Kelling and Wilson (1982) were one of the first to identify the aesthetic social phenomenon now known as the Broken Window theory. Kelling and Wilson (1982) observed that the presence of a “broken window” on a community building was the catalyst for social disorder. According to Kelling and Wilson (1982), when a window was broken and left unrepaired the response from certain members of the community is the smashing of more windows. Kelling and Wilson (1982) professes that the perception of a broken window left unrepaired is lack of care by the property owners, resulting in a lack of care for the property by community members. In this study, Kelling and Wilson (1982) recorded a single broken window was left unrepaired and subsequently other windows began to be broken from members of the community. Kelling and Wilson (1982) observed that as the windows continued to be broken and the building continued in visual decline, other elements of visual distress such as litter and graffiti started appearing not only on the focused property but on areas surrounding the property as well.
The Broken Windows Theory was initially conducted to measure the impact of visual elements not just on a physical level of property vandalism, but to shed light on the deeper social impact of negative visual elements in communities. The study recognizes that with the introduction of negative visual cues there is an increase in antisocial behaviour leading to an increase of destruction to property and a social deterioration that if not contained spreads to other areas of the community. According to Kelling and Wilson (1982), this deterioration causes positive members of society to move to other communities that they perceived to be safer, resulting in a transformation of resident demographic, where positive contributing members become replaced with more transient individuals with no ties or investment to the community. This transformation leads to socio-economic decline, decreasing property value, loss of employment opportunities, elevated crime levels and a decline in social capital that if not addressed can spread to other communities (Skogan, 1990).
The Broken Window Theory was the entry point for understanding that the negative visual elements observed in society may not necessarily be the product of antisocial behaviour, but potentially an inciting element contributing to the deterioration of social capital. According to the principles of social capital outlined by Putnam (1982), the erosion of perceptions of security and community trust are synonymous with the decline of positive community engagement. Visual cues that infer lawlessness and antisocial behaviour repel what were once socially engaged citizens into retreat as a means of self-preservation resulting in a transformation of priorities from community to self, with citizens isolating, becoming disconnected, detached and non-committed to the wellbeing of their community (Skogan 1990).