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 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 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 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 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  In developed countries, the risk of having a car stolen was highest in England and Wales, Australia, New Zealand and Italy. In countries of Central and Eastern Europe, a lower level of risk was found, with the exception of Georgia. Car owners in Buenos Aires, Dar es Salaam, Kampala, and Greater Pretoria run the highest risk of theft among cities in developing countries. Theft from cars (luggage, radios, car mirrors and similar items) was highest in Moscow, at Dar es Salaam, Tunis, Kampala, and in Netherlands, England and Poland. Among developed countries, bicycle thefts were commonest in Netherlands, Sweden and Japan. Indeed, the only offences for which the figures for Japan were high were bicycle and motor-cycle thefts. In developed countries in which bicycle thefts are high, car thefts tend to be low. When there are plenty of bicycles around, it seems as if thieves will make do with two wheels rather than four. Among cities, Bombay had the lowest victimization rate for bicycle thefts, while for motor cycles, Manila, Tunis, Dar es Salaam, Kampala and Moscow exhibited the highest victimization rates.  Property crimes Burglaries from homes were reported most often in African cities, the former Czechoslovakia, England, New Zealand and France. Citizens of Ljubljana and Bombay and Swedish and French residents were the least likely victims of robbery. On the other hand, Rio de Janeiro, Dar es Salaam, Kampala, Pretoria, Buenos Aires and cities in Spain were the most likely sites for becoming a victim of robbery. Two African cities (Kampala and Dar es Salaam), Moscow and cities in Poland showed the highest rates of victimization for theft of personal property. Most of developed countries had lower risks.  Assault, threat of assault and sexual incidents Risks of assault and frightening threats were highest in Kampala, Dar es Salaam, New Zealand, Netherlands, Canada and the United States. The safest places in terms of violence were cities in Belgium, Italy and Japan, as well as Bombay, Manila, Jakarta and Ljubljana. Women were also asked about their experience with sexual victimization. It should be noted, however, that this issue is highly sensitive in some cultural settings. An additional complication results from different cultural perceptions of sexually offensive behaviour and from differences in the propensity to report it for the survey, as well as to the authorities. Women in Poland, Canada, Finland, Germany and particularly African cities reported the highest levels of risk, although the effects of overreporting and underreporting should not be disregarded.  Corruption and consumer fraud Corruption is a ubiquitous problem, although in the 1992 survey corruption was dealt with only in developing countries and countries of Central and Eastern Europe. There was a serious problem of corruption in developing countries in particular, in which it was one of the commonest forms of citizen victimization. It was also frequently reported in Georgia and Moscow. Consumers were cheated and badly treated in particular at Dar es Salaam, Tunis, Moscow and in cities of Georgia and the former Czechoslovakia. Both forms of victimization appear to indicate a lack of consumer and client protection and to reflect the ways in which people go about, or are made to go about, satisfying their needs and rights. On average, consumer fraud rates were much lower in developed countries. As noted in World Development Report 1991, this can be explained by patterns of behaviour which are adapted to market needs and which influence transactions costs: "Only after markets become established, when transactions become regular and competition increases, do traders have an incentive to establish and maintain their reputation not only because sanctions are administered more efficiently, but also because a good reputation reduces transaction costs".   Figure IV. Corruption and consumer fraud: aggregated data for 1991   Trends between 1988 and 1991 In the European countries taking part in both surveys, the risk of crime generally increased, particularly for thefts of, and from, cars. Risks for many crimes in the United States have not increased significantly or have shown a decline. Risks in Canada and Australia have also remained relatively stable. Future international surveys will allow for analyses of trends over time and with a much wider geographical spread.  Fear of crime Fear for safety is generally seen as an important element of the social cost of crime, and crime prevention policies are geared towards reducing and controlling not only crime and crime-generating opportunities, but also anxiety and feelings of insecurity. Rio de Janeiro and African cities are perceived to be the least safe in which to walk around after dark; the same holds true for cities in Australia, Italy, England, Poland, former Czechoslovakia and the United States. The perceived likelihood of falling a victim of burglary in the near future was highest in Australia, England, the former Czechoslovakia and in African cities.  Citizens' experience of and satisfaction with the police The frequency of reporting to the police differs by the perceived seriousness of the event, which in general is linked to the type of crime (thus, for example, the higher percentage of car thefts reported as compared with pickpocketing), as well as to many factors related to actual or expected police behaviour. Therefore, on average, crimes are not reported because they are deemed "not serious enough". Frequently, in the majority of developing countries and countries of Central and Eastern Europe, it is a belief in the lack of effectiveness of the police which figures prominently. In general, people in developed countries report a much higher satisfaction with police performance than in developing countries and countries of Central and Eastern Europe. In the latter countries, the majority of respondents were not satisfied with the police and showed a marked lack of confidence in law enforcement capabilities and willingness to serve the community. While the relationship between police and citizenry is a very complex one, there is a need for further efforts to improve police-community relations, including training and education of police personnel. The United Nations crime prevention and criminal justice programme can assist in that task.  Attitudes to punishment A question was put to respondents about their opinions on sentencing. In contrast to the stereotypical image of public demand for imprisonment, community service is seen in most developed countries as the most suitable punishment for a recidivist burglar aged 21. That was particularly evident for Germany, Switzerland, Belgium and France. Support for imprisonment was highest in United States, United Kingdom, Canada, Australia and, conspicuously, in all developing countries and countries of Central and Eastern Europe.  Future of the international victim surveys International victim surveys represent part of a continuous effort to further develop the international and national crime and criminal justice database. The results of the surveys will be put at the disposal of the international community through publications and database access. The wealth of the material collected merits further analyses, including data validation, secondary analysis, testing of criminological theory, and the development of relevant policy considerations. Preliminary negotiations are under way regarding a third international victim survey to be carried out later in the decade, which will cover, it is so hoped, some countries not previously involved. Consideration is also being given to the development of an international survey on crime against business.