functions, these U- Bahn stations were designated to create small centres within the residential areas. Although satisfying the daily needs (e.g., food, etc.), these sub-centres fail to give the feeling of a vital and lively public space. Particularly at the weekends and during the evening hours, the area appears dead since people principally stay at home due to a lack of restaurants or other facilities of urban nightlife. In this respect the Gropiusstadt still matches the original idea of a dormitory town, which does not include labour and leisure time facilities. Concerning labour, the research area offers only poor prospects. Although providing some jobs in the field of retail trade, most of the employed residents are forced to leave the Gropiusstadt for work. Regarding the health care infrastructure, the area is well equipped. North of the Gropiusstadt Berlin s largest non-university hospital, located in Britz, offers a full supply of medical care. In addition, according to the model of eastern German policlinics the medical centre at Lipschitzallee was founded in Fundamentally modernised during the last years, the facility comprises 23 medical practitioners from various realms of health care caring for ordinary and particular diseases. Contrasting to Marzahn North, the Gropiusstadt features several churches. Apart from St. Dominicus (catholic) at Lipschitzallee and Martin-Luther-King (evangelic) at Johannisthaler Chaussee the actual research area houses the evangelic parish Gropiusstadt-Sued. Furthermore, a couple of public facilities, like the Haus der Mitte are operated by ecclesiastical organisations. Although constituting the majority among the non-germans in the Gropiusstadt Turkish or Arabian migrants in the area are not organised in religious respects. Mosque associations are more typically located in the northern parts of Neukoelln.

21 21 / B2.3 Socio-Demographics of the research areas in Marzahn North and the Gropiusstadt 47B2.3.1 Inhabitants Marzahn North is a particularly young area. Young in the sense of its history as well as in the sense of its inhabitants. Whereas the other parts of the panel estates in Marzahn-Hellersdorf were occupied with young families from East-Berlin and other GDR governmental districts, who were well educated and well paid, Marzahn North due to its late construction as well as its contemporary politics of occupation was let to entire tenant groups from the poorer East-Berlin inner-city districts, which were predominantly not redeveloped and to a high extend let to socially and politically problematic people. During the past years, the demographic development in Marzahn North showed a steep decline of the population and high turn-over rates: Better-off families left the district whereas low-income households moved in. Whereas the entire borough of Marzahn-Hellersdorf still suffers from the shrinkage of the population, Marzahn North benefited from the efforts made in the course of urban regeneration particularly at the Ahrensfelder Terraces (see chapter 2.5.1) and nowadays registers an even increasing population after several years of decline (+2.7 per cent). As at the end of 2005, the area accommodated 17,479 inhabitants (Figures 2.13 and 2.14). The gender ratio is rather balanced at 51 per cent men and 49 per cent women Marzahn Nord Gropiusstadt Inhabitants Figure 2.13:Populations developments in Marzahn North and the research area of the Gropiusstadt Year In contrast, the population in the research area in the Gropiusstadt is rather stable. Although suffering from high turn-over rates shortly after reunification, when West-Berlin s island position was abolished and people could move to the surrounding areas, the population figures during

22 22 / 111 the last five years lie rather constantly between 16,498 in 2004 and 16,797 inhabitants in Noteworthy vacancies do not exist within the Gropiusstadt (2-3 per cent within the DEGEWO housing stock). As at the end of 2005, the research area housed 16,782 inhabitants. The gender ratio shows a slight surplus of women at 53 per cent (47 per cent men). 2000/ / / / /05 Berlin +0.2% +0.1% -0.1% ±0.0% +0.2% Marzahn-Hellersdorf -1.9% -1.1% -1.2% -0.6% -0.4% Neukoelln +0.3% +0.1% -0.2% -0.4% +1.0% Marzahn North -4.3% -2.9% -10.8% -1.1% +2.7% Gropiusstadt -0.3% ±0.0% -1.1% -0.4% +1.7% Figure 2.14: Development of the population percentage de- and increase (Source: StaLa Berlin) 48B2.3.2 Ethnicity Though throughout Berlin the share of migrants is much higher (13.7 per cent in 2005), Marzahn North shows the highest rate in Marzahn-Hellersdorf at all. Whereas the entire borough accommodates only 3.3 per cent non-germans, which is one of the lowest rates compared to the other boroughs in Berlin, Marzahn North shows 5.5 per cent at the end of However, in real terms the ethnic minority in Marzahn North is actually larger. It is estimated that approximately per cent of the population are German-Russian migrants ( Spaetaussiedler ), who as legal Germans are not counted amongst the migrant population (cp. Knorr-Siedow/Droste 2003, p. 107). By way of contrast, the share of migrants in the research area in Gropiusstadt is lower than in the entire borough of Neukoelln. Although Neukoelln possess one of the highest percentages of non-germans in the whole of Berlin (22.1% as to the end of 2005), the research area in the Gropiusstadt contains only 16.4 per cent migrants. It proves that the migrant population predominantly lives in the northern part of the borough Berlin 13,1% 13,2% 13,3% 13,3% 13,5% 13,7% Marzahn-Hellersdorf 3,1% 3,1% 3,1% 3,5% 3,6% 3,3% Neukoelln 21,3% 21,5% 21,6% 21,7% 21,9% 22,1% Marzahn North 4,2% 4,2% 4,6% 4,8% 5,1% 5,6% Gropiusstadt 17,8% 16,2% 16,2% 16,1% 16,1% 16,4% Figure 2.15: Share of migrants in percent (Source: StaLa Berlin) Over the past five years, Berlin as a whole has seen an increasing share of migrants. On a spatial level it can be registered that particularly boroughs characterised with an already high share of non-germans (e.g., Neukoelln) show the highest growth rates of immigration (Figure 2.15).

23 23 / 111 This development is mirrored on a smaller scale spatial level: Marzahn North, which is already characterised by a relatively high share of migrants, displays increasing rates whereas the entire borough of Marzahn-Hellersdorf, which features only a low share of migrants, does not benefit from immigration as a whole. On the other hand, the migrant population in the research area in Gropiusstadt is relatively stable. Whereas the vast majority of non-germans in Marzahn North come from Asia (particularly from Vietnam) and the former USSR, nearly half of the migrant population in the Gropiusstadt shows a Turkish background (43.9 percent as to the end of 2005). 49B2.3.3 Age composition Marzahn North was and still is the district with the youngest population within Marzahn- Hellersdorf. Whereas in the overall borough the average age of the inhabitants is 39 years, it is 35.7 years in Marzahn North. In comparison, the entire borough of Neukoelln and particularly the research area in the Gropiusstadt appears to be much older. The average age of the inhabitants in Neukoelln is 40.5 years and in the research area this is even 42.5 years as to the end of F F Also, in comparing both research areas to the overall city-average of Berlin, it can be noticed that especially with regard to senior citizens Marzahn North shows lower rates than the city of Berlin whereas the research area in the Gropiusstadt features explicitly higher rates of elderly people than the municipal average. Although the overall development during the last five years displays significant rates of growth in both the research areas and Berlin regarding the age group of 65 and older, these figures are particularly high in the research area in the Gropiusstadt (Figure 2.16). Marzahn North Berlin Gropiusstadt in per cent in per cent in per cent < > Figure 2.16: Population of Marzahn North, the Gropiusstadt and Berlin by age (Source: StaLa Berlin) 11 Own calculations, based on StaLa Berlin.

24 24 / 111 The discrepancy between the research areas can be particularly shown with regard to the comparison of old and young people. Whereas in Marzahn North the gap between the inhabitants aged 65 and older and the juveniles aged only recently grew apart, the research area in the Gropiusstadt shows an even wider gap between youngsters and elderly people. The portion of juveniles nowadays is nearly six times higher than the share of elderly people. Since the share of juveniles remained relatively stable whereas the percentage of senior citizens increased rapidly during the past five years, the aforementioned development continues and the generation gap will become worse in the future. In Marzahn North, this development became apparent only in 2003 and is still at a less advanced stage. But even today, the ratio of young and old is nearly one to two (Figure 2.17). However, despite declining values in Marzahn North both research areas Marzahn North (18.7 per cent) and the Gropiusstadt (18.5 per cent) show a higher share of children and juveniles than the Berlin average (16.1 per cent). 25,0% 20,0% 15,0% 17,8% 18,2% 19,1% 19,9% 20,5% 21,5% Percentage 10,0% 5,0% 0,0% 7,8% 8,1% 8,1% 7,0% 8,0% 8,7% 5,7% 6,4% 6,8% 7,2% 7,3% 4,6% 3,4% 3,4% 3,4% 3,5% 3,4% 3,7% Gropiusstadt Marzahn Nord Gropiusstadt 65 and older Marzahn Nord 65 and older Figure 2.17: Age composition of senior citizens and juveniles in Marzahn North and the research area in the Gropiusstadt (Source: StaLa Berlin) Year 50B2.3.4 Unemployment and social situation Specific data regarding unemployment in Germany is usually represented as rates of unemployment, i.e., the share of persons registered as being unemployed of all persons being capable of gainful employment. However, German data protection rules as well as the layout of statistics on unemployment prevent the calculation of rates, related on a small scale spatial level. Data production in this regard is organised by employment-office-districts, which are spatially much larger than the relevant research areas in the Gropiusstadt and Marzahn North. The smallest unit, which is available for the presentation of absolute unemployment figures, is the

25 25 / 111 statistical unit of traffic cells ( Verkehrszellen ). However, the relevant cells in the Gropiusstadt are larger than the research area and include additional areas with a completely different physical and social structure. Thus, data regarding unemployment in the research area in the Gropiusstadt is not available. Concerning Marzahn North, the relevant traffic cell Havemann Straße coincides exactly with 12 the research area. Figure 2.18 shows the calculated rates on the basis of the available dataf F. According to this, the area has suffered from dramatically increasing unemployment during the last five years. As the end of 2005, nearly one in four of the population is beleived unemployed. 13 In comparison, the overall average in Berlin is 17.8 per cent (November 2005)F F, which is already one of the highest rates in Germany. 25,0% 23,0% 23,6% 21,0% 21,0% 21,8% 22,3% 19,0% Percentage 17,0% 15,0% 17,4% 17,9% Figure 2.18: Unemployment in Marzahn North (Own calculations: Share of persons registered as being unemployed of all persons aged years) Year Apart from the unemployment rate, the Senate for Health, Social Services and Consumer Protection frequently collects data to create a social index (Sozialindex), which indicates relative levels of social disadvantage and disempowerment on a spatial level. The index is based upon 25 indicators derived from data on demographic developments, household structures, education, unemployment, income, housing and health care. Not significant with regard to the absolute level, the figures provide data to compare different areas with respect to the ranking and interpretation of social changes (Senatsverwaltung fuer Gesundheit, Soziales und Verbraucherschutz 2004). 12 Source: StaLa Berlin. 13 Source: Bundesagentur für Arbeit (2005).

26 26 / 111 On the borough level, Marzahn-Hellersdorf is registered positive and ranked five, whereas Neukoelln is registered negative and ranked ten of a total of twelve boroughs (Figure 2.19).F F As 14 Neukoelln was ranked 17 in 1995 and 19 in 1999 (due to the old division into 23 boroughs), the social structure of the borough has changed for the worse during the past years. Since the smallest spatial unit generating the social index is the traffic cell, the social position of Neukoelln as a whole does not give evidence about the social situation of the research area in the Gropiusstadt. However, it is generally assumed that particularly the northern parts of Neukoelln are sinking deeper into poverty. That said, the relevant traffic cells including the research area provide an ambivalent picture: Whereas the cell Lipschitzallee has deteriorated slightly, the cell Wutzkyallee has improved. However, it is assumed that the social burden within the Gropiusstadt is explicitly higher than in the neighbouring areas of the traffic cells. According to information provided by the police, the Report on children and youth welfare service states an increased moving in of problematic and moving out of better-off families at the same time. Particularly the residential areas of the research area (Lipschitzallee, Joachim-Gottschalk-Weg, Kaethe-Dorsch-Ring, Sollmannweg, and Theodor-Loos-Weg) are heavily burdened with a disproportionately high share of migrants, single parents and families suffering from social welfare, drugs or psychic diseases. The area is increasingly characterised by drug use, school refusal and growing poverty (Bezirksamt Neukoelln von Berlin 2003). 2 1,5 1 0,5 0-0,5 Social Index -1-1,5-2 Steglitz Zehlendorf Treptow Köpenick Charlottenburg Wilmersdorf Reinickendorf Marzahn Hellersdorf Lichtenberg Spandau Tempelhof Schöneberg Pankow Neukölln Mitte Friedrichshain Kreuzberg Figure 2.19: Social Index with highlighted Marzahn-Hellersdorf and Neukoelln (Calculation: Senate for Health, Social Services and Consumer Protection) Borough 14 All data collected for 2003.

27 27 / 111 Characterised by similar problems, the research area Marzahn North shows the lowest values of the social index within the entire borough of Marzahn-Hellersdorf, which indicates a high rate of unemployment as well as a high density of people dependant on social welfare. Actually, although decreasing in 2003, Marzahn North was characterised by nearly twice as many persons receiving social welfare benefits than the Berlin average at the end of 2004 (15.2 per cent compared to 8.0 per cent in entire Berlin). Thus, Marzahn North has the highest figures within in the borough. Generally, the share of women dependant on social welfare at 52 per cent is higher than the share of men at 48 per cent.

28 28 / B2.4 Crime rate trends for Marzahn North 19Band the Gropiusstadt Although unanimously declared as relatively safe and not especially noteworthy with regard to crime, the crime rate trends in both Marzahn North and Marzahn-Hellersdorf increased from to 2004.F F Whilst in 2000, the total number of crimes committed in Marzahn-Hellersdorf (per 1000 of the population) outnumbered the total number of crimes in Marzahn North, this trend changed over the next two years. Already in 2001, more crimes were registered in Marzahn North than in Marzahn-Hellersdorf. In both areas, the total number of registered crimes increased between 2000 and 2002, reaching a peak in After 2002, the number slowly decreased again, coming to a preliminary halt in However, the increase in Marzahn- Hellersdorf followed a steady path, rising from crimes to crimes calculated per 1000 of the population. And after its climax in 2002, it steadily decreased, almost returning to its point of origin with crimes per 1000 of the population in The increase in Marzahn North did not follow a steady path, but escalated unproportionally from 132 in 2000 to a preliminary high of crimes, reaching a peak of crimes calculated per 1000 of the population in , ,5 169,2 158,7 172,4 151,6 166, , ,8 142,3 Frequency Figure , ,3 City Marzahn-Hellersdorf Marzahn North Figure 2.20: Crime statistics for Marzahn North compared to Marzahn- Hellersdorf and Berlin (all crimes calculated per of the population) Year As Figure 2.20 shows, Marzahn North witnessed a steeper incline in the total number of crimes registered than Marzahn-Hellersdorf did. The crime-rate of Marzahn-Hellersdorf followed the 15 Due to the adoption of a new processing system in 2005, which caused a loss of three months within the crime statistics of 2005, the reported period is 2000 until On this small scale spatial level, the data only refers to offences reported to the police ( access statistics ) and does not give evidence about the further treatment within the criminal justice system.

29 29 / 111 general trend registered in the city of Berlin, though never reaching Berlin s peak of crimes calculated per 1000 of the population. This was not the case in Marzahn North, where the crime-rate disproportionally escalated between 2000 and 2004 as compared to Berlin. With 166 crimes calculated per 1000 of the population in 2000 and in 2001, Neukoelln basically followed the general trend of the crime rate of the overall city of Berlin, registering about the same number of crimes as the city in general. In 2002, Neukoelln outnumbered the amount of crime registered in the city of Berlin, witnessing crimes calculated per 1000 of the population. After 2002, the crime-rate decreased in Neukoelln, following the general trend as had been noted in the city of Berlin (Figure 2.21) ,5 167,7 169,2 182, , ,2 162,7 159,3 140 Frequency Figure City Neukölln Gropiusstadt 135,8 137,4 116, Figure 2.21: Crime statistics for the Gropiusstadt compared to Neukoelln and Berlin (all crimes calculated per of the population) Year The Gropiusstadt had with 125 crimes calculated per 1000 of the population a significantly lower crime-rate in 2000 than both Neukoelln and the city of Berlin did. It also fell short of the number of crimes registered in Marzahn in the same year. Following the general trend as seen across Berlin, the Gropiusstadt witnessed an increase in crime in Yet, with crimes calculated per 1000 of the population, it still did not reach the number of crimes registered in either Berlin or Marzahn. However, in 2002 the Gropiusstadt registered 182 crimes per 1000 of the population, outnumbering not only the number of crimes registered in Marzahn in the same year (151.6 in Marzahn-Hellersdorf and in Marzahn North) but in the city Berlin as well (172.4). After the peak in 2002, the number of crimes registered in the Gropiusstadt dropped significantly (137.4) in 2003, falling behind the number of crimes registered in both Marzahn- Hellersdorf (173) and Marzahn North (142.3) as well as in the city of Berlin (166.2). This trend continued in 2004, with an all-time low of crimes calculated per 1000 of the population.

30 30 / B2.5 Crime maps for Marzahn North and the Gropiusstadt 51B2.5.1 Description of the relevant Police KOBs 16 The research area in Marzahn North includes seven Police KOBsF F, though two of these KOB areas, one in the north-eastern part of the research area and one in the south, go beyond the boundaries of the research area. Maerkische Allee in the west, Klandorfer Straße in the north, Havemann Straße in the south and Rosenbecker Straße in the east define the first Police KOB (KOB 1) of Marzahn North. The second Police KOB (KOB 2) stretches across an area between the Rosenbecker Straße in the west, the Havemann Straße in the south, Schorfheider Straße in the east and Hoehenwalder and Klandorfer Straße in the north. Schorfheider Straße defines the western border, An der Wuhle the eastern border and Havemann Straße the southern border of the third Police KOB (KOB 3). Because it goes beyond Golliner Straße and because it includes a small verge of green in the west, KOB 3 exceeds the research area. The fourth KOB (KOB 4) covers the area between Maerkische Allee and the railway tracks in the east, the Havemann Straße in the north, the western Flaemingstraße and the Wittenberger Straße in the south. Flaemingstraße also defines the western border of the fifth KOB (KOB 5). KOB 5 further ranges from Havemann Straße in the north to Borkheider Straße in the east and Niemegker Straße in the south. The sixth KOB (KOB 6) covers the area between Borkheider Straße (western border), Havemann Straße (northern border), Golliner Straße/Belzinger Ring (eastern border) and Borkheider Straße (southern border). The research area exceeds the area of KOB 6. Further, in the eastern part of the research area between the northern part of Havemann Straße, the Belzinger Ring in the west and the south-eastern section of Kemberger Straße, the research area includes an area that is not registered in the available data. Wittenberger Straße and Niemegker Straße define the northern border of the seventh KOB (KOB 7). In the east, KOB 7 ends at Borkheider Straße. In the west, Maerkische Allee delimits KOB 7. In the south, Wuhletal Straße borders the seventh KOB. The research area in the Gropiusstadt includes three Police-KOBs, generally covering the area between Fritz-Erler-Allee in the north, Zwickauer Damm in the east, Lipschitzallee in the west and Friedrich-Kayßler-Weg, Wutzkyallee and Theodor-Loos-Weg in the south. The area between the northern Fritz-Erler-Allee, western Lipschitzallee, Rudower Waeldchen and Sollmanweg/Friedrich-Kayßler-Weg in the south defines the first Police-KOB area (KOB 1). KOB 1 includes a western section which does not cover the research area. The second Police KOB of the Gropiusstadt, KOB 2, covers the area between Fritz-Erler-Allee in the north, the southern Friedrich-Kayßler-Weg and Horst-Caspar-Steig as well as Zwickauer Damm in the east. The third Police KOB area, KOB 3, located south of KOB 2, consists of the 16 The so called contact area ( KOB ) is the smallest spatial level on which crime statistics are registered by the police in Berlin.

31 31 / 111 area between Friedrich-Kayßler-Weg and Horst-Caspar-Steig, Zwickauer Damm in the east, Zittauer Straße and Matthaeuser Weg in the south and Rudower Waeldchen in the west. 52B2.5.2 crime In Marzahn North, the KOB, showing the highest amount of crime calculated per 1000 of the population varied. In general, KOB 7 tended to show the highest number of crimes registered in Marzahn North. However, this wasn t always the case. In 2000, the number of registered crimes was highest in KOB 2. Except for 2002, when the number dropped to 151.5, the amount of crimes registered in KOB 2 tended to be around 200 crimes calculated per 1000 of the population. This was similar to KOB 7 and KOB 6, the other two KOBs that tended to register the largest amount of crime. When in 2002 the number of registered crimes in KOB 2 dropped to calculated per 1000 of the population, the number dramatically rose in KOB 7 to crimes calculated per 1000 of the population. Other KOBs, showing a smaller amount of registered crime, tended to increase in the number of crimes throughout the years. Generally, the Gropiusstadt registered a smaller number of crimes compared to Marzahn North. In the Gropiusstadt the largest KOB, KOB 1, showed the highest level of crime throughout the years, except for 2002 when KOB 3 registered more crimes than KOB 1 did. In this year, the number of crimes in KOB 1 significantly decreased while they increased in KOB 3, a development comparable to the one that took place in Marzahn North in In 2001, KOB 1 reached its all-time peak of crimes calculated per 1000 of the population. After that, numbers of crimes have tended to decrease.

32 32 / 111 Figure 2.22: Crime maps for the research area Marzahn North (all crimes calculated per 1000 of the population)

33 33 / 111 Figure 2.23: Crime maps for the research area in Gropiusstadt (all crimes calculated per 1000 of the population)

34 34 / B2.5.3 Theft With the exception of 2004, Marzahn North always had one KOB with more than 90 thefts calculated per 1000 of the population throughout the years covered. In 2000, 2002 and 2003 the rate of thefts committed per mill was highest in KOB 7, the largest of the Marzahn KOBs. Over 90 thefts per mill were registered within this area, reaching a peak in 2002 with thefts calculated per 1000 of the population. In the year 2001, however, it was no longer KOB 7 but KOB 5, a KOB bordering on KOB 7, which superseded the mark of more than 90 thefts calculated per 1000 of the population. This was not the case in the Gropiusstadt, where a crime-rate of more than 90 thefts calculated per 1000 of the population was only reached in In that year, KOB 1 of the Gropiusstadt had 103 thefts. As in Marzahn North, it was also the case that the largest KOB, registered the highest rate of thefts. However, in the Gropiusstadt, the KOB registering the highest rate of thefts remained the same throughout the years and reached a theft-rate comparable to the one in Marzahn North with more than 90 thefts calculated per 1000 of the population only once. In deviating from the findings in the Gropiusstadt, in Marzahn North two KOBs witnessed significantly high crime level. When the number of thefts increased in one of these KOBs, the number of registered thefts decreased in the other. So, in 2000 KOB 7 had 95.9 thefts calculated per 1000 of the population whilst KOB 5 only registered 70 thefts. In 2001, thefts decreased in KOB 7 from 95.9 in 2000 to 79.4 in At the same time, however, the number of thefts registered in KOB 5 increased from 70 thefts in 2000 to 94.5 in In 2003, the theft-rate reached a peak with thefts registered in KOB 7. KOB 5, on the other hand, noticed a slight decrease with 84.8 thefts. This changed in 2003, when both KOB 7 and KOB 5 noticed a small decrease of thefts from (2002, KOB 7) to (2003, KOB 7) and 84.8 (2002, KOB 5) to 72 (2003, KOB 5) calculated per 1000 of the population. In 2004, neither KOB hit the mark of more than 90 thefts. But the number of thefts registered in both KOBs came to a state of equilibrium of 84.1 in KOB 7 and 80.3 in KOB 5. In 2000 as well as in 2001, Marzahn North had one KOB that showed comparatively small rates of theft. In 2000, KOB 1 registered 24 thefts calculated per 1000 of the population. In 2001, the number of thefts in KOB 1 decreased to However, in 2002 the number of thefts registered in KOB 1 more than doubled from 19.1 in 2001 to 58.3 in This continued in 2003, reaching a peak of 85.1 thefts calculated per of the population. In 2004, the number of thefts registered in KOB 1 slightly decreased again to 74 thefts but never came close to its original mark of 24 thefts calculated per 1000 of the population. None of the KOBs of the Gropiusstadt registered quite as few thefts as some KOBs of Marzahn North did. While the Gropiusstadt KOBs only once crossed the mark of more than 90 thefts, the Gropiusstadt KOBs never fell below a rate of 30 thefts. KOB 2, the one with the smallest amount of registered thefts, started off with 31.4 thefts in In 2001, the number of thefts in

35 35 / 111 KOB 2 had increased to 34.1, reaching its final peak in 2002 with 47.9 thefts calculated per 1000 of the population. In 2003, the number of thefts started to decrease again (42.9). This continued in 2004, with the number of registered thefts (32) similar to the one in Figure 2.24: Crime maps for the research area Marzahn North (all crimes calculated per 1000 of the population)

36 36 / 111 Figure 2.25: Crime maps for the research area Gropiusstadt (all crimes calculated per 1000 of the population)

37 37 / B2.5.4 Burglary Burglary in Marzahn peaked in During this year, KOB 7, Marzahn North s largest KOB and the one leading in the number of thefts registered in Marzahn North, witnessed 11.2 burglaries calculated per 1000 of the population. In 2001, this number decreased to 9.3 burglaries. It further decreased in the following years to 0 burglaries in 2002, 1.4 burglaries in 2003 and 0.7 burglaries calculated per 1000 of the population in Thus, the number of burglaries registered between 2002 and 2004 strongly decreased within KOB 7, while at the same time it increased in KOB 1 from 0 burglaries in 2000 to 4.8 in 2002 to 6.8 burglaries calculated per 1000 of the population in Between 2000 and 2004, Gropiusstadt registered fewer cases of burglary than Marzahn North did. As in Marzahn North, the largest KOB of the Gropiusstadt registered the highest number of burglaries with 3.5 burglaries calculated per 1000 of the population in 2000 and After 2001, the number dropped to 3.2 in It then continually decreased to 2.5 in 2003, reaching a final low of 1 burglary calculated per 1000 of the population in In difference to Marzahn, the KOB registering the highest number of burglarys remained the same in the Gropiusstadt throughout the years. The other two KOBs of the Gropiusstadt outbalanced each other in the number of registered burglaries. When the number increased in KOB 2, it decreased in KOB 3. In 2003 and 2004, the numbers of burglaries calculated per 1000 of the population reached a state of equilibrium in both KOBs. 55B2.5.5 Robbery Between 2000 and 2003, KOB 5 of Marzahn North witnessed the highest rate of robberies calculated per 1000 of the population. After a short decline in 2001, robbery reached an all-time peak in 2002 with 6.4 robberies. After 2002, a shift took place: In 2003, it was KOB 7, the largest of the Marzahn North KOBs, that noticed the highest number of robberies, registering 6.2 robberies calculated per 1000 of the population. In 2004, neither KOB 7 nor KOB 5 registered the highest amount of robberies. Instead, it was KOB 6 which registered 5.7 robberies. A development had taken place in this particular KOB. KOB 6 had started off with a very small rate of registered robberies in 2000 and This changed in 2002, when the number of robberies registered in KOB 5 jumped to 3.1. After a slight decline in 2003, KOB 5 reached its peak of 5.7 robberies. The number of robberies registered in the Gropiusstadt was continually higher than the number registered in Marzahn North between 2000 and The KOB with the highest amount of robberies remained the same throughout the years. As with the other types of crime, KOB 1 kept its leading position with an all-time peak in 2002 of 17.8 robberies calculated per 1000 of the population. Except in 2000, the number of robberies registered in KOB 1 never fell below 9 robberies calculated per 1000 of the population. The other two KOBs of the Gropiusstadt noticed an increase between 2000 and 2002 with a peak in After 2002, the number of robberies decreased again, reaching about the same level as had been registered in

38 38 / While the level of robberies registered in the different KOBs of Marzahn North varied, the number of robberies remained relatively steady in the KOBs of the Gropiusstadt. In Marzahn North the different KOBs varied in the number of robberies registered there throughout the years, alternating the position of the area with the second highest level of robberies. Figure 2.26: Crime maps for the research area Marzahn North (all crimes calculated per 1000 of the population)

39 39 / 111 Figure 2.27: Crime maps for the research area Gropiusstadt (all crimes calculated per 1000 of the population)

40 40 / 111 Figure 2.28: Crime maps for the research area Marzahn North (all crimes calculated per 1000 of the population)

41 41 / 111 Figure 2.29: Crime maps for the research area Gropiusstadt (all crimes calculated per 1000 of the population)

42 42 / B2.5.6 Street crime The amount of street crime registered in Marzahn North declined between 2000 and As with other types of crime, KOB 7 took over the leading position with regards to the phenomenon of street crime. In 2000, 64.8 street crimes calculated per 1000 of the population were registered in KOB 7, which defined the peak of street crimes committed in Marzahn. After 2000, the number of registered street crimes continually declined in KOB 7, except for a small increase in In 2004, the number of street crimes had reached an all-time low of 22.4 calculated per 1000 of the population. The other KOBs in Marzahn North strongly varied in the number of registered street crime over the years. In general, the number of street crimes in KOB 5, the other KOB in Marzahn North tending to take on a prominent role in the number of registered crimes, remained relatively high. However, the number of street crimes registered in KOB 5 was comparable to other KOBs in Marzahn. Thus, KOB 5 did not take on a leading position concerning the numbers of registered street crimes except for in 2001, when 52.0 street crimes were registered in KOB 5. This was the only time during the research period when KOB 5 witnessed the highest amount of street crimes registered in Marzahn. However, in 2001 and 2004 the level of street crime in KOB 5 superseded the level registered in KOB 7. Significantly, KOB 1 started with a relatively small number of registered street crimes in Throughout the research period, it noticed a steady increase. In 2003 and 2004 it reached a peak of 37.3 street crimes calculated per 1000 of the population. Only one KOB, KOB 6, maintained a relatively small and steady number of street crimes throughout the years. In 2002 and 2004, the number of street crimes registered in Marzahn showed a significant distribution. All of the KOBs of Marzahn showed similar numbers of registered street crime, with registered numbers amounting to around 30 street crimes calculated per 1000 of the population. In the Gropiusstadt, KOB 1 registered the highest number of street crimes throughout the years. Though never quite reaching Marzahn s level, there existed a steady rate of around 50 street crimes calculated per 1000 of the population, with a peak of 59.8 in The number of street crimes remained about the same in 2002 and then dropped until it reached an all-time low of 38.5 in The development noticeable in KOB 2 of the Gropiusstadt was comparable to the development in KOB 1 of Marzahn North. At first, it showed a relatively small number of street crimes. Then, in 2002 the number increased and kept its level in 2002 and 2003, before decreasing again in Other than in Marzahn North, the KOBs of the Gropiusstadt never reached equilibrium as occurred in Marzahn North in 2002 and However, as had been the case with other types of crimes, KOB 2 and KOB 3 tended to register similar numbers throughout a period of three years (between 2002 and 2004). Except for 2004, KOB 3 showed a relatively constant figure of regis-

43 43 / 111 tered street crimes with around 25 street crimes calculated per 1000 of the population. In 2004, this number dropped to Figure 2.30: Crime maps for the research area Marzahn North (all crimes calculated per 1000 of the population)

44 44 / 111 Figure 2.31: Crime maps for the research area Gropiusstadt (all crimes calculated per 1000 of the population)

45 45 / B2.6 Tackling social and physical problems in Marzahn North and the Gropiusstadt Besides other diverse intervention strategies to solve the complex problems in disadvantaged urban districts, the Federal Government, the states and local actors have established several measures in order to up grade large housing estates all over Germany. In the following section, measures are introduced which refer to the research areas in Marzahn North and the Gropiusstadt. Apart from the efforts made by the (noise-) police, these measures are not directly aimed at the prevention of crime. Nevertheless, it is assumed that these measures can be interpreted against the larger backdrop of creating sustainable and safe neighbourhoods as well. 57B2.6.1 City Reconstruction East: Ahrensfelder Terraces Crime 58BPrevention through physical measures Due to the massive process of population shrinkage in East-Germany caused by demographic trends and structural economic change since reunification (Glock 2002), the Federal Government and the states launched the subsidy programme City Reconstruction East (Stadtumbau 17 Ost)F F in Following a rather restrained phase of implementation, the programme today appears as the most important tool of urban development in the new federal states. Provided 18 with 2.7 billion euros for the period until 2009F F, the programme aims to enable local administrations to develop coherent approaches to the vacant housing problem as well as to improve the quality of living conditions in the cities. The programme focuses on both restoring city centres and improving the high rise estates located on the fringes of the cities. Its major goal is to preserve socially mixed neighbourhoods and attractive cities in eastern Germany. To this end, two main strategies are pursued: On the one hand, the demolition of vacant dwellings in order to diminish the oversupply on the housing market is carried out, on the other hand is the improvement of neighbourhoods by renewal or maintenance of the existing buildings, adapting the infrastructure and reusing urban wastelands. Whilst during the first years of the programme most 19 cities concentrated almost exclusively on tearing down vacant buildingsf F, a revised version of the programme now states that only 50 per cent of the funds can be spent on demolishing, whereas the other 50 per cent will have to be spent on the improvement of neighbourhoods. Nevertheless, the primary attention remains the removing of dispensable panel blocks in the large housing estates outside of the inner-city districts. 17 In addition to this programme, a similar one for urban restructuring in western Germany has been launched in The development costs in 2006 amount to 110 million euros. All in all, 342 cities and 753 measures have been funded so far (BMVBS 2006). 19 Thus, critics regarded the programme nothing more than a blueprint for demolition (Oswalt, P. 2005, p. 14). Actually, this is the first time in German history that large-scale demolition of housing space has been state-funded.

46 46 / 111 Due to a vacancy rate of approximately 21 per cent in 2001, the main focus of the programme in Berlin was set to Marzahn North. Apart from the upgrade of the infrastructural location at Woerlitzer Street (including the refurbishment of an old school building and the rearrangement of surrounding public space) and the establishment of so called intercultural gardens as a meeting place for natives and migrants, the most successful example of how to realise the City Reconstruction East -programme in Berlin is probably the Ahrensfelder Terraces, where a whole estate of old panel buildings was adapted and given a fundamental makeover (Figure 2.32). Source: WBG Marzahn Apart from a partial demolition, the height of the buildings has been lowered by varying amounts in order to create a less uniform profile of the area. Balconies, architectural canopies and roof terraces have been added to create a differentiated and individualised landscape which is closer to an ensemble of townhouses Source: WBG Marzahn than to a monotonous housing estate. The interiors of the buildings have also been redesigned with larger, more open dwellings and modern kitchens and bathrooms. The housing stock was reduced from 1670 to 409 dwellings. According to demand, the flats were predominantly conceptualised to incorporate two rooms, whereupon multifarious ground plans Source: WBG Marzahn provide appropriate housing conditions for families, single households, senior citizens and disabled persons as well. A couple of dwellings on the ground floor have been provided with garden lots (Picture 2.12) and redundant parking space was unsealed and vegetated. Due to the demolition and reconstruction, the streets Figure 2.32: Havemann as defined space have altered heavily. Thus, the rearrangement Straße before and after reconstruction of the environment played a major role in shaping the districts structure. As the result of excessive planting, formerly treeless streets now appear as avenues ; yards, rubbish containers and public spaces aroused from the demolition have been broadly vegetated and the front gardens as well as the entrance areas of the buildings were diversified (Picture 2.11). Although mainly carried out for economic reasons rather than preventive purposes the Ahrensfelder Terraces reconstruction still incorporates aspects of crime prevention measures. First of all, the construction of smaller housing units breaks up anonymity and promotes advanced possibilities of neighbourhood contact. Secondly, due to higher rents the new tenants of the Ahrensfelder Terraces are principally better off inhabitants which leads to an improved social composition of the population structure. Finally, since the modernisation of the Ahrensfelder Terraces radiates into the surrounding area the entire district benefits from an upgraded image that creates increasing identification and individual responsibility.

47 47 / 111 Picture 2.11: View of Ahrensfelder Terraces (front side and entrance areas) Picture 2.12: View of Ahrensfelder Terraces (back side and gardens) 59B2.6.2 Socially Integrative City : Neighbourhood management 60BCrime prevention through social measures Based on district development concepts successfully implemented in North Rhine-Westphalia and Hamburg at the beginning of the 1990s, the Federal Government and the states jointly launched the programme Districts with Special Development Needs the Socially Integrative City in The overall objective of this programme is to improve the actual housing and living conditions (predominantly through investment in construction measures and projects), to increase the residents' personal opportunities (by imparting qualifications, skills and knowledge, creating openings in the labour and housing markets and helping people to help themselves) and to up grade the district's image, local profile and neighbourhood identification (through stabilization and revitalization measures). Berlin s instrument to realise the Socially Integrative City programme is the neighbourhood management (Quartiersmanagement), which was established in Economic difficulties, increasing impoverishment and ethic problems have arisen in particular urban settings. Moreover, the entire city has become somewhat social-spatially polarised and more and more segregated. Some so called Kieze (a colloquial expression within Berlin which grasps the concept of a village in a metropolis) suffered and were identified by the local government as so called disadvantaged neighbourhoods. The Senate of Berlin defined 15 areas with so called special development needs. A couple of years later, another two areas were additionally selected. The neighbourhood management was introduced in order to upgrade declining neighbourhoods. Besides the difficult social structure a deficient built environment also aggravates the problems. The selection of these neighbourhoods is based on a broad variety of parameters. The data have been collected and administrated for the purpose of a Social Urban Development since 1994 in the framework of the project City Monitoring (Stadtmonitoring). It contains geographically referenced data of mobility, selective migration and demographic structure such as bal-

48 48 / 111 ance of migration, migration of Germans and non-germans, migration of children under 6 20 yearsf F, number of foreigners per 100 inhabitants, data of unemployment such as unemployed Germans and migrants per 100 inhabitants, change in per cent within 2 years, unemployed juveniles and young adults under 25 years, per cent of long-term unemployed (over 1 year) as well as data of social welfare, discerned by Germans and foreigners per 100 inhabitants, long and short term beneficiaries. The collection has increasingly been augmented with relevant information but at present does not contain crime data; even those this might be a very important factor and could increase the strength of City Monitoring. This data was used for a cluster analysis which generated 9 types of areas (in 2000, another study followed in 2004 with 10 clusters) with similar developmental tendencies. The research area in Marzahn North was classified as part of a cluster, mainly characterised as an area with average fluctuation but heavy loss of population, strongly selective migration and a high unemployment rate. 270,000 out of 3,300,000 Berliners used to live in this type of areas, which are East-Berliner neighbourhoods on the fringe of the city dominated by high-rise panel buildings. Approximately 25 per cent live for less than five years in this type of cluster, what indicates a rather stable population. The fluctuation rests on tenancy turnovers, 40 per cent move in the rural surroundings. Families move away and other families move in, while more gainfully employed persons move out than into these areas. Due to the City Monitoring in 2000, the Gropiusstadt was not clearly identifiable within a particular cluster. This might have been a reason, why only Marzahn North became a neighbourhood management area in 1999 besides 14 other areas. Finally, over 225,000 people lived in these neighbourhood management areas, in each of them between 4,500 and 24,000 people. In each neighbourhood management area a local team has been established, that is hired by a responsible body, which was chosen by the Senate Department of Urban Development in order to implement social urban development. For each team, the borough appoints a co-ordinator in the administration and the Senate of Urban Development appoints another one to ensure concerted action among their departments. The neighbourhood management team is supposed to activate people and local business owners to participate in the economic and social development of the Kiez. The team has to network local actors, to coordinate and organize cooperation between institutions e.g., schools, police; associations, enterprises, and housing companies. Since community activation is a central issue in the programme, the neighbourhood management team is linked to a resident council, which has been founded and organised by the neighbourhood management team. Furthermore, it is supposed to help with project development and initiates such projects in different categories like constructions in public space, social activities, as well as cultural and economic operations. 20 Migration of children less than 6 years indicates the movement of families, who do not want to start schooling their kids in the neighbourhood school.

49 49 / 111 Obviously, the employees of the neighbourhood management need excellent skills in moderating, networking and management, as well as additional knowledge about fundraising with the aid of other educational and labour programmes and how to guide local small scale businesses. The neighbourhood management team develops an integrated concept of action in the frame of the programme within certain categories that rest on an analysis of their area. These concepts are revised on an annual basis.. With local actors the neighbourhood management teams arrange public meetings about different topics and organise working groups, workshops, mediation and planning processes, exhibitions and press coverage. The aim is to enlist the residents of the estates. Therefore, there is a fund with or 15000, to implement small scale projects like planting vegetation in the streets and public places or organising a backyard party. Generally, neighbourhood management works in an optimum fashion when effective cooperation exists amongst those who are in charge of implementing the programme. Therefore there are steering committees on different levels (local, borough, state), concerting the next steps and goals of the programme. Obviously, the programme works top/down. Numerous projects have been implemented. Although there is no evidence based on the mentioned quantitative indicators that neighbourhood management is effective in terms of stabilising the socio-economic basic data, the qualitative evaluation of the programme is positive regarding the implementation of neighbourhood management and the results of the efforts. The evaluation demonstrates that neighbourhood management is basically and essentially right to up grade disadvantaged neighbourhoods. Accordingly, the policies of urban politics turned out to be successful. Supposedly, an outstanding success was the community activation through citizen boards. The evaluator recommends continuing neighbourhood management on a permanent basis. Neighbourhood management aims to achieve nine strategic goals under the guiding idea of integration and improved living conditions. These strategic goals are embraced by an Integrated Action Concept. One goal is to improve the individuals prospects on the labour market, since unemployment is regarded the key-problem of exclusion. Therefore e.g., existing workplaces must be kept, particular job qualifications for excluded groups (especially juveniles and young adults) should be offered, the unemployed are to be re-integrated into the labour market through measures on the secondary labour market (public funded work), business start-ups and small-scale businesses have to be sponsored and the general business location requires good marketing. Another goal is continued training, as a lack of qualifications is a principle reason for unemployment. This means that existing public facilities are to be kept and their services made better known. Furthermore, non-german inhabitants often need to improve their language skills and their basic knowledge about the political and legal system. Another strategic goal is the general improvement of the physical shape of the neighbourhood in order to increase acceptance and contentment with the housing area. The same is true with the facilitation of social

50 50 / 111 infrastructure. Neighbourhood management aims to improve schooling, to support youth and social work and to improve possibilities of leisure time activities in general. Furthermore, local culture is supposed to be strengthened in order to activate and enhance the quality of public life. Public health is another focus of the strategic goals. Health issues tackled by the neighbourhood management include an improvement in the health of the poor and the support of public health education. Social structures are to be stabled through the promotion of dialogue, e.g., by promoting contact among neighbours and the adoption of responsibility for the neighbourhood in general. One more strategic goal is the active participation of citizens in public decisions about the neighbourhood s development, be it temporarily or on a regular basis. One more and, in the context of this project, most interesting strategic goal is the improvement of public safety and the enhancement of subjective safety. Subjective safety is considered a main factor of contentment of living in the neighbourhood. The operational goals to implement the strategic goals include the application of Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED) and an enlargement of violence prevention. Another focus is to fight the open drug scene. Even when the crime rates are more or less the same as in other city areas, the Senate Department considers a greater fear of crime in the neighbourhood management areas though as yet there has been no inquiry. On the basis of the City Monitoring in 2004, the Senate decided to extend the neighbourhood management in Berlin. As three areas developed properly mainly because of typical gentrification processes they were removed from the social urban renewal process. Two areas were spatially extended and 16 new areas were declared. Among those, only one area has the status of the first generation of neighbourhood management. The process has been sophisticated and different categories of areas have been developed. Additionally, besides the neighbourhood management areas there are also District Management Areas Intervention and District Management Areas Prevention. The main difference between neighbourhood management and district management areas is the allowance of money. District management areas are forced to focus on the actual social urban renewal in the fields of integration, education, sponsorship of gainful employment and participation of any class of the population. There is just a little funding for constructions in the physical environment. Another difference is that there exist important actors in the neighbourhood. These so called strong partners e.g., like housing companies, associations, parishes, community centres or schools are supposed to gradually adopt the role of the former neighbourhood management team. Marzahn Nord-West has been a neighbourhood management area since 1999, while the Gropiusstadt became a District Management Area Prevention in Some general criticism of neighbourhood management says that neighbourhood management and district management is a response to impairment and does not provide prevention.

51 51 / 111 In 1999, the housing company DEGEWO, which holds a stock of 4300 dwellings in the Gropiusstadt, already established a privately financed district management and was anticipated as a strong partner in the future model of the programme. The company invested into their own properties and performed urban renewal beyond typical refurbishment. The DEGEWO district management focuses on tenant and citizen participation as well as upgrading the surrounding environment of their buildings. The driving forces here were not citizen and public administration, but citizen and the public private investor. 61B2.6.3 Crime prevention representatives A measure of 62Bcommunity policing During the 1970s, the Berlin police discovered the advantages of citizen-friendly police work. The relationship between citizens and police had until then been neglected; prevention work had not been a primary focus and the preferred principle was that of prevention through repression. As soon as the police realised that repressive measures offered fewer possibilities to exert an influence on the development of local crime, the expansion of a trustful citizen-policerelationship became a high value and strategically important instrument for successful crimereduction. With this acknowledgement, the Berlin police started the implementation of so called contact area officers ( Kontaktbereichsbeamte ), officers who represented an immediate link between citizens and police, acting as contact persons in questions of safety and therefore as a means of bringing back police to the streets. In 1988, first steps in the implementing the so called Berlin Model led to the decision to convey the contact area officers into the respective police sections. Apart from an amplified involvement of uniformed police with detection work this model comprised a district and community orientated approach, which was characterised by a stronger police presence aimed at a policy of more efficient crime abatement. While more and more police sections adapted to the Berlin Model over the years, in 2004 a further element of crime prevention was established by the police. From then on every police authority and police section introduced a full-time crime prevention representative who is to coordinate crime preventive measures in his/her area. Regarding the case study areas the prevention representatives emanate from the police authorities five (Friedrichshain-Kreuzberg and Neukoelln) and six (Lichtenberg, Treptow-Koepenick and Marzahn-Hellersdorf). The appropriate police sections 56, covering the districts Britz, Buckow and Rudow, and 62, encompassing the area of Marzahn, are located next to the research areas. Although there are still some doubts about the acceptance and effectiveness of this measure; it has nevertheless led to an increased consciousness of the importance of prevention within police ranks as well as amongst the population. The police s self-perception also changed as they now consider themselves as a service provider for the community and thereby strengthens the

52 52 / 111 social control. Crime prevention nowadays is recognized as a task the entire society has to tackle, requiring a joint effort of the federal, state and local authorities alike, as well as private citizens. The combination of both repressive and preventative strategies appears applicable to reduce crime related problems in disadvantaged urban neighbourhoods. The crime prevention representative is responsible for accomplishing a number of different measures. Public relations and cooperation with different organisations, for example, neighbourhood management and other projects for residents belong to the functions of the crime prevention representative. Moreover, crime prevention by the police is aimed at the autonomous development of preventive approaches and plans for action as well as the identification of crime-abetting conditions within the respective areas. High attention is paid to anti-violence-activities, especially those conducted in schools. Schools are motivated to enter into a contract with the police in order to organise anti-violence presentations. Thereby, information regarding violence and crime in general and prevention methods and consequences of criminal behaviour are provided. Possible situations of conflict are analysed in role-plays and children are given advice on how to behave in such situations. By now, the work of the crime prevention representatives is equally appreciated both by the police and by the residents. The model represents a substantial and efficient contribution to the prevention work of the police on a small scale spatial level. 63B2.6.4 Concierge services A rediscovered measure of crime 64Bprevention Going back to the period of promoterism ( Gruenderzeit ) a large number of German housing companies rediscovered concierge services in the end of the 1990s. Basically concerned with the surveillance of entrance areas in residential buildings the concierge additionally controls floors, garages, lifts and the surrounding area predominantly by using CCTV cameras. Apart from the aspect of providing control and safety, the concierge, frequently described as the house s good soul, fulfils an important function concerning the social cohesion of the household as well as providing services for the residents: The doorman satisfies different orders and errands, especially for elderly, handicapped or ill people, accepts deliveries and post, and opens the doors for tradesmen whilst the residents are at work. He even waters the flowers or feeds the pets while the residents are on holidays. Many residents use the concierge lounge to deposit their second latchkey. Residents do not only come when they need help with minor repair work but also to share personal worries about their family or work. After a while, the concierge becomes a reliable contact person, who knows all or at least most of the residents by name, which can be up to 300 individuals. He is somebody to trust, who is always there, always friendly and highly knowledgeable about the house; an institution that communicates a feeling of safety. Very often, the residents possess his telephone number to call in case of an emergency.

53 53 / 111 On the one hand, the focus of the concierge services lies on the improvement of the living conditions, especially in socially disadvantaged areas, which leads to a higher attractiveness and therefore a better profitability of tower block dwellings. On the other hand, the service strengthens the feelings of safety for the residents and leads, by means of control and surveillance, to a decrease in crime rates. Additionally, the concierge also affects the revaluation of the residential areas and their image in the media by attracting new target groups from the middle class. Nevertheless, there are cases where residents resisted the establishment of a concierge service; especially in cases where they have to pay higher rents in order to cover the expenses of the provided service. However, many housing companies found ways to pay for this service on their own or with the participation of surrounding retailers. Despite the deprecatory response of some residents and other critical voices, which fear the establishment of a permanent state of surveillance, the number of concierges employed has rapidly increased during the last years. Both the WBG Marzahn (admittedly not in the research area) as well as the DEGEWO (for example, at Zwickauer Damm 12 or at Joachim-Gottschalk-Weg 1) have introduced such services a long ago. Due to several resident surveys conducted by the housing companies, the establishment of concierges evidently strengthens the residents subjective perception of safety. Due to these experiences, the concierge services are considered to be an effective measure in preventing crime and avoiding anonymity in residential areas. 65B2.6.5 Noise Police (Laermpolizei) A measure of neighbourhood 66Bimprovement Due to cumulative registered disturbances of the peace by night the housing company WBG Marzahn established a private security firm in 2004, which aims to ensure compliance with the rest periods in their housing stock. Additional functions of the so called Noise Police (Laermpolizei) are the enforcement of the rules of the houses in general, the prevention of criminal offences and the surveillance of abandoned buildings due to high vacancy rates in the area. The service is available everyday from 4/6 pm to 3 am and at weekends until 4.30 am. During that time, occupants who feel disturbed by excessive noise or other problems caused by the neighbours are encouraged to call the number of the Noise Police, which can be found in all floors of the houses. The employees of the Noise Police patrol the district partly by car, partly on foot. As regards to their outward appearance, the Noise Police is constituted by uniform-wearing men. In most cases their very appearance leads to a quick solution of the problem; especially concerning juveniles, who constitute the bulk of the disturbers. The security firm follows an attempt which is mainly based on the de-escalation principle. Eminently trained in handling people under alcoholic influence, the Noise Police give a warning at first. Calling the police is necessary only in cases where the disturber does not open the door or

54 54 / 111 in the case of an irresolvable conflict. Accesses to the dwellings as well as the use of arms are not allowed. However, every incident will be reported to the housing company and permanent disturbance could ultimately lead to eviction from the flat. Due to the success of a model experiment implemented in some residential areas of Marzahn, the WBG Marzahn expanded this service to the entire district. The costs of these services are solely borne by the housing company and do not cause higher rents for its tenants. Since the implementation of the Noise Police shortened the lengthy and bureaucratic way of handling noise exposure into a direct and effective reaction, the vast majority of the occupants have expressed a favourable opinion about this measure. Short distances enable the Noise Police to intervene rapidly which, in many cases, is not possible for the police. Furthermore, they support the work of the police by preventing some of the smaller criminal offences. In the past, many former occupants moved to other districts because of the permanent noise exposure in the badly soundproofed slab buildings, which was an incentive for the housing companies to counteract this increasing development. Due to the cumulative competition on the housing market, more and more housing companies are forced to offer an atmosphere of more comfort and safety to their tenants. Thus, the establishment of the Noise Police was regarded as an effective measure of control in order to strengthen the feelings of safety in the entire neighbourhood. Although regarded as a type of social commitment, the service operates with an economic backdrop that is aimed at reducing the fluctuation of residents and high vacancy rates. Most occupants do not consider the assignment of this measure as a stigma but as a contribution to a higher quality of living. The declining number of cases in which residents demanded the Noise Police s help during the last two months is regarded by the housing company as evidence of the measure s success. 67B2.6.6 Physical refurbishment Measures to prevent vandalism Apart from measures aimed at the take-over of informal social control through institutionalised social control (i.e., Noise Police, concierges, video surveillance in specific areas), the housing companies in Marzahn North and the Gropiusstadt implemented a number of actions that targeted a decrease in damages caused by vandalism and the improvement of public safety in their buildings and the surroundings: Entrances have been secured and covered with steel plates on the ground and first floors (Picture 2.31) Unhindered access to the attic storeys has been prevented by means of lattice doors The areas below the basement stairs have been refitted with grills in order to avoid the deposit of bulky refuse Porches above the front doors have been installed Rubbish containers have been locked in barred cages (Picture 2.32)

55 55 / 111 Frequently daubed walls (gables, entrances, ground floors and pillars) have been supplied with a surface coating aimed at preventing graffiti All newly fixed shields in the surroundings have been applied with a varnished film to prevent graffiti Formerly easily accessible technical facilities in the basements have been locked with lattices Damaged benches, fences and palisades in public areas have been rebuilt using rugged materials (metal, concrete) Feelers related to thermal flue and smoke outlets have been substituted with powerful metal casings Picture 2.13: New designed entrance in Marzahn North Picture 2.14: Barred rubbish cages in the Gropiusstadt

56 56 / 111 6BReport on quantitative data 5B322BThe following chapter reports the results of the population survey which was con- ducted from December 2005 until February 2006 in the research areas in Marzahn North and the Gropiusstadt. 23B3.1 Drawing of the sample The actual drawing of the sample was done by the State Administration Authority in Berlin. There were two prerequisites for the sample from our side. First, only people at least 18 years of age were allowed to be in the sample. This is due to the fact that the respondents are asked to do a Time Journey, a retrospective evaluation of the situation in their district five years ago. We assumed that this task already critical from a methodological viewpoint would make no sense with younger respondents since they would hardly be able to remember things when they were children. For the same reason, our second criterion was that the respondents had to have been living in the given districts for at least five years. In the run-up to the survey, there were announcements in local newspapers and information was provided by the housing companies. The questionnaires were handed out to the respondents in a drop-off process: four student assistants were assigned to each of the two districts. They made four attempts to drop off each questionnaire and scheduled a date with the respondent to pick it up again. In case the target person refused to participate or if all four attempts failed to hand out the questionnaire, then another person in that house was chosen by the student assistant. 24B3.2 Description of the sample 5065 questionnaires were distributed by four student assistants in each of the case study areas. For Marzahn North, 502 out of 2182 questionnaires were filled out (23 per cent response rate). In the Gropiusstadt, 519 of the 2883 questionnaires distributed were filled out (18 per cent response rate). 68B3.2.1 Gender ratio In Marzahn Nord we find an almost balanced ratio between the sexes in the official data as well as in our sample (Figure 3.1). Gropiusstadt Marzahn North Male Female Male Female Official Data 47,5% 52,5% 51,0% 49,0% Sample 39,1% 60,9% 48,8% 51,2% Figure 3.1: Gender ration 2005 The situation in the Gropiusstadt is different. There is a slight gap in the official data in favour of women which might be explained by the fact that the people living in the Gropiusstadt are

57 57 / 111 significantly older than those living in Marzahn Nord. The longer lifespan of women could explain why there are more women. But this does not explain the 20 percent gap in our sample. 69B3.2.1 Ethnicity It is a commonly known issue that migrants are usually underrepresented in surveys. Unfortunately this proves true for our study as well. The discrepancy in Marzahn North is not very strong but for the Gropiusstadt we find a considerable bias in terms of non-germans participating in our survey (Figure 3.2). But how can this 12 percent gap be explained? One approach could be to try and associate the reason with a lack of German knowledge among the foreign citizens. When the designated respondents are not capable of understanding the questionnaire they are more unlikely to participate in a survey. Marzahn Another possibility we cannot rule out is a bias Gropiusstadt North among our interviewers. Seven out of eight are German which alone might influence the likelihood of Official Data 16,4% 5,5% Sample 4,3% 3,0% foreign citizens to participate. Furthermore, there Figure 3.2: Migrants 2005 are clear differences between the percentages of foreign citizens interviewed by each of them. One interviewer had only one non-german respondent whereas the interviewer with the highest percentage of foreign citizens interviewed eight (11 out of 138 interviews carried out). While this would explain a general low percentage of migrants in our sample, it does not explain the difference between the two districts. We assume that there are also differences between foreign citizens in the two districts. The majority of the foreign citizens in the Gropiusstadt show a Turkish background while in Marzahn North, most of the migrants are either from Russia, Poland or Vietnam. We can only speculate about the reasons why different groups of foreign citizens should show different participation patterns. 70B3.2.1 Composition of age First of all, it is important to call attention to the fact that the official data in this table needed to be adapted in order to be comparable with our sample (Figure 3.3). Marzahn North Gropiusstadt It was necessary to limit the base Official Official Agegroups Data Sample Data Sample on which percentages were calculated ,5% 16,2% 12,4% 5,1% on ages at 18 years and older ,2% 31,1% 28,5% 24,1% since in our sample only respondents ,6% 27,5% 15,5% 15,6% ,0% 14,4% 17,3% 26,2% of 18 years of age and older ,7% 10,8% 26,4% 29,0% were allowed to participate. 100% 100% 100% 100% Before we investigate the age differences Figure 3.3: Composition of age (Official data and sample) between the districts we must control how well our sample

58 58 / 111 represents the actual age distribution in the two districts. For Marzahn North we notice only one large gap in the age group of the 18 to 27 years old which are underrepresented in our sample by 7 percent. This age group is also underrepresented in the Gropiusstadt by 7 percent. For both research areas the age group of the 55 to 65 years old is overrepresented in our sample. The explanation for these results might be that the younger people are less often at home and therefore their likelihood to participate in our survey is lower than the one for elderly people who might spend more time at home Gropiusstadt Marzahn North Most obvious is the age difference of the districts in the official data as well as in our sample. In our sample, 15 there are almost three 10 times as many elderly 5 people (65+ years) über 65 living in the Gropiusstadt Age than in Mar- Figure 3.4: Composition of age (Sample) zahn North. Conversely, there are three times as many young people living in Marzahn North than in the Gropiusstadt (Figure 3.4). Percentage 71B3.3 Living conditions in the two research areas When asked if their neighbourhood was pleasant five years ago, more than two thirds of the respondents reported that this was the case. The percentage of consent in the Gropiusstadt was higher than in Marzahn North reaching 79 percent among women (Figure 3.5). District Gropiusstadt Marzahn Nord The district was a pleasant district The district is a pleasent district agree disagree agree disagree female male female male 79,1% 70,3% 64,0% 66,5% 20,9% 29,7% 36,0% 33,5% 100% 100% 100% 100% 47,7% 36,7% 68,5% 64,0% 52,3% 63,3% 31,5% 36,0% 100% 100% 100% 100% Figure 3.5: Pleasant district (2000 and 2005)

59 59 / 111 Today the situation has changed drastically. Whereas in Marzahn North the percentage of people considering their district to be friendly remained almost unchanged, the consent in the Gropiusstadt has dropped by almost 50 percent. Only 48% of the female and 37% of the male respondents agree that their district is friendly. A curiosity is the discrepancy between male and female respondents in the Gropiusstadt. So far, we have no explanation for the fact that women find their district more pleasant than men. Indeed, we would have expected that such a discrepancy would have been the other way round. District Gropiusstadt Marzahn Nord The district was a safe district The district is a safe district agree disagree agree disagree female male female male 62,6% 59,2% 64,6% 61,3% 37,4% 40,8% 35,4% 38,7% 100% 100% 100% 100% 24,5% 24,1% 49,2% 42,9% 75,5% 75,9% 50,8% 57,1% 100% 100% 100% 100% Figure 3.6: Safe district (2000 and 2005) Around 60 percent of the respondents in both areas say that there district was safe five years ago (Figure 3.6). For the present these numbers dropped massively. Only 24 percent of the respondents in the Gropiusstadt feel that their district is safe compared to 42.9 (for male) respectively 49.2 percent (for female) of the respondents in Marzahn North. District Gropiusstadt Marzahn Nord The district was a calm district The district is a calm district agree disagree agree disagree female male female male 69,9% 70,3% 67,9% 63,2% 30,1% 29,7% 32,1% 36,8% 100% 100% 100% 100% 41,5% 44,3% 54,5% 50,4% 58,5% 55,7% 45,5% 49,6% 100% 100% 100% 100% Figure 3.7: Calm district (2000 and 2005)

60 60 / 111 In both research areas for today there is a significant lower consent to the statement This district is quiet than for five years ago (Figure 3.7). Again, the drop in the Gropiusstadt is harsher than in Marzahn North with almost 30 percent displaying less consent. Compared to this number the 13 percent drop of Marzahn North appears to be relatively low. District Gropiusstadt Marzahn Nord The district was an attractive district The district is an attractive district agree disagree agree disagree female male female male 69,9% 56,2% 45,3% 38,9% 30,1% 43,8% 54,7% 61,1% 100% 100% 100% 100% 57,6% 43,8% 75,8% 74,3% 42,4% 56,2% 24,2% 25,7% 100% 100% 100% 100% Figure 3.8: Attractive district (2000 and 2005) The above table proves the success of the massive structural measures taken in Marzahn North. For today a large majority of around 75 percent of the respondents consider that they live in an attractive district (Figure 3.8). That is a boost of almost 30 percent compared to the situation five years ago. In the Gropiusstadt however, where less structural efforts were conducted, the percentage of those who think that their district is nice dropped more than 10 percent. District Gropiusstadt Marzahn Nord The district was a clean district The district is a clean district agree disagree agree disagree female male female male 57,6% 48,5% 44,3% 44,1% 42,4% 51,5% 55,7% 55,9% 100% 100% 100% 100% 31,0% 22,4% 45,3% 50,4% 69,0% 77,6% 54,7% 49,6% 100% 100% 100% 100% Figure 3.9: Clean district (2000 and 2005) Concerning the cleanness of the research areas we find a similar picture like before (Figure 3.9). Assumingly as a result of the efforts taken in Marzahn North, the percentage of the respondents who think that their district is tidy for today is slightly higher than for in the past. On

61 61 / 111 the contrary, in the Gropiusstadt only 31 percent of the female and 22 percent of the male respondents think that their district is tidy. Interestingly, female respondents in the Gropiusstadt show another answer pattern than expected. It is unclear why 9 percent more women think that the Gropiusstadt is a clean district, than men. District Gropiusstadt Marzahn Nord If I could have, I would have left the district If I could, I would leave the district agree disagree agree disagree female male female male 32,1% 33,3% 34,0% 34,8% 67,9% 66,7% 66,0% 65,2% 100% 100% 100% 100% 49,5% 52,6% 38,5% 38,2% 50,5% 47,4% 61,5% 61,8% 100% 100% 100% 100% Figure 3.10: Wish to move (2000 and 2005) In the table If I could, I would leave [ ] we find that the wish to move out of the district has grown enormously in the Gropiusstadt whereas there was only a slight increase in Marzahn North (Figure 3.10). In other words: more than half of the respondents in the Gropiusstadt find their district so unattractive to live in that they would like to move somewhere else. 72B3.4 Level of Fear of Crime in the research areas The overwhelming majority of the citizens in both districts feel safe in their homes at daytime (Figure 3.11). However, there is a rise in the feeling of insecurity especially among women and especially in the Gropiusstadt. District Gropiusstadt Marzahn Nord Feeling of safety alone at home during the day - five years ago Feeling of safety alone at home during the day - today safe unsafe safe unsafe female male female male 94,4% 96,4% 91,5% 95,2% 5,6% 3,6% 8,5% 4,8% 100% 100% 100% 100% 87,7% 91,4% 88,8% 96,1% 12,3% 8,6% 11,2% 3,9% 100% 100% 100% 100% Figure 3.11: Fear of crime alone at home during the day (2000 and 2005)

62 62 / 111 More than twice as many state that they are feeling unsafe at home today compared to the situation five years ago. The level of insecurity felt by female respondents today is almost identical in the two districts. But there has been a different development for men. While less male respondents in Marzahn North feel unsafe today than five years ago, this figure has increased by five percent in the Gropiusstadt. For today more than twice as many male respondents in the Gropiusstadt state that they feel unsafe at home than in Marzahn North. District Gropiusstadt Marzahn Nord Feeling of safety alone at home at night - five years ago Feeling of safety alone at home at night - today safe unsafe safe unsafe female male female male 85,8% 94,4% 79,8% 89,0% 14,2% 5,6% 20,2% 11,0% 100% 100% 100% 100% 75,2% 82,7% 74,8% 89,1% 24,8% 17,3% 25,2% 10,9% 100% 100% 100% 100% Figure 3.12: Fear of crime alone at home at night (2000 and 2005) There is a sharp increase in the level of insecurity felt at home at night compared to the situation during daytime (Figure 3.12). Overall, 25 percent of the female respondents state that they feel unsafe at home today. Comparing the two research areas we find interesting differences. In particular, the developments in the Gropiusstadt raise several questions. The percentage of male respondents feeling unsafe at home during night has increased by more than 300 percent within the last five years while this figure remained unchanged in Marzahn North. Delving deeper into the data we find that among the 17 percent feeling unsafe, the vast majority are elderly people. And since the population in the Gropiusstadt is much older than the one in Marzahn North, this fact contributes to an explanation. District Gropiusstadt Marzahn Nord Feeling of safety alone in the corridors and communal spaces of your appartment block during the day - five years ago Feeling of safety alone in the corridors and communal spaces of your appartment block during the day - today safe unsafe safe unsafe female male female male 91,1% 91,3% 85,2% 89,0% 8,9% 8,7% 14,8% 11,0% 100% 100% 100% 100% 79,9% 81,6% 86,6% 89,5% 20,1% 18,4% 13,4% 10,5% 100% 100% 100% 100% Figure 3.13: Fear of crime alone in the corridors of the apartment block during the day (2000 and 2005)

63 63 / 111 Although the numbers have dropped somewhat there is still a high level of security felt both in the Gropiusstadt and in Marzahn North concerning the feeling of being alone in the corridors and communal spaces of the apartment block during the day (Figure 3.13). Again the measures taken in Marzahn North become obvious. While the level even increased a little bit, there is a 10 percent drop to be stated for the Gropiusstadt. Every fifth resident feels unsafe today which gives reason to worry and to think about counter measurements. Since there have been good experiences with the introduction of the Concierge services in Marzahn North, this might be one measure to think about in the Gropiusstadt as well. District Gropiusstadt Marzahn Nord Feeling of safety alone in the corridors and communal spaces of your appartment block at night - five years ago Feeling of safety alone in the corridors and communal spaces of your appartment block at night - today safe unsafe safe unsafe female male female male 64,4% 82,1% 62,9% 81,4% 35,6% 17,9% 37,1% 18,6% 100% 100% 100% 100% 52,6% 64,5% 63,9% 76,3% 47,4% 35,5% 36,1% 23,7% 100% 100% 100% 100% Figure 3.13: Fear of crime alone in the corridors of the apartment block at night (2000 and 2005) The question How safe do you feel when you are alone in the corridors and communal spaces of your apartment block at night? concerns women in a different way than men since this is the prototypical scenario for the fear of being raped (Figure 3.13). So it is to be expected that women show a much higher level of insecurity. Looking at the data we find no real differences between the situation now and for five years ago. The levels are almost identical in the two districts with female respondents showing almost twice as much discomfort than males. But today, the respondents state very different levels of security. In Marzahn North, male respondents show a slightly increased fear while in the Gropiusstadt this figure exploded by 100 percent. The gap between male and female respondents is much smaller than in Marzahn North. Again, this can be explained in good part by the fact that the population in the Gropiusstadt is significantly older than in Marzahn North. And since elderly people in general are more fearful of crime, the gap between the sexes is smaller, too.

64 64 / 111 District Gropiusstadt Sex Marzahn Nord Sex Feeling of safety alone in the local street during the day - five years ago Feeling of safety alone in the local street during the day - today safe unsafe safe unsafe female male female male 93,7% 94,4% 93,0% 90,7% 6,3% 5,6% 7,0% 9,3% 100% 100% 100% 100% 82,1% 81,3% 91,9% 89,5% 17,9% 18,7% 8,1% 10,5% 100% 100% 100% 100% Figure 3.14: Fear of crime alone in the streets during the day (2000 and 2005) Asked how safe the respondents feel alone in their local streets during the day, the figures for Marzahn North remained stable with about 90 percent feeling safe out on the streets (Figure 3.14). In contrast to that there is a sharp increase of insecurity among the respondents in the Gropiusstadt independent of their sex. Nowadays, 18 percent feel unsafe, compared to only 6 percent five years ago. District Gropiusstadt Sex Marzahn Nord Sex Feeling of safety alone in the local street at night - five years ago Feeling of safety alone in the local street at night - today safe unsafe safe unsafe female male female male 49,5% 60,6% 56,5% 66,7% 50,5% 39,4% 43,5% 33,3% 100% 100% 100% 100% 27,5% 36,2% 48,5% 63,0% 72,5% 63,8% 51,5% 37,0% 100% 100% 100% 100% Figure 3.15: Fear of crime alone in the streets at night (2000 and 2005) Asked whether they feel safe out on the streets alone at night the respondents in Marzahn North judge it all about the today as they did five years ago (Figure 3.15). Naturally there is a strong gap between men and women. Women generally feel less safe than men. Compared to the Gropiusstadt the level of security felt in Marzahn North is still high. For today only one third of the respondents there feel safe out on the streets at night. That is a sharp decrease of more than 20 percent within five years and certainly reason enough to discuss the overall policing concept of this district.

65 65 / 111 District Gropiusstadt Marzahn Nord Feeling of safety using local public transport during the day - five years ago Feeling of safety using local public transport during the day - today safe unsafe safe unsafe female male female male 85,0% 88,6% 89,7% 86,1% 15,0% 11,4% 10,3% 13,9% 100% 100% 100% 100% 59,1% 57,1% 83,1% 82,8% 40,9% 42,9% 16,9% 17,2% 100% 100% 100% 100% Figure 3.16: Fear of crime using public transport during the day (2000 and 2005) Another drastic drop in feelings of security in the Gropiusstadt can be found in the item How safe do you feel when you are using local public transport during the day? (Figure 3.16). From a similarly high level of more than 85 percent five years ago this figure dropped in the Gropiusstadt down to less than 60 percent, whereas it remained stable in Marzahn North. District Gropiusstadt Marzahn Nord Feeling of safety using local public transport at night - five years ago Feeling of safety using local public transport at night - today safe unsafe safe unsafe female male female male 39,3% 49,7% 46,4% 50,7% 60,7% 50,3% 53,6% 49,3% 100% 100% 100% 100% 14,3% 23,2% 29,3% 39,6% 85,7% 76,8% 70,7% 60,4% 100% 100% 100% 100% Figure 3.17: Fear of crime using public transport at night (2000 and 2005) The above table presents the lowest scores of security of all items polled (Figure 3.17). With a top low score of only 14.3 percent of the female respondents in Gropiusstadt feeling secure today using the public transportation system at night it shows that there is an urgent need to do something about it. But this also holds true for Marzahn Nord. Only 30 respectively 40 percent of the respondents feel safe using the public transportation system at night a fact which cannot be regarded as a satisfying finding for the operating company. 73B3.5 Summary It can be garnered from the overall findings that the level of security felt amongst the respondents five years ago and today in Marzahn Nord has remained (with one exception) almost un-

66 66 / 111 changed, whereas a drastic drop of consent has occurred amongst the residents of the Gropiusstadt. There is a general trend that the percentage of respondents from the Gropiusstadt feeling safe today in various circumstances is down by up to 50 percent. To a large extent, this finding can be explained by differences in the age composition of the districts. While residents in Marzahn North are rather young, there are mostly elderly people living in the Gropiusstadt. And from numerous studies we know that elderly people are in general more fearful of crime than younger people. A true reason of concern is the situation in the public transport system, especially at night. With a vast majority feeling unsafe using busses, the subway etc., the authorities need to address this problem and find ways to give their customers a feeling of safety. 74B3.6 Social cohesion Since there are big differences in the socio-demographics between the districts, one could have assumed bigger differences concerning social cohesion as well. But this is not the case. District Social Cohesion Index very little social cohesion low level of social cohesion moderate level of social cohesion high level of social cohesion Gropiusstadt Marzahn Nord 8,9% 9,8% 18,1% 15,4% 36,6% 37,3% 36,4% 37,5% 100% 100% Figure 3.18: Social cohesion in the research areas Computed as the mean of the items v06a, and v09a-e, the index social cohesion does not show significant differences between Marzahn Nord and Gropiusstadt. In both districts, more than 70 percent of the respondents state a medium or high level of social cohesion (Figure 3.18). While this finding sounds impressive, it also raises questions about its validity. When we think about who is likely to participate in a survey like ours, it becomes clear that our respondents in general are rather those who are getting involved in their district. People who are not integrated in social networks are less likely to participate in surveys. Thus, we have to assume a bias in our sample that overestimates the real level of social cohesion.

67 67 / B3.7 Problems in the research areas In order to get an overview concerning the general strain with problems in the district a sum index over the variables v32a to v32r was computed. As a result, a new index variable with values from 1 No problem at all to 4 Very big problem emerged. Comparing the two research areas we District Gropiusstadt Marzahn Nord find Marzahn North to be less strained Level of low level of problems 14,0% 21,7% with problems than the Gropiusstadt problems in the District moderate level of problems 65,0% 61,9% (Figure 3.19). There is a 5 percent difference high level of problems 21,0% 16,4% in the group of those respon- 100% 100% Figure 3.19: Problems in the research areas dents who think that there is a high strain with problems in their district. Gropiusstadt District Marzahn Nord 76B3.7.1 Incivilities There are seven items measuring inci- Demolished/Derelict No problem 70,6% 69,1% vilities in the districts. While problems buildings Is a problem 20,9% 23,7% such as Noise or Demolished/Derelict Don't know 8,5% 7,3% 100% 100% buildings are equally Groups of youths No problem 17,0% 28,9% hanging around Is a problem 80,1% 65,8% serious in both districts, there are some Don't know 2,9% 5,3% which are a bigger problem in one of 100% 100% the districts than in the other (Figure Rubbish or litter in No problem 32,3% 41,9% streets and parks Is a problem 65,3% 54,4% 3.20). Don't know 2,4% 3,6% Groups of youths hanging around are 100% 100% Homeless people No problem 64,6% 70,9% seen much more as a problem in the and beggars Is a problem 30,3% 22,6% Gropiusstadt than in Marzahn Nord. 80 Don't know 5,1% 6,5% percent of the respondents think that 100% 100% Drunks on the streets No problem 37,4% 45,8% they constitute a problem in contrast to Is a problem 58,1% 48,1% only 65 percent of the respondents in Don't know 4,5% 6,1% 100% 100% Marzahn Nord. This result is partly explained Drug addicts on the No problem 53,4% 65,2% again by a conflict of the streets Is a problem 20,0% 11,7% generations. Elderly people in general Don't know 26,5% 23,1% 100% 100% are more fearful of young people, especially Too much noise No problem 49,7% 50,8% when they hang around in Is a problem 46,0% 46,4% Don't know 4,3% 2,8% groups. They might pose a threat to 100% 100% them although they are totally harmless. Figure 3.20: Incivilities in the research areas And since there are many more elderly people living in the Gropiusstadt, this item is more likely to be considered a problem there than in Marzahn Nord.

68 68 / 111 Gropiusstadt District Marzahn Nord 77B3.7.2 Crime In the corresponding table, items are Graffiti No problem 27,2% 28,3% joined together which are constituted as Is a problem 68,2% 67,6% crimes: Graffiti, Harassment of women, Don't know 4,5% 4,1% 100% 100% Drug dealer, Domestic violence, Vandalism, Harassment No problem 55,2% 60,6% Violence in public space and of women Is a problem 15,4% 13,1% Molesting of children (Figure 3.20). Don't know 29,3% 26,3% 100% 100% While only 10 percent of the respondents Drug dealers No problem 49,8% 61,0% in Marzahn Nord think that drug dealers Is a problem 17,5% 10,1% are a problem in their district, this figure Don't know 32,7% 29,0% 100% 100% can go up to 68 percent for the items of Domestic No problem 43,6% 41,4% Graffiti and Vandalism in the Gropiusstadt. violence Is a problem 15,0% 23,9% And drug dealers constitute a Don't know 41,4% 34,6% 100% 100% bigger problem there as well. Enlightening Vandalism No problem 24,2% 28,2% is furthermore the category Don t know. Is a problem 67,6% 61,7% When 41 percent of the respondents in Don't know 8,2% 10,1% 100% 100% the Gropiusstadt and 35 percent in Marzahn Violence in No problem 38,2% 49,0% North state that they don t know if public space Is a problem 34,6% 26,6% domestic violence in their district is a Don't know 27,2% 24,4% problem or not, this tells you something 100% 100% Molesting of No problem 44,4% 51,9% about the social cohesion as well. For this children Is a problem 21,4% 20,2% reason, the fact that domestic violence is Don't know 34,2% 28,0% rather seen to be a problem in Marzahn 100% 100% North might only reflect a higher level of Figure 3.20: Crime in the research areas social awareness. The actual level might be much higher in the Gropiusstadt. The high level of unawareness of violence in public space might be due to a behavior of avoidance, e.g., not going out after dark, avoiding certain places etc.

69 69 / 111 Poor lighting No problem Is a problem District Gropiusstadt Marzahn Nord 50,0% 56,9% 46,9% 40,1% 78B3.7.3 Deficits There were four items presented which portray different shortcomings (Figure 3.21). None of them was rated lower than Lack of police on the streets Don't know No problem Is a problem Don't know 3,1% 3,1% 100% 100% 40,8% 40,0% 42,8% 47,4% 16,4% 12,6% 40 percent as being a problem, poor lighting, surprisingly, is a relatively small problem in Marzahn North. On the other hand, the lack of police on the streets is consid- Lack of leisure-time facilities Lack of social services No problem Is a problem Don't know No problem Is a problem Don't know 100% 100% 41,5% 34,2% 47,4% 57,8% 11,0% 7,9% 100% 100% 20,7% 36,7% 72,3% 55,0% 7,0% 8,3% 100% 100% Figure 3.21: Deficits of the research areas ered to be a problem by more than 72 percent of the respondents in the Gropiusstadt. Interestingly, this item was only moderately stated as a problem when the same respondents were asked to name problems in their districts with an open ended question. Instead, a lack of leisure facilities and a lack of / or broken lighting were prominently stated. 79B3.7.4 Conclusions Comparing the results from the closed question battery with those from the open query, we find that most of the problems in the research areas are covered with the first. However, there are problems which were not addressed in the question battery. Basically, there a two big problem areas that also must be taken into consideration. The first one embraces cleanness in general, but also dog droppings and rubbish in the streets. The second problem area reflects a certain xenophobic attitude: too many non-germans and a lack of integration efforts on the part of migrants. In addition to these two issues, there are two more single items that were stated as problems: alcohol and unemployment.

70 70 / B3.8 Development of problems during the last five years District Gropiusstadt Marzahn Nord 81B3.8.1 Incivilities The results for the incivilities reflect to a Demolished/Derelict buildings Better Equal Worse 25,3% 50,0% 65,1% 38,8% 9,5% 11,2% 100% 100% certain extent the success of the neighborhood management in Marzahn North (Figure 3.22). In all items, this dis- Groups of youths hanging around Better Equal Worse 3,5% 6,1% 44,9% 53,8% 51,6% 40,1% 100% 100% trict performs better than the Gropiusstadt. Nevertheless, most problems are seen to have become worse or re- Rubbish or litter in streets and parks Better Equal Worse 9,3% 19,7% 52,6% 58,1% 38,1% 22,2% 100% 100% mained as bad over the last five years. Especially Groups of youths hanging around, Drunks in the streets and Too Homeless people and beggars Better Equal Worse 8,5% 13,9% 71,3% 63,7% 20,2% 22,4% 100% 100% much noise are negative examples for both districts. Rubbish or litter in streets and parks constitutes a specific problem Drunks on the streets Better 3,2% 6,5% in the Gropiusstadt, where 38 percent of Equal Worse 59,1% 61,3% 37,6% 32,2% 100% 100% the respondents view the situation to have become worse. The only item Drug addicts on the streets Better Equal Worse 5,3% 16,1% 78,2% 74,3% 16,5% 9,6% 100% 100% where a majority believes that is has gotten improved over the last five years is Demolished/Derelict buildings. Half of Too much noise Better 4,3% 10,4% the respondents in Marzahn North state Equal Worse 64,3% 61,3% 31,5% 28,3% 100% 100% that this problem has gotten better, still 25 percent in the Gropiusstadt. Figure 3.22: Perceived development of incivilities during the last five years

71 71 / 111 Graffiti Better District Gropiusstadt Marzahn Nord 7,5% 16,5% 82B3.8.2 Crime Among the problems which constitute crimes, especially Graffiti, Vandalism Equal 51,8% 49,4% and Violence in public space have be- Harassment of women Drug dealers Worse Better Equal Worse Better 40,7% 34,1% 100% 100% 5,6% 15,3% 81,3% 73,1% 13,1% 11,6% 100% 100% 4,4% 15,6% come worse. Again, the overall performance of Marzahn Nord is significantly better than in the Gropiusstadt. Still, the development of the three problems mentioned above gives reason to worry about the future. Domestic violence Equal Worse Better Equal Worse 79,0% 77,1% 16,5% 7,4% 100% 100% 4,5% 8,9% 81,0% 73,8% 14,5% 17,3% Leaving methodological questions concerning the validity of a retrospective evaluation aside, the concerns of the residents are clear and should be taken seriously by the authorities. Vandalism Better Equal 100% 100% 2,9% 7,6% 48,8% 55,8% 83B3.8.3 Deficits Concerning the (infrastructure) deficits, Worse 48,3% 100% 36,6% 100% only marginal improvements have been made, if any. The picture for Marzahn Violence in Better 3,4% 6,6% Nord is ambivalent since the respondents public space Equal 61,0% 67,8% from that district are more aware of Worse 35,5% 25,6% Molesting of children Better Equal Worse 100% 4,4% 78,1% 17,5% 100% 100% 8,0% 74,3% 17,6% 100% changes than the ones from the Gropiusstadt. However, there are mixed results. For instance, while 14 percent think that there has been an improvement in leisure-time facilities, almost 29 percent Figure 3.23: Perceived development of crime during the last five years think that the situation got worse over the last five years. Overall, a majority in both districts view the deficits as more problematic than was the case five years ago. The only deficit in the Gropiusstadt that was drastically rated worse is Lack of police on the streets with 45 percent thinking that this problem has worsened. In Marzahn Nord, there are three deficits that are striking: Lack of leisure-time facilities, Lack of social services and Lack of police on the streets are all seen by approximately 30 percent as having gotten worse over the last five years.

72 72 / B3.9 Measures to improve the situation in the research areas In a question battery, the respondents were presented with 17 different measures to solve / reduce the problems in the district. They were asked to rate them from 1 Not at all appropriate to 4 Very appropriate. For reasons of clarity we merged the categories into two: appropriate and not appropriate. Furthermore, we excluded the category don t know in which only very few percent of the respondents made their cross. The different measures can roughly be divided into two groups. The first reflects a dimension of prevention and social solutions whereas the second reflects active countermeasures and a call for law and order. District Gropiusstadt Marzahn Nord 85B3.9.1 Prevention The overall agreement rate differs from 72 Better lighting Fewer blind corners not appropriate appropriate not appropriate 16,7% 24,0% 83,3% 76,0% 100% 100% 6,5% 14,3% percent of the respondents in Marzahn North pleading for a better integration of immigrants up to 95 percent for measures appropriate 93,5% 85,7% like Violence-prevention in schools and More cleanliness in streets and parks not appropriate appropriate 100% 100% 11,3% 15,5% 88,7% 84,5% Better co-operation between police and citizens (Figure 3.24). Integration of immigrants not appropriate appropriate 100% 100% 20,9% 28,0% 79,1% 72,0% 100% 100% Interestingly, Better lighting although stated prominently in the open query to problems in the district received only Violence-prevention in schools Better support for low-income groups not appropriate appropriate not appropriate appropriate 5,2% 5,7% 94,8% 94,3% 100% 100% 14,4% 7,4% 85,6% 92,6% relatively moderate agreement rates in the districts compared to the other measures proposed. More participation of citizens in district matters not appropriate appropriate 100% 100% 13,3% 11,2% 86,7% 88,8% 100% 100% 86B3.9.1 Repression Compared to the agreement levels for the Prevention measures, a repressive law- More sports- and leisure-time facilities for young people Better co-operation between police and citizens More information on crime and crime prevention measures in my neighbourhood not appropriate appropriate not appropriate appropriate not appropriate appropriate 9,4% 7,3% 90,6% 92,7% 100% 100% 5,3% 7,4% 94,7% 92,6% 100% 100% 11,0% 16,6% 89,0% 83,4% 100% 100% and-order policy is seen as being somewhat less suitable in the opinions of the respondents (Figure 3.25). Only 33, respectively 37 percent think that Citizenpatrols are an appropriate measure to counter the problems in the district. But More police on the streets and Figure 3.24: Preventive measures perceived as adequate or inadequate Stronger punishment for acts of violence still get agreement rates up to 93 percent.

73 73 / 111 Gropiusstadt District Marzahn Nord 87B3.9.2 Conclusions Looking at the results of these question Video monitoring not appropriate 23,0% 39,3% batteries one might wonder about the high of public spaces appropriate 77,0% 60,7% rates of consent with the measures proposed. 100% 100% More police not appropriate 15,1% 24,7% Apart from Citizen-patrols, all powers appropriate 84,9% 75,3% measures find widespread acceptance 100% 100% Use of private not appropriate 25,8% 37,6% among the respondents. security firms appropriate 74,2% 62,4% In the open query to measures that would 100% 100% make the inhabitants feel safer in their Citizen-patrols not appropriate 66,6% 63,1% district, 573 respondents made 1086 appropriate 33,4% 36,9% 100% 100% statements. They were grouped into 22 Reduce the influx not appropriate 18,9% 20,7% categories. Among those, the demand for of foreigners appropriate 81,1% 79,3% more police was most prominent with % 100% Stronger not appropriate 8,3% 8,6% percent of all statements. Better lighting punishment for acts of violence appropriate 91,7% 91,4% with 12 and noise patrols / private security 100% 100% firms with 10 percent ranked at More police on not appropriate 7,1% 14,1% the streets appropriate 92,9% 85,9% places two and three. While the call for 100% 100% more police is consistent with the results Figure 3.25: Repressive measure perceived as adequate or inadequate from the question battery, there is again a discrepancy in the prominence of Better lighting in the open query and the question battery. An attempt to explain this gap could be that there are some areas where bad lighting constitutes a very severe problem while in most of the other parts the situation is not that bad. Those who are affected by this take the opportunity to specifically point this problem out, although it is voiced more in the Gropiusstadt, it cannot be specified.

74 7B 74 / BReport on qualitative data The following chapter summarises the outcome of the expert interviews that have been conducted in Berlin in May and June Serving as interview partners in Marzahn North Mr Matthias Bahlo and Mrs Christiane Hoehne representing the housing company WBG Marzahn, Mr Gerd Boussel, prevention representative of the police, and Mr Hans Panhoff from the neighbourhood management Marzahn North-West were available. In the Gropiusstadt Mr Martin Voecks and Mrs Petra Haumersen from the neighbourhood management Lipschitzallee as well as Mr Joern Richters and Mrs Annett Biernath from the housing company DEGEWO were interviewed. In the form of a group discussion Mr Hardy Telge, the prevention representative of the police in the Gropiusstadt, as well as Mr Einfinger and Mr Fibranz, both section leaders of the police, have been consulted. In addition, Mr Jens-Oliver Heuer, the prevention advisor of the State Office of Criminal Investigation in Berlin (LKA) was interviewed. 25B4.1 Objectives The goal of all the interview partners who participated in the project, and the institutions they represent, is ultimately to improve the quality of life of those residents living in the respective large housing estates. The institutions involved generally carry out not-for-profit community service work, although it is to be noted that the interests of the WGB are somewhat more economically orientated: For us, improving the marketability of our housing assets stands at the fore (Bahlo, Line 20). Likewise, Mr Richters from the DEGEWO notes: it also has to do with tenant satisfaction. By renovating the building facades, particularly those in the large housing estates, the reputation of the entire suburb is considerably strengthened (Richters, Lines 38-41). The work of the crime prevention representatives is, in as much, the only explicitly concerned with crime prevention. The work of the other institutions is skewed more in the direction of social engagement, where aspects concerning crime prevention and anxiety levels play more of a supplementary role: ( ) Prevention, ( ) is more of a side effect (Bahlo, Line 20). Mr Richters, the manager of customer services at DEGEWO, sets similar priorities, assessing the actual role of crime in the Gropiusstadt as secondary in nature:

75 75 / 111 Crime does not play a role regarding the measures, which I have mentioned. It plays - it plays a role with regard to other considerations in the Gropiusstadt. These considerations arise again and again, although I don t want to claim that they all contain an aspect of criminality. I believe that it has more to do with the low threshold (Richters, Lines 63-66). When functionally separated, the individual interviewees can be seen as focusing on the following priorities: The activities of Mr Boussel are concerned primarily with criminal prevention in Marzahn. His target group is overridingly comprised of children and senior citizens those considered most susceptible to criminal behaviour. Following on is the work of Mr Telge, a prevention advisor in the Gropiusstadt. His work places a clear emphasis on the schools in the area. The work of Ms Biernath is primarily concerned with enabling cooperation to occur between the various parties involved, which means building up contacts (also amongst the residents) and initiating projects. The work of the Neighbourhood Management group is of a prophylactic and supportive nature, going beyond the exclusive landlord -role of the DEGEWO. By influencing and maintaining the structures already in place it is hopped that the suburbs concerned will be propped up and prevented from sliding in a backwards direction. That said, despite the implementation of some improved safety measures, criminal prevention is not concretely considered and continues to only play a marginal role in their program. WBG sets its priorities in the first instance with the optimisation of their property (housing assets). Thus, whilst the implementation of increased safety measures arose from the wishes of the residents, the final decision on the matter was still made primarily with economic considerations in mind. The area of crime prevention alone is not of a concrete concern for WBG (Lines 20, 22, 28). The Marzahn Nord-West Neighbourhood Management group is represented by Mr Panhoff. Likewise, this group also does not place any particular priority on criminal prevention which can be attributed to the fact that crime is not regarded as being a particularly problematic issue in the area. The activities of the Neighbourhood Management consist instead of enabling the residents to stabilize their living arrangements and to bring about and maintain a certain standard to their quality of life. Resident irritation and antagonization caused by high fluctuations in the suburb are therefore of special concern. (Lines 424, 442). Mr Voecks from the Neighbourhood Management group in the Gropiusstadt also seeks to attain similar goals, although he notes that the group in the Gropiusstadt is only at an embryonic phases and therefore is unable to give any concrete priorities (Voecks, Lines ). Thus, it can be concluded that, with the exception of the police, criminal prevention does not play a major role for the institutions involved in the housing estates of Marzahn and Gropiusstadt, and is seen as not presenting, in itself, a grave problem.

76 76 / B4.2 Crime and fear of crime With regard to the level of criminal incidences in the two research areas (which are predominantly comprised of juvenile crime) it can be concluded that problems have continued to exist even after reconstructive measures were carried out. However, Mr Boussel has stated that the evaluation period has been too short and that, on a positive note, in the reconstructed areas no increase in the crime rate has been observed: ( ) when one analyses the general surrounding and the incidences of street crime in the areas, then it could be said that we have a state of relative peace and quite (Boussel, Line 371). Mr Telge, the Gropiusstadt prevention advisor, also adds that the crime rate is not read in clear conjunction with the overall crime rate figures of Berlin, as the crime rate, when compared with Berlin as a whole has not significantly increased: It simply isn t the case that the Gropiusstadt is a present day incarnation of Sodom and Gomorra it just isn t so (Telge, Lines ). Mr Richters from the DEGEWO further stated: The police once told me that the Gropiusstadt, in comparison with North-Neukoelln, ( ), is relatively peaceful (Richters, Line ). Furthermore, with reference to the size of the area involved: I personally think that what we are experiencing here could be considered relatively normal for a district where some 35,000 people ( ) that is, live together in a close environment ( ). That is roughly the size of a small city, and naturally there is always something going on in a small city, and yet the media headlines always declare: Once again in the Gropiusstadt. That is however not in my opinion the correct approach. With 35,000 people there is always something going on, and even when we take a multi-storey house, with say 700 people living in it, then that is also like a little village and even in a little village there will be things happening on an everyday basis (Richter, Lines ). Ms Biernath has estimated that the crime rate in the Gropiusstadt has remained both before and after the redevelopment, relatively consistent. Likewise, on the basis of police information Mr Panhoff considers Marzahn a relatively safe place: ( ) all police statements suggest, including those related to crime prevention and those special reports relating to re-settler crime, demonstrate that there is no particular problem with crime here (Panhoff, Lines ).

77 77 / 111 In fact, apart from the aforementioned issue of youth and juvenile crime, Mr Panhoff holds that the area itself does not offer a sufficient criminal gain. This claim is based on the fact that the residents of Marzahn have a low per-capita income, meaning that crimes such as robbery and break and entry are an ineffective means of acquiring financial gain for any would be criminals (Lines 865, 890, 908). He sees Marzahn less as a criminal hot-spot and more as a residence for criminals (Line 859). Mr Bahlo from the WBG noted a decrease in criminal activity in the special redevelopment area of the Ahrensfelder Terraces : the police have also confirmed that since the redevelopment of the Ahrensfelder Terraces, the crime rate in this area has sunk dramatically (Bahlo, Lines ). He sees the grounds for this change stemming from a new (more affable) tenant clientele brought about by an increase in rental prices and a revaluation of the area (Line 300). In comparison with the city as a whole, the crime rates are not considered above average. The factors that support the advent of crime in Marzahn and the Gropiusstadt are factors that also occur in a number of other areas of Berlin, not to mention large housing estates in general. Thus, the overestimation is attributed to an exaggerated external perception (Panhoff, Lines 859, 866; Bahlo Lines 306, 563). The feelings of uncertainty expressed by the residents of both areas have been categorised as being rather subjective. That is, a high rate of discrepancy often arises between the feelings of uncertainty of the residents and the number of criminal offences that are actually taking place. This is made most visible through the use of questionnaires, public discussions and the ranking of the residents concerns with regard to questions of security. It was made apparent by the residents that the introduction of safety and monitoring measures was not only wanted but indeed demanded. In particular, the residents desired more lighting, especially in public parks, and a strengthening of security measures at the (apartment) entrances (Panhoff, Line 732; Bahlo, Line 372). In a similar vein, Mr Voecks from the Gropiusstadt also noted that in addition to lighting problems is the lack of a public social life after the sun sets (Voecks, Lines ). His colleague Ms Haumersen additionally noted the so-called fear of crime -paradox: I have the feeling that there is a paradox at work here, that is, anxiety and a fear of one s safety is to a certain extent self induced as nobody leaves the apartments after dark, there is nobody on the streets and it accordingly becomes more dangerous (Haumersen, Lines ). The establishment of a concierge service as well as the engagement of security firms and the so called Noise Police have resonated well with the majority of the residents. In the Gro-

78 78 / 111 piusstadt, although the objective problems of crime are considered relatively small, anxiety levels amongst residents are particularly pronounced: In all honesty, I am not sure myself how we are to deal with this. You cannot simply tell the people that their fear and anxiety is ungrounded (Haumersen, Lines 86-88). Therefore, an actual improvement in the objective security is somewhat of secondary importance more important is the goal of providing an increased feeling of safety. The (concierge) had as its particular purpose, on the one hand ( ) the control of the entrance, which is probably the most important task, but naturally it also provides a certain service for the tenants there. And if this does not increase the objective security then at least it increases the subjective security, a fact which is particularly important for many tenants (Richters, Lines 88-91). The installation of video surveillance cameras is, according to Ms Biernath, endorsed in the Gropiusstadt (Line 332), whereas in Marzahn, although the cameras were not necessarily declined, they were also not explicitly called for (Panhoff, Line 1002). Moreover, it could be posited that the anxiety feelings expressed by the residents of Marzahn are not directly associated with the redevelopment, as they could also have been affected through social change brought about by the fall of the Berlin Wall. Since then, tenants have registered an increasing necessity for security (Bahlo, Line 372). However, according to the WBG, a certain degree of ambivalence seems to exist with regard to the fact that increased security precautions will also call for greater financial expenditure (Line 881). All participants in the study certified that the introduction of increased security measures has had a preventative effect, and that the addition decrease in anxiety levels amongst residents has also had a positive effect on the general living climate (Boussel, Lines 532, 515). The Gropiusstadt Prevention Representative and his colleagues have also seen such changes occur: In general, it is my opinion that here in the Gropiusstadt nothing more happens here than anywhere else, and the residents feel as safe or unsafe as anywhere else. What they want is what they actually deserve. They want to see the police in the streets either patrolling or talking with the elderly residents it doesn t really matter, they just simply want to see them (Telge, Lines ). However, according to all key players in the Gropiusstadt (including the police), the central problem remains the degree of disproportionate uncertainty amongst residents which can only be partly nullified and sometimes even strengthened by video cameras etc. Those involved are in agreement that such a distortion exists: ( ) the residents do not see their environment in reality, they do not see it objectively (Richters, Line 1075).

79 79 / 111 Feelings of uncertainty, fear and prejudice have their roots in social problems, and exist independently of those experiences suffered by victims of crime: Thus, punch ups between teenagers, which are evidently somewhat in vogue occur everywhere, and every now and then they also occur in the Gropiusstadt ( ) and then at other times they occur elsewhere ( ) but it is correct to say ( ) that these incidents reaffirm the judgements and prejudices that the residents already have (Richters, Lines ). Those participants interviewed from the Gropiusstadt see the roots of the uncertainty as stemming, in particular, from the discrepancies between various generations in the mix between older, more established residents, and the numerous younger more recent arrivals. Beyond this, there is also the degree of uncertainty that exists between migrant and ethnic German cultures, although it is to be pointed out that the actual ratio of migrants living in the Gropiusstadt is no higher than in Berlin as a whole. Mr Panhoff also sees the age-discrepancy as a reason for the feelings of anxiety and uncertainty (Line 1147). He also notes that in Marzahn, which has a very young population, there is fewer potential for such uncertainty to develop, in comparison with the borough of Wilmersdorf for example, which possess a high proportion of older, female inhabitants. Mr. Bahlo (Line 395) also attributes part of the problem of uncertainty and anxiety to the media, which, through their reports often shape the perception of a certain area and the opinion of the residents living there. He illustrates this claim with the reoccurring issue of rightwing radicalism in Marzahn: It is the same with the theme of right-wing radicalism here in Marzahn, which is covered enormously in the media even though it is simply not correct. For instance, in the year that I have been here, the NPD has only carried out a rally once or twice. And on such an occasion only around 40 NPD members were involved while there were around 80 police. And yet, that evening in the news there is a report that the NPD are marching through Marzahn (Bahlo, Lines ). Mr Heuer, the Prevention Officer from LKA Berlin, points out that a rise in feelings of uncertainty may also have been caused by the intensified sensitisation of the population, brought about by police crime awareness campaigns (Heuer, Lines ). The most common criminal group in both Marzahn and the Gropiusstadt remain young offenders between 14 and 25 who come from a migrant background. It is felt that the redevelopment has brought about no changes to this criminal group. The Prevention Officer Mr Boussel estimates that the situation is the same across Berlin: The main group of criminals are youth, juveniles and adolescents between the ages of 14 to 25 ( ) this is not just in Marzahn but rather is across the board as this is a

80 80 / 111 phase in life where some young people behave in a more or less delinquent manner (Boussel, Lines ). Another issue within the Gropiusstadt is that not all of those committing crimes actually reside there: A segment of those involved in criminal activities certainly lives here, however others simply come here from all over during the afternoon. This is particularly so in the Gropiusstadt as the U-Bahn connections are so good (Einfinger, Lines ). As a result, young delinquents are seen as the most common criminal group in the Gropiusstadt, in particular the subcategory of: travelling pupils. And thus the schools are labelled as offering services to many pupils who do not even live in the area (Einfinger, Lines ). Akin to the aforementioned causes of resident anxiety, these travelling pupils are often considered responsible for the existence of the many criminal groups (Einfinger, Lines ). Similarly, Mr Voecks of the Gropiusstadt Neighbourhood Management notes: I believe that it (the most common criminal group) is comprised of adolescents who want to steal and who come here from North-Neukoelln as students because they have been kicked out of the schools there (Voecks, Lines ). However, for other crimes he sees different groups as being responsible: There is also the whole raft of fraud crimes which are carried out at the apartment doors. These are mostly carried out my middle aged people, not youths, with the most potential victims comprised of the elderly residents (Voecks, Lines ). The most frequent crimes which are observed fall within the field of adolescent and juvenile delinquency. In both areas these include vandalism, break-ins, shoplifting, armed robberies and physical assaults. More serious crimes that occur infrequently include murder and manslaughter and white collar crime which generally take the form of complicated fraud schemes. 27B4.3 Solution approaches In accordance with Mr Boussel the problems of crime and security in Marzahn concern the young population structure, migration and subsequent integration problems, an increasing degree of anonymity amongst neighbours and the lack of caretakers to provide social control (Lines 92, 95, 103, 110). The interview with the Gropiusstadt partners follows suit (Voecks, Lines ). Ms Biernath sees some of these problems in the Gropiusstadt as arising from the many dark areas brought about by overgrown trees and bushes. On the other hand, large numbers of non-germans meet in public, which could be attributed to the fact that there are

81 81 / 111 very few suitable meeting places in the near vicinity (Lines 189, 265). The police see such structural problems as strengthening the perception of criminality: When one sees these houses, houses between eight and tens stories high, then it is only natural that one s feeling of safety is impaired, as, when I enter these houses the lift is covered with graffiti, the corner smells as if someone has recently urinated in it and the stairwells are rancid because they have never been pained and have collected decades of grime and muck. In such cases even the hair on my neck rises up (Einfinger, Lines ). In conjunction with the previously mentioned police cleanup campaigns, Mr Heuer has also visited the housing estates and noted: I spoke before about the crime awareness campaign which was recently conducted. The residents are now more aware, ( ) when you see the high-rises in Marzahn or the Gropiusstadt with their thin walls, where it is possible to hear your neighbour screaming, throwing objects around, loudly cursing and yelling out I ll kill you amongst other things (Heuer, Lines ). In a nutshell, the various criminal problems that occur in Gropiusstadt and Marzahn can be attributed to social difficulties. The biggest problem here in the Gropiusstadt, as I see it, is that there is a two-tier society. There are those who, having no work and nothing better to do, amuse themselves and run about here and those who work but have no time to care for their children or to carry out any other social activities (Telge, Lines ). Mr Voecks sees a similar problem with the generation divide: an engaged and accessible middle aged group is missing they are either up to their necks in work and have no time or they have nothing do it is these two extremes (Voecks, Lines ). Like the other participants from the Gropiusstadt, he sees the difficult social problems that unemployment can lead to: parents no longer know how they should go about raising their children as they themselves were raised in difficult social surroundings. This is for me particularly shocking (Voecks, Lines ). In Marzahn, Mr Panhoff also regards social problems as the root cause of the criminal activity. The biggest problem in Marzahn is alcohol abuse, and the consequent onset of violent crimes, particularly in the family sphere and amongst young people (Line 1167). Poverty, a lack of means, resignation, isolation, integration difficulties (amongst both Germans and migrants) and

82 82 / 111 general filth across Marzahn are in his opinion the gravitational forces that bring about criminal activity. Ms Hoehne and Mr Bahlo from the WBG see the problems of crime and security as pertaining to a lack of social integration between the tenants, a generational conflict between young and old, and the Ghettoisation of some residential complexes which, to avoid conflict, have been rented out to tenants from a homogeneous background. The minimal response to various initiatives of the WBG and the Neighbourhood Management is also seen as problematic (Lines 580, 966, 517). In an effort to reduce levels of crime in the two areas, and to improve the overall security situation, a number of starting points were touched upon in the interviews. In both districts ideas including the instillation of lockable window shutters, improved lighting, video surveillance and the use of security firms were raised. Although not explicitly aimed at reducing crime, urban planning measures to revitalise the districts were also suggested. The implementation of concierge services not only provides a surveillance function but can also be considered from a social aspect as a point of contact for the residents. With regards to the aforementioned problems, Mr Richters outlined the measures the DEGEWO has implemented: I can say that for individual houses ( ) that every measure, be it the concierge, security services, ( ) or the tenancy partners, who have sometimes become tenant advisors and who also feel responsible, that all of these measures display an effect as there is once again a degree of social control in these houses. The lack of social control has been a problem in such large housing estates social control as it once existed has fallen away over recent years. The roll that the caretaker previously fulfilled has disappeared as such caretakers are no longer respected by the youth. As a response the responsible neighbours are also forced into a state of remission (Richters, Lines ). Special attention is also to be placed both in Marzahn and in the Gropiusstadt (as soon as feasible) on the one hand at a mixing of the tenant clientele, which is aligned particularly to attract more financially viable residents and, on the other hand, social measures will help to prevent the prevalence of criminal activity. In the Gropiusstadt such measures include the implementation of a Neighbourhood Environment residential committee, youth and adolescent work, violence prevention meetings in the schools as well as the designation of a residential speaker. Furthermore, both the police and the housing companies have been seeking to work together with mixed results. Whilst in Marzahn both sides complained about a lack of readiness to cooperate (Boussel, Lines , Bahlo, Lines ), in the Gropiusstadt the cooperation allowed for improved interpersonal contacts: The cooperative arrangement has functioned with Degewo since Ms Biernath has been there and the position of district manager has been occupied. She and Ms

83 83 / 111 Koehler have treated us as a contact partner we have frequently visited the area and have met up on a regular basis. This has allowed them to show us the certain areas that need particular attention from police, and us the certain areas that need particular attention from Degewo. The partnership has functioned extremely well, but it is to be added that this is only the case with Degewo (Telge, Lines ). In Marzahn a number of projects are being carried out including the Intercultural Gardens, the implementation of official graffiti walls, a neighbourhood mediation project and a project to help combat youth unemployment. A central role of the crime prevention work in both city districts is a breaking up of the anonymity factor, which is seen as a key to many of the conflicts that occur. As to what are the best methods for preventing crime, a number of strategies were favoured by the interview partners. Mr Boussel holds that crime prevention in the first instance in not only a job for the police but also a task for society as a whole, where each individual has as role to play. This opinion was also expressed by Mr Heuer: In order to prevent crime ( ) we must firstly look at educational aspects, ( ) as prevention is ( ) a task for society as a whole (Heuer, Lines ). In practise, Mr Boussel has called for an arrangement that incorporates both repression and prevention, as he sees the implementation of only one or the other as unable to bring about lasting results (Line 1094). Mr Heuer is in agreement and condemns any approach that only uses one of the aforementioned methods: Well, when it comes to the approach offered by Mr Beckstein (Bavarian Interior Minister), then it would be a case of prevention through repression (Heuer, Lines ). However, his colleagues from Section 56 of the Gropiusstadt have put forward a harder proposal aimed specifically at creating perspectives for adolescents (Einfinger, Lines ). A changing of values and life perspectives as well as the consistent punishment of crimes even with younger offenders also represents for Ms Biernath a promising model for successfully decreasing crime (Line 398). Mr Richters points to the greater societal problems that are at play here, problems which the housing company alone cannot remedy (Richters, Lines ). Mr Voecks from the Neighbourhood Management shares this opinion and also places emphasis on work with adults and adolescents and the creation of a better perspective for juveniles. However, he notes at the same time the extreme lack of youth perspective, especially for those coming from a migrant background: around 80% of young migrants have no apprenticeships however, where should they get the motivation to sit down and learn as they have so many personal difficul-

84 84 / 111 ties (at home too) including language, religion and cultural conflict (Voecks, Lines ). In Marzahn Mr Panhoff notes than better security will be brought about above all else by technical measures, as crime will always exist regardless of any particular societal constellation. He considers a higher police presence and a stronger crackdown on all crimes as being of particular importance (Lines 800, 1237). Mr Bahlo also endorses a method that would see severer punishments being used to deter would be offenders: ( ) I am of the opinion that harder punishments provide deterrence. I believe that the situation which we are presently facing, that is, where first time offenders only receive a warning (even for relatively serious offences) is not OK. I do not believe that has any type of corrective effect (Bahlo, Lines ). Furthermore, Mr Bahlo also notes that his colleagues in the Gropiusstadt hold that a change in the degree of apathy amongst the residents, particularly adults with a migrant background, would play a pivotal role in reducing crime. As well as the rebuilding of functioning communities which can often only be achieved by changing the way society thinks. These long-term processes and changes can however only have an impact when they are widely supported by the neighbourhood and at present such support is rather unforthcoming, both in the Gropiusstadt and Marzahn. Positive participation is predominantly demonstrated by a small minority who offer there services time and time again, not however by the majority. 28B4.4 Crime and built environment Increasing the attractive nature of the neighbourhood through the refurbishment and/or demolition of the multi-story buildings promotes social control and cohesion and gives the residents a sense of identity with the area in which they live. Moreover, such measures create opportunities for the residents to come together and break the cycle of anonymity (Boussel, Lines 274, 173). That said, Mr Richters places less weight on the actual refurbishment measures and more on seeking the right tenant clientele: The problems are not caused by the buildings conditions, and will therefore not be fixed through such refurbishment measures the problems arise from the tenant structure (Richters, Lines ). A particular structural problem that many of those involved noted was the lack of facilities in the Gropiusstadt: I believe such facilities are required (to reduce crime). For instance, when I look at the corridors, which from the way they are designed are certainly not inviting, it becomes clear that they propagate anonymity rather than a spirit of community. How-

85 85 / 111 ever, in spite of this it was the case that in years gone by better social contact existed. And the reason was that there used to be far more spaces and facilities where people could meet. Today, these areas no longer exist which means that if we are to create solutions to the present problems we need to reinvigorate the social environment (Voecks, Lines ). The completion of such structures favours interaction between the residents in the housing estates (Biernath, Line 414), enabling them to better discover the public spaces on offer (Panhoff Line 91). The police in the Gropiusstadt also see this: I tell you, when my residential living environment is pleasing to the eye, when it allows me to have fun, where there are plenty of places to hang out, and where it is easily accessible then I wouldn t have to loiter around at the U-Bahn station (Einfinger, Lines ). It has been established that through the construction of smaller housing complexes a drop in crime can be achieved. Likewise, the crime rate can be mollified through opportunity reduction building design (Bahlo, Lines 685, 699). The prevention advisor from LKA, Mr Heuer, expressed this view: Yes you can (lower the crime rate through urban development). We now have a new employee who is concerned solely with this idea, as I believe that over the last few years in Berlin this idea has not received as much support as it perhaps should have (Heuer, Lines ). Moreover, Mr Heuer is perfectly aware of the difficulties that exist between the police, the administration and the housing companies. The police are often included during the building construction phase with relation to questions of traffic and road safety, but not with regard to questions of security. All the interview partners are convinced that the increased safety levels in the buildings and the surrounding premises have successfully led to an improvement in the overall situation. On the one hand, the changes have provided a deterrent to would be offenders, and on the other the feelings of safety and wellbeing displayed by the residents has increased. Of particular appeal have been the concierge, the increased amount of lighting and the improved surveillance offered by video cameras and the noise police. None of the interview partners in Marzahn drew a direct correlation between problems in the residential area brought about by the increase in security neither in their opinion nor on behalf of the residents. However, in the Gropiusstadt the measures adopted were viewed somewhat more critically, at least by some of those interviewed:

86 86 / 111 and Well, if the citizens feel safer because of the video surveillance then so be it (Telge, Lines ) Less communication means less social control. That is, so long as the video cameras and technical equipment monitor the situation there is no great desire for the residents to actively involve themselves with one another. Thus, they become less concerned about what is going on around them. When someone leaves rubbish piled up in a corner, they will just leave it there thinking that it would have already been captured by the camera (Einfinger, Lines ). Mr Voecks from the Gropiusstadt Neighbourhood Management feels similarly inclined: I am particularly impressed with the idea of the concierge, as it provides a point of human contact, ( ) someone who is able to keep an eye out for the elderly residents ( ) I find it important that a degree of social control can thus be brought about. However, from all this video surveillance I am not that taken aback. It provides a feeling of apparent safety where the residents don t have to worry and have the feeling that they are no longer so accountable. I find this a problem as people are then happy to simply delegate their civil duties that is why we are trying to strengthen civil courage (Voecks, Lines ). Even Mr Richters levelled some criticism at the cameras: The cameras are controlled by the concierge, with the idea being that if something serious happens, then it can be properly monitored. However, based on my personal experience, such cameras rarely meet with much success. I therefore think that the cameras are more there as a deterrent, which is OK, though I don t think that they would succeed in stopping a determined criminal (Richters, Lines ). These matters aside, the measures already in place as well as those that are in planning provide no further alternatives to increase security within the buildings. Other measures that were highlighted are not directly related to building security and orientate themselves in a more social direction. 29B4.5 Success The success of their own work has been evaluated differently by those interviewed. Mr Boussel (Line 901) views success as the meaning of his work and a prerequisite for his motivation. For the officers from Section 56 of the Gropiusstadt the question of success is also an important, though not entirely unproblematic topic:

87 87 / 111 Well it depends how you want to define success - success for yourself or success for the authority. If I were to make a personal definition that I only meet with success when he [the offender] is actually caught, then I might as well not show up to work anymore because this kind of success has not occurred. I will never be able to achieve this and will thus never have this success. So I must change the way I look for success and think that at least once in a while I manage to bring someone in from out of the dark. Noticing names, writing things down and collecting information - only that can be the goal. Anything else I am unable to achieve (Einfinger, Lines ). Mr Panhoff has no doubts about the success of his work, though he worries about its sustainability: if viewed solely from the output perspective I would say that the situation here is not that bad. ( ) I think it s an illusion ( ) to believe that through our intervention strategy and our work here such stable and robust self organization structures emerge and that they will simply take over everything without any governmental support and some degree of professional guidance (Panhoff, Lines 624, ). Mr Voecks points to the fact that the Gropiusstadt Neighbourhood Management has not been in existence long enough to truly evaluate success or failure. Neither Ms Birnath or Mr Richters of the DEGEWO nor Ms Hoehne and Mr Bahlo of the WBG made concrete statements concerning the success of their work. Ms Birnath does however note that the strengthening of the social cohesion and social control through the Neighbourhood Management is regarded as selfevident, as is the support and maintenance of communications and contacts which are favoured by the citizens in general (Line 679). With regard to the positive feedback received concerning the redevelopment of the Ahrensfelder Terraces, the WBG can only conclude that this was a successful perception of their work. 30B4.6 Acceptance According to the appraisals of the interviewees, the urban redevelopment was largely accepted by the residents in both districts (Boussel, Line 1003, Panhoff, Line 1367). That said, at the beginning of the reconstruction project surrounding the Ahrensfelder Terraces some resident resistance was met, particularly from those who wanted to remain in their old houses. These issues were addressed at a number of meetings and discussion rounds. In one interview it was proposed that the current residents of the Ahrensfelder Terraces identified themselves with their living quarters and were proud to live there (Bahlo, Line 136, 336). In the Gropiusstadt Mr Richters summarized the general feelings of the residents as follows:

88 88 / 111 Prior to the actual construction work beginning, everyone found the ideas good, however once the builders showed up and began to work everyone found it pretty horrible due to the inconvenience caused. At the end though everyone was glad we had done it. It s a sloppy way to put it, but in the end that s exactly how it was (Richters, Line ). Mr Boussel and Ms Biernath also expressed that the accompanying social measures like the Neighbourhood Management program found favour amongst the residents at the very least they were accepted (Boussel, Line 1054, Biernath, Line 81). Mr Panhoff saw the Neighbourhood Management program as being heavily stigmatized, though an image reversal occurred at a relatively fast pace. However, what he sees as problematic is the fact that the work of the program is not perceived by the residents, as positive results are not ascribed to its work (Panhoff Lines 510, 1370). Even if its work were more widely accepted, Mr Bahlo still sees the Neighbourhood Management adding a certain stigma to the area. He believes that its initial implementation was a rather excessive measure since there are not that many problems in the area. He also adds that the activities of the Neighbourhood Management are scarcely noticed and simply taken for granted by the residents (Bahlo, Line 278, 869). In the Gropiusstadt there were mixed feelings about the Neighbourhood Management program. On the one hand many residents felt relieved that something was being done, on the other its implementation encountered resistance less so from the residents themselves but rather more from the institutions that already existed in the Gropiusstadt (Voecks, Lines ). 31B4.7 Social Cohesion Though the strengthening of the social ties and social control through the redevelopment and Neighbourhood Management programs was supported by the interviewees, the would be success of such measures is somewhat difficult to define. In the first instance, examples of measures to strengthen social cohesion have been put forward. The measures have been viewed as offering a positive contribution to the culture of the residents, offering the potential to create community. However, the extent to which the residents will actually take these suggestions onboard remains questionable. Mr. Bahlo from the WBG has only seen successful uptake in the Ahrensfelder Terraces. In other areas there remains, as previously, a large degree of anonymity (Lines 278, 936). The Gropiusstadt police have indeed seen a weakening of social cohesion brought about by the Neighbourhood Management: Neighbourhood Management is run by the Senate. And we have had the experience in our sector that many, many institutions have been shut down or starved to death ( ) because the money just isn t there. And now all of a sudden our great left wing

89 89 / 111 Senate comes along and says hey we have a great idea, let s make a Neighbourhood Management program here and give you an easy 5 or 6 million Euro. Well, this is a great idea, but this money should really have been given to those institutions and clubs that were already integrated, that were settled here. One could have given it to them and they could have continued (Telge, Line ). In contrast, the Neighbourhood Management counters that they have made a good start, though ongoing problems regarding the integration of migrants and juveniles certainly exist (Voecks, Lines ). Only Ms Hoehne and Mr Bahlo made statements concerning the efficiency of the certain strategies at play. As the most successful examples they listed the reconstruction of the Ahrensfelder Terraces, the removal of graffiti within 24 hours, and the implementation of the concierge service (Line 981). Mr Telge pointed to the importance of emerging social networks as a strategy for Gropiusstadt (Lines ). However, the Neighbourhood Management referred to a failed attempt to make use of one such network: (the) immigration office was involved, the Department of Construction of the Borough Authority, Ms Vogelsang, the building councillor made numerous attempts to inspect no-go areas and to look at what could be done. Well, there were many ideas pertaining to suitable measurements which they agreed upon, but then the project just fizzled out (Voecks, Lines ). In general one can say that according to the interviews all measures that resulted in increased surveillance (concierge, video cameras, noise police, private security firms etc.) proved to be successful as well as the majority of the redevelopment measures (reconstruction, maintenance of public parks). This not only holds true in terms of a lower instance of crimes committed, but also in terms of higher satisfaction levels with the living conditions in general and lower levels of fear and anxiety in particular. This has positively impacted upon the marketability of the apartments themselves and brought about a general improvement in the area s image. Measures to safeguard against burglary were implemented by the housing companies in Marzahn after the fall of the Berlin Wall. New entrances were installed, along with new apartment doors and lockable windows. In some cases two doors were placed at an apartment s entrance with numerous deadbolts, though alarm systems were not installed. The safeguards the tenants themselves installed were also of a diverse nature, though they were not seen as being above the average standard in Berlin. The efficiency of the reconstruction measures in relation to the costs involved is viewed in a positive light. The stabilisation on the district has been seen as the most important factor. This has benefited the city as a whole as people have stopped moving away from the district. The overall image of the district has also improved. Even if minor vandalism like graffiti could not be

90 90 / 111 noticeably decreased, there remains a higher level of satisfaction amongst the residents and a positive identity that can help to counterbalance negative aspects. Ms Hoehne points out that if these measures are to be evaluated more precisely then a long term approach must be applied. 32B4.8 Future planning What is generally left to be done in the districts was answered by the interviewees specifically in the terms of their professional fields. Mr Boussel would like more financial funding for personnel carrying out prevention work and to higher the quality of living by implementing more social measures. He strongly recommends the reintroduction of the Contact Area Officer who functions as a contact person for the residents (Lines 1075, 1122). A lack of acceptance from within their own department rather than a lack of acceptance amongst the residents is seen as a problem that will require future consideration (Lines ). Ms Biernath would like to see more institutions settle into the residential area in order to be able to invest her project s budget in a more efficient and sustainable manner (Line 740). Furthermore, she views improved communication possibilities as particularly important (Lines 791, 795). Mr. Richters agrees with this sentiment: In a residential area like this it is a problem in general when you cut back facilities. Then along come small institutions that try and create facilities again and we then provide those with premises and such. It would be nice if now under the Neighbourhood Management program all of this could become somewhat more networked (Richters, Lines ). Better networking and a broader knowledge of the situation in the Gropiusstadt is also a desire of the police: By the time it was installed as an institution, the Neighbourhood Management was exceptionally poorly prepared with regard to crime. As I have previously said, I was present ( ) at the very first meeting when the group was constituted, and what we heard there really raised our hackles as police officers. Well they were talking about things, blood and thunder, open drug scenes, dealing on the streets or whatever. This is all far-fetched. There is nothing like that in the Gropiusstadt and they were totally stunned when we really said that it is not going to work like this. Guys, you cannot claim to want to fight something that we don t have here so what then do you want to fight? (Telge, Lines ). The Gropiusstadt Neighbourhood Management sees a need for networking and rethinking amongst all participants:

91 91 / 111 When we agree upon a strategy which shall be applied here, and when we are all supposed to work together to pull the strings, then this must happen not only at the street level but also at the higher levels (Voecks, Lines ). Mr Panhoff recommends that the Neighbourhood Management in Marzahn should take on the role of a communicative entity with a local perspective, enabling them to initiate, manage and limit certain processes (Line 1469). Openly discussing the problems of crime was raised by Ms Hoehne as important. She also states that it is crucial to approach fundamental problems from a local level. Mr Bahlo would like to see the police taking more rigorous steps, as, in his view, the police do not take some matters very seriously. He thinks the police should move away from simply driving around in patrol cars to actively appearing and engaging themselves with the residents. According to Mr Boussel, future planning should comprise of an evaluation and, where necessary, modification of the social programs with an aim to achieving the proposed goals (Line 1188). Funding for the Marzahn Neighbourhood Management is scheduled to cease in At this point an evaluation process will be carried out to decide whether the program should be continued. Until then several construction measures are planned for the area as well as the examination of the proposal for a resident patrol (Panhoff, Lines 597, 1250, 1414). Mr Richter sees the future planning as a continuation of the work achieved thus far (Lines ). The Gropiusstadt Neighbourhood Management would like to revitalize old neighbourhood networks (Voecks, Lines ). Despite the fact that the other interviewees did not make clear statements concerning future planning, one could assume that from the conversations held the majority would like to stay the course as far as financial means enable them to do so.

92 92 / BSite visit reports 9B5 33B5.1 Objective description of the Gropiusstadt Criteria Content General description of the entire area: Gropiusstadt Physical boundaries Main type of function Other functions in the area Circumference of the area Gropiusstadt was constructed between the years 1962 and 1975 in between the old villages Britz, Buckow and Rudow as part of the overall borough Neukölln in the south of Berlin. Residential 11 schools, 3 churches, library, medical supply, smaller shopping arcades, Berlin s biggest shopping mall ( Gropius-Passagen ), parks, recreation areas and playgrounds, (indoor) swimming pools, sports hall and sports fields, bars & restaurants, community houses inhabitants (2005), mostly high-rise buildings, primarily owned by two housing companies (GEHAG, DEGEWO), ha General description of the specific area: Gropiusstadt (Lipschitzallee - Zwickauer Damm) The research area borders to Lipschitzallee in the east, Fritz-Erler-Allee in Physical boundaries the north, Zwickauer Damm in the west and the railroad track in the south. Main type of function Residential Smaller shopping arcades, medical supply, schools and library, parks, Other functions in the recreation areas and playgrounds, (indoor) swimming pools, sports hall area and sports fields, bars & restaurants, community houses Circumference of the area inhabitants (2005), 89.9 ha Method Date of visit September Time of visit 11:30h 17:00h, during daylight Weather conditions Sunny Mr Armin Woy, Official Tour-Guide Minoy Fachstudien Services Mr Marcus Ehbrecht, Mr Thomas Einfinger, Police (Division 5, Precinct 56) Mr Hardy Telge, Crime Prevention Advisor of the Police (Division 5, Precinct 56) Mr Martin Vöcks, Head of the Neighbourhood Management Lipschitzallee People spoken to Mrs Petra Haumersen, Member of the Neighbourhood Management Lipschitzallee Mrs Marlene Lerch, Trainee of the Neighbourhood Management Lipschitzallee Mr Michael Lohmüller, Head of Customer Service Dept. of the Housing Company Degewo Mrs Annett Biernath, Neighbourhood Management of the Housing Company Degewo What was the problem in Bad image the past (before measures High crime rates particularly at the U-Bahn stations were taken)? High fear of crime figures of the residents

93 93 / 111 What measures have been taken? Situational Social Effect of the measures Measures still planned for the area Concierge-Lounges in some high-rise blocks CCTV in entrance areas of few high-rise blocks Redesign of some of the playgrounds Private Security Firm in one of the shopping arcades Neighbourhood management supporting local activities and projects District management (run by the housing company DEGEWO) Anti-violence-activities in schools (hold by the police) Temporarily extensive activities of the police (particularly at the U-Bahn stations) Less crime Still high fear of crime-figures (particularly in public space, i.e. near the U-Bahn stations) Less crime More balanced social structure (Measures not realised yet, when will those measures been taken?) Neighbourhood management has been implemented in 2005 they are lots of things to do Redesign of the green corridor that crosses the Gropiusstadt Rehabilitation of still unredeveloped buildings (i.e. at the Horst-Caspar- Steig) 34B5.2 Objective description of Marzahn North Criteria Content General description of the entire area: Marzahn-Hellersdorf Lying on the north-eastern edge of Berlin, the district borders the federal state of Brandenburg to the north and the east, and the administrative Physical boundaries districts of Berlin Treptow-Köpenick and Berlin Lichtenberg to the south and the west respectively. Main type of function Residential All functions a city with more than inhabitants could offer: Shopping centres, industry and trade, nurseries, schools and university, hospi- Other functions in the area tals, recreation areas, etc. etc inhabitants (2005), mostly high-rise buildings made with precast Circumference of the area concrete slabs, predominantly owned by big housing companies and cooperatives, ha altogether General description of the specific area: Marzahn Nord-West The research area Marzahn North is part of the overall borough Marzahn- Hellersdorf which is situated in the Northeast of Berlin. Given its peripheral situation the area is rather isolated: It borders to the villages Ahrensfelde Physical boundaries (Brandenburg) in the north and Eiche (Brandenburg) in the west. In a southward direction the site is naturally delimited by the small river Wuhle. In the east the urban rail tracks towards Ahrensfelde establishes a border against the western part of Marzahn North. Main type of function Residential Other functions in the area Neighbourhood Management, Community Centre Kiek In, Children and Youth Welfare Service, Children and Youth Clubs, Migration and Resettlers Centres, German-Russian Theatre Tschechow, Women s Centre, 4 Primary Schools, 1 Secondary School, 2 Special Schools, 5 day-carecentres, 2 Adventure Playgrounds, Boxing Centre, Shopping Centre Zu den Eichen, Recreation Area Clara-Zetkin-Park Circumference of the area inhabitants (2005), ha Method Date of visit September Time of visit 11:00h 17:00h, during daylight

94 94 / 111 Weather conditions People spoken to What was the problem in the past (before measures were taken)? What measures have been taken? Situational Social Effect of the measures Measures still planned for the area Sunny Mr Jodock, Official Tour-Guide StattReisen Berlin GmbH Mr Gerd Boussel, Crime Prevention Advisor of the Police (Division 6, Precinct 62) Mr Hans Panhoff, Head of the Neighbourhood Management Marzahn Nord-West Mr Torsten Preussing, Head of the Residents Council Marzahn Nord- West Shrinkage of the population Increasing Unemployment Rate Increasing Number of Welfare Recipients Generally bad image of the area in public opinion Deconstruction and demolition of buildings ( Ahrensfelder Terrassen : 1670 flats reduced to 409 flats) Redesign of Ahrensfelder Square (Square in front of train station Ahrensfelde) Environmental measures in Eichepark and Sellgrabenpark (both recreation areas) as well as at Schwarzwurzel Square and Havemann Square Redesign of the schoolyards at Falkenschool, Paavo-Nurmi-School and Dahlmannschool Private Security Firm ( Noisepolice ) for resident s concerns Neighbourhood Management initiates and finances several projects on i.e. neighbourhood newspaper, Job Gate (institution to be consulted in all questions round the job market and possibilities of vocational training), mediation of neighbourhood conflicts, anti-aggression-training for children and youth, language advancement, festivals (sports, music, etc.), art projects, intercultural gardens, local Image-campaign, etc. Projects initiated by the Neighbourhood Management require acceptance of the residents council Residents have been involved on all levels of rehabilitation process Police carries out anti-violence-presentations in schools Stabilisation of the population number Moving in of higher-income population groups ( More balanced social structure) Redesign of Clara-Zetkin-Park (in the very next future) Rehabilitation of so far unredeveloped buildings

95 95 / B5.2 Site visit report from Poland 88B5.2.1 Gropiusstadt What stroke you most in the area? Situational One of the most striking features of the area constitutes its dimensions: it is just real huge, both in terms of the area, and dimensions of the buildings. When compared with such residence area as Hartclife in Bristol or even Pradnik Czerwony in Krakow, it becomes clear what really big residential area means. It is also striking, that some buildings are really huge and high (including the highest apartment building in Europe). Such high houses were not constructed in the East, but probably mainly because of cost reasons. In Berlin additional factor stimulating construction of such houses constituted also the fact that building areas in the West Berlin were scarce. An absolute high point constitutes the half-round monster in the centre of the area. In principle one can say that it is quite impressive, even somehow interesting. But in fact it is a real monster. From the eastern European perspective there are few striking features. First, a rather complex design involving not only apartment houses, and schools they constituted obvious element of the design in the East as well but also shopping centres, and other elements of infrastructure which were planned in advance and build and developed parallel to the apartment houses. This makes the area a completely different from many in the East, where apartment houses had absolute priority, and only later one started to think what else to build (Marzahn is a good example here). Social It is one interesting feature about Gropiusstadt which is both, situational and social. I mean here the huge green strip running through the area (with subway underneath, I understand). In principle such green areas in the middle of the residential areas are something very good, they seem to improve quality of live, provide opportunity to spend free time and make nice impression when one walks along. But example of Gropiusstadt shows that every stick has two ends. Remarks of the police officer, that there are relatively many offences committed there, because this green strip is easy to escape from, show that unintentionally you can crate areas extremely difficult to control. As a matter of fact there is no way to control them in any informal way for inhabitants. Because of this what remains is intensification of police patrols and constructing fences separating houses from this area. Anyway, this shows how problematic are huge public spaces (even if they are nice green areas), and that you end up anyway by trying to crate some sort of easier controllable private or quasi-private spaces. It is interesting to note that apart from these fences and fence plus barbed wire around the Gropius Gymnasium there is very little of design specifically intended at crime prevention. Does it mean such thing are not necessary or something else?

96 96 / 111 What lessons can your country learn from the visited project? Second absolutely striking feature constitute green areas, obviously planned well in advance and constituting integral element of the design. This makes the entire area much more humane and acceptable, despite huge amount of concrete around. They are also wonderfully maintained. This contrasts very strong with Marzahn which was build without such elements, and because of this was bald. This is like in many such areas in Poland what makes them unbearable. Third, it is quality of building, materials etc. This is something always striking for someone from Eastern Europe where quality of construction was notoriously poor. But here in Gropiusstadt I saw for the first time in my live buildings build of concrete plates which looked really good, and one was not afraid they will crumble any moment. I would say that after approximately 30 years since construction most of these buildings look very well and are well maintained. There are very few signs of them being run down beyond normal tear and wear. This is especially striking when compared with old, not renovated yet parts of Biilmermeer which were in an appalling shape. This lesson is practically one: that to maintain decent quality of such residential areas you have to have an idea in advance (even if original ideas of Gropius were not implemented fully), and not to build by putting together separated pieces, and that to do this you have to have money, money and once more money. What was impressive for me was the meeting with police officers after the visit. It seems that Berlin police like probably the police in may other German cities seems to be really engaged in various crime prevention related activities. I think it is very important, that police officers involved in crime prevention are not just regular police officers assigned to such tasks, but that they undergo a special training in crime prevention. This is something very important in my opinion.

97 97 / 111 What advise would you give to the visited project? Can you give references (good or bad examples) of projects in your own country? It is hard to consider any concrete advice. Gropiusstadt is certainly not necessarily an ideal place to live, but as compared with such places in Eastern Europe it seems to require hardly any advising. I must admit that one of the most striking features for me was Walter Gropius Gymnasium: interesting architectonic design, but barbed wire around was something difficult to believe to be seen; Well I have not seen CCTV around the school (like in Krakow). I wonder what is actually worse. Cameras may be considered to be more intrusive of course, but I think they are better anyway. Schools surrounded by a barbed wire are just terrible. I am not certain about this, as it escaped my attention during the visit, but now after going through my notices and pictures I have realised, that apart from schools there are no specific youthrelated facilities like clubs, meeting points etc. There may be various reasons for this, like for example no demand for them. But I wonder whether a more active and specific policies in this area, beyond establishment of the Neighbourhood Management Area and some activities of the DeGeWo (like younger children who interrupted our meeting preparing some journalistic materials on the district) may be eventually worth considering. 89B5.2.2 Marzahn North What stroke you most in the area? Situational Lighting in green areas which does not belong to anyone; Neglected surroundings of one of the shopping centers (almost a hot spot) as well as the green areas in some parts of the housing estate; A neglected foot bridge over the railway station; Helplessness of the police in the face of almost open sale of cigarettes; Closed backyards; Reconstruction of a housing estate by reducing the number of floors in high blocks of flats. Social One policeman responsible for the prevention on a vast area of a housing estate; liquidation of Kontaktbeamte The work of the NGO members with children and youths in the streets (street workers) Festival 5 Kontinente improvement of the feeling of safety through integrating actions strengthening community bonds Quartiersmanagement as a form of a all-inclusive support of weaker neighbourhoods (but also as a form of stigmatization)

98 98 / 111 What lessons can your country learn from the visited project? What advise would you give to the visited project? Can you give references (good or bad examples) of projects in your own country? Deconstruction of buildings (reduction of the number of floors and the improvement of the standard of the flats) Multifunctional caretaker supported by technical security measures including close circuit cameras Tidying the green areas around entrances to buildings, regulating the issue of the lighting of the green areas, liquidating Angsträume around the shopping centre, revitalization of the remaining part of the housing estate (part of the blocks still looked like in the socialist times), considering putting under monitoring administered by public institutions of areas regarded by the residents to be dangerous. Zero tolerance as a form of reaction of the police to petty and agravating street crimes In Kraków the results are doubtful: Stop 24 a programme to combat car thefts special marking of cars whose owners declare that they do not usually drive at night. If a police patrol spots such a vehicle in the street at night, they check the driver. A stranger programme for school and nursery school children to teach them proper behaviour towards strangers in the street and in their own homes. Anti-aggression training for children and youths Kick-NGO as a mediator between neighbours Boxzentrum organization of sport activities to prevent crime among children and youths Quartiermanagement as a form of - targeted support of local initiatives with grants and actions to develop society s selforganization - integration of the institutions which should cooperate to solve problems In the neighbourhood Limited programmes (grants) to aid people seeking jobs A programme to combat graffiti through the creation of Graffiti Gallery Fortifying of the local police both to counteract any evidence of the lack of social control and to improve relations with community consistent with the philosophy of community policing ( greater engagement of the police in activities undertaken by other institutions) Development of the community policing by strengthening the function of a district constable Programme Blue Card aimed at combining the aid provided by different institutions for the victims of home violence Senior initiating mutual aid among elderly people Multiplicator organizing the victims of crimes to mutual aid and to prevent repeated victimization (also situational) Involving the best firms for the prevention of people and property into preventive actions on a town or city district level.

99 99 / B5.3 Site visit report from the UK 90B5.3.1 Gropiusstadt What struck you most on the site? The high quality of building and environmental state and maintenance. Good use of colour and imaginative open spaces (eg: playground, see below): Good relations between local police and young people: Potential problems with block boundary treatments (burglars and vandals can get right up to building edge), recessed entrances, high-grown shrubs and garage blocks which are not well overlooked: Lots of community based social projects and resident involvement in decision making.

100 F Many 100 / 111 What lessons can your country learn from the visited project? What advise would you give to the visited project? Can you give references of projects in your own country? That if you have good quality, people will respect it. High quality refurbishment, landscaping and maintenance will save money in the long run, as places are less likely to spiral into decline. Make sure building boundary treatments and landscaping don't give easy opportunities for offenders. Hulme area redevelopment, Manchester 91B5.3.2 Marzahn North Marzahn is an inspiring example of how to revitalise a gloomy peripheral system-built housing estate of 21 the type found on the edge of many UK and other European cities.f of these estates (particularly in the UK) have gone into serious decline and have become places of last resort for people with no other choice. In the UK, the general approach with such estates is to demolish the high rise blocks and then rebuild with cottage style housing (see, for example Barton Hill, Bristol, Castle Vale, Birmingham and Southgate Runcorn - a modernist concrete slab estate designed by James Stirling that was subsequently demolished and rebuilt with pitched roof brick clad houses). An exception to this was the Niddrie House Estate in Edinburgh where the Civic Trust Award-winning slab blocks had their heights reduced and variegated as part of an extensive rehabilitation programme for this drug and crime-ridden estate. In Marzahn this latter approach has been taken on wholeheartedly. One of the advantages of pre-cast concrete slab construction, is that, a bit like Lego, bits of the building can be unplugged relatively easily (see photos). Overall, the attempt by the designers has been to produce a much more varied, lively, verdant and colourful environment. How the redevelopment relates to good Urban Design Criteria Permeability. With the exception of some communal garden areas enclosed by perimeter blocks (see photo below), the whole vast neighbourhood is completely permeable and links reasonably well to surrounding areas. 21 See Hwww.goethe.de/kue/arc/dos/dos/sls/wus/en htm

101 101 / 111 Vitality. Including new retail, cultural and communal places, along with public art, has helped to make Marzahn a more lively and fulfilling environment to live and work in (see photos above and below) Community-run cafe Public art at school Variety and legibility. The remodelling of the neighbourhood has been done with the explicit intention of achieving more diversity and variety, both in terms of appearance, dwelling type, tenure and usage: Different apartment types over shops and cafes Creating more variety and identifiable "quarters" through the deliberate breaking up of the original uniform, monolithic appearance of the estate has made Marzahn more "legible". Robustness and Sustainability. German craftsmanship ensured that the original slab blocks were well constructed. The opportunity was taken during the re-modelling to improve insulation for dwellings. The considerable "greening" of the communal areas, is another sustainability benefit, along with the improvement of community facilities to increase social resilience: Playground

102 102 / 111 Social Engagement. The "neighbourhood management" approach, along with early resident consultation has ensured that social engagement has always been at the core of Marzahn's destiny. One of the positive legacies of the communist regime in Eastern Germany was that residents tended to be closely involved in the co-operative management of housing estates. This has continued, to some extent, under the new regime, with block representatives still active in the neighbourhood. Conclusions The downside. It is difficult to find fault with this rehabilitation programme. Two minor niggles observed during the site visit (in September 2006) were: a considerable amount of graffiti on bridges and walls around the rail station and some rather secluded car parking spaces, hidden by luxuriant vegetation. (See photos below) Replicable strengths. Quality. Probably the single most effective aspect of the success of the Marzahn redevelopment is the investment in quality throughout. Everything has been done to a high standard and few corners have been cut (as would probably happen in the UK when budgets over-run and economies are made). One only has to look German cars and other technical products to realise that high quality, although expensive upfront, pays off in the long-term. The group responsible for regenerating Marzahn wanted to avoid the decline of so many peripheral housing estates and foresaw the dangers of underinvestment, so they went in the opposite direction, with apparent success. Diversity. As mentioned previously, a monolithic residential neighbourhood, where the only aim, under the Soviet regime was to provide a roof over everyone's head, has been diversified both physically and socially. This has enabled a demographically varied range of residents to remain in the area, where in Britain or France, such estates have become ghettoes for the poor. Good infrastructure. Although it appears, geographically, to be isolated on the fringe of Berlin, Marzahn is well connected to the rest of the city with reliable, fast and subsidized public transport. The inclusion of new "destinations" in the form of the iconic "Westgate" (sic) shopping centre and other cultural attractions, means that other Berliners go there by choice. Colour and delight. The motto for the Marzahn redevelopment roughly translates as "regeneration with colour". There has been an explicit aim of introducing sensual pleasures throughout the neighbourhood in the form of brightly coloured buildings and substantial investment in public art. There has been a recognition that people benefit from finding joy, and not just functionality, in their living environment. Community involvement. Marzahn has benefited from its communist legacy in this respect and has continued to involve residents in planning, management, maintenance and service provision in the neighbourhood. This has helped to maintain cohesion and enhance social capital, evidenced by falling crime rates over the last few years.