Manual for National Observatories - OAS ·...

2

Manual for the Creation of National Public Security Observatories on Crime and Violence

Introduction

The OAS Secretariat for Multidimensional Security is proud to present this manual for the

creation of national observatories on crime and violence.

The purpose of the manual, developed by the OAS Inter-‐American Observatory on Security

(OIS), is to provide the tools needed to support OAS member states in designing and implementing

national observatories on crime and violence, so that they can obtain relevant, up-‐to-‐date

information to assess the magnitude of the public security situation and identify its characteristics,

with a view to improving their capacity to develop intervention strategies and public policies for the

prevention and control of crime and violence.

Based on the experience in these areas of the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime

(UNODC, and on that of international organizations, such as the United Nations Development

Programme (UNDP), the United Nations Latin American Institute for the Prevention of Crime and

Treatment of Offenders (ILANUD), the Inter-‐American Development Bank (IDB), and the Inter-‐

American Drug Abuse Control Commission (CICAD/OAS), this manual identifies the steps to take to

develop a national, governmental observatory, and describes the information systems to consider,

in order to for countries to contextualize, understand, and address their public security challenges.

More specifically, this document sets forth the conditions needed to guarantee the establishment

and operation of a national observatory, conceptual and operational definitions, the data

processing methodology, and proposals for analyzing the information and using the national

observatories.

3

In fact, this manual was designed to serve as a starting point for building and strengthening

national observatories, and so it is accompanied by an “online toolbox,” where reference

documents, a description of best practices and lessons learned, and a specific bibliography on

methods and techniques for processing public security information can be found. We trust that this

material will be highly useful.

For more information, please consult the OAS Department of Public Security:

Inter-‐American Observatory on Security Department of Public Security Secretariat for Multidimensional Security General Secretariat Organization of American States 1889 F Street N.W. Washington, D.C. 20006 United States Telephone: 202-‐458-‐3000 Fax: 202-‐458-‐3882 e-‐mail: [email protected] Web: www.oas.org/dsp

4

Acknowledgements This manual was prepared by the OAS Department of Public Security, under the supervision of its

Director, Adriana Mejía-‐Hernández, and with the coordination and assistance of Julio Rosenblatt,

head of the Section on Public Security Policies.

The manual was technically directed by Luiz Coimbra, Coordinator of the Inter-‐American

Observatory on Security, and was made possible as a result of the research and review of Ariana

Szepesi-‐Colmenares and Martín Ribeiro. It had the support of Ana María Díaz, Sheridon Hill, and

Andrea Arteaga.

We should also mention the important contributions to this Manual of the work of UNODC on crime

trends and the operation of criminal justice systems, and the studies on municipal observatories,

coordinated by IACPV and prepared by the CISALVA Institute, Universidad del Valle, Cali, Colombia.

This manual was prepared with the financial support of the Canadian Government, through its

“Anti-‐Crime Capacity Building Program”.

5

Table of Contents

I. Introduction .................................................................................................. 8 A. The concept of multidimensional security ........................................................................ 8 B. Commitment of member states to create national observatories ................................... 9 C. OAS study on criminal information ............................................................................. 10

II. the Inter-‐American Observatory on Security: Crime and Violence .......................... 11 A. Origins .................................................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined. B. Mission and vision ........................................................................................................... 11 C. Users ............................................................................................................................ 12 D. Public security information networks ......................................................................... 12

1. Types of information ................................................................................................... 12 2. Links with regional observatories,and subregional organizations and research centers14 3. Network of observatories on crime and violence: presentation/ introduction ......... 19

III. National observatories on crime and violence ......................................... 20 A. Definition of a national observatory ................................................................................ 21 B. Objectives ........................................................................................................................ 21 C. Management and planning ......................................................................................... 22 D. Types of observatories ................................................................................................ 23 E. Prior considerations ......................................................................................................... 27

1. Policy / Political considerations ................................................................................... 27 2. Coordination and linkage with various actors ............................................................. 28 3. Training human resourcs and monitoring ................................................................... 28 4. Sustainability mechanism ............................................................................................ 28 5. Political neutrality and objectivity ............................................................................... 29 6. Public visibility ................................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined. 7. Scope and functions .................................................................................................... 29

F. Recommendations for implementation and operation of a national observatory ......... 30 1. Infrastructure and resources ....................................................................................... 30 2. Linkage with other actors ............................................................................................ 31 3. Data sources ................................................................................................................ 31 4. Compilation and collection of information ................................................................. 32 5. Data processing and analysis……………………………………..36

a) Receipt and recording of data ................................................................................. 36 b) Checking and publishing the data ........................................................................... 38 c) Data analysis ........................................................................................................... 39

G. National information networks ................................................................................... 40 H. Communication mechanisms ...................................................................................... 40 I. Links between national observatories and OIS ................................................................ 41

1. Rights and responsibilities of a national observatory ................................................. 41 2. Collecting the information .......................................................................................... 42 3. Quality of the information ........................................................................................... 43 4. Mechanisms for updating the information ................................................................. 43

6

5. Communication mechanisms ..................................................................................... 43 6. Information products .................................................................................................. 44

a) MISPA situation reports .......................................................................................... 44 b) Thematic analyses ................................................................................................... 44

7. Follow-‐up and evaluation ............................................................................................ 45 IV. Tools for collection of statistical data ...........................................................

1. Historical background ................................................................................ 46 2. Objectives .................................................................................................................... 46 3. Methodological concerns and challenges ................................................................... 47

B. The International Crime Victims Survey .......................................................................... 48 1. Historical background .................................................................................................. 48 2. Objectives .................................................................................................................... 48 3. Specificities .................................................................................................................. 49 4. Methodological concerns and challenges ....................................................................... 5. Victimization surveys and national observatories ....................................................... 52

C. Regional System of Standardized Security and Citizen Coexistence Indicators ......... 53 1. Historical background .................................................................................................. 53 2. Objectives .................................................................................................................... 53 3. Expected results ......................................................................................................... 54

7

ACRONYMS

• IDB: Inter-‐American Development Bank • RPG: Regional Public Goods (IDB project line) • EEC: UN Economic Commission for Europe • CEJA: Justice Studies Center of the Americas (OAS) • IACHR: Inter-‐American Commission on Human Rights (OAS) • CIM: Inter-‐American Commission of Women (OAS) • CtIDH: Inter-‐American Court of Human Rights (OEA) • CTS: United Nations Survey on Crime Trends and the Operations of Criminal Justice Systems • CICAD: Inter-‐American Drug Abuse Control Commission • DPS: Department of Public Security (SSM/SG/OEA) • FLACSO: Latin American School of Social Sciences • GS: General Secretariat (OAS) • ILANUD: United Nations Latin American Institute for Crime Prevention and Treatment of

Offenders • IACPV: Inter-‐American Coalition for Prevention of Violence • IOD: Inter-‐American Observatory on Drugs (CICAD/OAS) • MEM: Multilateral Evaluation Mechanism • MESECVI: Mechanism to Follow-‐Up on the Inter-‐American Convention on Violence against

Women (Convention of Belém do Pará) • MESICIC: Mechanism for Follow-‐Up on Implementation of the Inter-‐American Convention

against Corruption • MISPA: Meeting of Ministers on Public Security in the Americas • OAS: Organization of American States • OIS: Inter-‐American Observatory on Security – Crime and Violence • PAHO: Pan American Health Organization • SMS: Secretariat for Multidimensional Security (GS/OAS) • UN: United Nations Organization • UNDP: United Nations Development Programme • UNICRI: United Nations Inter-‐Regional Crime and Justice Research Institute • UNODC: United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime

8

I. Introduction

A. The Concept of Multidimensional Security

For the Organization of American States (OAS), building peaceful, prosperous societies is a key

objective, and threats to security unquestionably pose a serious obstacle to achieving it. In 2002 in

Bridgetown, the OAS General Assembly adopted a multidimensional approach to security. This

involved an expansion of the traditional definition of security, which focused exclusively on

external, military threats, to include a combination of social, political, economic, and environmental

factors.

At the Special Conference on Security in Mexico in 2003, the concept of multidimensional security

was definitively established. According to the Declaration on Security in the Americas (annex 1):

“The foundation and purpose of security is the protection of human beings.”1 Therefore, issues

such as trafficking in persons and cybernet attacks are part of a common security agenda for the

Hemisphere. In fact, these problems go beyond the borders of states, and their transnational

nature makes regional and international systems of cooperation imperative.

The states of the Hemisphere are facing increasingly complex threats to their security. Criminals

have taken advantage of modern tools and new technologies to improve their organizational

capacity, and this has resulted in an increased degree of violence and fatality in their crimes.

The insecurity of our citizens is one of the primary threats to peaceful, civilized coexistence today,

and poses a challenge to efforts to consolidate democracy and the rule of law.

Moreover, homicides, generally related to other criminal activities such as drug trafficking, are not

the only form of extreme violence confronting our countries. They also are afflicted by countless

1. Organization of American States, Declaration on Security in the Americas, Mexico, 2003.

9

daily crimes, such as violent thefts, kidnappings, extortion, sexual abuse, crimes committed by

criminal gangs, and domestic violence.

As the political organ of the region, the OAS plays a key role in designing a common regional

agenda. Other intergovernmental organizations, such as the United Nations Office on Drugs and

Crime (UNODC) and the Inter-‐American Development Bank (IDB), with its ample experience in this

area, also make fundamental contributions to mitigating this serious problem. It is essential to

coordinate this work with governments, civil society organizations, and other social actors, since by

involving all stakeholders we will be better prepared to respond to the new threats to security.

B. Commitment of member states to create national observatories On September 17, 2007, OAS Secretary General José Miguel Insulza proposed to the OAS

Permanent Council’s Committee on Hemispheric Security that for the first time it call a meeting of

public security ministers of the Americas, to tackle the complex situation of violence in the

Hemisphere. “In my opinion, issues affecting security have ended up becoming the principal threat

to stability, and to efforts to strengthen democracy, and develop our region’s potential. We must

therefore act quickly and energetically to counter these risks,” the Secretary General stated upon

presenting the proposal.

During the First Meeting of Ministers Responsible for Public Security (MISPA I), held in Mexico City

on October 7 and 8, 2008, the document entitled “Commitment to Public Security in the Americas”

(annex 2) was approved. In that document, the ministers responsible for public security in the

Americas, “bearing in mind the purposes of the Charter of the Organization of American States,

emphasized the importance of international cooperation for improving economic and social

conditions and thereby strengthening public security.” The Commitment underlines the need for

governments to strengthen the capacity of their states to deal with insecurity, crime, and violence,

and to adapt their structures and promote management tools that enable the national authorities

to evaluate and improve, as necessary, the effectiveness of public security policies. In the

Commitment signed in Mexico, governments committed to strengthen channels of communication

and exchanges of information among member states to fight and prevent crime, and to promote

10

the adoption of measures that further the exchange of information, with a view to strengthening

public security policy structures.

As for public security indicators, the ministers decided to “encourage member states to

consider developing comparable public security parameters in order to strengthen our

cooperative efforts. “ Finally, the Commitment adopted by the ministers suggests that

states “consider creating and maintaining, as necessary, governmental observatories of

crime and violence for the purpose of contributing to the design of strategic and

operational plans for public and citizen security, to strengthen the fight against and

prevention of crime, violence and insecurity.”2

C. OAS study on criminal information

In 2008, the OAS Secretary General instructed a group of consultants to conduct a study on criminal

information systems in the region. This study found that there were a series of limitations and

obstacles in both official statistics and victimization surveys, and that important data needed to

measure the impact of security policies are problematic in many countries of the region. These are

some of the greatest challenges to having rigorous and reliable information systems. This study

makes certain suggestions for ways to deal with this problem:

• Further efforts to generate comprehensive information systems at local and national levels;

• Ensure the public nature of the information in these systems;

• Implement measures to reduce the dark figure of crime: optimize and decrease the entities

and actors involved in processing complaints and reports; raise levels of confidence in the

police and the judicial system;

• Take into account the complementary nature of victimization surveys and official statistics;

• Conduct surveys based on the same instrument on a regular basis;

2. First Meeting of Security Ministers of the Americas, Commitment to Public Security in the Americas,

Mexico, 2008.

11

• Use victimization surveys as a tool for evaluating security policies at local and national

levels.

According to the study, the authorities should take on political commitments so that information is

collected and surveys are conducted in a sustained manner, despite changes in the political system.

II. The Inter-‐American Observatory on Security: Crime and Violence

A. Origins In view of the rise in insecurity and its social, economic, and cultural impact, the General Secretariat

of the Organization of American States has emphasized the need to improve access to reliable,

comparable data on crime and violence to facilitate the design and implementation of public

security strategies focused on prevention, law enforcement, rehabilitation, and social reinsertion.

In this context, in January 2009, the Inter-‐American Observatory on Security: Crime and Violence

(OIS) emerged as an initiative of the Secretariat for Multidimensional Security of SG/OAS, with the

financial support of the Spanish government, through its Ministry of Foreign Affairs and

Cooperation, and the Canadian government, through its Anti-‐Crime Capacity Building Program.

B. Mission and vision Given the limited access to reliable data on public security, the OIS was created as an instrument to

collect, measure, and analyze quantitative and qualitative information on crime and violence, for

the purpose of providing reliable information to support decision-‐making processes and the design

of adequate public policies on security, based on an evaluation of the actual public security situation

in each country. Hence the OIS is a key functional instrument in the process of public security

ministerial meetings (MISPA), which began in Mexico in October 2008. The OIS also feeds the

12

debate of this ministerial process, and in turn receives feedback from it, since its research work is

based on the topics discussed at those meetings.

The OIS seeks to foster horizontal cooperation by creating government observatories and

strengthening existing observatories, with a view to setting up a network of national observatories

working to facilitate and support the collection, measuring, analysis, and dissemination of both

quantitative and qualitative data on crime and violence in the OAS member states, and thereby

guarantee their reliability and timeliness. At the same time, the OIS will become the center for

coordinating information that was previously gathered, selected, and circulated by national

observatories in their own countries, and transferred via the channels of communication described

in Section III of this manual.

It is important to note that the work of the OIS and national observatories should cover three

primary areas: prevention; rehabilitation; and law enforcement. Collection of data on these three

aspects is critical to support the design and development of public policies in this area at both

national and local levels.

C. The users The work done by OIS is primarily directed to the OAS member states, and more specifically to

representatives of the ministries responsible for public security in the countries, and decision

makers, planners, and other government officials. But the OIS also has a broader ambition, and

hopes to be able to benefit civil society, and the academic and private sectors, by facilitating their

participation in designing and monitoring national public security policies.

D. Information networks on public security

1. Types of information

Together with the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), and with the support of a

project financed with resources from Regional Public Goods of the Inter-‐American Development

13

Bank, implemented by the CISALVA Institute of Universidad del Valle (Cali, Colombia), the OIS has

identified a series of indicators that allow for the use of comparable quantitative data and facilitate

an understanding of the public security situation in the region. Both institutions (UNODC and IDB)

have worked with crime and violence indicators which they have fed back into OIS. In the case of

UNODC, the United Nations Survey on Crime Trends and Operations of Criminal Justice Systems

(CTS), which was conducted for the first time in 1978 with a view to gathering statistical data on the

main components of criminal justice systems, has supported OAS efforts to seek comparable data.

In the same way, the Regional Public Goods project developed by the CISALVA Institute with the

financial support of IDB has helped to create a regional system of standardized indicators of citizen

coexistence and security, thereby facilitating measurement, follow-‐up, and regional comparison of

the phenomena linked to these issues, so as to strengthen the capacity of decision makers in the

region. Both initiatives are described in Section IV of this document.

The Basic Core Information (see tables 1 to 3) is based on the work of UNODC and the results of the

Regional Public Goods Program coordinated by the CISALVA Institute of Universidad del Valle,

Colombia, and financed by the IDB. The basic core information includes a series of basic

comparable indicators on crime and violence, among other things:

Example 1:

Indicator: Homicide rate (for every 100,000 inhabitants per year)

Definition: Intentional injuries inflicted by one person on another that cause death (excluding

deaths as a result of traffic accidents and other unintentional injuries) 1

Example 2:

Indicator: Rate of deaths by firearms (for every 100,000 inhabitants per year)

Definition: Any death caused by wounds from a bullet shot by a firearm.2

The complete list of indicators is available in annex 13, and includes data related to prevention,

rehabilitation, and law enforcement. Crime and violence data include violent acts, such as

homicides, suicides, traffic accidents, kidnappings, thefts and robberies, rape and sexual crimes, and

crimes related to organized crime, among others. It also contains data pertaining to security agents,

14

such as absolute numbers of police and judicial personnel. In view of the aspect of rehabilitation

and social reinsertion, it is essential to have data on the prison and penitentiary system in each

country. Finally, through an agreement with IDB, OIS includes basic socioeconomic data, such as

development indices and demographic statistics that help to paint a complete picture of public

security in a given country.

The OIS has managed to collect quantitative data based on crime and violence statistics taken from

official sources, as well as qualitative information that includes the legal system, public policies, best

practices, and lessons learned in the OAS member states.

This information, supplemented by other publications on public security matters, is available on the

web page of the Department of Public Security, at the following address: http://www.oas.org/dsp

2. Links with regional observatories, research centers, and subregional organizations

Various institutions (organizations of the UN and inter-‐American systems, subregional, national, and

local observatories, research centers, academic institutions, and NGOs) have developed projects on

related, complementary subjects. Consequently, the OIS has tried to foster cooperation

agreements in order to avoid duplication of efforts and to facilitate the exchange of information.

We are highlighting below some of the institutions that provide official information on crime and

violence in the countries of the Western Hemisphere:

Inter-‐American Observatory on Drugs (OID): This entity is the scientific research, information, and

statistics branch of the Inter-‐American Drug Abuse Control Commission (CICAD) of the OAS. It

gathers official statistical data taken from reports produced by the countries of the region as part of

the Multilateral Evaluation Mechanism (MEM). The OID assists countries in improving collection

and analysis of drug-‐related data by promoting the establishment of national observatories and the

use of standardized data and methods, and by scientific and technical training of the professionals

working in the field of drugs. Data on the demand for, and the supply and control of drugs

15

(including alcohol, cocaine, ecstasy, inhalants, marijuana, base cocaine, and tobacco) are available

on the CICAD Observatory’s web site.3 The site also contains official data on the following: seizures

of marijuana, coca, crack, heroine, and ecstasy; marijuana, coca, and poppy crops; and, laboratories

detected, and the number of persons indicted.

Inter-‐American Commission of Women (CIM): This regional organization of the OAS publishes and

disseminates country reports on violence against women, produced under the Mechanism for

Follow-‐Up on Implementation of the Inter-‐American Convention on Violence Against Women

(MESECVI),4 and published on its web page.5 They include qualitative data, such as specific

legislation on the subject of violence against women, and efforts by countries to punish violent acts,

as well as information on security agents (police, prosecutors, courts) involved in this effort.

Anti-‐Corruption Portal of the Americas6: This entity was established under the Secretariat of Legal

Affairs of the OAS General Secretariat, and presents country reports produced in conjunction with

the Mechanism for Follow-‐Up on Implementation of the Inter-‐American Convention against

Corruption (MESICIC) -‐ an intergovernmental instrument established in the OAS to support states in

implementing the provisions of the Inter-‐American Convention against Corruption, through a

mutual evaluation process. The official country reports contain information on countries’ efforts to

counter public corruption, including laws, indicators of transparency in administrative procedures,

and the number of persons convicted for corruption.

Inter-‐American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR): This independent organ of the OAS has

approached the problem of citizen security and its impact on respect for human rights through a

study on petitions, cases, and provisional measures, the adoption of reports on the human rights

situation in OAS member states,7 issuance of thematic reports, and public hearings convened while

3. http://www.cicad.oas.org 4. To see the country reports, go to the following site:

http://portal.oas.org/Portal/Topic/Comisi%C3%B3nInteramericanadeMujeres/ViolenciacontralaMujerMESECVI/Reuniones/ConferenciaEstadosParte/Reuni%C3%B3n2/RespuestaalCuestionarioInformedepa%C3%ADsobservac/tabid/1468/Default.aspx

5. http://www.oas.org/cim 6. http://www.oas.org/juridico/english/fightCur.html 7. http://www.cidh.oas.org/pais.eng.htm

16

it is in session. Based on the information received, the Commission decided to draw up a thematic

report on citizen security (Report on Citizen Security and Human Rights, annex 3), with a view to

examining the problem and making recommendations to member states aimed at strengthening

their institutions, laws, policies, programs, and practices for prevention and control of crime and

violence from a human-‐rights perspective.

Justice Studies Center of the Americas: This entity of the inter-‐American system is responsible for

preparing the biannual Report on the Status of Justice in the Americas,8 with a view to providing a

tool to support research on justice-‐related problems and to facilitate comparisons, on the basis of

the information collected. In addition, it endeavors to encourage the production and publication of

information by institutions in the justice sector. Since 2004, CEJA has been publishing the only

index in the Americas on access to judicial information on the Internet,9 for the purpose of

measuring on a yearly basis access to basic information made available to the public on the web

pages of judicial institutions in every country of the Hemisphere. This index makes it possible to

compare and classify data by institution and by country (annex 4). The Center has also done a study

of instruments to develop information systems, with a view to producing a guide or manual to

enable countries to collect statistical information on justice systems (annexes 5 and 6).

The Latin American School of Social Sciences (FLACSO)10: This independent, regional international

organization was established in 1957 at the initiative of UNESCO and several regional governments.

Its primary objective is to promote the social sciences in Latin America and the Caribbean. Today,

the General Agreement of FLACSO has seventeen member countries, all in Latin America and the

Caribbean. FLACSO carries out a variety of academic activities, including teaching, research,

publication, academic outreach, and technical cooperation, that are developed in ten academic

units, seven of which are headquarters, and three programs. FLACSO Chile, in particular, has

promoted the initiative of a Latin American Observatory on Citizen Security. In its work in

coordination with OIS, FLACSO has published several papers, including the following ones: Crime

8. http://www.cejamericas.org/reporte/2008-‐2009/ 9. http://www.cejamericas.org/portal/index.php/en/management-‐and-‐information/access-‐to-‐

information-‐on-‐judicial-‐systems 10. www.flacso.org

17

and Insecurity. Indicators for the Americas (annex 8); and ¿Políticas de seguridad a ciegas? Desafíos

para la construcción de sistemas de información en América Latina [“Blind” Security Policies?

Challenges to building information systems in Latin America] (annex 9).

Institute of Criminal Justice and Security (ICJS)11: This entity was established by the Vice-‐Chancellor

of the University of the West Indies (UWI), Professor E. Nigel Harrison, as a response of the

University to the region’s need to strengthen its capacity to deal more effectively with the problems

of crime and insecurity. The Institute’s primary objectives are: to expand the teaching and learning

of criminology in the region; to develop and implement a research agenda that will lead to

development of policies based on empirical evidence; and, to expand and strengthen the

University’s efforts to disseminate information. The ICJS is headed by Professor Anthony Harriott,

Professor of Political Sociology and head of the Government Department of the University of the

West Indies, Mona campus.

Implementation Agency for Crime and Security (IMPACS) of the Caribbean Community

(CARICOM)12: This agency was established by the 27th meeting of the CARICOM Heads of

Government Conference in July 2006. IMPACS was created as the operational arm of a new

regional structure for development and management of the CARICOM Regional Action Agenda on

Matters related to Crime and Security. The agency is headed by an Executive Director, and reports

to the Council of Ministers Responsible for National Security and Law Enforcement of CARICOM.

IMPACS has two subagencies, called the Joint Regional Communications Center (JRCC) and the

Regional Intelligence Fusion Center (RIFC). These subagencies were formed to support the Regional

Strategy for the 2007 World Cup of the International Cricket Council (ICC CWC 2007). As a result of

the success of the work done by both subagencies, the 18th Intersessional Meeting of Heads of

Government in February 2007 in Saint Vincent and the Grenadines approved a proposal to establish

it on a permanent basis.

11. www.mona.uwi.edu/government/icjs/index.html. 12. www.caricomimpacs.org.

18

Central American Observatory on Violence (OCAVI)13: This is a virtual information center geared to

decision-‐makers, operators of prevention systems, academicians, and the general public interested

in the phenomenon of crime in Central America. It was created under the Framework Treaty for

Democratic Security and the Central American Safe Plan of the Central American Integration System

(SICA). It circulates information, such as violence indicators, studies and research projects,

successful experiences in prevention, control, and rehabilitation, and public policies and legal

systems in Central America.

United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC)

In 1984, in a decision of its Economic and Social Council (Resolution 1984/48), the United Nations

made collection of statistical information a key tool for studies on crime trends and the operation of

criminal justice systems. The primary objective of the CTS Survey (annex 7) is to gather data on the

incidence of the crimes reported and the operation of justice systems, with a view to improving the

analysis and dissemination of information in the world. These studies can provide an overview of

crime trends and the interrelationship between the different parts of the criminal justice system to

support decision-‐making nationally and internationally. At the same time, the OIS works together

with UNODC to promote implementation of the International Crime Victimization Survey,

developed in 1987 to fill the void in police criminal records, so that crime indices in the different

countries could be compared.

Last February 24, 2010, the OAS Secretary General and UNODC signed a memorandum of

understanding to strengthen cooperation between the two organizations in common areas of work.

The OAS/SSM/DSP and UNODC/SASS agreed to work together to promote the CTS Survey in the

region. In addition, UNODC is responsible for designing a CTS questionnaire and maintaining a

global data base, while the OAS Department of Public Security is the focal point to promote this

survey in the Americas, in order to enhance the response rate by member states and to conduct an

analysis of the results obtained.

13 http://www.ocavi.com

19

In the following table, the quantitative information sources are summarized, according to

geographic coverage.

Table 1: Sources of quantitative information, according to geographic coverage

3. Network of observatories on crime and violence: presentation

As explained earlier, one of the objectives of OIS is to create a network of national observatories in

the Americas to coordinate the collection and analysis of information on crime and violence. The

function of OIS in this effort is to coordinate the work being done by the different national

observatories, as indicated in Graph 1. This coordinated work entails the establishment of points of

contact in the various OAS member countries, to ensure that the information is transmitted, the

data are accurate and compatible, and that the access to public security information in the region is

transparent.

Regional Subregional National Local

CTS Survey X

Regional observatories (OCAVI, CARICOM, etc.)

X X

National observatories X X

National Victimization Survey X X X

CICAD (country reports) X X X

CIM (country reports) X X X

Anti-‐Corruption Portal (Country reports) X X X

Government web sites X X

Information transmitted by governments X X

20

Graph 1:

[Model of Communication OIS – National Observatories]

At national level, each point of contact will be in charge of collecting data based on indicators

identified in the tools defined in Section IV of this document, and organizing information on public

security at national level. It will also be responsible for activities related to the CTS Survey

promoted by UNODC and OAS, and for acting on the country’s commitment by developing and

approving comparable indicators based on the Regional System of Standardized Citizen Security

Indicators, fostered by the IDB through its Regional Public Goods Program. To support this

initiative, the contact point will be responsible for coordinating the work pertaining to the national

observatory in countries that already have them, and for participating in setting up an observatory

in those countries that have not yet created an entity of this sort.

III. National observatories on crime and violence

There is no single model or “magic recipe” for implementing and operating a national observatory

on crime and violence that can be adapted to the needs and possibilities of all countries. Thus, in

line with the concepts outlined in the preceding paragraph, this chapter will make some

recommendations and suggestions based on the diverse experiences that have been developing

locally, nationally, or regionally in recent years. The idea is that these recommendations will serve

as a guide for establishing a minimal observatory structure—that can subsequently be developed

21

and expanded—for countries that do not have one, and for implementing standardized indicators

and variables in countries that already have an observatory.

A. Definition of a national observatory

A national observatory is understood as a government agency or office designed to collect, process,

and analyze data on public security along with its various actors, with a view to drawing up reports

to help understand the current situation and developments in the area of public security, as well as

challenges and progress achieved, so that they can be used as inputs for planning and implementing

public policies on security at national and international level.

The specific form the observatory takes, both administratively and structurally, as well as its scope

of operations, will depend on the characteristics and needs of each country. We will make some

remarks and recommendations in this regard later on.

B. Objectives

The purpose of national observatories is to gather, analyze, and process information on a timely and

effective basis, in order to generate inputs that are used to evaluate and improve public policies,

and the performance of the institutions involved in public security. In other words, they are

responsible for providing reliably, timely, and systematic information for designing public security

policies, and for evaluating and monitoring policies being implemented and the institutions

responsible for ensuring public security. The United Nations Manual for the Development of a

System of Criminal Justice Statistics14 identifies three interdependent areas in which this

information is used: administration, planning and research, and analysis of policies. Since these

statistics are an integral part of the information managed by observatories and in view of the nature

of the same, the information produced by them is extremely useful in these areas, which will be

considered in greater detail below.

14. Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Statistics Division, United Nations. Manual for the

Development of a System of Criminal Justice Statistics, New York, 2004.

22

Specific objectives

To achieve this objective, national observatories will try to attain the following specific objectives,

among others:

• Centralize qualitative and quantitative information on crime and violence at national level;

• Implement (where they exist) and develop standardized indicators and definitions that

ensure consistency and comparability of the data at both national and international levels;

• Generate studies to identify patterns or typologies and indicators on the situation of crime

and violence that will be useful for their monitoring and evaluation at a local level;

• Generate hypotheses on causes, that could lead to future studies;

• Monitor and follow up on the policies, programs, or projects that address citizen security

issues;

• Expand the dissemination and exchange of information to further the production of

information;

• Encourage, through public dissemination, coordination of the different efforts involving

studies and analyses on violence and crime.

C. Administration and planning

Administration requires management and optimization of resources, especially in regions where

resources are scarce or at best limited. In this vein, it is very useful for administrators or persons in

charge of management to have timely information to enable them to determine the level of

achievement of goals and objectives, the effectiveness of operations, and whether the areas or

departments have sufficient resources, or which ones should be strengthened, etc. This

information is crucial for decisions on personnel and budget.

Every national observatory should establish clear planning processes that include the following

stages: diagnosis of the current situation; formulation of objectives; determination and evaluation

of the procedures to follow; selection of a strategy; implementation of the strategy; and, monitoring

23

and evaluation of that implementation and its impact. During all of these processes, it is important

to have relevant information to perform each of these steps, and this information can be provided

by the observatory.

D. Types of observatories

There are different types of public sector observatories and their structure and objectives may vary

according to the scale on which they operate. National observatories, for instance, are created as

focal points whose responsibility is, as already mentioned, to collect, analyze, and disseminate

quantitative and qualitative information from institutions involved in public security in the country.

National observatories can also be created at municipal or state levels, creating a decentralized

process that facilitates the work of collecting, analyzing, and disseminating data on crime and

violence. This decentralization process should be accompanied by establishment of a national

network of observatories in which information is shared, regularly updated, and forwarded to a

national coordination center. The operation of such a network, patterned after Colombia’s National

Crime Observatories Network, is described in Graph 2.

Graph 2:

1. National Observatory 2. Municipal and/or Local Observatory]

24

To ensure the viability of this decentralization process, it is critical to make a commitment in terms

of technical support, and coordination and quality control of the various observatories comprising

the network. Moreover, it is essential to select first the strategic city, region, and/or state that will

make it possible to cover the information needs for this sector of the country.

Whether a centralized or decentralized model is used, the observatories should be part of the

structure of the ministry responsible for public security, in order to facilitate and expedite the data

collection processes, and serve as an effective tool for designing and implementing policies in this

area.

Besides geography, another perspective to consider in determining the type of observatory is

addressed by Paula Rossiasco,15 and makes it possible to visualize quickly and simply the advantages

and disadvantages of the different types of observatories. This model proposes a typology of

observatories based on the type of information and the institutions working with them, and defines

the following categories:

Universal (U): All cases, all institutions. Examples are the System for Monitoring Deaths due to

External Causes (Cali, Colombia); and the Life Observatory (Antioquia, Colombia).

Institutional Registers (RI): Periodic review of institutional registers; precise definition of the flow of

information. Examples include the National Observatory on Violence and Crime (Uruguay), the

“Pilot Plan to Reduce Violence” project (Panama, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Honduras), the Violence

Observatory of the Valle de Sula Region (Honduras), and the Unified Violence and Crime

Information System of Bogota (Colombia).

15. Rossiasco, Paula. Observatories on violence in Latin America: lessons learned. Power Point, 2006

(Annex 10)

25

Case Samplings (MC): Information on a representative sampling of the population. Examples

include the Domestic Violence Observatories of Cauca Valley (Colombia), and the Citizen Security

Division of the Ministry of the Interior (Chile) and SERNAM (Chile).

Surveys (E): Questionnaires that focus on a specific subject, covering predefined time periods and

intervals. Examples are the Fundación Paz Ciudadana [Citizen Peace Foundation] (Chile), the

Instituto Universitario de Opinión Pública [University Public Opinion Institute], UCA / OCAVI (El

Salvador).

Sentry (C): One or more institutions are selected to determine trends and suggest intervention

activities; not representative of the population, but useful to draw attention to key issues.

Examples are: National Police Information System (Colombia); Information System of the National

Reference Center on Violence – INMLyCF (Colombia); BPD Crime Statistics (Boston, US); and NYPD

Crime Statistics (NYC, US).

Others (O): Miscellaneous types, such as the Femicide Data Bank (Chile), or the Security and

Democracy Foundation (Colombia).

The following attributes or evaluation criteria are considered:

Simplicity (S): Structure of the system, facility of operation, flow of information.

Flexibility (F): Ease of adaptation to new needs.

26

Acceptance (A): Interest and availability of participants, relevance, experience, restrictions.

Sensitivity and Predictive Value (SyVP): Largest possible percentage of cases in the population /

differentiation between real and unreal cases.

Representativity (R): Magnitude of the problem, characteristics in terms of time, space, and actors;

extrapolation to the population.

Timing (O): Speed of the information flows.

Impact on public policies (IPP): Implementation of new programs; adjustment of existing programs;

incorporation into violence management programs.

If we cross the types of observatories with these attributes, the crosswalk table looks like this:

S F A SyVP R O IPP

U

RI

MC

E

C

Difficult

Moderate

Easy

27

E. Prior considerations

Regional experience regarding the implementation and continuity of national observatories shows

that they need to meet a series of requirements to ensure the success of their implementation, as

well as their continuity over time and effective achievement of their purposes. These requirements

include the following, among others:

• Political considerations

• Coordination and linkage with different actors

• Establishment of prior conditions

• Training of human resources and monitoring

• Sustainability and viability of national observatories

• Political neutrality and objectivity

• Good public visibility

• Clear linkage between scope and functions

National observatories should interact with a series of public actors that will be the source of the

information used to develop their activities. This is why it is critical that these actors are in a

position to be able to facilitate this information. At the same time, since these actors are also end

users of the products developed by the observatories, it is important that the space required to

achieve these objectives is created and institutionalized.

1. Political considerations

The decision to launch and operate an observatory and the allocation of resources to it are

essentially political decisions, made by the pertinent government officials. In order to facilitate the

implementation and continuity of observatories, it is important that their establishment is an

administrative act that has the support and commitment of the entire political system and is part of

28

government policy, so that its continuity is ensured through the periodic changes of government

that occur in countries. The institutionality of observatories is a key aspect of their operation, and

of their ability to continue over time.

2. Coordination and linkage with the different actors

Coordination and linkage with the different actors involved is key to guaranteeing the normal

operation and viability of observatories, regardless of the nature of said actors. In the case of

government actors, including the judiciary, ministries, the police, etc., it is important to guarantee

the flow of information to the national observatory, since they are the primary sources of data, as

well as the flow from the observatory, as the generator of reports and analyses to support the work

done by government actors. In the case of nongovernmental actors, such as international or

regional organizations, research centers, universities, and the like, the circulation of information is

critical, as is the joint work and the possibility of generating agreements or arrangements to

develop joint activities and to support specific programs or projects of the observatories, since

these institutions can be the source of material, human, technological, and other resources.

3. Training human resources and monitoring

It is important that minimal material and human resources are ensured for the operation of

observatories. As regards human resources in particular, it is strongly advised that national

observatories have their own officials, and also support the training of specific human resources and

ensure continued or in-‐service training based on the activities and needs of the observatory.

4. Sustainability mechanisms

Inevitably, the creation of national observatories and their capacity to compile and process

information and generate reports are limited by their initial conditions and the difficulties inherent

in putting a new structure of this sort in operation. To facilitate the viability of national

observatories, it is crucial to guarantee conditions conducive to their development and evolution, in

29

order to increase the quality and quantity of their products and thus to enable them to advance to

accomplish their objectives.

5. Political neutrality and objectivity

As in the case of statistical offices or institutes and other institutions responsible for collecting and

analyzing information, it is important for observatories to maintain a certain objectivity and political

neutrality. In this vein, there is a series of measures or steps that could facilitate this, despite

problems that may arise. They include institutional aspects, such as the following ones: adoption of

a political commitment and establishment of an observatory under a government policy that

extends beyond political parties and government administrations or terms; the guarantee that the

observatory has the necessary resources, and, if possible, an independent budget; and, transparent

management of both resources and the information gathered and processed by the observatory.

6. Public visibility

Making the observatories and their activities highly visible to the public has the following effects:

the public is more aware of the issues of security and violence; use of the information provided by

both government agencies and other organizations is enhanced; the actors involved are more

committed, which increases the quality and quantity of the information managed by the

observatory; the establishment of links and agreements with nonstate entities and organizations,

such as universities, research centers, and international organizations, is facilitated and furthered;

and, these entities are better protected from the possibility of political or other interference.

7. Scope and functions

Since many expectations, ideas, or interests may be generated with regard to the nature, objectives,

functions, and responsibilities of national observatories, it is essential to define in advance their

scope, purposes, and functions.

30

F. Recommendations for implementation and operation of a national observatory

1. Infrastructure and resources The creation of a national observatory entails the optimization of physical and human resources.

This means that it requires not only an infrastructure, but also a minimum trained staff to operate

the observatory and to perform the tasks of collection, analysis, and dissemination of information.

Putting into operation and sustaining an observatory also require optimal data processing resources

and communications material.

On this point, a few minimum recommendations are made below for starting up and sustaining the

operations of an observatory. Please note that these are only recommendations, since the specific

characteristics of each observatory will depend both on the structure and on the type of

observatory selected, as well as on the possibilities of each country:

• Space: It is critical to have the physical infrastructure and necessary space in which to

perform the every day work. It is also important that the sections or departments of the

observatory (management, input and processing of data, analyses, etc.) have sufficient

space separate from each other so that they can adequately perform their functions.

• Personnel: It is important that the observatories have a specific minimum staff that should

work on a full-‐time basis. The staff should include, among others: administrative officers;

personnel trained in the input and processing of data (statistics); personnel specializing in

analysis of information (social researchers); data collection personnel; and, personnel

responsible for communication with the outside world (web page, publications, etc.).

• Furnishings and equipment: Specification of the furnishings, office equipment (including

computers, printers, scanners, etc.); office supplies (paper, toner for the printers,

information supports, etc.), and others.

31

• Communications: It is important for observatories to have minimum communication tools,

such as Internet access, telephone lines, etc.

2. Linkage with other actors

To support the work of a national observatory, it is important to promote linkage with various

actors, including ministries, the police, public prosecutors, the courts, other government agencies

and offices, civil society organizations, universities and research centers, other observatories, and

regional and international organizations, to name a few. In fact this coordination is key for the

following reasons:

• To avoid duplication of effort, and the resulting waste of resources;

• To facilitate collection of information;

• To facilitate access to resources, such as those that could be provided by international

organizations (both material and logistical project support);

• To facilitate dissemination of the reports and analyses prepared by the observatory;

• Guarantee attainment of the principal objective of observatories, namely, serving as a key

input for evaluation and analysis of the performance of security policies and the institutions

involved.

3. Data sources

The main sources of data are the ministries, courts, legislature, prosecutors’ offices, police, prisons,

and other government agencies and offices responsible for the collection and initial organization of

information. Thus, it is critical for these sources to be in a position to support the work of the

observatories. In this regard, it is essential to develop efficient coordination and communication

mechanisms between the two parties to ensure the flow of information. To this end, it is

32

recommended that they have an office or reference point responsible for preparation of the

information and coordination with the observatory, as well as with other possible actors.

Other sources of data highly important to observatories are intergovernmental entities and

nongovernmental organizations or offices (civil society organizations, universities and research

centers, and nongovernmental observatories). In any event, bearing in mind the nature of the

national, governmental type of observatory model being considered, it is essential that “hard data”

or primary information in general, i.e., information that has not been analyzed, be provided by

official government sources. It is true that some kinds of primary information, such as data from

surveys not conducted by a government agency, may not exist as official data and yet be of

tremendous value, but in that case the nature of such information, and especially the fact that it is

not official information, must be clarified at the time it is processed.

4. Compilation and gathering of information

National observatories are responsible for gathering, selecting, and analyzing both qualitative and

quantitative information on public security. This includes institutional documents, information on

events, national laws and regulations, and public policies, as well as statistical data for the relevant

geographical sector. In this way, government observatories should compile and manage all the

relevant information pertaining to crime and violence in the country.

In this section, we will describe the types and characteristics of this information, giving examples

and recommendations as to how to collect, process, and analyze it. For this purpose, we will use as

an example the so-‐called “Core Information” (statistical information) developed by OIS on the basis

of the United Nations Survey on Crime Trends and the Operations of Criminal Justice Systems (CTS),

and variables and indicators comprising the Regional System of Standardized Citizen Security

Indicators (IDB/ CISALVA), among others (see Section II of this document). As we have already

indicated, these variables and indicators only serve as a basis, and every observatory is free to add

other dimensions depending on its needs and specific objectives. These aggregates may also be

useful for the work of other observatories, generating a feedback process through mechanisms for

33

exchange of experiences, good practices, and lessons learned among observatories in the region.

Moreover, the creation of regional, subregional, or national indicators may be considered, to

facilitate the work of collection, research, and analysis of observatories in the Hemisphere.

There follows a more detailed description of the types of information an observatory will work with.

Quantitative Information

As already mentioned, the quantitative or statistical information we are working with here

corresponds to the so-‐called “Core Information” developed by the OIS. This information is grouped

by areas related to the subjects addressed and to the information sources. The areas are defined

as:

• Security actors

• Crime and violence

• Penitentiary and prison systems

The following tables/ boxes contain the core variables organized by category:

Table 1

Security Actors

Police personnel at national level (total and broken down by sex)

Private guards at national level (total and broken down by sex)

Registered private security firms

Total number of prosecutors at national level (total and broken down by sex and ethnic origin) Total professional magistrates and judges (total and broken down by sex and ethnic origin)

34

Table 2:

Crime and violence

Homicides (consummated and attempted) Homicides using a firearm Homicide victims (total and broken down by sex, age, and ethnic origin) Deaths from traffic accidents (total and broken down by sex and age of victim) Suicides (total and broken down by age, sex, and ethnic origin of victim) Assaults (total and broken down by age, sex, and ethnic origin of victim) Sexual violence (total and broken down by age, sex, and ethnic origin of victim) Sexual crimes against children Rape (total and broken down by age, sex, and ethnic origin of victim) Child abuse (total and broken down by age, sex, and ethnic origin of victim) Domestic violence (total and broken down by age, sex, and ethnic origin of victim) Legally registered civilian firearms Robbery Theft Vehicle theft (general and private automobiles) Robbery with unlawful entry [“breaking and entering”] (general and of a home) Drug-‐related crimes

Possession or use of drugs (crimes, convictions, investigation, and a breakdown) Drug trafficking (crimes, convictions, investigations, and a breakdown) Kidnapping (broken down) Persons who have had formal contact with the police or the criminal justice system (broken down) Trafficking in persons (total and a breakdown) Trafficking in cultural goods (total and a breakdown) Persons against whom action is brought in criminal court (total and a breakdown) Persons convicted (total and a breakdown)

35

Table 3:

Each national observatory must, as a preliminary phase of its work, define the quantitative variables

it wants to work with, since these definitions may vary from one country to the next, or even within

the same country. Here use of standardized definitions may facilitate comparison of data both

nationally and on a regional and international scale, and thus avoid discrepancies in figures and

Sistemas penitenciarios y carcelarios

Official capacity of prisons, penitentiaries, or correctional institutions for adults Total number of prisons, penitentiaries, or correctional institutions for adults Official capacity of prisons, penitentiaries, or correctional institutions for minors Total number of prisons, penitentiaries, or correctional institutions for minors Personnel of prisons, penitentiaries, or correctional institutions for adults Personnel of prisons, penitentiaries, or correctional institutions for minors Total inmates Inmates not sentenced / awaiting trial Sentenced inmates Adult inmates (total and a breakdown by sex and ethnic origin) Inmates who are minors (total and a breakdown by sex and ethnic origin) Inmates who are nationals of the country (adults and minors) Inmates who are nationals of other countries (adults and minors) Number of inmates who are drug addicts

Number of inmates who have tuberculosis

Sistemas penitenciarios y carcelarios

Official capacity of prisons, penitentiaries, or correctional institutions for adults Total number of prisons, penitentiaries, or correctional institutions for adults Official capacity of prisons, penitentiaries, or correctional institutions for minors Total number of prisons, penitentiaries, or correctional institutions for minors Personnel of prisons, penitentiaries, or correctional institutions for adults Personnel of prisons, penitentiaries, or correctional institutions for minors Total inmates Inmates not sentenced / awaiting trial Sentenced inmates Adult inmates (total and a breakdown by sex and ethnic origin) Inmates who are minors (total and a breakdown by sex and ethnic origin) Inmates who are nationals of the country (adults and minors) Inmates who are nationals of other countries (adults and minors) Number of inmates who are drug addicts

Number of inmates who have tuberculosis

36

results. In annex 12, there are standardized definitions of the variables contained in the Core

Information for the Americas.

Qualitative Information

As a complement to the quantitative information, national observatories should compile, analyze,

and disseminate qualitative data on public security. As part of this process, they will have to collect

data on and keep up-‐to-‐date the body of law related to public security matters, including the laws in

force, regulations, and bills. In addition, observatories should consistently and regularly compile

information on national public policies, and if necessary state or municipal policies as well,

depending on the administrative organization of each country. It is also important for them to take

responsibility for collecting and disseminating information on best practices and lessons learned,

and for disseminating an analysis on the status of public security on a national, regional, provincial,

or municipal level, depending on the area of operations. Finally, to complete this work, it is

recommended that they obtain information on projects and programs related to public security and

to compile news reports on public security in every country related to a specific program, public

policy, or law on the subjects in question.

The specific subjects to consider for these purposes include, but are not confined to the following:

organized crime and illicit trafficking in arms or persons; gangs, violence, and youth; prison and

penitentiary systems; violence against women; and forces of law and order, including the police,

private security units, etc.

5. Data processing and analysis

a) Receipt and recording of data

Using the observatory model we have been considering (taking core information as a reference), the

data collection process should not be very difficult. The following comments, however, may be

helpful:

37

If things have gone well so far, data collection, or at least collection of the data we have been

referring to, should not pose major problems. If coordination and linkages are good, the institutions

that will be feeding data to the observatory should essentially have them ready to be sent to the

observatory or to be collected.

The most critical point of the data collection stage has to do with two things: first, that definitions

and concepts are clear; and secondly, that the data meet validation and verification criteria, which

in any event should be reviewed by the observatory staff at the time they are entered for

processing. To ensure that this stage runs smoothly, it is essential to use information verification

mechanisms, such as confirming that the definitions used by the sources are in line with the

standardized “core information” definitions, and if not, that this is clearly indicated and the

definition used is included. Another key aspect has to do with the metadata that contextualize the

actual data. The metadata should include information such as whether there is an interruption in

the series that could affect the comparability of the data (as for instance in the case of a change in

definitions, sources, or recording methods), or whether the data are public and if so, where and

how are they published, etc.

Annex 7 includes the form developed by UNODC for the CTS survey for exchange of statistical

information, as well as cards developed by OIS with recommendations on the format for qualitative

information.

For those observatories that need to go somewhat further and explore direct compilation of

information, or in the case of countries whose source institutions do not have adequately

developed statistical information systems, it is recommended that they read Chapter IV of the

Manual for the Development of a System of Criminal Justice Statistics16 (annex 10).

16. Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Statistics Division, United Nations, Manual for the

Development of a System of Criminal Justice Statistics, New York, 2004.

38

The data may be received in different formats and/or by different carriers (paper, electronic

format). The frequency and periodicity with which data are received may vary, depending on both

the supplying institution and on the nature of the data themselves.

Finally, an important aspect for consideration in this stage is information support mechanisms.

Data may be supported both on paper and in electronic format, but it is recommended that there

always be more than one copy of them, and preferably not in the same computer, network, or

physical space. It is important to protect the data to avoid damage, unauthorized access, or loss of

information.

b) Checking and editing the data

A very important part of entering the data into the system involves editing and verification of the

information, to ensure quality and the completeness of the data base. The software included in the

toolkit of which this manual is a part provides criteria for validating the data, although manual

verification and editing are recommended.

Editing makes it possible to detect inconsistencies, such as contradictory data, atypical values, or

compatibility problems within the data. Editing should also identify cases in which data are missing.

The editing and verification of data is a fundamental process, because the quality of the data base

will depend on the quality of the analyses that can be done, to avoid situations in which it is difficult

to track inconsistencies in analyses.

Finally, although it is critical to control the quality of data at the time they are entered into the

system, it is recommended the original records on which the data was recorded be retained in all

cases, without any changes or corrections.

39

c) Data analysis

Public security is the responsibility of states, and so governments must define national and local

policies to this end, through both laws and decrees and the activities of organizations such as

ministries in charge of security. Observatories generate key inputs for both the design, and the

implementation and evaluation of policies, and for analysis of their impact on the population as well

as on the different institutional actors involved.

A key aspect of the analysis, and its starting point, is posing the question or problem requiring a

response, or the situation to be described. In annex 13 you will find indicators and rates that are

part of the core data, as well as definitions and computation methods.

It is important at this point to recall that the accumulation of data (i.e., the data base) is not a value

in and of itself, but rather a first step. Data acquire their real dimensions and worth only when

analyses are done on them and conclusions extracted from them.

Descriptive statistics constitute the basic level of analysis of quantitative data. Most analyses are

done on the basis of simple descriptive statistics that, in spite of their name, make it possible to

answer a number of important questions, and to describe the situation at a given moment and its

evolution over time.

Among the analytical tools of descriptive statistics are frequencies, percentages, rates and rates of

change, correlation and regression, and estimation and weighting procedures. The analytical

method or methods determined will depend on the nature of the analyses to be conducted and the

question or questions to be answered by the analysis. In any event, it is important that the

personnel performing these tasks be duly trained and skilled. To conduct this type of analysis, it

may be advisable for the observatory to work in coordination with the institute responsible for the

statistics, so as to be assured of the necessary human and technical resources and experience.

40

The OIS has selected a series of indicators and rates (core information) to describe the security

situation in the Hemisphere. These rates and indicators, and their definition and method of

calculation, are shown in annex 13. Different reports and evaluations conducted by observatories in

the region are also included as annexes of the toolkit, as examples or for reference purposes.

G. National information networks

It is important for national observatories to coordinate the activities of the different existing

observatories to avoid duplication of efforts and to facilitate the exchange of statistical and legal

information, events, best practices, and lessons learned. The OIS of the OAS will sign cooperation

agreements with national observatories in order to lay the groundwork for working in coordination.

H. Communication mechanisms

The periodic dissemination of information by observatories is essential to give them visibility, which

in turn will make society more aware of the issues of security and violence, as we said earlier. It will

also encourage use of the information produced, increase the commitment of the various actors

involved, and thus the quantity and quality of the source information the observatory uses, as well

as establish and solidify links with other research centers and universities, in addition to

international organizations, and position the observatory (and the state) at both local and

international levels.

When it comes time to define a dissemination plan, it is important to consider the targeted public,

dissemination techniques, and the different levels and types of information. Not all of the targeted

public has the same interests or the same tools to use the information, nor are all the media

appropriate for disseminating the information or addressing the public in question.

Among the dissemination tools used by observatories are periodic news sheets (on paper or

electronic), publications on specific topics, web pages, e-‐mail using distribution lists (which also

41

make it possible to break the information down by topics of interest), and press releases, to name a

few.

Public and private media play an important role in disseminating information on public security to

the population. News briefings, press releases, interviews, and opinion articles bring national

observatories to the media and can be used to disseminate the results of projects, studies, and

technical and political events.

I. Links between national observatories and the OIS

1. Rights and responsibilities of a national observatory

Every national observatory is responsible for periodically updating the information compiled and for

ensuring the quality and reliability of the information produced by decentralized observatories.

Once the information is compiled and checked, the observatory designated as a focal center should

work with the OIS on a regular basis to update national information on crime and violence to ensure

that it is synchronized with the national data bases in the OIS. For the OIS, these are key steps in

developing its work to support decision-‐making and the design and development of public policies

in the Hemisphere.

The national observatory will be responsible for drafting periodic reports on the national public

security situation and for promoting debate on specific issues. It will also foster mechanisms to

improve basic data collection related to core information (see tables 1, 2, and 3).

It is important to emphasize the fact that national observatories need to check the quality of the

information to be sent to the OIS. In this regard, national observatories are solely responsible for

the original sources and for the official information of their country published by the OIS.

42

2. Collection of the information

If deemed necessary, there will be regional core information, including data that do not appear in

the CTS Survey or in the work done by IDB-‐CISALVA, but that are considered indispensable to

measure a public security situation in the Americas. The situation of indigenous communities

and/or the participation of ethnic minorities may be subjects for study that should be included in a

specific annex for the Americas. Regional core information will supplement the established core

data. Similarly, each country may consider it necessary to include data on crime and violence

pertaining to a specific situation. These data will be included in the national core information, as

information supplementing the core data and regional core information.

Qualitative information, however, should be presented in a very specific way to ensure

homogeneity among the different member states, with a view to offering updated information and

facilitating dissemination. For example, laws and public policies should be presented as follows:

Table No. 4:

Presentation of laws

Title: Decree no. *** – Law on *****

Month and year: Date adopted, approved, or entered into force

Status: In force, revoked ...

Type: Decree, Law, Treaty, etc.

Number: No. ****

Country: OAS member state(s)

Language: Original language

Scope: Geographical area

No. of articles X no. of articles and X no. of annexes

43

Presentation of all types of documents and reports must follow a previously specified precise

bibliographical methodology. The OIS uses as a reference for Spanish the Manual de español

urgente17 of the EFE agency, and for English, the Associated Press Style Book.18

3. Quality of the information

Every national observatory, through its point of contact, will be responsible for the quality of the

information on its country, by conducting adequate periodic controls on the information gathered,

with a view to ensuring consistency, reliability, and timeliness of the data. However, the OIS will

also conduct regular quality controls on the information to guarantee that the data of the various

member states are homogeneous and to ensure that the data compiled correspond to the pre-‐

established core information. To this end, the national observatories should foster mechanisms to

improve the collection of basic data related to the core information.

4. Mechanisms for updating information

The sustainability of this work requires mechanisms for regular updating to be established, to

ensure collection and publication of up-‐to-‐date information. Similarly, the different data bases

must be updated periodically and sent to the OIS. It is critical that this process be systematized to

avoid delays in obtaining and publishing information and to guarantee to users prompt and easy

access to timely, reliable data.

5. Communication mechanisms

To facilitate coordination between OIS and the different national observatories, the OAS is creating

communication mechanisms that will simplify the exchange of quantitative and qualitative

information among the various elements comprising the network of crime and violence

17. EFE Agency. Manual de español urgente,”. Ediciones Cátedra, Madrid, 2000 18. www.apstylebook.com

44

observatories in the region. For this purpose, the OIS has been developing a digital platform that

will facilitate the exchange of information and will open the way for discussion groups in which

problems can be shared, solutions provided, and questions answered. This virtual platform should

be the meeting point for the different persons working with the OIS and the instrument for

exchanges of files among the different parties. The solution proposed by the OIS is based on the

Microsoft Office Groove program (later to be called Microsoft SharePoint Workspace). MS Groove is

an application geared to teams that are generally working off-‐line and do not share the same

network. It is software designed for coordination and communication among members of small

groups. The central paradigm of Groove is the series of files that are shared in joint work. All the

data are in figures, both on the disc and on the network, and every Workspace has a single set of

encoding keys. The members interact and work together on Workspace, which is a virtual private

place. All the changes being made to statistical data and/or qualitative information are

synchronized almost instantaneously. The content can be worked on and transferred to a web site

when it is complete. This program allows for a system of classification by stages of preparation and

development of documents. Groove also allows users to send instant messages to colleagues.

6. Information products

a) Situation reports for MISPA

The fundamental purpose of collection and analysis of quantitative and qualitative data is for use in

situation reports on public security in OAS member states, which are then used as inputs for the

Meeting of Ministers Responsible for Public Security in the Americas (MISPA).

b) Thematic analyses

The compilation, analysis, and dissemination work done by different national observatories is

critical to provide inputs for thematic studies in areas related to public security in each country. The

key themes will be defined by the public security ministers of OAS member states during MISPA

meetings. The following themes were selected by ministers at MISPA I and MISPA II: organized

crime; trafficking in persons; illicit trafficking in firearms; gangs; violence and youth; prison and

45

penitentiary systems; police training and reform of the law enforcement sector; private security;

and, relationship with the judiciary, from a gender perspective.

7. Monitoring and evaluation

The OAS Department of Public Security will develop a methodology for monitoring and evaluation

that will include quality control, control for completeness of the data, and control of capacity and

incidence on a technical and political level.

Under this project, a series of seminars will be conducted at subregional level, with the participation

of the coordinators of the national observatories. These seminars will try to enhance coordination

among the different government observatories in the member states, to ensure homogeneity and

comparability of the work done, and to guarantee the exchange of information and experiences

among them.

Another key component to achieve this purpose is to organize training courses for the staff of

national observatories and refresher training courses to further the training of personnel and foster

the sustainability of observatories. These courses could also focus on a study of the vocabulary and

the previously named communication mechanisms.

IV. Tools for collection of statistical data

As already mentioned, the OIS and this Manual are part of a series of regional and international

initiatives for the collection and standardization of information on crime and violence. The three

activities on which this project is based are presented below:

46

A. The United Nations Survey on Crime Trends and the Operations of Criminal Justice Systems (CTS)

1. Background In response to the concern voiced by the United Nations to create an international system for

collection and analysis of data on crime, in 1948 the UN’s Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC)

adopted a series of resolutions on the subject. In Resolution 1984/48 of May 25, 1948, ECOSOC

requested the UN Secretary General to develop and maintain up-‐to-‐date a United Nations data base

on crime, by developing studies on crime trends and the operation of criminal justice systems. The

five-‐year studies of the 1970s became annual studies as of 2009. The nature of the questionnaires

has also been changing over the years, to focus on basic data and metadata that show crime trends

and the operation of criminal justice systems, to make it easier for states to answer them.

2. Objectives The primary objective of CTS is to gather data on the incidence of crimes reported and the

operation of criminal justice systems, with a view to improving the analysis and dissemination of

this information internationally. The CTS does not try to measure precisely the number of crimes in

member states, but rather to survey the crimes and the response of governments. This encourages

countries to develop national mechanisms for recording crimes and data on their judicial systems in

a systematic, consistent, and predictable way. The results obtained by CTS offer a panorama of

crime trends and relations between the different parts of the criminal justice system, and

contribute to making informed management decisions on national and international level.

In the first place, the information obtained can be used to determine crime trends and problem

areas for possible intervention in the form of technical cooperation. Secondly, the data gathered

can be used to draft reports, such as the Global Report on Crime and Justice.19 In the third place,

interested governments can use the data to compare with others in a similar situation.

19 http://www.uncjin.org/Special/GlobalReport.html.

47

3. Methodological concerns and challenges

The CTS data are taken from a standard questionnaire sent to national officials by the United

Nations Statistics Division, who adjust their national statistics to bring them into line with the

categories related to crime and justice systems defined in the questionnaire. However, it should be

noted that the different entities in the criminal justice system of each country do not always form a

single organization, and in fact are likely to operate almost independently of each other; hence, the

ways of obtaining and compiling the data may vary from one country to the next. Because the

questionnaires involve different officials from different bureaucracies, the responses are frequently

fragmented, and this creates inconsistencies and contradictions in the statistics set forth in the

responses of a country. Consequently, utilization of official statistics for comparative purposes

entails a careful examination of the sources of each country’s statistics.

Another difficulty in using and interpreting the CTS statistics has to do with the fact that they reflect

official national statistics, and so may represent political declarations of member states. The

statistics on crime and the justice system available to a state in the international community have

an essentially political element, with all the ramifications that this entails.

Moreover, as specialists in criminology have maintained for a long time, official data on crime are

plagued with systematic and random errors. These data only include crimes that are reported to

the police and recorded by the authorities, so they represent an incomplete inventory of the crimes

committed in a society. The number of unreported crimes—the “dark figure” of crime—are not

reflected in official statistics and must be measured with alternative instruments, such as

victimization studies (see Chapter VII).

Another factor to be considered in analyzing data from one country to the next is the problem of

definitions, since the definition of a certain type of crime may vary from one country to another.

Systemic differences in legal systems may influence crime rates, regardless of the actual number of

crimes in a society. Moreover, definitions used in the CTS questionnaire are necessarily general,

48

which makes it difficult to reflect precisely the diversity of legal definitions and recording practices

in the different countries.

It is essential for countries to take note of these methodological concerns when they respond to the

CTS Survey, so as to reduce the obstacles to filling it out.

B. The International Crime Victims Survey

1. Background

The work of compiling unofficial data on international crime is relatively recent. The first round of

the International Crime Victims Survey (ICVS) was conducted in 1989 in 14 developed countries by

the Ministry of Justice of the Netherlands, in cooperation with the Ministry of Interior of the United

Kingdom and Lausanne University in Switzerland. The United Nations Inter-‐Regional Crime and

Justice Research Institute (UNICRI) began participating in the international study in 1991, when the

project expanded to include a larger number of countries. The most recent ICVS round in 2000 was

conducted in 17 developed countries, and in 16 Eastern European and Central Asian capitals, four

Asian cities, seven in Africa, and four in Latin America. With these four ICVS rounds, over 140

studies were completed in at least 70 different countries.

2. Objectives

To supplement statistical studies based on police records and the judicial system, which only

provide a partial picture of the crimes recorded in a country, it is important to have alternative

mechanisms to measure the rate of unreported crimes, which is critical to obtain a complete view

of a country’s public security situation. The ICVS is in fact an international instrument designed to

help identify the “dark figure” and to fill the gap in data not reported because of distrust of the

police, or because people believe that the time wasted in so doing is greater than the benefit of the

report, or due to fear of retaliation on the part of criminals, or to shame or fear of public ridicule,

etc. As a victimization survey, it provides valuable data on the perception of insecurity and

exposure to crime, by asking people direct questions.

49

3. Specificities Victimization surveys and the ICVS specifically, are valuable instruments that not only gather

information on the direct contact of citizens with crimes and the criminal justice system, but also

provide a view of the public’s perception of the justice system and the police. The surveys are also

now being used to consider issues such as crimes motivated by prejudices, domestic violence,

gender violence, abuse of the elderly, harassment, bribery, and the public perception of security.

The ICVS shares other known objectives of national victimization studies with regard to collection of

information on experiences with crime and the level of delinquency, the risk of victimization, the

propensity to file reports with the police, attitudes towards the police and punishment, crime

prevention, and evaluation of policies based on the results of the study. It is hoped that the

experience acquired with the International Study will encourage the organization and

implementation of national and local studies.

4. Methodological concerns and challenges

The ICVS was conducted using a standardized methodology based on experience acquired in

measuring crime rates and related matters through national victimization studies. Consequently, it

is able to provide independent, comparable information on victimization experiences, the context

of the crime, and attitudes towards crime and criminal justice policies, as well as the opportunity to

develop and verify crime theories in a broader context. The list of statistical information requested

in the international study for 2000 is included in diagram 7. The full questionnaire (face-‐to-‐face

version) is reproduced in section H of the annex.

One of the main advantages of the international study is that it can transcend the different

definitions of crimes in each country, since the questionnaire has structured its own categories of

crimes, which are the same in all of the countries covered by the study. As a result, it provides

50

better comparative material than the results of national victimization studies organized

independently, in which design differences severely limit possibilities for comparison.

The United Nations Manual for Development of a System of Criminal Justice Statistics20 points out

the advantages of using victimization surveys:

Studies on crime victims offer several advantages. First, results from victimization surveys can show

crimes that have not been reported to the police because such surveys collect information about

reported and unreported crimes directly from crime victims. In so doing, victimization studies

provide an indication of the propensity of citizens to report incidents and information on the

repercussions of victimization, as well as on attitudes towards crime and criminal justice. They can

provide a more valid estimate of the actual crime rate than official records.

Second, crime rates derived from victimization studies are not sensitive to changes in legal

definitions or operational policies and procedures in the same way that police statistics can be. For

example, crime rates as recorded by the police may show an increase as a result of a broader

definition of crime, when in fact there was no change. Likewise, a change in recording policies (such

as computerization) may increase efficiency and result in a higher number of crimes recorded.

Victimization surveys are not sensitive to these types of developments.

Third, in victimization studies samples are drawn from the general population and data are collected

from both victims and non-‐victims over a given time period. This allows researchers to compare the

two groups and to analyze which social and demographic groups face the greatest risk of

victimization and how these risks are affected by particular kinds of lifestyle behaviors, such as

drinking alcohol or living alone. These data can help in the development of theoretical models that

link victim involvement in criminal events to social, demographic and behavioral factors.

Fourth, victimization surveys permit an investigation into the consequences of victimization and

how victims cope with these consequences. For example, respondents may be asked how their

20. See note 17.

51

victimization experience has affected their attitudes toward crime and the criminal justice system,

their level of injury, emotional trauma and the monetary value of a theft or vandalism.

Finally, victimization studies are particularly useful in helping administrators of criminal justice and

policy-‐makers to monitor people’s perceptions, concerns and fears regarding crime and criminal

justice. Effective criminal justice policies and programs and relevant criminological theories must

address the subjective side of crime and people’s everyday fears and concerns. The fear of crime

can be as great a problem as crime itself, and public disenchantment with criminal justice and

control agencies provides not only an indicator of serious problems, but also a significant challenge

to criminal justice. Victimization surveys allow us to go beyond merely recounting incidents. They

provide data on the costs of victimization, financial losses, and physical injuries and on the concern

and fear victimization may produce.

The UN Manual21 also explains how victimization studies supplement official data from the police:

The data from victimization studies and police data reveal different facts about crime. They

measure the phenomenon of crime in two very different ways and from different perspectives. The

choice of which data to use depends on the interests of the researcher, the questions to be

answered and the level of analysis desired.

Victimization surveys cannot replace administrative statistics and will not produce hard operational

data for the police. However, a well-‐planned and executed crime victimization survey, especially if

conducted periodically, can complement police-‐reported data and provide essential information to

policy makers and administrators. To maximize their potential use and facilitate comparison with

the next survey, it is desirable to retain information on and from victimization surveys, preferably

on a centralized and accessible database.

Joint publication of victimization data and police-‐reported data helps to inform the public about the

full nature and extent of crime. Data from victimization surveys can be used to contextualize

21. See note 17.

52

information from police-‐reported data. However, this has to be done with great care, since the

definitions, and the types and categories of crime and victimization from the two sources often

differ widely. These complexities have to be dealt with when using the two sources

complementarily.

The two data sources can also be used to test alternative hypotheses related to criminal activity.

Neither police statistics nor victimization surveys alone can provide comprehensive information

about crime. However, they can confirm and complement one another. (See figure 5 for

comparison of the two sources.) Some combination of improved official statistics and periodic

victimization surveys would appear to be the best approach. Together, they contribute to a better

overall understanding of crime.

5. Victimization surveys and national observatories The purpose of the Manual on Victimization Surveys (annex 14), initiated by UNODC and by the

European Economic Commission (EEC/UN) and published in early 2009, is to provide basic

information to develop national victimization surveys, improve the comparability of survey data,

serve as a technical reference, assist in decision-‐making, and provide options for improved

practices.

Observatories should ensure that this type of survey is conducted in countries that do not have

them and that they are systematized in the case of countries that do conduct them. Moreover,

observatories should in any event make an effort to standardize the surveys so as to facilitate the

exchange and comparability of data obtained from these surveys internationally.

53

C. Regional System of Standardized Citizen Security and Coexistence Indicators

1. Background The decision to begin developing a standardized system of indicators on violence, crime, and the

perception of security as a public good was launched in Medellin at a regional meeting of the Inter-‐

American Development Bank (IDB) in September 2005, and consolidated as a proposal in October of

that year in Quito, Ecuador. In September 2006, a meeting was held in Bogota to strengthen the

proposal sent to the 2005 meeting on Regional Public Good and to resubmit the proposal to the

Bank, government officials, and delegates of institutions participating in this project. This initiative

emanates from beneficiary countries headed by the CISALVA Institute of Universidad del Valle and

the National Planning Department of Colombia, which, in coordination with the Colombian National

Police and Institute of Legal Medicine and Forensic Sciences, the Ministries of the Interior of Peru

and Venezuela, the Ministry of Security of Honduras, the Quito Office of Mayor, and the Jamaican

Ministry of Health, agreed on the proposal and counterpart funds.

2. Objectives

The project objective is to develop and implement as a regional public good a regional system of

standardized citizen security and violence prevention indicators, that will make it possible to

measure, monitor, and compare on a regional basis the phenomena linked to those issues, and to

support decision-‐making processes involving the design, implementation, and evaluation of public

policies on citizen security in some countries of the Andean region, Central America, and the

Caribbean. The project has four components:

a) Generating citizen security and violence prevention indicators, with a view to achieving

consensus on a series of citizen security and violence prevention indicators that will make up the

regional system, and to agree on the methodologies, sources, and common and/or harmonized

definitions to be used to implement the system. As a preliminary task;

54

b) Introduction of the system of regional indicators, designed to build the regional system

according to the guidelines defined in component I, and establish the mechanisms to feed the data

into it;

c) Systematization of good practices and lessons learned, to take advantage of good practices in

the area of public policies and direct interventions in collecting, analyzing, and using information on

security and violence prevention, with a view to providing the tools for decision-‐makers to design

policies to improve security and reduce violence in countries. This requires a definition of selection

criteria, identification of sources, definition of the accreditation process, and dissemination of good

practices, and entails preparation of a work plan to ensure that the process and exchange of

experiences are systematized.

d) Circulation and dissemination of the agreed indicators, with a view to disseminating the agreed

methodologies and indicators, as well as the public policies or studies based on them in each

country and on a regional basis.

3. Expected results

• A series of agreed indicators, with their respective methodologies, sources, and definitions,

in the area of citizen security and violence prevention, agreed by the participating

countries.

• A regional system of information on citizen security and violence prevention in the

beneficiary countries.

• Systematized good practices disseminated via a web site accessible to all participating

countries.

55

Text boxes:

1. During the First Meeting of Ministers Responsible for Public Security in the Americas (MISPA

I), the ministers examined the following issues: crime prevention strategies; improvement in

public security conditions and institutions; and, international cooperation.

2. At MISPA I, the ministers responsible for public security in the Americas highlighted the

important work accomplished in the inter-‐American and United Nations systems, and

acknowledged that further efforts on a national, subregional, and hemispheric scale were

needed.

3. In the document entitled “Commitment to Public Security in the Americas,” public security

ministers requested the OAS General Secretariat to provide ongoing technical support to

states that so request, so that they can achieve the purposes, objectives, and activities

stipulated in the Commitment.

4. During MISPA I, ministers invited OAS permanent observer states to make voluntary

contributions, to achieve full implementation of the Commitment. Spain was the first OAS

observer country to contribute to establishment of the OIS.

5. In response to concerns raised during MISPA I, the OAS General Secretariat developed an

Inter-‐American Observatory on Security, with Internet access and the objective of collecting,

monitoring, analyzing, and disseminating comparable information on crime and violence in

the Hemisphere. This observatory is the first of its kind in our region, and the data being

entered in it could be used as inputs for designing public policies on security and for

developing indicators to evaluate them. (Taken from the address of OAS Secretary General

José Miguel Insulza at MISPA II, Dominican Republic, November 2009).

6. Quantitative Core Information of the OIS:

Crime and Violence: Homicides (by gender and age); Deaths from traffic accidents; Suicides

(by gender and age); Kidnappings; Legally registered weapons; Homicides using firearms;

Rape; Rape convictions; Total crimes; Victimization rates; % of crimes reported; Robbery,

Theft, Automobile theft.

56

Security actors:

Total police (by gender); Total private security guards; Legally registered security

companies; Public prosecutors (by gender); Judges (by gender).

Prison system:

Number of prisons; Capacity; Prison population (by gender and age); Overcrowding rate;

Non-‐sentenced detainees; Prisons for minors, and Number of minors in prisons.

7. The ministers responsible for public security in the Americas also invited the organizations

and agencies of the inter-‐American System, such as the Inter-‐American Development Bank

and the Pan American Health Organization, as well as other United Nations organizations,

to contribute within their fields to achieving the objectives of the Commitment to Public

Security in the Americas.

8. The cooperating partners of OIS pursue their work on crime and violence in a coordinated

manner: Inter-‐American Development Bank (IDB); Inter-‐American Coalition for the

Prevention of Violence (IACPV); Central American Observatory on Violence (OCAVI);

International Juvenile Justice Observatory (IJJO); International Criminal Police Organization

(INTERPOL); Police Community of the Americas (AMERIPOL); Latin American School of

Social Sciences (FLACSO); CISALVA Institute (Universidad del Valle, Colombia); Political

Database of the Americas (Georgetown University, USA); Woodrow Wilson International

Center (USA); The Brookings Institution (USA); and, Instituto Viva Rio (Brazil).

9. The Inter-‐American Drug Abuse Control Commission (CICAD/OAS) gathers official statistics

from reports produced by member countries in the context of the Multilateral Evaluation

Mechanism (MEM). MEM is an instrument to measure anti-‐drug activities carried out in the

34 CICAD member states. This measurement is done by drafting national and hemispheric

reports evaluating progress in drug control. The country reports are available on the CICAD

web site: www.cicad.oas.org

10. “...the conduct of policies on citizen security problems requires a solid base of continuous,

up-‐to-‐date analyses. It cannot have an impact on the situation without knowing the

magnitude and evolution of problems. Nor can policies be evaluated without adequate tools

that indicate what we did well and what still needs to be done.”

57

11. The Uruguayan National Observatory on Violence and Crime was established in 2005 for the

purpose of providing data prepared using a rigorous methodology for treatment of the main

indicators on crime and police management. The Uruguayan Observatory is also a project to

promote modernization of information systems and production of knowledge and analyses

on violence and crime. For more information visit the web site of the Observatorio Nacional

of Uruguay.

12. The National Network of Crime observatories of Colombia is a series of public and private

entities gathered under the leadership of the Crime Investigation Center of the National

Police. Its activities include monitoring, evaluation, management, and statistical analysis of

crime, and development of methodologies and studies on the subject, with a view to

sharing this information and practices with members of the network, territorial entities, and

other interested organizations. Visit the web site of la Red Nacional de Observatorios del

Delito of Colombia for more information.

13. Each national observatory is responsible for compiling quantitative and qualitative

information on its country. In the case of decentralized observatories, and municipal, state,

and/or provincial observatories, and of the coordinating observatory, they are responsible

for compiling public security information at the different levels, and it is up to the national

coordinating observatory to transmit the information using the mechanisms described in

this Manual.

58

Interviews:

1. Colombia:

1. What is an Observatory on Crime and Violence?

R//: They are official or private entities designed to monitor, assess, and manage information, and evaluate, and analyze statistics and qualitative data on crime and violence, and to develop methodologies and studies on the subject, with a view to assisting in decision-‐making and in implementation of the activities of political authorities in international, national, and local spheres. The Crime Observatory of the Department on Criminal Investigation and INTERPOL of the Colombian National Police is a team working in the Area of Criminal Information and Analysis, whose mission is to “produce conceptual, theoretical, and prospective guidelines for building a criminal police force at national, regional, and local levels, by providing advisory services for decision-‐making to strengthen citizen security, from the standpoint of a study on the phenomenon of crime, shared-‐responsibility, and inter-‐ and intra-‐institutional work. The basic objective of this observatory is to “process crime information to analyze the social phenomenon, and establish causes, effects, and impacts from an inter-‐institutional perspective.”

2. What is an observatory used for? R//: A Crime Observatory is used essentially to produce recommendations that advise the decision-‐making process of national and international government and nongovernmental organizations, and the design of strategies for crime prevention, reduction, and intervention to serve as inputs in public policies on citizen security.

59

3. How should an observatory operate?

R//: In terms of human resources, crime observatories operate on the basis of the following structure:

4. What are the most common difficulties encountered in structuring an observatory? R//: Difficulties can involve infrastructure, or economic, technical, or human resources; however, if the project for implementation and maintenance considers these critical factors as fundamental and structural from the outset, the observatory can be developed without difficulties in a context of inter-‐institutional cooperation and team work.

a. Economic factors: Payment of salaries and benefits for over 30 professionals required for these operations is costly. It is important to clarify that no fees are charged for the products produced by crime observatories; in other words, they are not self-‐financing. Consequently, financing is exclusively from public funds. Fortunately the Colombian government realized the importance of the observatory and has continued to finance it. There are also other types of costs, such as public services, paper, printing, publications, and fees, among others.

b. Infrastructure and technical factors: Physical infrastructure or offices are also required for

the staff, computer equipment, maintenance of the data bases, purchase of licenses, and development of software, among others.

c. Human resources: In view of the specialization required by the profile of employees who

work in the observatory, an interdisciplinary team is needed for a skill-‐based management model comprising specialized professionals, including attorneys, specialists in international affairs, political scientists, economists, psychologists, statisticians, sociologists, and specialists in other disciplines involved in crime studies, with the following qualifications:

i. Professional and graduate studies in disciplines such as sociology, economy, law,

political science, international relations, criminology, scientific research, research methodology, systems engineering, data analysis, and a minimum knowledge of management of information systems.

ii. Management of crime mapping programs and business intelligence tools.

iii. Production of graphs and tables showing weekly, monthly, or annual criminal

patterns.

iv. Basic knowledge of statistics and research methodology (in social sciences). Therefore, to assemble a team with these skills is the primary difficulty of any crime observatory.

60

5. Are there differences between the structure of a government observatory and that of a nongovernmental observatory?

R//: The DIJIN Criminal Research Center is a public agency that has been working for over 50 years collecting, storing, and processing information on crimes, violations, and operational activities of the National Police, and, as a government entity, has lasted over time. Similarly, in view of its experience and deconcentrated offices in every administrative policy department in the country, the National Police managed to actively support the establishment of a crime observatory and to use it to head the National Network of Crime Observatories in the past decade. The information of the Crime Research Center and the software it developed are inputs and a source of inspiration for the creation of observatories and private and public research centers on issues of conflict, violence, and crime, although very few private observatories last due to lack of continuity and lack of solid information sources as inputs for analysis. In Colombia, there is no other institution with a capacity and crime statistics information as solid as that of the Crime Observatory of the National Police. It is the only institution that has been consolidating statistical data for almost 53 years. Another difference is that observatories or research centers that are part of public entities, universities, or city or state governments have greater opportunities for access to resources, whereas private centers or observatories open and close, as contracts are completed or agreements creating them lapse.

6. It is said that one of the weaknesses of observatories is that it is impossible to compare the information they generate. How can this be changed? Do you see other weaknesses?

R//: One of the ways to combat the isolation of the various observatories and research centers is by forming a National Network of Crime Observatories, which makes it possible to work inter-‐institutionally, to consult different variables and information sources, and especially to standardize the methodology and management of statistics on the different crimes established in the penal code.

7. On a national scale, it is possible to organize local observatories into a network, as opposed to a single centralized national observatory. In your opinion, what are the advantages and disadvantages of each of these models?

R//: Both are functional models; in Colombia, observatories emerged in a deconcentrated fashion in different departments or institutions depending on their research interests. It is important to clarify, however, that an interdisciplinary approach concentrated in a single entity is a tool that generates better results, because research requires the analysis of different variables. In view of the characteristics of the Colombian National Police, which is a single corps whose functions include citizen security, prevention, and criminal intelligence and investigation or research work, it is the leading institution in the country with its national crime observatory, since no other institution has national coverage reflected in gathering information and recording the events of every

61

administrative political department, which has a “deconcentrated” criminal research center that relies in all areas on the National Crime Observatory located at central level and headed by the Department of Criminal Investigation and INTERPOL DIJIN. Moreover, in every capital city or department, there are private research centers and observatories that are autonomous, but still linked through the national network of observatories headed by DIJIN.

8. What are the difficulties encountered in operating an observatory? R//: See response 4.

9. Do you believe that observatories have gained recognition as important tools to help in decision-‐making and in generating information and knowledge?

R//: Yes, they have in Colombia, because of the information they produce, the studies done, and the new knowledge generated. The National Observatory on Crime is so important in Colombia, that it advises the Consejo Superior de Política Criminal [High Council on Criminal Policy]. In fact, the information and analyses produced by the Observatory are sent daily and weekly to the President of the Republic, the Defense, Interior, and Justice Ministers, and to the heads of institutions and government and nongovernmental organizations in general, as inputs for decision-‐making at local, regional, and national levels.

10. Do you believe that the establishment of crime observatories has helped enhance the pool of knowledge on the subject?

R//: Unquestionably. In fact, despite the advances of the past decade, more observatories and research centers on the subject are needed, and especially in countries with situations of conflict, such as ours.

11. How is the information generated by the observatories used? Do you believe that it is used to good advantage, or could better use be made of it?

R//: In fact there are various ways in which information and studies or analyses, that are public and accessible to all citizens, are presented and delivered. They include the following:

a. Statistical data are presented in tables and other formats that show the dynamics of a crime or problem in real time and their trends, useful for decision-‐making by administrative policy authorities as well as police commanders, to tackle a problem situation.

b. Since this information is sent out daily, weekly, monthly, or annually in crime newssheets,

the information is used by both public users and the media.

c. Texts resulting from research projects are provided to the entire community.

62

d. The Revista Criminalidad [Crime Review] is an historical source of crime data and studies that are available for the use of all citizens.

e. Scientific research on criminal behavior and the transformation of crime.

12. What is the impact of observatories on decision-‐making today?

R//: In view of the fact that citizen security problems have become socially relevant, public authorities in recent decades have resorted to specialists, including the observatories and research centers, to help in diagnosing and identifying problems, devising solutions or action to be taken, and in advising in the decision-‐making process. Thus they have a considerable impact in Colombia.

13. How is the information generated by observatories translated into concrete results for the community?

R//: Evaluation of public policies on security should be considered from the project design stage. Although evaluation of citizen and urban security relies on subjective factors, such as perceptions of security or insecurity, reduction of certain types of crimes, such as homicide and kidnapping, and their national rates, can be demonstrated in objective terms, as can the increase in human resources and in technical and logistical resources of the National Police and other agencies in the penal system. However, the main achievement of the country and perhaps the region is the fact that national security problems have replaced urban security problems in the major cities.

14. What is the main contribution of crime and violence observatories in our Hemisphere?

R//: Unfortunately, the creation of observatories and research centers is uneven in our countries, and so that contribution has to be assessed for each country separately. The proposal of an Observatory on Crime and Violence for the Hemisphere is a good one, in view of the evolution of crime and its transnational nature, which indicate a need for evaluations on a regional basis and joint responses by the countries of the region.

Uruguay:

Interview on the National Observatory on Violence and Crime Rafael Paternain. Sociologist, Masters in Human Sciences and Doctoral candidate in Sociology. Manager of the Institutional Policy and Strategic Planning Area and Director of the Observatory on Violence and Crime of the Ministry of Interior, Uruguay. Professor and Researcher in the Sociology

63

Department, School of Social Sciences, University of the Republic. Researcher for the National System of Researchers (ANII). E-‐mail: [email protected].

1. What is an observatory on crime and violence?

In the case of Uruguay, the National Observatory on Violence and Crime is a technical tool to measure the phenomena of violence, crime, and insecurity in the country, and to evaluate the performance of institutions and the impact of public policies on citizen security. The Observatory is part of the Institutional Policy and Strategic Planning Area, which is a technical advisory organ of the Interior Ministry.

2. What is an observatory used for?

An observatory has two main purposes. In the first place, it informs public opinion and ensures transparency with regard to the principal indicators on violence, crime, and insecurity in a country. It should also inform the strategic content of a public policy and the debates and output of the academic sector. In a sphere in which secrecy, opacity, and improvisation have prevailed, the concepts of transparency and technical quality have now become the key ingredients of the project. In the second place, an observatory should offer monitoring and analysis tools useful to the decision-‐making of policy officials of ministries or security offices at a national, departmental, or local level. Because of the complexity of citizen security, it requires a government that uses instruments provided by an observatory.


An observatory should function on the basis of information systems that provide valid, reliable data. It should also have a multidisciplinary analytical team with its own agenda and absolute technical independence. Finally, an observatory should have continuous political support and a commitment to transparency and to updating of strategic information for the public opinion of a country.

4. What are the difficulties most commonly encountered in building an observatory?

There are many difficulties, but three stand out. First, the absence of adequate information systems that provide data on the context, processes, and effects of a public policy. In the area of violence, crime, and insecurity, improvised criteria for production of information continue to dominate, with gaps that distort the data and make it unreliable. Second, there is a shortage of interdisciplinary technical personnel to perform complex analytical work. As long as these subjects remain under the interpretative monopoly of the police, there will be no qualitative improvement. And third, there is a lack of political will to make the information transparent. Few countries in the region keep their data on crime and insecurity up to date.

64

5. Are there differences between the structure of a government observatory and that of a nongovernmental observatory?

There are, since they have different objectives. Each one reflects the institutional matrix

and the frame of interpretation of the organization that supports it.

6. It is said that one of the problems of observatories is that the information they generate is not comparable. What can be done to change this? Do you see other weaknesses?

It is very true that national observatories have considerable problems in producing

information that is compatible and comparable. In federal systems with more than one police force, this is very obvious. In the case of Uruguay, these problems do not exist, and we have a relatively consistent national system. But the pitfalls multiply when one attempts to compare data between countries. Varying legal frameworks, different types of records, disparate institutional quality in the production of data, etc. are the most frequent difficulties encountered in comparing data in the region. However, efforts to ensure comparability are crucial. The famous sociologist Emilio Durkheim used to say that the only explanation is a good comparison. Today many countries in the region are implementing a project entitled ‘Regional System of Standardized Citizen Security and Coexistence Indicators” (IDB Regional Public Good Project), which provides agreed criteria and makes it possible to align efforts to make headway in this area. In any event, comparison requires more advanced academic efforts and analytical programs that place trends in violence, crime, and insecurity in the region in a social and political perspective.

7. On a national scale, is it possible to organize local observatories into a network, as opposed to a single centralized national observatory? In your opinion, what are the advantages and disadvantages of each of these models?

Uruguay is a small, highly centralized country, with 40% of its population living in the capital

and the metropolitan area. Moreover, municipalities have no authority in security matters (specifically stipulated in the Constitution of the Republic). This means that local initiatives in this area are virtually nonexistent. However, it would be important to promote departmental observatories that would be based on an inter-‐institutional strategy.

8. What are the difficulties encountered in operating an observatory?

As stated in earlier responses, one of the major difficulties is the weakness of information systems on violence, crime, and insecurity in our countries. Over and above government sources, observatories need special studies, such as victimization surveys, for instance, and it is difficult to find resources for them. Another problem is linked to political disputes, and has to do with the fact that observatories are not always able to achieve the legitimacy they require to become a reference point for a public policy on the subject.

65

9. Do you believe that observatories have gained recognition as important tools to help

in decision-‐making and in generating knowledge?

Here only partial results have been achieved. Generally speaking, there is a great deal of recognition of specialized actors and public opinion itself, but the authorities are not always aware of the importance of the tool: it is very difficult to manage security issues by exposing oneself to constant evaluation. And, there is always the deep-‐seated belief that it is better to govern with preconceived notions and political instinct.

10. Do you believe that the creation of crime observatories has helped to enhance the pool of knowledge on the subject?

The experience is Uruguay would indicate yes. First, because there are parameters that

show us where we are now in this area. We used to be relatively ignorant of these matters. By way of example, Uruguay has had the crime of domestic violence in its books since 1995. It was another ten years before we began to measure the number of reports produced throughout the country. Today it is the second most frequently reported crime after theft. Without the Observatory, today we would not know that either. Second, a clear and direct association with academic research centers has been fostered, and the Observatory has also provided information as inputs in projects, studies, theses, and monographs in all the social sciences.

11. How is the information generated by observatories used, and do you think it is used to good advantage, or could better use of it be made?

Generally speaking, the information is underutilized. It is almost always used in reaction,

when something happens to trigger it, a request is submitted, a report ordered, etc. Seldom is the information part of a strategic plan for programming content used to build a policy. It will take time to increase its uses and to understand that all information is necessarily policy oriented.

12. What is the impact of observatories on decision-‐making today?

In Uruguay, the new administration took office on March 1, 2010. It is still in the process of organizing and implementing its strategic lines, and so it is impossible to give a definitive response to this question. Our Observatory has yet to establish its identity.


It is very difficult to evaluate this. Information is a complex, intangible, symbolic good with

a strong political impact, and it is complicated to determine its concrete usefulness for society. In any event, an observatory is a reference point for public opinion, a different voice among

66

hegemonic and traditional voices. Its work has an impact on the media, political forces, and civil society groups. I will give an example: during the process of making the public aware of the depth of the problem of domestic violence, our Observatory played an important role in providing an objective measure of the magnitude of the problem.

14. What is the principal contribution of crime and violence observatories in our Hemisphere?

In a Hemisphere wrought with inequalities, where violence, crime, and insecurity are acute

problems, government and private observatories are spaces for accumulating evidence and knowledge, to build evaluation instruments that will help in securing more complex, comprehensive, and effective public policies. The observatories in our region have an important role to play in the institutional quality of our democracies.

______________________________________________________________

67

Analyst in charge of Latin American projects, International Crime Prevention Center (ICPC) Sociologist, with a Masters in urban planning from University of Strasbourg, France. Started out in the area of urban security in the UN Habitat Program on “Safer Cities” in Kenya, and worked as a consultant for the Inter-‐American Development Bank (IDB), as well as performing local security evaluations in the city of Montreal. At ICPC, he is in charge of developing cooperation projects in Latin America, and he participates in technical assistance missions and maintains relations with ICPC partners in the region.

1. What is an observatory on crime and violence?

An observatory is above all a tool to support the authorities in generating effective responses to citizen security issues. An observatory is an agency or a center dedicated to systematizing information from different sources, to produce periodic analyses or studies and to provide a picture and show the development of crime and violence in a given territory. According to a study done by the International Crime Prevention Center, an observatory has at least three basic criteria: collection of data; analysis of data; and, public dissemination. At the same time, there are diverse types of observatories: governmental, nongovernmental, university, and joint or mixed ones. Observatories can operate on different levels: local (and micro-‐local), national, regional, and international. There are also generalist observatories (on violence, security, crime, etc.) or thematic ones (on school violence, domestic violence, trafficking in goods, trafficking in persons, organized crime, etc.). Finally, there are agencies that perform the same work as an observatory but are not necessarily called observatories.

2. What is an observatory used for?

An observatory is primarily a tool to help in decision-‐making, based on the principle that a better knowledge of situations affecting security will make it possible to ensure more targeted and thus more effective interventions. In this vein, an observatory is a diagnostic tool, although as action is taken, over time an observatory also makes it possible to monitor and evaluate the impact of measures adopted. At the same time, an observatory also plays other roles: it is a tool for learning about territories at both national and local levels, a tool for understanding certain phenomena, such

68

as when, where, and how certain types of crimes , such as homicides, occur. It is also a cooperation tool that permits partnerships with different institutions, such as the police, the courts, the health sector, schools, municipalities, and the like, and the development of a culture of cooperation.


An observatory operates according to a certain scientific rigor, which means the use of certain working methodologies, that include cooperation with different institutions and organizations, multiple sources of information (from the health, security, and justice sectors, among others), collection of reliable quantitative and qualitative data, and creation of valid indicators. An observatory must also have a certain autonomy to analyze and disseminate information independently of the position of the authorities. Thus, some observatories have a board of directors that manages the observatory’s operations independently, and/or a committee of experts that in some way advises and validates the work of the observatory on the basis of scientific criteria.

4. What are the problems most commonly encountered in building and operating an observatory?

The first is to convince actors, and primarily governments, as to the usefulness of an observatory and the benefits to be derived from it. The next problem, frequently linked to the first, is the financing needed to create an observatory. However, international cooperation agencies are increasingly willing to support governments by implementing observatories or prevention programs that include them. Financing should be maintained over time, so that observatories can function in a sustainable way and produce tangible effects. Then, there is everything that has to do with creating a climate of cooperation and confidence among institutions willing to work together, and that means concluding agreements on the responsibilities of each, and defining common indicators and then sharing the information they handle, which is the subject of the studies and operations of an observatory.

6. It is said that one of the weaknesses of observatories is that it is impossible to compare the information they generate. How can this be changed? Do you see other weaknesses?

Generally speaking, just as there are difficulties in devising common indicators, there is an additional difficulty when it comes time to make international comparisons where these indicators will be valid from one country to the next, since the way the information is obtained is not necessarily based on the same legal definition, or uses the same methodology. In such cases, transnational observatories increasingly form a working group to harmonize the definitions of the types of crimes or indicators, to facilitate comparison of data internationally. This is the case, for instance, with the Central American Observatory on Violence (OCAVI) and its Advisory Council comprising representatives of the member countries that meet periodically, or with the European Group for harmonization of crime statistics.

69

9. Do you believe that observatories have gained recognition as important tools to assist in decision-‐making and in generating knowledge?

In terms of international prevention trends, we have noted a growing interest on the part of governments, municipalities, research centers, civil society organizations, and international organizations in creating observatories or analytical tools for security-‐related problems (e.g., school violence, drug use, etc.). This led us to organize a series of international meetings (in Paris in 2007, Santiago in 2009, and Montreal in 2010), initially with a view to creating an international panorama of observatories and establishing the basic conditions and challenges for operating an observatory. In 2009, we launched an international questionnaire to identify observatories, and 102 entities in different parts of the world responded. This confirms that observatories have been recognized as essential tools for gaining knowledge of security-‐related problems and decision-‐making, since they make it possible to have a better knowledge of the areas of intervention.

10. Do you believe that the creation of crime observatories has helped to enhance the pool of knowledge on the subject?

In public policy matters, there is a consensus that to prepare effective programs, one must first know the situations in which they are meant to intervene. In the case of initiatives on security matters, one must have as objective a view as possible, one that reflects the viewpoint of actors in different sectors, such as the police, courts, health, education, social development, etc., and that goes beyond pure police statistics or information produced by the media. In this context, observatories on security are a tool that helps to paint a global picture of the situation at a given time, and to analyze the evolution of the situation over time. This is partly due to the collection of statistical data from different sources, and partly a result of the production of information based on the use of other tools, such as local evaluations, victimization surveys, and the like, that make it possible to know more about certain territories or subjects. For instance, in 2007, France’s National Observatory on Crime conducted a national survey on violence towards women (ENVEFF), which provided a better picture of the general status of violence against women in France, and helped identify the most frequent situations of violence in the public, private, and institutional spheres, and which sectors were most affected, based on age groups, socio-‐economic situation, place of residence, etc. This survey was conducted on the basis of over 7,000 face-‐to-‐face interviews, which also contributed to obtaining a more precise idea of problems of domestic violence, in terms of scope, typical situations of aggression, and access to existing arrangements, and made it possible to draw up a series of recommendations on how to raise public awareness and on the intervention of professionals.

11. How is the information generated by observatories used? Do you believe that it is used to good advantage, or that it should be better used?

With regard to the information generated, one of the main challenges is related to devising indicators, which requires a common definition among the different actors of what is to be measured and methodologically valid data that can be regularly updated. This last point is in turn related to the political will to ensure that the work of observatories is sustained, with the necessary financing for their operations. As regards the use of the information generated by observatories, there is still much to be done to facilitate public access to information. However, it is important to

70

acknowledge that observatories are increasingly disseminating their results on a regular basis via their internet web site, or in regular reports and publications, e-‐bulletins, and the like. For example, the Observatory on Security of the Bogota Chamber of Commerce (Colombia) periodically disseminates the results of a victimization survey conducted regularly in a publication and on its web site.

12. What is the impact of observatories in decision-‐making today?

We know that observatories help us gain information and knowledge and that most of them contribute to the decision-‐making process. Yet the circumstances and challenges of every observatory are different, hence the effective contribution to decision-‐making also varies from one to the next. This is one of the main issues we want to tackle at the Third International Meeting of Observatories in Montreal, Canada, October 27-‐29, 2010. Over and above their importance in enhancing our knowledge of crime, what is their usefulness and how do they contribute effectively to decision-‐making and the implementation of security measures. The idea is to have a better idea of the real impact of observatories and to know who is using the information they produce as well. In the final analysis, this meeting, which will gather experts from different continents, is interested in investigating how the information generated by observatories is translated into useful results for the community.


Through this meeting, we hope to gain a better idea of how the information generated produces concrete effects. Among the experiences we know, there are various interesting cases, such as the French Drug Use and Addiction Observatory (OFDT), which has a mechanism called TREND in the city of Bordeaux, France. This project consists in a network of workers in the field who frequent sites known for hard drug use, to learn firsthand about current drug use trends, new products available on the market, and access to assistance. Through an ethnographic survey, the periodic report TREND describes new tendencies and makes recommendations to different actors. Specifically, these recommendations help to sensitize the public and to ensure emergency intervention at illegal parties where there is heavy drug use.

14. What is the main contribution of observatories on crime and violence in our Hemisphere?

According to the questionnaire referred to, we have been able to observe that if there is one region in the world where observatories have evolved it is precisely in our Hemisphere, and especially in Latin America and the Caribbean (of the 104 responses received, 58% were from observatories in the Americas). This can be explained by the changes in security models and greater openness to more scientific and cooperative approaches. The primary contribution of observatories is a change in mentality, to greater acceptance that security policies must be based on reliable, objective information. In this vein, there is an increasing use of diagnostic and evaluation tools, which helps observatories learn more about levels of victimization and insecurity, and the effectiveness of policies. In this way, more and more countries in the region have established information systems or observatories, not only for homicides and crimes, but also for a series of phenomena associated with security and peaceful co-‐existence. In Chile, the Public Security Division conducts a national

71

victimization survey regularly, which, together with a series of other national surveys on school violence, drug use, domestic violence, and the like, comprises its information system. Many cities also have observatories, such as the city of Bogota, which together with collection of data from institutions, also produces more ethnographic reports in the field. But we can also refer to more concrete contributions, such as the “Proyecto Desepaz” in Cali, one of the first observatories in the region that helped reduce the homicide rate from 90 to 23 per 100,000 inhabitants between 1983 and 1993. Today, thanks to technology, observatories using geo-‐referencing tools can also be created, such as CRISP in Belo Horizonte, which permits cooperation among municipal actors, the police, and universities. Thus there have been clear advances, although there is still a great deal of work to be done to continue convincing the authorities, the media, and the citizenry.

Variables: Crime and Violence

Intentional homicides (excluding attempted homicides)

Intentional homicides at national level, number of crimes

“Intentional homicide” refers to the act of deliberately causing the death of another person, including infanticide.

Intentional homicides in the largest city, number of crimes Intentional homicides using a firearm, at national level, number of crimes Total number of homicide victims, (nationally) Total number of victims of homicide nationally (men) Total number of homicide victims nationally (women) Total number of homicide victims nationally (18-‐24 years of age) Total number of victims of homicide nationally (men 18-‐24 years of age) Total number of victims of homicide nationally (women 18-‐24 years of age) Total number of homicide victims nationally (under 18 years of age) Total number of homicide victims nationally (males under 18 years of age) Total number of homicide victims nationally (females under 18 years of age)

72

Total intentional homicides (executed and attempted)

Total intentional homicides at national level (number of crimes)

Intentional homicides in the largest city, (number of crimes) Total intentional homicides committed with a firearm nationally (number of crimes) Assault

Number of crimes of assault at national level

“Assault” refers to a physical attack on another person that causes serious bodily harm, excluding indecent or sexual assault, threats and slaps or punches. “Assault” resulting in death should also be excluded.

Total number of victims of assault at national level Total number of victims of assault at national level (men) Total number of victims of assault at national level (women) Total number of victims of assault at national level (18-‐24 years of age) Total number of victims of assault at national level (men 18-‐24 years of age) Total number of victims of assault at national level (women 18-‐24 years of age) Total number of victims of assault at national level (under 18 years of age) Total number of victims of assault at national level (males under 18 years of age) Total number of victims of assault at national level (females under 18 years of age)

Total for sexual violence

Total number of crimes of sexual violence, at national level

“Sexual violence” refers to rape and sexual assault, including sexual crimes against children.

Total number of victims of sexual violence, at national level Total number of victims of sexual violence at national level (men) Total number of victims of sexual violence at national level (women)

73

Total number of victims of sexual violence at national level (18-‐24 years of age) Total number of victims of sexual violence at national level (men 18-‐24 years of age) Total number of victims of sexual violence at national level (women 18-‐24 years of age) Total number of victims of sexual violence at national level (under 18 years of age) Total number of victims of sexual violence at national level (males under 18 years of age) Total number of victims of sexual violence at national level (females under 18 years of age) Rape

Number of rapes at national level

Rape is understood as sexual intercourse without valid consent.

Total number of rape victims at national level Total number of rape victims at national level (men) Total number of rape victims at national level (women) Total number of rape victims at national level (18-‐24 years of age) Total number of rape victims at national level (men 18-‐24 years of age) Total number of rape victims at national level (women 18-‐24 years of age) Total number of rape victims at national level (under 18 years of age) Total number of rape victims at national level (males under 18 years of age) Total number of rape victims at national level (females under 18 years of age)

Total sexual crimes against children Total number of sexual crimes against children, at national level

"Sexual crimes against children" refer to crimes sexual in nature committed against minors (in accordance with the definition of “minor” given below in the metadata).

Total number of sexual crimes against children, at national level (males)

74

Total number of sexual crimes against children, at national level (females) Additional matters involving improper use of technology in the abuse and exploitation of children

Total number of crimes of child pornography, at national level

“Child pornography” refers to the representation by any means of a real or fictitious person less than 18 years of age, or who appears to be less than 18 years of age, participating in real or simulated sexual activities, or any representation of the sexual parts of a minor for primarily sexual purposes.

Number of crimes of possession of child pornography, at national level

“Possession of child pornography” refers to the acquisition, deliberate access or view, receipt, storage, or possession of child pornography.

Robbery

Number of robberies, at national level

“Robbery” is understood as the theft of a person’s property using force or with the threat of using force. Inasmuch as possible, the category of “robbery” should include hold-‐ups or bag-‐snatching and theft with violence, but not pick-‐pocketing or extortion.

Kidnapping

Number of crimes of kidnapping, at national level

“Kidnapping” refers to the illegal detention of one or several persons against their will (including with the use of force, threats, or trickery or deceit), for the purpose of demanding, in exchange for their release, illicit enrichment or any other economic gains or material benefits, or for the purpose of forcing someone to do something or to refrain from doing something. Kidnapping does not include child-‐custody disputes.

75

Theft

Number of crimes of theft at national level

"Theft” refers to taking property from a person or an organization without the use of force, with the intention of keeping it. It does not include burglary, or unlawful entry and theft [breaking and entering], theft with the use of force, or theft of motor vehicles, which are defined separately.

Theft of motor vehicles

Number of crimes of motor vehicle theft, at national level

“Theft of motor vehicles” refers to the taking of a motor vehicle without the consent of the vehicle owner. “Motor vehicle” refers to any land vehicle that operates on roadways, including automobiles, motorcycles, buses, trucks, and construction and farm vehicles.

Theft of private automobiles

Number of crimes of theft of private automobiles, at national level

"Private automobiles” refers to motor vehicles, excluding motor cycles, commercial vehicles, buses, trucks, and construction and farm vehicles.

Burglary

Number of crimes of burglary, at national level

“Burglary” refers to the unauthorized entry into part of a building, residence, or other facilities, including with the use of force, with the intention of taking property. Inasmuch as possible, it should include burglary of homes, apartments, or other types of housing, factories, shops, or offices, military establishments, or burglary using false keys. It should exclude thefts of automobiles, containers, vending machines, parking meters, and fenced-‐in fields, or enclosed areas.

76

Residential burglary

Number of crimes of residential burglary, at national level

"Residential burglary” is understood to refer to burglary of houses, apartments, or other types of housing.

Total persons who have had formal contact with the police or criminal justice system (total crimes) Total persons who have had formal contact

“Formal contact” with the police or the criminal justice system may include persons who have been suspected, detained, or cautioned, at national level.

Adults who have had formal contact

Male adults who have had formal contact Female adults who have had formal contact Minors who have had formal contact

Male minors who have had formal contact Female minors who have had formal contact

Nationality of persons (adults and minors) who have had formal contact (all crimes)

Nationals of the country (adults and minors) who have had formal contact

Foreigners (adults and minors) who have had formal contact

Indicate the five most common nationalities of foreigners who have had formal contact and provide the following data on each one:

Total persons who have had formal contact, by crime

Persons who have had formal contact for intentional homicide

Males who have had formal contact for intentional homicide Females who have had formal contact for intentional homicide Total persons who have had formal contact for intentional homicide Total males who have had formal contact for homicide Total females who have had formal contact for homicide Persons who have had formal contact for rape Males who have had formal contact for rape

77

Females who have had formal contact for rape

Suicides at national level

Total number of suicides nationally

"Suicide" refers to death caused by intentional, self-‐inflicted injuries in persons over 5 years of age

Total suicides of males, at national level Total suicides of females, at national level

Total suicides of youth 18-‐24 years of age

Total suicides of males 18-‐24 years of age Total suicides of females 18-‐24 years of age Total suicides of minors under 18 years of age Total suicides of male minors under 18 years of age Total suicides of female minors under 18 years of age

Deaths from traffic accidents

Total deaths from traffic accidents nationally

"Deaths from traffic accidents " refer to fatalities caused by injuries sustained in a road accident

Total male deaths from traffic accidents

Total female deaths from traffic accidents Total deaths of men over 24 years of age from traffic accidents Total deaths of women over 24 years of age from traffic accidents Total deaths of men 18-‐24 years of age from traffic accidents Total deaths of women 18-‐24 years of age from traffic accidents Total deaths of males under 18 years of age from traffic accidents Total deaths of females under 18 years of age from traffic accidents

Reports of child abuse at national level

Total reports of abuse of minors under 18 years of age, nationally

"Child abuse" refers to any action or omission by persons with whom there is a relationship or by institutions that violate the physical or psychological health and welfare

Total reports of abuse of male minors under 18 years of age, nationally

78

Total reports of abuse of female minors under 18 years of age, nationally

of children and adolescents.

Reports of domestic violence

Total reports of domestic violence nationally "Domestic violence” is understood as any act

or omission that generates violence among members of a family or couple/former couple, excluding sexual crimes

Total reports of domestic violence against male victims, nationally Total reports of domestic violence against female victims, nationally

Active bribery

Total number of crimes of active bribery at national level

"Active bribery" is defined as the promising, offering, or giving, either directly or indirectly, to a public official, of an undue benefit to his or her own advantage or to that of any other person or entity, so that said official will act or refrain from acting in performance of his or her official functions.

Passive bribery

Total number of crimes of passive bribery, at national level

"Passive bribery" is defined as the request or acceptance by a public official, either directly or indirectly, of an undue benefit, to his or her own advantage or that of another person or entity, to act or refrain from acting in the performance of his or her official functions.

Total bribery

Total bribery, nationally

"Total bribery” refers to the promise, offer, or granting, or the request or acceptance, either directly or indirectly, by a public official of an undue benefit to his or her own advantage or to that of another person or entity, so that said official will act or refrain from acting to fulfill his or her official functions.

79

Embezzlement

Total crimes of embezzlement, at national level

"Embezzlement" refers to the wrongful appropriation or other form of conversion by a public official, for his own benefit or that of third parties or other entities, of public or private instruments, funds, or property, or any other objects of value that were entrusted to the official by virtue of his post.

Illicit enrichment

Total number of crimes of illicit enrichment, at national level

"Illicit enrichment" refers to the significant increase in the assets of a public official in relation to his lawful earnings that he or she cannot reasonably explain.

Abuse of functions

Total number of crimes of abuse of functions, at a national level

"Abuse of functions" refers to an act or the omission of an act, in violation of the law, by a public official in the performance of his duties, for the purpose of obtaining an undue advantage or benefit for himself or for another person or entity.

Persons who have had formal contact with the police or criminal justice system for active bribery Total persons who have had formal contact for active bribery

Men who have had formal contact for active bribery Women who have had formal contact for active bribery Persons who have had formal contact with the police or criminal justice system for passive bribery Total persons who have had formal contact for passive bribery

Men who have had formal contact for passive bribery Women who have had formal contact for passive bribery

80

Persons who have had formal contact with the police or criminal justice system for total bribery Total persons who have had formal contact for total bribery

Men who have had formal contact for total bribery Women who have had formal contact for total bribery Persons who have had formal contact with the police or criminal justice system for embezzlement Total persons who have had formal contact for embezzlement

Men who have had formal contact for embezzlement Women who have had formal contact for embezzlement Persons who have had formal contact with the police or criminal justice system for illicit enrichment Total persons who have had formal contact for illicit enrichment

Men who have had formal contact for illicit enrichment Women who have had formal contact for illicit enrichment Persons who have had formal contact with the police or criminal justice system for abuse of functions Total persons who have had formal contact for abuse of functions

Men who have had formal contact for abuse of functions Women who have had formal contact for abuse of functions

Total persons indicted (for all crimes)

Total persons indicted and tried “Persons indicted” refers to the alleged criminal offenders indicted by the Office of Public Prosecutor or by the law enforcement agency responsible for prosecution at national level, regardless of the final decision in the case.

Males indicted Females indicted

Men over 24 years of age Women over 24 years of age

Men 18-‐24 years of age indicted

Women 18-‐24 years of age indicted

81

Total minors under 18 years of age indicted Boys under 18 years of age indicted

Girls under 18 years of age indicted

Persons (adults and minors) indicted, by crime

Total persons indicted for intentional homicide (executed)

“Intentional homicide (executed)” is understood to exclude attempted homicides.

Men indicted for intentional homicide (executed) Women indicted for intentional homicide (executed) TOTAL persons indicted for intentional homicide

“Intentional homicide” refers to the act of deliberately causing the death of another person, including infanticide.

TOTAL men indicted for intentional homicide TOTAL women indicted for intentional homicide Total persons indicted for rape

“Rape” refers to sexual intercourse without valid consent.

Men indicted for rape

Women indicted for rape

Persons indicted for active bribery

Total persons indicted for active bribery "Active bribery" is defined as the promising, offering, or giving to a public official, either directly or indirectly, of an undue benefit to his or her own advantage or to that of any other person or entity, so that said official will act or refrain from acting in performance of his or her official functions.

Men indicted for active bribery

Women indicted for active bribery

Persons indicted for passive bribery (by sector)

Total persons indicted for passive bribery


Men indicted for passive bribery

Women indicted for passive bribery

Police officials indicted for passive bribery

Judicial officials indicted for passive bribery

Health sector officials indicted for passive bribery Education sector officials indicted for passive bribery

82

Social service officials indicted for passive bribery Tax, treasury, and customs officials indicted for passive bribery Defense officials or officers of the armed service indicted for passive bribery

Persons indicted for total bribery

Persons indicted for total crimes of bribery "Total bribery” refers to the promising, offering, or giving, or the requesting or accepting, either directly or indirectly, by a public official, of an undue benefit or advantage for himself or herself or for any other person or entity, to act or refrain from acting in the exercise of his or her official functions.

Men indicted for total crimes of bribery

Women indicted for total crimes of bribery

Persons indicted for embezzlement

Total persons indicted for embezzlement "Embezzlement" refers to the wrongful appropriation or other form of conversion by a public official, for his own benefit or that of third parties or other entities, of public or private instruments, funds, or property, or any other objects of value that were entrusted to the official by virtue of his position.

Men indicted for embezzlement

Women indicted for embezzlement

Persons indicted for illicit enrichment

Total persons indicted for illicit enrichment "Illicit enrichment" refers to the significant increase in the assets of a public official in relation to his lawful earnings that he or she cannot reasonably explain.

Men indicted for illicit enrichment

Women indicted for illicit enrichment

Persons indicted for abuse of functions

Total persons indicted for abuse of functions "Abuse of functions" refers to an act or the

omission of an act, in violation of the law, by a public official in the performance of his duties, for the purpose of obtaining an undue advantage or benefit for himself or for another person or entity.

Men indicted for abuse of functions

Women indicted for abuse of functions

83

Persons against whom legal action was brought in criminal court (INPUT data)

Total persons against whom legal action was brought in criminal court

“Persons against whom action was brought in criminal court” refer to persons against whom legal proceedings were initiated in any judicial organ authorized to issue conviction judgments under national criminal legislation, whether the person was ultimately acquitted or not, at national level.

Persons convicted, all crimes (OUTPUT data)

Total persons convicted

“Convicted persons” refer to persons found guilty by a judicial organ authorized to issue conviction judgments under national criminal legislation, whether or not the conviction was ultimately confirmed or not. Total convicted persons should include persons convicted for serious crimes, but not persons convicted for relatively mild traffic violations or other minor offenses.

Total persons acquitted

“Persons acquitted" refer to persons found not guilty by a judicial organ authorized under national criminal legislation, whether the acquittal was ultimately confirmed or not, at national level. Total persons acquitted should include those acquitted for serious crimes, but not those acquitted for relatively mild traffic violations or other minor offenses.

Adults convicted (all crimes)

Adults convicted “Convicted persons” refer to persons found guilty by a judicial organ authorized to issue conviction judgments under national criminal legislation, whether or not the conviction was ultimately confirmed or not. Total convicted persons should include persons convicted for serious crimes, but not persons convicted for relatively mild traffic violations or other minor offenses.

Male adults convicted

Female adults convicted

Minors convicted (all crimes)

Minors convicted “Convicted persons” refer to persons found guilty by a judicial organ authorized to issue Male minors convicted

84

Female minors convicted

conviction judgments under national criminal legislation, whether or not the conviction was ultimately confirmed or not. Total convicted persons should include persons convicted for serious crimes, but not persons convicted for relatively mild traffic violations or other minor offenses.

Nationality of persons convicted (adults and minors) (all crimes)

National of the country (adults and minors) convicted

Foreigners (adults and minors) convicted “Foreigner” refers to any person who is not a national of your country.

Indicate the five most common nationalities of convicted foreigners, and provide the following data on each:

Persons (adults and minors) convicted, by crime

Intentional homicide (executed), total persons convicted

“Intentional homicide (executed)” refers to intentional homicide, excluding attempted homicide.

Intentional homicide (executed), males convicted Intentional homicide (executed), females convicted Total intentional homicides (executed), total persons convicted

Intentional homicide” refers to the act of deliberately causing the death of another person, including infanticide.

Total males convicted of intentional homicide Total women convicted of intentional homicide Total persons convicted of rape

“Rape” refers to sexual intercourse without valid consent.

Males convicted of rape Females convicted of rape

Persons convicted and acquitted (OUTPUT data)

Active bribery

Total persons convicted of active bribery "Active bribery" is defined as the promising, offering, or giving to a public official, either directly or indirectly, of an undue benefit to

Males convicted of active bribery

Females convicted of active bribery

85

Total persons acquitted of active bribery

his or her own advantage or to that of any other person or entity, so that said official will act or refrain from acting in performance of his or her official functions.

Passive bribery

Total persons convicted of passive bribery


Males convicted of passive bribery Females convicted of passive bribery

Total persons acquitted of passive bribery Police officials convicted of passive bribery Judicial officials convicted of passive bribery Health sector officials convicted of passive bribery Education sector officials convicted of passive bribery Social service officials convicted of passive bribery Tax, treasury, and customs officials convicted of passive bribery Defense and armed forces officials convicted of passive bribery

Total bribery

Total persons convicted for total bribery "Total bribery" refers to the promise, offer, or giving, or to the request or acceptance, either directly or indirectly, by a public official, of an undue benefit to his or her own advantage or to that of another person or entity, so that said official acts or refrains from acting in the performance of his or her official functions.

Males convicted of bribery Females convicted of bribery

Total persons acquitted for total bribery

Embezzlement

Total persons convicted for embezzlement "Embezzlement" refers to the wrongful appropriation or other form of conversion by a public official, for his own benefit or that of

Males convicted for embezzlement Females convicted for embezzlement

86

Total persons acquitted for embezzlement

third parties or other entities, of public or private instruments, funds, or property, or any other objects of value that were entrusted to the official by virtue of his position.

Illicit enrichment

Total persons convicted for illicit enrichment

"Illicit enrichment" refers to the significant increase in the assets of a public official in relation to his lawful earnings that he or she cannot reasonably explain.

Males convicted for illicit enrichment Females convicted for illicit enrichment

Total persons acquitted for illicit enrichment

Abuse of functions

Total persons convicted for abuse of functions "Abuse of functions" refers to an act or the

omission of an act, in violation of the law, by a public official in the performance of his duties, for the purpose of obtaining an undue advantage or benefit for himself or for another person or entity.

Males convicted for abuse of functions

Females convicted for abuse of functions

Total personas acquitted for abuse of functions

87

Variables: Prison systems

Official capacity as of December 31

Official capacity of prisons, penitentiaries, or correctional institutions for adults *

“Official capacity” is defined as the estimated number of places available as of December 31, without overcrowding, except for places or capacity used for the detention of persons based on their immigration status.

Official capacity of prisons, penitentiaries, or correctional institutions for minors

Official capacity of prisons, penitentiaries, or correctional institutions for adults, by place of imprisonment Official capacity of prisons, penitentiaries, or correctional institutions for minors, by place of imprisonment

Prison staff as of December 31

Staff of prisons, penitentiaries, or correctional institutions for adults

“Prison staff” is defined as all the individuals employed in penal or correctional institutions as of December 31, including administrative personnel, guards, treatment staff, and others (maintenance, meal service, etc.)

Staff (male) of prisons, penitentiaries, or correctional institutions for adults

Staff (female) of prisons, penitentiaries, or correctional institutions for adults

Staff of prisons, penitentiaries, or correctional institutions for minors

Staff (male) of prisons, penitentiaries, or correctional institutions for minors

Staff (female) of prisons, penitentiaries, or correctional institutions for minors

“Prisons, penitentiaries, or correctional institutions” are defined as all the institutions with public or private funding where persons deprived of their freedom are lodged. These institutions may include penitentiaries and correctional or psychiatric institutions under the responsibility of the prison administration, but are not limited to them.

Inmates in prisons, penitentiaries, or correctional institutions

Total inmates Non-‐offenders who are confined for administrative purposes, including those persons confined during investigation of their immigration status and foreigners not

88

Total inmates by detention center

entitled to remain in the country prior to their expulsion, should not be included in a given day among the “inmates in prisons, penitentiaries, or correctional institutions.”

Inmates in prisons, penitentiaries, or correctional institutions, by category

Inmates not sentenced, awaiting trial Non-‐offenders, who are confined for administrative purposes, including those persons confined during investigation of their immigration status and foreigners not entitled to remain in the country prior to their expulsion, should not be included in a given day among the “inmates in prisons, penitentiaries, or correctional institutions.”

Sentenced inmates

Adult inmates in prisons, penitentiaries, or correctional institutions

Adult inmates (men and women) (Total)

Non-‐offenders, who are confined for administrative purposes, including those persons confined during investigation of their immigration status and foreigners not entitled to remain in the country prior to their expulsion, should not be included in a given day among the “inmates in prisons, penitentiaries, or correctional institutions.”

Adult inmates (men and women) (By detention center) Adult male inmates (Total)

Adult male inmates (By detention center)

Adult women inmates (Total) Adult women inmates (By detention center)

Minors who are inmates in prisons, penitentiaries, or correctional institutions

Minor inmates (males and females) (Total)

Non-‐offenders, who are confined for administrative purposes, including those persons confined during investigation of their immigration status and foreigners not entitled to remain in the country prior to their expulsion, should not be included in a given day among the “inmates in prisons, penitentiaries, or correctional institutions.”

Minor inmates (males and females) (By detention center) Male minors imprisoned (Total) Female minors imprisoned (By detention center) Female minors imprisoned (Total) Female minors imprisoned (By detention center)

Nationality of inmates (adults and minors) in prisons, penitentiaries, or correctional institutions

Inmates who are nationals of the country (adults and minors)

Foreign inmates (adults and minors) Indicate the five most common nationalities of foreign inmates in prisons, penitentiaries, or correctional institutions and give the following data for each:

89

Total number of prisons, penitentiaries, or correctional institutions

Total number of prisons, penitentiaries, or correctional institutions for adults

“Prisons, penitentiaries, or correctional institutions” are defined as all the institutions with public or private funding where persons deprived of their freedom are lodged. These institutions may include penitentiaries and correctional or psychiatric institutions under the responsibility of the prison administration, but are not limited to them.

Total number of prisons, penitentiaries, or correctional institutions for minors

90

Variables: Security actors

Police personnel

Police personnel at national level Total

"Police personnel” is defined as the personnel of public agencies as of December 31, whose primary functions consist in the prevention, detection, and investigation of crime and arrest of presumed offenders. The data on support staff (secretaries, office aides, etc.) should be excluded.

Police personnel at national level Men

Police personnel at national level Women

Prosecutors

Total prosecutors, nationally Total male prosecutors, nationally

Total female prosecutors, nationally

Total professional magistrates and judges as of December 31

Total professional magistrates and judges “Professional magistrates and judges” refers to full-‐time or part-‐time officials authorized, as of December 31, to hear civil, criminal, or other cases, including in courts of appeals, and to issue judgments or rulings in a court of justice. They also include authorized assistant magistrates and judges.

Total professional magistrates and judges male

Total professional magistrates and judges female

Firearms

Legally registered civilian firearms, national total

Absolute number of firearms in the possession of civilians that are legally registered by the state

Firearms registered by private security firms, national total

Absolute number of firearms in the possession of private security firms that are legally registered by the state.

91

Registered private security firms

Total security firms registered at national level

Total number of private firms with a valid license registered by the state.

Private security guards

Total private guards, at national level

“Private guards" refer to the personnel of private security agencies whose primary function is protection of and guarantee of the security of private actors.

Total private guards, at national level (men)

Total private guards, at national level (women)

92

Indicators: Crime and Violence

Homicide (100,000 inhabitants):

The quotient between the number of homicides and the total population, at the end of the period, per 100,000 inhabitants for a given period:

Regional System of Standardized Citizen Security and Coexistence Indicators (SES)

TH = (NTH/TP)*100,000 TH: rate of homicides

OAS/IDB/CISALVA NTH: total number of homicides

TP: total population

Homicides of women (100,000 women):

The quotient between the number of homicides of women and the total female population, at the end of the period, per 100,000 inhabitants for a given period:

THM = (NTHM/TPM)*100,000

OIS

THM: rate of homicides of females NTHM: total number of homicides of females

TPM: total female population

Homicides of men (100,000 men):

The quotient between the number of homicides of men and the total male population, at the end of the period, per 100,000 inhabitants for a given period:

THH = (NTHH/TPH)*100,000

OIS

THH: male homicide rate NTHH: total number of male homicides

TPH: total male population

93

Homicides of young adults 18-‐24 years of age (100,000 inhabitants 18-‐24 years of age):

The quotient between the number of homicides of youth 18-‐24 years of age and the total population, at the end of the period, per 100,000 inhabitants for a given period:

THJ = (NTHJ/TP)J*100,000

OIS

THJ:homicide rate of youth 18-‐24 years of age NTHJ: total homicides of persons 18-‐24 years of age

TPJ: total population of youth 18-‐24 years of age

Deaths due to traffic accidents 100,000 inhabitants):

The quotient between the number of deaths due to traffic accidents, at the end of the period, per 100,000 inhabitants for a given period:


TMT = (NMT/TP)*100,000 TMT: rate of deaths from traffic accidents NMT: total number of deaths from accidents


Suicides (100,000 inhabitants over 5 years of age):

The quotient between the number of suicides and the total population over 5 years of age, at the end of the period, per 100,000 inhabitants for a given period: Regional System of

Standardized Citizen Security and Coexistence Indicators (SES)

TSu = (NSu/TP>5)*100,000 TSu: suicide rate NSu: total suicides

TP>5: total population over 5 years of age

94

Female suicides (100,000 female inhabitants over 5 years of age):

The quotient between the number of female suicides and the total female population over 5 years of age, at the end of the period, per 100,000 inhabitants for a given period:

TSM = (NSM/TPM>5)*100,000 TSM: female suicide rate NSM: total number of female suicides

TPM>5: total female population over 5 years of age

Male Suicides (100,000 male inhabitants over 5 years of age):

The quotient between the number of male suicides and the total male population over 5 years of age, at the end of the period, per 100,000 inhabitants for a given period:

TSH = (NSH/TPH>5)*100,000 TSH: male suicide rate

OAS/IDB/CISALVA NSH: total number of male suicides

TPH>5: total male population over 5 years of age

Kidnappings (100,000 inhab):

The quotient between the number of kidnappings and the total population, at the end of the period, in terms of 100,000 inhabitants for a given period:

TSe = (NSe/PT)*100,000 TSe: kidnapping rate

OAS/IDB/CISALVA NSe: Total number of kidnappings

PT: total population

95

Deaths from firearms (100,000 inhabitants):

The quotient between the number of homicides using firearms and the total population, at the end of the period, per 100,000 inhabitants for a given period:


TMAf = (MAf/TP)*100,000 TMAf: rate of deaths from firearms

OAS/IDB/CISALVA

MAf: total number of deaths from firearms


Convictions in rape cases (100,000 inhabitants)

The quotient between the total number of convictions for rape and the total population, at the end of the period, per 100, 000 inhabitants for a given period:

UNODC – Crime Survey TCV = (NCS/PT)*100,000 TCV: ate of convictions NCS: total number of rape convictions


Victimization rate: % of persons who claim to be victims of a crime out of the total population surveyed in a victimization survey

Thefts (100,000 inhab):

The quotient between the number of thefts and the total population, at the end of the period, per 100,000 inhabitants for a given period:


This rate is computed as follows, for a year or a specific period: THu = (Hu/TP)*100,000

OAS/IDB/CISALVA THu: rate of thefts Hu: total number of thefts


96

Robbery rate (per 100,000 inhabitants)

The quotient between the number of robberies and the total population, at the end of the period, per 100,000 inhabitants for a given period:


TRo = (Ro/TP)*100,000 Ro: total number of robberies

OAS/IDB/CISALVA TP: total population.

Vehicle theft (100,000 inhab):

The quotient between the number of vehicle thefts and the total population, at the end of the period, per 100,000 inhabitants for a given period:

UNODC TRV = (NRV/PT)*100,000 NRV: total number of vehicle thefts


Reports of sexual crimes (100,000 inhabitants):

The quotient between the total number of sexual crimes reported and the total population, at the end of the period, per 100,000 inhabitants for a given period:


TDS = (DDS/PT)*100,000 DDS: total number of sexual crimes reported

OAS/IDB/CISALVA PT: total population

Rate of reports of abuse of children and adolescents (100,000 children and adolescents)

The quotient between the total number of cases of child abuse reported and the total population under 18 years of age, at the end of the period, per 100,000 inhabitants for a given period:


97

TMNNA = (CMNNA/TP<18)*100,000

OAS/IDB/CISALVA

CMNNA: Total number of reports of abuse of children and adolescents

TP<18: total population under 18 years of age

Reports of domestic violence (100,000 inhabitants)

The quotient between the total number of reports of domestic violence recorded and the total population, at the end of the period, per 100,000 inhabitants for a given period:


TDVIF = (VIF/PT)*100,000 VIF: Total number of reports of domestic violence, excluding sexual crimes

OAS/IDB/CISALVA


98

Indicators: Security actors

Police (100,000 inhabitants)

The formula for computing this rate for a given moment in time is:

OAS Department of Public Security

TP = (TNP/PT)*100,000 TNP: Total number of police

PT: Total population

% of female police or police-‐ women:

Represents the percentage of female police at a given moment in time. The rate is computed as follows:


WP = (TNWP/TPP)*100 TNWP: total number of female police

TPP: total number of police (men and women)

Private guards (100,000 inhabitants.):



TPG = (TNPG/PT)*100,000 TNPG: total number of private guards


% of female private guards:

Represents the percentage of female private guards at a given moment in time. The rate is computed as follows:

WPG = (TNWPG/TNPG)*100 TNWPG: total number of female private guards

TNPG: total number of private guards (men and women)

99

Prosecutors (100,000 inhabitants):


TF = (TNF/PT)*100,000 TNF: Total number of prosecutors


% of female prosecutors:

Represents the percentage of female prosecutors at a given moment in time. The rate is computed as follows:

WF = (TNFw/TNF)*100 TNFw: total number of female prosecutors

TNF: total number of prosecutors (male and female)

Judges (100,000 inhabitants):


UNODC, Crime Survey / OAS Department of Public Security

TJ = (TNJ/TP)*100,000 NTJ: total number of judges

TP: Total population

% of female judges:

Represents the percentage of female judges at a given moment in time. The rate is computed as follows:


WJ = (TNJw/TNJ)*100 TNJw: total number of female judges TNJ: total number of judges (men and women)

100

Indicators: Prison systems

Overcrowding rate

This represents the percentage of inmates in excess of the official prison capacity at a given time. It is computed as follows:


OL = (NTPP/OPC)*100 NTPP: total prison population

OPC: official prison capacity

Prison population (p/100,000 inhabitants)

This represents the percentage of persons deprived of their freedom for every 100,000 adults at a given time. It is computed as follows:


TPP = (NTPP/TP)*100,000 NTPP: total prison population

TP: Total population

Percentage of inmates not sentenced:

This represents the percentage of persons deprived of their freedom who have not been sentenced by a court. It is computed as follows:


TPD = (TNPD/TNPP)*100 TNPD: total number of inmates who have not been sentenced

TNPP: Total prison population

MISCE00862E04

Manual for National Observatories - OAS ·...

Documents

Transcript of Manual for National Observatories - OAS ·...