In fact, for most of my career, I never thought of these habits as having anything to do with economics, which is why a recent SBI Research report caught my attention.
The report analyzed cities and found that those with greater CCTV coverage tended to see lower crime growth than those with fewer cameras. And, more women go to work in cities with less crime.
It’s a significant opportunity for a $2 billion industry growing 15-16% annually, according to Counterpoint, a global technology research firm. Chinese players used to dominate this space until a couple of years ago when the government of India decided to clamp down on Chinese hardware used in CCTVs.
The socio-economic impact of CCTV cameras that no one talks about
The issue is one that women have long known, but economists are only now quantifying: safety affects women’s participation in the economy. A NITI Aayog-Rocky Mountain Institute report on mobility noted as far back as 2018 that many women feel unsafe traveling alone and often avoid public transport as a result.
Yet, according to a reply tabled in the Delhi Assembly in 2025 by New Delhi’s Public Works Department (PWD), the city had 2,64,613 CCTV cameras installed, and nearly 32,000—roughly one in eight—were non-functional. Infrastructure creates value only when it works. And that’s the national capital, with all the resources available, and a place where women’s safety is widely acknowledged as a problem.
We talk about increasing female labor force participation. We discuss education, skilling, childcare and workplace flexibility—all of which matter. But labor markets begin before a worker reaches an office or factory.
A 1% decline in crime is associated with roughly 0.11% higher real GDP growth in the short run, the SBI Research report estimates. Crime, it argues, discourages investment, raises transaction costs and reduces labour-force participation.
Correlation, of course, is not causation. But it raises an intriguing question: should we think of surveillance infrastructure in the same way we think about economic infrastructure?
We readily accept that roads are economic infrastructure because they improve mobility. If safety improves mobility, too, especially for women, why should it be treated differently?
In some parts of the country, the conversation is already evolving beyond cameras. Tamil Nadu’s recently launched Singappen initiative combines a specialized women’s safety force with technology such as drone surveillance.
Whether it succeeds remains to be seen, but it reflects a broader shift: safety is increasingly being viewed as something that can be built, monitored and improved through policy.
For years, women have understood something economists are now beginning to quantify. Safety influences opportunity. When a woman turns down a job because she is worried about the journey home, the loss is not just personal. It is economic.
We usually measure infrastructure in kilometers of highways or megawatts of power. But some forms of infrastructure are harder to see. They are the systems that make people confident enough to step out of their homes, board a bus, take a train, or return home after dark.
The latest PLFS data for May 2026 showed that only 32.8% of women aged 15 and above were in the labor force, while urban female labour-force participation stood at just 24.8%.
And the latest available NCRB data from 2024 shows India recorded 4.41 lakh crimes against women in 2024, with a crime rate of 64.6 per lakh women. If India is serious about bringing more women into the workforce, safety cannot remain a side conversation. It is not merely a law-and-order concern. It is part of the infrastructure that enables economic participation.
The ideal labor market is one in which men and women weigh the same factors before accepting a job.
Read more: Six skills that can save you even when AI comes for your job
