Criminal victimization: a global perspective Being exposed to the risk of criminal victimization or actually being a countries throughout the world. Concern about risk and the effects of reflected international level, in the Declaration of Basic Principles of Justice for vict me and Abuse of Power, adopted by in its resolution 40/34 of 29 November 1985. It is also reflected in an increasing number of surveys of the victims of crime. While such surveys have a longer tradition in developed countries, and in some countries have become a regular part of a crime and criminal justice database, the 1992 International Victim Survey for the first time involved a considerable number of countries of Central and Eastern Europe as well as developing countries. An increasing number of criminal justice administrations are utilizing the survey results as a basis for considering changes in law enforcement and crime prevention strategies, and for interventions of various sorts That crimes recorded by the official criminal justice agencies(police and courts, for example)are only a portion of the actual crimes committed as a criminological truism, and international victim surveys simply provide cross-cultural confirmation of that fact. In victim surveys an attempt is made to determine the true extent of crime. However, they also reveal that the propensity to report crimes varies from country to country, and by type of crime. There is also variation in the risk of criminal victimization , and more or less related correlates such as fear of crime (or fear for safety), satisfaction with police performance, and participation in crime prevention activities. Those variables also depend on other factors such as residential status, age, lifestyle and, to a certain extent, the development profile of a country. The findings of the United Nations surveys on crime trends and operations of criminal justice systems and data of the International Criminal police Organization (ICPO/Interpol)repeatedly demonstrate the many difficulties involved in comparing crimes internationally. One difficulty is that the vast majority of incidents that become known to the police, and are processed further by (or dropped from) the criminal justice system, come from reports by victims. Therefore, the credibility of police to victims, and the credibility of victims to police, become statistical determinants. A second difficulty is that any comparison i severely undermined by differences in legal definitions, and by
Criminal victimization: a global perspective Being exposed to the risk of criminal victimization or actually being a victim of crime is a common feature of life for most people in most countries throughout the world. Concern about risk and the effects of crime are reflected in various national legal provisions and, at an international level, in the Declaration of Basic Principles of Justice for Victims of Crime and Abuse of Power, adopted by the General Assembly in its resolution 40/34 of 29 November 1985. It is also reflected in an increasing number of surveys of the victims of crime. While such surveys have a longer tradition in developed countries, and in some countries have become a regular part of a crime and criminal justice database, the 1992 International Victim Survey for the first time involved a considerable number of countries of Central and Eastern Europe as well as developing countries. An increasing number of criminal justice administrations are utilizing the survey results as a basis for considering changes in law enforcement and crime prevention strategies, and for interventions of various sorts. That crimes recorded by the official criminal justice agencies (police and courts, for example) are only a portion of the actual crimes committed as a criminological truism, and international victim surveys simply provide cross-cultural confirmation of that fact. In victim surveys an attempt is made to determine the true extent of crime. However, they also reveal that the propensity to report crimes varies from country to country, and by type of crime. There is also variation in the risk of criminal victimization, and more or less related correlates such as fear of crime (or fear for safety), satisfaction with police performance, and participation in crime prevention activities. Those variables also depend on other factors such as residential status, age, lifestyle and, to a certain extent, the development profile of a country. The findings of the United Nations surveys on crime trends and operations of criminal justice systems and data of the International Criminal Police Organization (ICPO/Interpol) repeatedly demonstrate the many difficulties involved in comparing crimes internationally. One difficulty is that the vast majority of incidents that become known to the police, and are processed further by (or dropped from) the criminal justice system, come from reports by victims. Therefore, the credibility of police to victims, and the credibility of victims to police, become statistical determinants. A second difficulty is that any comparison is severely undermined by differences in legal definitions, and by
administrative procedures regarding counting, classification and disclosure. In view of these difficulties, UNICRI has promoted, within the United Nations crime prevention and criminal justice programme, the inclusion of victim surveys among the main sources for data collection and analysis of criminal activity. UNCJIN will incorporate the victim-related data into of its electronic databases The potential of victim surveys for comparative purposes led to the first and second international victim surveys carried out in 1989 and 1992 coordinated by an international working group and encompassing al together 37 deve loped and developing countries and countries of Central and eastern Europe. The second survey was supervised by the ministry of Justice of the Netherlands and by UNICRI The following countries participated in the surveys 1989 1992 Central and Developed Developi Eastern Europe Australia Australia Czechoslovakia Argentina Belgium Belgium Canada Costa rica Finland France Ital ermany, Federal Japan Federation Indonesia Republic of Netherlands Slovenia apua New guinea Indonesia Philippines Japan weden South Africa Netherlands United Kingdom of Tunesia Norway Great gan Poland Britain and United Republic Switzerland Ireland Tanzania United Kingdom of and Wales Great United States of Britain and America Northern United States of America
administrative procedures regarding counting, classification and disclosure. In view of these difficulties, UNICRI has promoted, within the United Nations crime prevention and criminal justice programme, the inclusion of victim surveys among the main sources for data collection and analysis of criminal activity. UNCJIN will incorporate the victim-related data into one of its electronic databases. The potential of victim surveys for comparative purposes led to the first and second international victim surveys carried out in 1989 and 1992, coordinated by an international working group and encompassing altogether 37 developed and developing countries and countries of Central and Eastern Europe. The second survey was supervised by the Ministry of Justice of the Netherlands and by UNICRI. The following countries participated in the surveys: 1989 1992 Developed Central and Eastern Europe Developing Australia Belgium Canada Finland France Germany, Federal Republic of Indonesia Japan Netherlands Norway Poland Spain Switzerland United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and Wales United States of America Australia Belgium Canada Finland Italy Japan Netherlands New Zealand Sweden United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and Wales United States of America Czechoslovakia Georgia Hungary Poland Russian Federation Slovenia Argentinia Brasil Costa Rica Egypt India Indonesia Papua New Guinea Philippines South Africa Tunesia Uganda United Republic of Tanzania
Proceedings of the International Conference on Understanding Crime Experience of Crime and Crime Control, Rome, 18-20 November 1992 The standard questionnaire applied in the international victim survey is available in the language of the sites of the survey and can be obtained fI UNICRI Mr.J. De Waard Via Giulia 52, 1-00186 Rome, Italy Crime Prevention Directorate Telephone:+(39-6)6877437 Ministry of Justice Fax:+(39-6)6892638 The Hague, P 0. B. 20301, The Netherlands Telephone:+(31-70)3706558 Fax:+(31-70)3707905 All countries interested in participating in future surveys are invited to contact either of the above. The 1992 International Victim Survey used a questionnaire that elicited reports of crimes against individuals aged 16 years and above. The questionnaire also identified opinions and attitudes about reporting to the police, fear of crime, crime prevention and attitudes to punishment. Many difficulties were encountered in attempting to ensure comparability between diverse national contexts, which required certain methodological ad justments. In some countries, the survey was carried out on a national territory, in others only in ma jor cities. In developed countries, data were collected using computer-assisted telephone interviewing: in developing countries and countries of Central and Eastern Europe, by face-to-face interviewin The survey was based on a population sample of, on average, between 1, 000 and 2, 000 respondents in each area surveyed
Proceedings of the International Conference on Understanding Crime: Experience of Crime and Crime Control, Rome, 18-20 November 1992 The standard questionnaire applied in the international victim survey is available in the language of the sites of the survey and can be obtained from: UNICRI Mr. J. De Waard Via Giulia 52, I-00186 Rome, Italy Crime Prevention Directorate, Telephone: +(39-6) 687 7437 Ministry of Justice Fax: +(39-6) 689 2638 The Hague, P.O.B. 20301, The Netherlands Telephone: +(31-70) 370 6558 Fax: +(31-70) 370 7905 All countries interested in participating in future surveys are invited to contact either of the above. The 1992 International Victim Survey used a questionnaire that elicited reports of crimes against individuals aged 16 years and above. The questionnaire also identified opinions and attitudes about reporting to the police, fear of crime, crime prevention and attitudes to punishment. Many difficulties were encountered in attempting to ensure comparability between diverse national contexts, which required certain methodological adjustments. In some countries, the survey was carried out on a national territory, in others only in major cities. In developed countries, data were collected using computer-assisted telephone interviewing; in developing countries and countries of Central and Eastern Europe, by face-to-face interviewing. The survey was based on a population sample of, on average, between 1,000 and 2,000 respondents in each area surveyed
The type of information obtained by the 1992 Survey covered crimes against clearly identifiable individuals and households, disregarding, therefore organizational, environmental and so-called victimless crimes", such as P which victimization risks to individuals and populations, may be included in future surveys Comparative overview Countries and cities participating in both international surveys differ greatly in many respects. Differences in samples and territorial coverage do not allow for straightforward comparisons. The following is an attempt towards comparison based on data from cities and urban areas only. It should be noted that urban area refers to areas with more than 100 000 inhabitants for the nationally based surveys. In the Russian Federation and Slovenia and in developing countries, data refer to a major city Consequently, straightforward comparisons between cities and urban areas should be made with caution doping aunties M11 D Caurtescf Eastem Europe ard Canard Erope 5) ■ Dvdcredcaunties4 ugarywithentry Persone thκt Aesalturetof Sexd incidents Figure II. Aggregate victimization rates for selected crimes in one year in cities and urban areas It is apparent that developing countries exhibit higher victimization rates for almost all selected types of crime. Urban areas in developed countries appear to be at lower risk compared with both developing countries and countries of Central and Eastern Europe for theft of personal property and for sexual incidents. Countries of Central and Eastern Europe and developed countries exhibit an almost identical level of victimization risk for burglary and robbery. The smallest difference
The type of information obtained by the 1992 Survey covered crimes against clearly identifiable individuals and households, disregarding, therefore, organizational, environmental and so-called "victimless crimes", such as drug abuse. Perceptions of the latter, which present important victimization risks to individuals and populations, may be included in future surveys. Comparative overview Countries and cities participating in both international surveys differ greatly in many respects. Differences in samples and territorial coverage do not allow for straightforward comparisons. The following is an attempt towards comparison based on data from cities and urban areas only. It should be noted that "urban area" refers to areas with more than 100,000 inhabitants for the nationally based surveys. In the Russian Federation and Slovenia and in developing countries, data refer to a major city. Consequently, straightforward comparisons between cities and urban areas should be made with caution. Figure II. Aggregate victimization rates for selected crimes in one year in cities and urban areas It is apparent that developing countries exhibit higher victimization rates for almost all selected types of crime. Urban areas in developed countries appear to be at lower risk compared with both developing countries and countries of Central and Eastern Europe for theft of personal property and for sexual incidents. Countries of Central and Eastern Europe and developed countries exhibit an almost identical level of victimization risk for burglary and robbery. The smallest difference
between the groups of countries relates to assault and threat of assault for which developing and developed countries show equivalent risks Vehicle-related crimes Concerning vehicle-related crimes, comparison is further complicated by drastically different ownership rates and structures in different groups of countries. There is a certain correlation between risk of car theft and levels of car ownership It is apparent that industrialized countries have a somewhat higher rate of car theft, indicating that high car ownership in industrialized countries (on average above 80 per cent) results in a higher probability of car theft. However, in developing countries and countries of Central and Eastern Europe (with an ownership rate of less than 50 per cent) the probability of car owners being victi is higher because of the unequal ownership structure and scarcity. Other factors will influence the relationship (for example, quality of cars usage of security devices, workings of the criminal justice apparatus) recovery rates for stolen cars appear to indicate a difference in the usage of stolen cars: a high rate implies a prevalence of theft for the purpose ding, while few cars recovered may indicate further marketing of stolen cars. The latter, in turn, may also indicate a presence of organized crime involved in trafficking cars both in the domestic market and across borders. On the one hand, this is an example of a response by organized crime to a market demand for cars, particularly in some countries of Central and Eastern Europe, and in some developing countries. On the other hand, it is also an indication of a need for better car protection systems and devices, more suitable car insurance policies, and improved police capability in vehicle recovery procedures. dEveloping countries (11 Ocoumtles of Eastem Europe and Central Europe师) Theft of car (total s ample Theft of car(owners) Figure Ill. Aggregate victimization rates for car theft In one year in cItles and urban areas
between the groups of countries relates to assault and threat of assault, for which developing and developed countries show equivalent risks. Vehicle-related crimes Concerning vehicle-related crimes, comparison is further complicated by drastically different ownership rates and structures in different groups of countries. There is a certain correlation between risk of car theft and levels of car ownership. It is apparent that industrialized countries have a somewhat higher rate of car theft, indicating that high car ownership in industrialized countries (on average above 80 per cent) results in a higher probability of car theft. However, in developing countries and countries of Central and Eastern Europe (with an ownership rate of less than 50 per cent) the probability of car owners being victims is higher because of the unequal ownership structure and scarcity. Other factors will influence the relationship (for example, quality of cars, usage of security devices, workings of the criminal justice apparatus). Recovery rates for stolen cars appear to indicate a difference in the usage of stolen cars: a high rate implies a prevalence of theft for the purpose of joyriding, while few cars recovered may indicate further marketing of stolen cars. The latter, in turn, may also indicate a presence of organized crime involved in trafficking cars both in the domestic market and across borders. On the one hand, this is an example of a response by organized crime to a market demand for cars, particularly in some countries of Central and Eastern Europe, and in some developing countries. On the other hand, it is also an indication of a need for better car protection systems and devices, more suitable car insurance policies, and improved police capability in vehicle recovery procedures. Figure III. Aggregate victimization rates for car theft in one year in cities and urban areas