« Previous | Contents | Next »
Listen
CHAPTER TWO EXTENT OF CRIME IN SCOTLAND
2.1 This chapter examines the extent of crime in Scotland, firstly giving an overview of the total number of crimes estimated by the survey and the overall risk of victimisation. Individual sections then examine the different types of offence recorded by the survey. Throughout the chapter, comparisons are made with previous sweeps of the survey.
Extent of Crime: Overview
Total number of crimes reported by the survey
2.2 According to the 2006 SCVS there were just over one million crimes committed against individuals and households in Scotland between the 1st April 2005 and 31st March 2006 4. It must be remembered though that the SCVS does not cover all types of crime and so this estimate is not a definitive statement about the total number of crimes in Scotland. Full details of the crimes counted by the survey are given in Annex 6.
2.3 Figure 2.1 shows how the number of crimes reported on the SCVS has varied since the first sweep in 1993 (covering 1992). There was a steady decline between 1992 and 1999 but since this point the estimated total number of crimes has risen and fallen with each sweep of the survey. In 2002, the estimated number of crimes reached a peak of around 1.1 million crimes, before falling in 2003/4 and then rising again in 2005/6. The principle cause of the rise between 2003/4 and 2005/6 was a 40% increase in the number of violent (and in particular those of minor assault) crimes recorded.
2.4 The 2005/6 estimate of the total number of crimes was similar to the estimate produced by the first survey in 1992 5. In general, this stems from an increase in personal crime (in particular minor assault) balanced by a fall in household crime (particularly housebreaking). More details are provided in section 2.2 below.
Figure 2.1 Trends in crime reported to the SCVS, 1992 to 2005/6 (number of crimes in millions)
Source: 2006 SCVS (n = 4,988); 2004 SCVS (n=3,034); 2003 SCS (n=5,041); 2000 SCS (n=5,059); 1996 SCS (n=5,045); 1993 SCS (n=5,030)
2.5 Of the total number of crimes estimated by the survey as having taken place in Scotland, around 690,000 were directly comparable with offence categories used in police recorded crime figures (namely: vandalism, housebreaking, theft of a motor vehicle, bicycle theft, assault and robbery) 6. In the period between the 1st April 2005 and the 31st March 2006, the police recorded the details of 127,000 comparable crimes suggesting that around three quarters (76%) of these comparable offences went unrecorded.
2.6 Figure 2.2 provides an overview of the breakdown of various types of crime (more detail is provided in section 2.2 below). This shows that crimes against property were more numerous than crimes against individuals, with 56% of crimes being classed as 'household crimes' and 44% as 'personal crimes' 7. Three in 10 crimes reported (30%) involved violence (robbery and serious and minor assault) which was a significantly higher proportion than was found in previous sweeps of the survey: in 2002 and 2003/4, the proportions were 22% and 24% respectively. This rise is due to the increase in minor assault, as discussed further in section 2.2.3.
2.7 All types of vandalism (property and vehicle) represented around one in 4 (26%) of all crimes reported in 2005/6. This was a significantly lower proportion compared with what was reported in both 2002 and 2003/4, when vandalism accounted for around one in 3 of all crimes.
Figure 2.2 Crime in Scotland in 2005/6 by offence type
Source: 2006 SCVS (n = 4,988)
Risk of victimisation
2.8 As well as estimating how many incidents of each type of crime happened in 2005/6, the SCVS can also be used to estimate the proportion of households or individuals who were the victims of crime in 2005/6 (the prevalence rate, or risk of being a victim).
2.9 Figures from the 2006 SCVS estimate that just over one in 5 adults (22%) reported being the victim of at least one household or personal crime between 1st April 2005 and 31st March 2006. This was not statistically different from the estimates in the previous 2 surveys (2003 SCS and 2004 SCVS) 8.
2.10 As explained above there were far more crimes against property than against individuals. The risk of being the victim of household crime was therefore much higher than the risk of being the victim of a personal crime (16% or around one in 6 compared to 7%, or one in 14).
2.11 The risk of being the victim of a crime has remained constant in recent years (since 1999), and there have been no statistically significant differences by type of crime during that time. Going back to 1992, there has been an overall decrease in the risk of victimisation, due to a fall in the risk of household crime (in particular housebreaking and theft from a motor vehicle), from 22% to 16%.
Types of Offence
2.12 Each type of offence recorded by the survey is now examined in more detail; full details of the estimates for all offences can be found in Tables A2.1 to A2.4 in Annex 1. Prevalence rates for each offence are shown in Table A2.5.
2.13 The estimates in this section are 'best estimates'; however, each estimate has an associated sampling error, which varies by type of offence. Tables A2.1 and A2.3 show the 'best estimate' for each type of offence, together with the confidence interval associated with this estimate. These tables also show figures for 'lower' and 'upper estimate', effectively showing the range within which the true figure will lie at the 95% confidence level 9.
2.14 In practice, changes in less common types of crime (e.g. violent crime) are particularly difficult to measure over time, as any changes detected tend not to be statistically significant. Subsequent sweeps of the survey will employ a larger sample size to improve the ability of the survey measures to monitor statistically different changes in rarer crimes.
Vandalism
2.15 In 2005/6 there were an estimated 274,000 incidents of vandalism in Scotland. Figure 2.3 shows that incidents of motor vehicle vandalism were more numerous than incidents of property vandalism (168,000 compared with 106,000).
2.16 In terms of incidence rates, there were 733 incidents of motor vehicle vandalism and 464 incidents of property vandalism for every 10,000 households, giving a total incidence rate for vandalism of 1,197 incidents per 10,000 households in Scotland.
Figure 2.3 Estimated number of incidents of vandalism in 2005/6 (in 000's)
Source: 2006 SCVS (n = 4,988)
2.17 Figure 2.4 shows how the incidence rate for vandalism has changed since 1992. The number of incidents of vandalism (of both motor vehicles and property) per 10,000 households rose sharply between 1999 and 2002. However, since 2002 the number has been falling steadily, with the sharpest decline being seen in incidents of property vandalism, which in 2005/6 was roughly back to the level reported in 1992 10.
2.18 This decline has not been mirrored in police recorded crime figures which rose significantly between 1999/2000 and 2004/5 from 27,000 comparable incidents to 42,000. The 2005/6 figure has remained at this level (42,000 comparable incidents). This increase is thought to have come about largely as a result of the introduction of the Scottish Crime Recording Standard ( SCRS) in 2004 which ensured that all incidents reported by victims would be recorded as crimes regardless of any corroborative evidence.
Figure 2.4 Changes in vandalism between 1992 and 2005/6: rates per 10,000 households
Source: 2006 SCVS (n = 4,988); 2004 SCVS (n=3,034); 2003 SCS (n=5,041); 2000 SCS (n=5,059); 1996 SCS (n=5,045); 1993 SCS (n=5,030)
2.19 The prevalence rate or risk of vandalism, was higher than for any other crime type, with 8% of households reporting that they had been the victim of an incident of vandalism in 2005/6. The prevalence rate has risen and fallen in line with the incidence rate since 1992. When the incidence rate was at its highest in 2002, the prevalence rate for vandalism was 10%.
Theft of property
2.20 In 2005/6, 45% of all crimes reported on the SCVS involved the theft or attempted theft of property. These crimes can be divided into theft against households (housebreaking, other household theft, theft from and of a motor vehicle, and theft of a bicycle) and personal theft (theft from the person and other personal theft). The SCVS estimates that there were 324,000 incidents of household theft and 153,000 incidents of personal theft in Scotland in 2005/6.
2.21 The total number of property thefts is shown in Figure 2.5, but in summary the estimates are as follows:
- 64,000 incidents of housebreaking, including attempted housebreaking.
- 135,000 incidents of 'other household theft'.
- 10,000 incidents of theft of a motor vehicle; 77,000 incidents of theft from a motor vehicle and 15,000 incidents of attempted theft either of or from a motor vehicle.
- 22,000 incidents of bicycle theft.
- 26,000 incidents of theft from the person, including all actual or attempted pick-pocketing
- 127,000 incidents of 'other personal theft' (that is personal property stolen from outside of the home where there was no direct contact between the offender and the victim, e.g. valuables stolen from the workplace or a cloakroom).
Figure 2.5 Estimated number of thefts of property offences in 2005/6 (in 000's)
Source: 2006 SCVS (n = 4,988)
2.22 It is worth noting that the above figures represent simply a count of the total number of incidents estimated from the survey, rather than the incidence rates for each type of offence. The remainder of this section examines these figures in more detail.
Housebreaking / Other household theft
2.23 The 64,000 incidents of housebreaking estimated by the survey included 33,000 incidents where the offender gained entry to the home and 31,000 incidents where the offender did not manage to gain entry (attempted housebreakings).
2.24 Only 4 in 10 cases of housebreaking (41%) actually involved items being stolen.
2.25 In 2005/6 there were 282 incidents of housebreaking for every 10,000 households. This is the lowest incidence rate ever recorded by the SCVS or the SCS. Figure 2.6 shows that there has been a steady decline in the incidence of housebreakings since 1992. This is likely to be at least in part explained by improvements in the home security measures available.
Figure 2.6 Changes in housebreaking between 1992 and 2005/6 (rate per 10,000 households)
Source: 2006 SCVS (n = 4,988); 2004 SCVS (n=3,034); 2003 SCS (n=5,041); 2000 SCS (n=5,059); 1996 SCS (n=5,045); 1993 SCS (n=5,030)
2.26 Police recorded crime figures show a similar decline in the number of housebreakings: in 1996 the police recorded 62,000 incidents of housebreaking, but by 2005/6 this had halved to 31,000 incidents.
2.27 A decline of a similar magnitude has also been seen in England and Wales, where the incidence of domestic burglaries (as measured by the British Crime Survey) reached its peak in the early-mid 1990s and has been falling steadily since this time.
2.28 Figures from the 2006 SCVS estimate that the risk of being the victim of a housebreaking in 2005/6 was just 2%. This risk is 3 times lower than in 1992.
2.29 In 2005/6 there were an estimated 135,000 incidents of ' other household theft' (defined as actual and attempted thefts from outside or inside a dwelling that did not involve a break-in) 11. The incidence of 'other household thefts' rose by 45% between 2003/4 and 2005/6 to 592 incidents per 10,000 households. This is the highest rate that has been recorded since the survey began, although it is not significantly higher than the rate recorded in the first sweep of the survey (see Figure 2.7).
2.30 It is notable that the incidence rate of 'other household thefts' has risen while the incidence rate of housebreaking has decreased. This pattern may relate to improvements in home security features, which discourage housebreaking but may lead to related crimes that do not require forced entry into the home.
2.31 The risk of being the victim of this type of crime in 2005/6 was estimated at 4%, compared with 3% in 2003/4.
Figure 2.7 Changes in other household theft between 1992 and 2005/6 (rate per 10,000 households)
Source: 2006 SCVS (n = 4,988); 2004 SCVS (n=3,034); 2003 SCS (n=5,041); 2000 SCS (n=5,059); 1996 SCS (n=5,045); 1993 SCS (n=5,030)
Vehicle crime
2.32 In total there were an estimated 102,000 incidents of vehicle crime recorded by the survey. The incidence rates for all three types of vehicle crime: ' theft of a motor vehicle', ' theft from a motor vehicle' and ' attempted theft of/from a vehicle' have in general been declining since 1992.
2.33 The 2005/6 incidence rates of 45 vehicle thefts and 63 attempted thefts of/from a vehicle per 10,000 households are the lowest rates recorded since the survey began (See Figure 2.8). When compared with the early 1990s, the incidence rate of thefts from a vehicle has (along with the other types of vehicle crime) fallen significantly.
Figure 2.8 Changes in vehicle crime between 1992 and 2005/6 (rate per 10,000 households)
Source: 2006 SCVS (n = 4,988); 2004 SCVS (n=3,034); 2003 SCS (n=5,041); 2000 SCS (n=5,059); 1996 SCS (n=5,045); 1993 SCS (n=5,030)
2.34 The decline in the number of vehicle thefts as estimated by the survey follows the same trend as police recorded crime figures. In 1996/97 the police recorded 30,000 incidents of theft of a vehicle but by 2005/6 this had fallen by over half to 13,000 incidents. Thefts from a motor vehicle fell from 40,000 incidents to 13,000 incidents over the same period.
2.35 As with housebreaking, a possible cause of the decline in vehicle crime may be improved security features; public awareness campaigns encouraging drivers to remove valuable items from parked cars may also have had an impact. However, there is no evidence from the SCVS to substantiate these possibilities.
2.36 Looking at prevalence rates, in 2005/6 less than one per cent of vehicle owners reported having a vehicle stolen and a similar proportion reported having someone try to steal their vehicle; just under 4% had had something stolen from a vehicle. As with incidence rates, these are the lowest prevalence rates recorded by the survey. When the incidence rates were at their highest in 1992, the prevalence rates for all 3 types of vehicle crime were around 3 times higher: 3% had had a vehicle stolen; 4% had experienced an attempted vehicle theft and 9% had had something stolen from a vehicle.
2.37 Incidence rates of bicycle theft have not followed such a clear trend. In 2005/6, there were 97 thefts per 10,000 households, a similar proportion to the number recorded in 2003/4. This follows a decline in bicycle thefts from 127 to 82 per 10,000 households between 1992 and 1999, but then a sharp rise in 2002 when a peak of 132 thefts per 10,000 households was reached 12. Less than 2% of bicycle owners were victims of bicycle theft in 2005/6, which represents the lowest prevalence rate ever recorded on the survey.
Thefts from the person /Other personal thefts
2.38 In 2005/6, there were 62 incidents per 10,000 people of ' theft from the person' (covering theft or attempted theft of a purse, wallet, cash, etc. directly from the person of the victim, but without the physical force or the threat of it). This is an increase on the level recorded in 2003/4 (just 13 incidents per 10,000 people). However, (as Figure 2.9 illustrates), the 2005/6 incidence rate is not significantly different from the incidence rates recorded in any of the other previous sweeps of the survey, which suggests that it is the 2003/4 rate (based on a smaller sample size of 3000) which is out of line.
2.39 In 2005/6 the risk of being the victim of theft from the person was less than one per cent (as it has been since 1992).
2.40 The incidence rate of ' other personal thefts' (defined as the theft of personal property outside the home where there was no direct contact between the offender and the victim) has not changed significantly since 1992. The 2006 survey recorded 304 incidents per 10,000 people.
2.41 The risk or prevalence rate of this type of crime in 2005/6 was 2%. As with the incidence rate, this has not changed significantly since 1992).
Figure 2.9 Changes in personal thefts between 1992 and 2005/6 (rate per 10,000 adults)
Source: 2006 SCVS (n = 4,988); 2004 SCVS (n=3,034); 2003 SCS (n=5,041); 2000 SCS (n=5,059); 1996 SCS (n=5,045); 1993 SCS (n=5,030)
Violence
2.42 The SCVS defines violence as the sum of all incidents of assault and robbery. Assault includes 'minor assault' (actual and attempted assaults which lead to no or negligible injuries) and 'serious assault' (leading to overnight stays in hospital or internal injuries, severe concussion, loss of consciousness, lacerations or other injury which could lead to impairment or disfigurement). There were an estimated 320,000 violent crimes in Scotland in 2005/6, which is 40% more incidents than were estimated to have taken place in 2003/4 (228,000 incidents), and the continuation of a longer-term upward trend.
2.43 Around 9 in 10 (91%) violent crimes were assaults. There were an estimated 291,000 incidents of assault in 2005/6, the vast majority being 'minor assaults' (95%), the remainder being 'serious assaults' (an estimated 16,000).
2.44 It is estimated that 4% of adults in Scotland were the victim of a minor assault during 2005/6, and less than 0.5% were the victim of a serious assault.
2.45 Robbery makes up a much smaller proportion of all violent crime. In 2005/6 there were an estimated 30,000 incidents of robbery, and the risk of being a victim of robbery was less than 0.5%.
2.46 Estimates of the number of violent crimes are shown in Figure 2.10.
Figure 2.10 Estimated number of violent crimes in 2005/6 (in 000's)
Source: 2006 SCVS (n = 4,988)
2.47 Figure 2.11 shows how violent crime has changed since 2002. The incidence rate of 'all violent crime' (which includes robbery) has been rising since 1995 and rose by 35 per cent between 2003/4 and 2005/6 to 765 incidents per 10,000 adults. Figure 2.10 clearly shows that minor assault is by far the most significant component of violent crime.
2.48 In 1992 the incidence rates for both serious and minor assaults were almost identical, but from that point on the incidence of minor assaults has risen steadily while the incidence of serious assaults has been in steady decline. The increase in the overall incidence of violent crime has been driven entirely by an increase in the incidence of minor assaults.
Figure 2.11 Changes in violent crime between 1992 and 2005/6 (rate per 10,000 adults)
Source: 2006 SCVS (n = 4,988)
2.49 Police recorded crime figures also show a rise in the number of minor assaults (from 44,000 comparable incidents in 1996/7 to 65,000 in 2005/6. In particular, between 2003/4 and 2004/5 there was a sharp rise in the number of minor assaults recorded by the police (from 52,000 to 67,000 comparable incidents), which is thought to be a result of the introduction of the SCRS in 2004. Therefore, while both survey and police-recorded figures follow a similar pattern, the introduction of SCRS makes it difficult to make a direct comparison. It is also worth noting that a relatively high proportion of minor assaults are not reported to the police.
2.50 The decline in the estimated number of serious assaults shown by the survey has not been seen in police recorded crime figures, which have remained fairly constant at around 7,000 incidents per annum since 1996.
2.51 The number of robberies reported in the survey also increased, from 32 incidents per 10,000 adults in 2003/4, to 71 incidents per 10,000 adults in 2005/6. However, because robbery is such a rare offence this difference is not statistically significant.
Workplace violence
2.52 Chapter 3 examines where incidents took place, and this shows that 10% of offences occurred in or around the respondent's workplace (section 3.2.1). In addition, the SCVS collects information from respondents about whether they have been victims of any form of verbal or physical abuse in the workplace while dealing with the public. These questions were asked as part of the Follow-Up A module, which is answered by approximately half of the sample.
2.53 Around 6 in 10 respondents (59%) were employed at the time of the interview and just over 4 in 10 (44%) were employed in a job which either involved face-to-face or telephone based contact with the general public.
2.54 Among respondents whose employment involved contact with the public, 37% reported that they had been either verbally or physically abused while dealing with the public, in the time since the 1st April 2005 13.
2.55 Figure 2.12 shows the regularity with which those employed in jobs involving contact with the public suffered any form of abuse in the workplace. The majority (63%) had not experienced any such incidents but amongst those who had there was a fairly even split between those who had been abused on a frequent basis (at least once a week), those who had been abused on a fairly regular basis (at least once every two to three months) and those who had been abused on a more sporadic basis (once or twice within the reference period). The questions in the follow-up module did not differentiate verbal and physical abuse, or collect information on the nature of this abuse; so it is not possible to gauge the severity of these incidents. However, analysis of data collected within the victim form shows that 24% of threats and 20% of minor assaults which occurred between 1st April 2005 and 31st March 2006 took place within the respondent's workplace. There were no reports of a serious assault taking place in the workplace within this period.
Figure 2.12 Regularity of physical or verbal abuse within the workplace
Source: 2006 SCVS - Follow Up A respondents whose employment involves contact with public (n =993)
Insults/pestering/intimidation
2.56 An additional set of questions within the Follow-Up A module asked respondents whether they had been insulted, pestered or intimidated by anyone who was not a member of their household in the time since 1st April 2005 14.
2.57 One in 6 respondents (16%) said they had experienced this type of incident. Around 3 in 10 (31%) of those who had been insulted, pestered, or intimidated had experienced just one such incident in the time since 1st April 2005, one in 5 (21%) had experienced 2 incidents, while just under half (46%) had experienced 3 incidents or more 15.
2.58 The majority (68%) of those who reported that they had been insulted, pestered or intimidated had not reported these incidents during the screener stage at the beginning of the questionnaire (which is used to identify whether the respondent has been the victim of any crimes during the reference period), which suggests that these incidents were not necessarily regarded by the respondents as threats. However, respondents who said they had been insulted, pestered or intimidated were more likely than average to have also been the victim of other types of crime, in particular minor assault (13% of people saying they had been insulted, pestered or intimidated also said they had been the victim of minor assault in 2005/6). In addition, one in 4 of the respondents that had said they had been verbally or physically abused at work while dealing with the public also said they had been insulted, pestered or intimidated in the same time period (although we cannot assess whether they were referring to the same incident or a separate one).
« Previous | Contents | Next »