Perceived Safety in Kolkata’s Public Spaces: Crowding, Social Activity and the Right to the City

CASE STUDY 33 / 200

Research area: India — Kolkata; qualitative public-space research

Status: Independent desk-research draft; qualitative findings are context-specific

Abstract / Executive Summary

This case study examines how women interpret public-space safety through social activity, crowding, people’s behaviour and the reputations of particular places. A qualitative study in Kolkata used focus-group discussions, in-depth interviews and visual surveys to contextualise women’s accounts. Its findings challenge simplistic assumptions that an empty street is always unsafe or a crowded street is always safe: women’s perceptions depend on the nature of activity, social context and reported histories of harassment.

Keywords

Kolkata; perceived safety; public space; gender; qualitative methods; urban planning

1. Introduction and Research Question

Which social and spatial features shape women’s perceptions of safety in public spaces, and how might those insights inform inclusive design?

The purpose of this case study is to translate evidence into practical questions for prevention, service design and evaluation. It does not claim to investigate an individual incident or to provide a comprehensive account of all experiences.

2. Methods and Evidence Selection

Narrative review of Roy and Bailey’s 2021 article, which reports focus-group discussions, in-depth interviews and visual surveys. This report summarises the published study rather than reproducing its data. No additional interviews, mapping or observational audit were performed.

3. Case Context

Public-space design is often assessed using physical features such as lighting, sightlines and access. These remain important, but the study shows that social context and behaviour also shape women’s assessments. A place may feel different depending on who is present, what they appear to be doing, whether businesses and transport are operating, and whether the location is associated with repeated harassment.

4. Findings from the Reviewed Evidence

• The study identifies the ‘male gaze’, behaviour and perceived characteristics of men, the presence of strangers, cultural context and places associated with repeated harassment as factors shaping perceived safety.
• Participants often perceived busy roads and lively spaces with purposeful activity—such as commuters, hawkers and shopkeepers—as safer than some other settings. This is a contextual finding, not a universal rule that crowding guarantees safety.
• The study describes women negotiating unsafe conditions through avoidance, protection and prevention. The authors argue that such adaptation can internalise the burden of negotiating public space rather than enabling women to reclaim it.
• Qualitative research is suited to understanding meanings and mechanisms but cannot estimate prevalence or establish that a particular physical intervention will cause a measured safety improvement.

5. Discussion and Interpretation

A useful public-space audit combines physical conditions, patterns of legitimate activity, transport availability, maintenance, reported incidents and women’s lived experience. ‘Eyes on the street’ should not be treated as a guarantee, and surveillance alone cannot replace trusted staff, accessible services or accountable responses. Audits should include women who travel at different times and those who may be excluded by disability, age or work schedules.

6. Legal and Policy Context

This report is not a legal assessment of any location or authority. Local planning, accessibility, public-order and privacy requirements should be checked before implementing changes.

7. Potential VETRIPEN Design Implications

The following are design hypotheses for research and testing, not claims that VETRIPEN currently provides these capabilities or has demonstrated effectiveness.

• Offer optional, structured place feedback (lighting, visibility, transport availability, harassment concern, accessibility) rather than a public map of unverified accusations.
• Use moderation and evidence thresholds before aggregating reports; clearly label reports as user-submitted and time-bounded.
• Provide privacy-preserving trend summaries only when there is sufficient data and a responsible review process.
• Do not recommend a route as ‘safe’ based only on popularity, crowd density or a low number of app reports.

8. Recommendations and Evaluation Metrics

• Co-design safety audits with local women and workers, including hawkers, shopkeepers and transport staff, without making them responsible for enforcement.
• Assess locations at multiple times and days, and document operational conditions such as open businesses and transit service.
• Combine perception measures with incident data and accessibility checks; state the limitations of each data stream.
• Test whether proposed changes improve women’s access and freedom of movement, not just their perception scores.

Suggested metrics for future pilots: task completion under stress; consent comprehension; alert success/failure rates; false activations; accessibility task success; user-reported sense of control; trip abandonment or route change where relevant; and privacy complaints. Choose only metrics appropriate to the specific intervention and predefine how they will be measured.

9. Limitations

The findings reflect the studied Kolkata settings and participants. This report does not provide a new location-level audit or prove that any single environmental feature causes safety. The full article should be consulted for detailed sample and analysis information.

10. Conclusion

The evidence supports a context-aware, rights-based approach that combines women’s lived experience, service accountability, physical conditions and carefully governed technology. Any proposed intervention should be tested locally, report failures honestly and avoid transferring the burden of prevention to women.

11. References and Source Notes

1. Sanghamitra Roy & Ajay Bailey (2021). Safe in the City? Negotiating safety, public space and the male gaze in Kolkata, India. Cities, 117, 103321. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2021.103321
2. Open-access institutional archive entry for the article. https://impressions.manipal.edu/open-access-archive/2477/

12. Research and Ethics Declaration

No original interviews, participant recruitment, surveys or field observations were conducted for this report. No participant quotations have been invented. Any product implications are proposals, not validated outcomes. Before external publication, verify full-text sources, bibliographic details, current laws and all numerical claims against primary materials.

Disclaimer

DISCLAIMER — INDEPENDENT RESEARCH DOCUMENT. Prepared privately by Digital Catalyzt as part of an independent research and product-design programme related to women’s safety and the proposed VETRIPEN service. For research, education, discussion and preliminary product planning only. Unless expressly stated and documented, this document has not undergone independent peer review and is not a journal publication, government statement, legal opinion, medical or psychological assessment, or formal investigation. Claims are limited to the sources and scope stated; sources may contain limitations, errors, incomplete data or later revisions. Hypothetical examples must not be represented as real events or interviews. Legal and policy discussion is general information, not legal advice. Proposed VETRIPEN features are design hypotheses unless independently evaluated. This document does not guarantee prevention of harm, emergency response, message delivery, confidentiality in every circumstance or any particular outcome. Readers should assess cited evidence, limitations and local context independently.

← Back to all research