The ‘broken windows’ theory of fighting crime has taken a reputational hit in recent years, somewhat justifiably because it somehow morphed into stop-and-frisk and other obnoxious policies of harassing law-abiding residents. But I still think some of the concepts behind ‘broken windows’ — i.e. that addressing little things in crime-ridden neighborhoods matter, such as fixing buildings with ominous looking broken-glass windows or removing derelict cars sitting on cinder blocks or cleaning up depressing vacant lots – contribute to a more positive environment that helps deter crime.

Well, well, well. Look what we have here: a variation of ‘broken windows,’ called ‘environmental design intervention,’ and it’s working in Philadelphia via things like “cleaning up vacant lots, installing warmer streetlights and developing community gardens,” as the NYT reports. The Times article does note the similarities – and the differences – between ‘broken windows’ and ‘environmental design intervention,’ but then quickly moves on, as if the former might discredit the latter. But the connection is clearly made. … Hopefully, ‘environmental design intervention’ isn’t eventually corrupted the way ‘broken windows’ was corrupted. It sounds like a great program.