Key Points

• Survey data indicates that in 29 out of 31 countries, more people believe crime and violence have increased in their neighborhoods, which contributes to social, economic, political, and health consequences.

• The perception of rising crime erodes social cohesion, resulting in increased public anger, distrust, and divisiveness; representing a critical threat to the stability of nations.

• Localized solutions to enhance residents' sense of safety are essential, with a focus on encouraging thriving business environments, coordinated urban planning, and leveraging private security in cooperation with local governments.

Risks to Stable Societies

Emerging coalitions of countries, shifting geopolitical alliances, and a more fragmented and contentious global environment represent a potentially destabilizing force with which nations and businesses will need to contend in 2025, a challenge that is receiving significant attention in advance of the World Economic Forum (WEF) Annual Meeting next week.

But additive to risks driven by external, global forces comes one getting comparatively little attention: a growing sense among citizens in many countries that their neighborhoods and cities are becoming less safe. New data from a survey of 31 nations finds that people are overwhelmingly more likely to think violence in their neighborhood is getting worse than getting better.

There is nothing new about the risks from citizens worrying about crime, but that does nothing to negate how impactful it can be. When people feel unsafe in their communities there are social consequences, including reducing social cohesion and increasing mistrust of authorities and institutions; economic impacts, including dampening business investment and fewer job opportunities; political implications, including instability and a drift toward authoritarianism; and health implications, including higher rates of depression and health problems arising from not engaging in outdoor activities. When residents are worried about growing insecurity, so does instability.

29 out of 31 Countries Trending in the Wrong Direction

Ipsos, one of the world’s leading market research companies, conducted a 31-country survey in 2024 on crime and law enforcement featuring online interviews with 23,800 adults. One disturbing finding: In 29 of 31 countries, more people felt crime and violence had increased in the last year than decreased. Only in Singapore did people see improvement in crime and violence prevention; in Malaysia, the same percentage reported more crime as less crime. Overall (31-countryaverage), 31% of people said there was more crime and violence in their community, while only 9% thought the crime picture had improved (47% said crime hadn’t changed; 14% said they didn’t know).

It's a troubling finding, even if reality doesn’t always match perception. Comparing the survey results against UN and other data, researchers said they uncovered “perils of perception.” In Peru, for example, 62% of people complained of deteriorating crime conditions, while official statistics indicate that serious assaults had actually declined during the corresponding period. In terms of impact, however, perception of crime is reality. When people feel increasingly unsafe—even if they may not be—it has negative health, economic, social, and political consequences.

One area of utmost concern is “social cohesion erosion," which the annual report on risks from the WEF characterizes as a critical threat to the world across all time spans—short, medium, and long term. Social cohesion erosion is a fracturing of social networks, and is reflected by persistent public anger, distrust, divisiveness, lack of empathy, and marginalization of minorities. It has multiple negative impacts, including degrading the stability of societies, individual well-being, and economic productivity —and has roots in the people’s sense of safety and security.

The unraveling of the social fabric correlates with perception of crime and disorder, which should propel the issue to the top of the agendas of community leaders, local politicians, and government officials. If governments fail to enact measures that give public confidence in their ability to keep them safe and secure, they can expect a backlash. For communities, then, it begs the question: what makes people feel safer?

Creating Safer Cities

Localized solutions are clearly needed—there is no one global blueprint for making residents of cities feel safer. One commonality, however, is the need for a thriving business environment. The fates of cities and businesses are connected; they form the foundation for local economies, workforces, and community main streets. This is especially true post-pandemic, as the division between work, life, shopping, and home has eroded.

How cities evolve, and the actions that planners and officials take—or don’t take—to encourage vibrant communities and discourage crime, play an integral role in where businesses locate, what risks they face, and how successful they are. For some cities, solutions may require addressing underutilized office and retail spaces, especially in core business areas, and being active in repurposing spaces to serve community needs. For others, flexible land use codes might encourage business, as some cities have had success adding small-scale or artisan manufacturing as a permitted land use to previously exclusive retail environments. And some technology-enabled cities are improving business conditions through the use of data like counts of pedestrians, vehicles, and parking spaces. While small, all improvements that make people’s experiences better or lives easier cause them to have a better view of the safety of their environment.

Crime is always an overriding factor in the relationship between cities and their citizens. Specifically, a lack of security investment or lax enforcement works at cross purposes with efforts to build a vibrant and cohesive urban environment. Crime can hijack a city’s future, running businesses out of town and creating fear among citizens.

For some cities, it is a problem of policies and priorities, where crime may be causing retailers to shorten hours or close-up shop, but only a few investigators may be on staff to conduct organized retail crime investigations. A slow (or absent) police response to crime can easily create a climate of fear that cities can find it hard to reverse.

Communication plays a vital role in public attitudes; especially as social media can amplify a single incident of crime or violence to the point that it seems epidemic. For businesses, one path forward may be to highlight the full impact of crime, and to expose it as a quality-of-life issue for communities rather than a loss-of-revenue issue for businesses. “I have found it easier [to get people interested] when it’s sold as a community problem rather than an individual company issue,” said the director for asset protection, operations, and safety at a global retailer.

Cooperation between the local government and the private security sector is necessary to ensure local security and public order — 2024 Study of Community Security in Poland

Coordination is also key. City planners, designers and architects need to work in conjunction with security design experts to create spaces that reduce crime without stoking fear. Quick and cheap security fixes like fencing can be a short-sighted investment, as they may temporarily assist crime prevention but do lasting harm by increasing the perception of threat and instilling fear in visitors, employees, and invitees. Technology and creative CPTED (Crime prevention through environmental design) solutions can help protect buildings, safeguard citizens, and thwart threats while avoiding military-style security fortresses that stoke fear.

Similarly, increasing the visible presence of police can be a double-edged sword. It can help prevent crime, making people feel safer, but can also raise anxiety about crime, and do the opposite, especially in countries and cities where there is mistrust of police.

Creative, community-driven security solutions are thus often a desirable alternative. A research study of a city in Africa, for example, found that utilizing private security was effective as both a crime prevention tool and an effective way to enhance residents’ sense of safety. “The result reflected that people and businesses indeed looked up to and depend on the Nigeria-based private security firms to provide security services and prevent crime on their behalf,” it concluded (“Role of Private Security Firms in Enhancing Urban Safety and Crime Prevention," International Journal of Criminology and Security Studies, Oct. 2024).

In many countries, decentralization of public authority is transferring authority to lower levels, including the local level. “From the point of view of ensuring security, this is extremely important,” notes a study of communities in Poland. (“Cooperation of the Local Government with the Private Security Sector in Ensuring Local Security,” Internal Security, July-December 2024).

On balance, this transfer is a good thing, according to researchers, as local government bodies are closest to the citizens and best positioned to understand their security needs. To fill gaps, leveraging private security resources is often critically important. “The private security sector can support local authorities in ensuring local security…and provides invaluable support in this area.”

Private security is key to community safety, but the study found that local governments don’t always effectively cooperate with private security services, identifying several barriers to cooperation. “The first factor is the lack of financial resources for this undertaking.”

To make residents feel safe, better cooperation is critical, say researchers, as there are increasingly few police officers and municipal guards in open public places, while private security operates in spaces intended for public use, such as shops, public buildings, workplaces, shared spaces in multi-family houses, shopping centers, cultural facilities, social buildings, and more. “It makes cooperation between the local government and the private security sector necessary to ensure local security,” the study concludes.

It recommends that local government improve cooperation by specifying an action plan to better leverage private security for community safety, including “organising joint training, exercises and drills, enabling mutual learning of each other’s operating methods, and thus providing a better understanding of each other’s needs and roles, which in turn may have a positive impact on the functioning of the entire local security system.”