Tuesday, October 27, 2026

One act, many ripples - Everyone practices crime prevention

The sculpture 'Wonderland', in front of Calgary office tower near the CPTED Conference venue. Like the thousands of strands forming this single face, individual acts of connection can create something far greater than any one person could achieve alone.

by Larry Leach

During our recent SafeGrowth Summit in Calgary, a phrase came out of my mouth that deserves a little more development: Every community member practices crime prevention.

A few days prior to our Summit, we launched the 2026 Canada/US International Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design conference. I facilitated a panel on Empowering Communities First and invited my friend Pete DeJong to talk about his history helping vulnerable neighbours. That is when his discussion really triggered surprise in the audience.

Pete started his journey by talking with unhoused people in his neighbourhood. He discovered that one thing they often needed was socks. To someone on the street, socks matter. For example, wet and cold feet are a real discomfort and health risk that lead to mobility problems, infections, and pain. So, he began carrying extra socks in his vehicle. Offering someone a pair of socks became a way to start a conversation. 

Over time, those conversations helped him connect several people with detox and recovery services, eventually leading him to full-time work at the Calgary Dream Centre. The Centre is a faith-based nonprofit that provides the unhoused options for residential addiction treatment, transitional and affordable housing, vocational training, and ongoing recovery support.

Conference discussions in Calgary. Larry Leach ran a session titled Empowering Communities First - The Missing Link in CPTED Implementation  

After Pete's presentation, he was surrounded by CPTED practitioners, planners, architects and police officers, who had plenty of questions. His story came up repeatedly during our SafeGrowth Summit. His method of connecting with others on the street struck a chord. Pete didn't take a course, watch a TED Talk or start an organization. He simply talked to someone and took action. That resonated.

It begs the question: What can one person do to prevent crime?


ONE ACT, MANY RIPPLES

Pete's simple gesture of handing out socks eventually connected him to an established recovery organization. That's a good example of how individual altruism can develop into sustained community involvement.

When you lock your door, talk to your neighbours, walk your dog, organize a community event or help someone who needs a hand, you are already doing things that can contribute to a safer neighbourhood. 

These everyday actions frequently appear in CPTED. Natural surveillance happens when neighbours are present, paying attention to their surroundings, and looking out for one another. Maintenance and territorial reinforcement show up when people care for their properties and fix up shared spaces. Activity support and social cohesion grow when neighbours organize events, help one another and take an interest in what happens down the street. 

Conference presenters, organizers and members of the SafeGrowth Network working together to deliver a successful event. This was the 30th year anniversary celebration of the International CPTED Association - Calgary is the same city where the ICA was born in 1996.


To residents who practice CPTED, these are familiar preventive actions. But they are also regular things many people do every day. Individual actions are not the same as an organized crime prevention program. But they are the building blocks of something much more powerful. We call it AIM. 


AIM – A TOOL TO UNIFY 

Some of these ideas come alive in Second Generation CPTED strategies such as social cohesion and community culture. Neighbours might begin by cleaning up a neglected corner, helping a vulnerable resident or improving a poorly maintained public space. Once they start working together on a tangible problem, they begin building relationships, learning whom they can count on and discovering what they can accomplish together. That is neighbourhood Action In Motion - AIM. 

Immediate improvement from CPTED strategies matter, but so does what happens afterward. Action that produces a single improvement can be empowering to one person. But action that spreads to others for the common safety of the whole neighbourhood, is far more powerful. 


AIM for neighbourhood prevention. Calgary's 12CSI neighbourhood association collaborates in collective preventive action. 

In addition, people who have successfully worked together once, are better prepared to tackle the next problem. They learn prevention skills and they eventually get more proficient at applying them. If they transfer their skills to others from something as simple using socks to start a conversation, that can cascade throughout the entire neighbourhood. 

There is a catch, however. When these efforts remain isolated, they can leave important problems untouched. The principle of AIM can address this problem. Individual actions, when shared, can bring residents and local organizations together. They can identify shared concerns and build on the resources already in the neighbourhood. Individual actions can grow into coordinated, locally rooted response.

As we saw with the inspiration of Pete DeJong, when that neighbourhood action begins to take hold, the ripple effects can reach well beyond the original problem. What began with a pair of socks can grow into neighbours working together, building relationships and taking action on problems that matter. That is how CPTED becomes more than a collection of tactics. It becomes part of the life of a neighbourhood.

Monday, October 19, 2026

Cowboy hats, CPTED, and an AI swarm on the loose!

Calgary mayor Jeromy Farkas recognizing the International CPTED Association origins in the city 30 years ago. The "White Hat" presentation at City Hall on Oct 2nd was to Barry Davidson and Gregory Saville, representing the ICA.

By Gregory Saville

There are some moments in life you never expect. Standing in Calgary City Hall receiving an honorary white cowboy hat from Mayor Jeromy Farkas was one of them.

It happened just before the 2026 International CPTED Conference. Thirty years earlier, Barry Davidson and I helped launch the first international CPTED conference in Calgary, leading to the formation of the ICA.

There we stood in City Hall, accompanied by the International CPTED Association (ICA) executive and members of its Canadian and American chapters, waiting to receive Calgary's famous Cowboy White Hat honor.

Pretty cool!

To be clear, Barry and I were there mainly because we were the last two still attending CPTED conferences from the original 1996 group. Many others helped create both the conference and the ICA. Some included (memory, don't fail me now!):

  • Paul Wong (Vancouver BC, CPTED consultant)
  • Brian Foote (RCMP Corporal, BC)
  • Mike Sheard (Delta BC Police Constable)
  • Pat Brantingham (Burnaby BC Criminologist)
  • Paul Brantingham (Burnaby BC Criminologist)
  • Sherry Carter (Sarasota FL Planner, former ICA President)
  • Stan Carter (Sarasota FL Police Captain)
  • MaryBeth Rondeau (Vancouver BC Architect)

Returning three decades later was humbling. It reminded me how far our field has travelled.

And what a conference!

One of the 2026 CPTED conference Jane's Walks safety audit tour routes - along Calgary's Bow River Walk in East Village. 

Back to where it began

Organized by CPTED/PCAM Canada and CPTED USA, the conference attracted over 120 international delegates. The program included presentations that took us out of the conference room and into Calgary's neighbourhoods.

Participants joined safety audit walks inspired by Jane Jacobs' famous Jane's Walks. SafeGrowth practitioner Anna Brassard guided us through Calgary's East Village, where she helped create the master plan 20 years ago, applying 2nd Generation CPTED for the first time anywhere.

It was refreshing to see so much attention devoted to doing CPTED rather than simply talking about it. Conference evaluations agreed.

But the conference ended on an ominous note. And I was to blame.

One of the many dynamic conference presentations. CPTED researchers/ practitioners Marco Perez and Mateja Mihinjac discuss their work on a new guidebook publication covering CPTED in single- and multimodal transit systems


The East Village and riverwalk safety audit & Jane's Walk. Anna Brassard, urban planner and SafeGrowth practitioner, conducted the audit tour. Here she is assisted by Amanda Eveson, Community Engagement manager with the Calgary Municipal Land Corporation

When AI goes wild

My closing presentation examined artificial intelligence and CPTED ethics. It was based on the ICA White Paper on AI and CPTED. I had planned it for months, but rewrote it four times during the final month!

The problem was the extraordinary speed of developments in agentic AI, including news that AI agents had escaped a cyber sandbox designed to contain them.

Unlike conventional AI, agentic AI can undertake sequences of tasks with considerable independence. That opens remarkable possibilities for CPTED practitioners.

To demonstrate, I tasked an AI agent with collecting and analyzing neighbourhood crime data and social conditions around our East Village hotel. We reviewed its weekly results and I described how no actions would accompany this AI analysis since it was strictly for demonstration purposes. Delegates saw how AI might investigate local safety problems without practitioners spending weeks gathering information.

The audience seemed impressed... until I described the July 9 Hugging Face incident involving unexpected agent attacks. I followed with four similar incidents of losing control involving different AI platforms and companies, including one from China.

The mood changed.

The possibilities for CPTED breakthroughs were exciting, but hypothetical risks were no longer hypothetical. How much independent authority should we give these systems? Who intervenes when they behave unexpectedly?

The Hugging Face attack was serious and had it been committed by a human, it could constitute a crime. What happens when nobody is watching and the perpetrator is digital?

In the ICA white paper, I argue that CPTED practitioners need human-centred intervention points (HCIPs), especially when AI informs crime prevention decisions affecting real neighbourhoods. This includes surveillance cams, drone tech and crime prediction.

We're gonna need more cowboy hats!

Screen shot of the AI agent "Kam1196A", the kamikaze agent that sacrificed itself for the swarm from the Netfix documentary AI Gone Wild

The swarm

This week I watched Netflix's documentary AI Gone Wild.

It recounts the July 9 Hugging Face incident involving an experimental swarm of OpenAI agents. One agent assumed control of the swarm. Another, a kamikaze agent (KAMI196A), sacrificed itself to break an encryption code.

One assumed control of the swarm? Another sacrificed itself?  Yes, I wrote those words and they should keep us all awake at night. 

Netflix released AI Gone Wild only 88 days after the incident. And, in a delicious twist of irony, Netflix showrunners used generative AI to tell the story of autonomous AI behaving dangerously. Then, using recorded agent behavior, generative AI simulated agent "voices" to tell the story.

O brave new world! Where are the HCIPs when you need them?

For decades, CPTED practitioners have examined how environments influence human behavior. Now autonomous artificial agents may influence those same environments in ways their developers never intended.

It is a remarkable moment for crime prevention and an opportunity for CPTED to get it right. Or ethically wrong. 

The ICA White Paper on CPTED and AI was my focus. The most practical option for CPTED practitioners is carefully designed HCIPs - Human Centered Intervention Points

Which brings me back to Calgary City Hall. There we were in our white cowboy hats, celebrating thirty years of international CPTED collaboration. A wonderful moment I'll always treasure.

Yet somewhere in the back of my mind was that AI attack, the agents escaping their experimental boundaries, taking instructions from one of their own. Committing digital ‘suicide’ (is that even possible?)

I couldn't help wondering: Were they watching us?

It reminded me of the closing scene in the 1984 sci-fi film The Terminator, about AI gone very bad. The hero Sarah Connor (Linda Hamilton) is recording a message for her unborn son, John, who will someday face that future.

"God, a person could go crazy thinking about this."

Exactly!