TFA claims that lights don’t reduce crime, but I‘d like to see the exact meaning of that statistic (eg dark places are less frequented hence less crime?).
I would say that going from no lighting at all, to some lighting, on urban paths, improves safety (not tripping over unexpected obstacles) and reduces crime (presuming there was any crime while it was unlit). The article doesn't refute that. I would suggest that if a major city decided to eliminate all street lighting, it would be absolute chaos.
> Wouldn't it be more reasonable to just expect people who want to walk places in the dead of night to wear a headlamp?