The modern city is a complex system that is characterized by numerous and dynamic interactions between various groups of people. According to Durkheim, through the mechanism of social solidarity, individuals create meanings, norms of communication and behavior, and symbols (Kumar et al. 45). In this regard, it can be argued that the physical face of the city is the result of people’s collective efforts and the partnership between government officials and the public (Monti et al. 173). Schafer mentions that because cities are created by humans, their parts bear a symbolic meaning that can be further deciphered by other individuals (3). Moreover, physical objects can signal the common pattern of behavior in certain neighborhoods. All these arguments suggest that a city and citizen behavior are related and can mutually impact each other. Therefore, it is true that ‘fixing’ the cities can result in improved public behavior and vice versa.
Probably, the most prominent theory that showcases the impact of the city’s physical face on citizens’ behavior is the framework of the broken windows. The theory postulates that broken windows, abandoned houses, cars with stolen wheels, garbage on the street, and vandalism in the neighborhood signal to people that such behavior is a norm (Liu et al. 237). This, in turn, implies that such a condition attracts more delinquent behavior (Liu et al. 238). The New York City Police Department’s fight against the small instances of public disorder probably constitutes the most famous practical case that proves the proposed hypothesis. As such, during the 1990s, police officers in New York were instructed to pay greater attention to the instances of vandalism, prostitution, and drinking. This resulted not only in reduced instances of small crimes but also in major instances of criminal behavior. In a similar vein, Al-Mosa et al. found that the “amount of existing litter, beautification efforts, and distance to rubbish bins” are significantly related to a person’s propensity to litter on the streets (235). Thus, it implies that ‘fixing’ cities’ physical faces can significantly improve citizens’ behavior.
On the contrary, the efforts that are directed at ‘fixing the people’ can similarly improve the appearance of a city. For example, various public service announcement initiatives can raise citizens’ awareness concerning their behavior that may directly or indirectly cause harm to the public spaces. In democratic societies, such an attempt to cultivate responsible citizenship has a spillover effect on the political sphere. Indeed, conscious citizens would be willing to vote for the candidates that can solve the existing city problems as well as be more involved in the construction projects.
In this respect, decision-makers who seek to improve the physical face of a city must invest equally in people’s education and material resources. Such a balance would, on the one hand, ensure that newly constructed or renovated public spaces such as parks, squares, buildings, and neighborhoods would not be vandalized or otherwise harmed. On the other hand, it will guarantee that people are adequately involved in the current issues that their city faces.
In summary, the current discussion identified that the physical face of a city and its citizens’ behavior is significantly interconnected. The symbolic meaning that the objects bear can signal to people about the prevailing social norms in a certain area. Thus, even one broken window in the neighborhood can inspire other delinquent actions as individuals would think that such behavior is acceptable. Conversely, educating people concerning their conduct can substantially reduce the instances of vandalism and inspire more participation in the city’s life. Thus, it can be concluded that it is necessary to ‘fix’ both people’s behaviors and attitudes and the city itself simultaneously.
Works Cited
Al-Mosa, Yara, et al. “A Socioecological Examination of Observing Littering Behavior.” Journal of Nonprofit & Public Sector Marketing, vol. 29, no. 3, 2017, pp. 235-253.
Kumar, Surender, et al. “Concretizing Social Solidarity During the Covid–19 Pandemic: An Exploration for Durkheimian Mechanical Solidarity.” International Journal of Multidisciplinary Educational Research, vol. 10, 2021, pp. 44-48.
Liu, Jingyan, et al. “Understanding Perceived Environment Quality in Affecting Tourists’ Environmentally Responsible Behaviours: A Broken Windows Theory Perspective.” Tourism Management Perspectives, vol. 31, 2019, pp. 236-244.
Monti, Daniel Joseph, et al. Urban People and Places: The Sociology of Cities, Suburbs, and Towns. Sage Publications, 2014.
Schafer, Tyler S. “Symbols, Sentiments, and Stories: Urban Culture and Social Problems.” Sociology Compass, vol. 11, no. 7, 2017, pp. 1-9.