To address crime smartly, begin with better data
Victimisation surveys can help bridge the gap between the people and the police, benefiting both stakeholders
Crime is a big problem in India, as big a problem, according to a recent survey, as lack of employment opportunities, corruption and terrorism. The official records are insufficient to gauge the scale of the problem because of widespread under-reporting. To address the problem of crime we must begin with better data.
IDFC Institute’s Safety Trends and Reporting of Crime (SATARC) survey of 20,597 households in Mumbai, Delhi, Bengaluru and Chennai, asked households about their experience with crime and perceptions of safety. It found that theft was the most prevalent among the seven surveyed crimes. About 8% of people in Delhi reported being a victim of theft. The proportions were 4% in Mumbai and 2% in Chennai and Bengaluru. Yet only 6-8% of theft victims lodged an FIR with the police in the four cities. It is this fraction of cases that is reflected in the official records, while 92-94% remain unreported.
The official records undercount theft because less than half of victims approach the police and only a handful of those end up filing an FIR. For instance, in Delhi, 45% of theft victims approached the police of which 16% lodged an FIR. The main reasons for not approaching the police were lack of evidence, fear of being caught in police or court matters, the perception that police may not entertain their complaint and the perception that the crime was not of a serious nature.
The survey tells us a low official crime rate may not necessarily mean ‘lack of crime’. When victims don’t report, the police cannot effectively target and prevent crime. Such surveys give the police a better understanding of crime and help bridge the gap between the people and the police, benefiting both.
The survey also has good news. A large proportion of victims who lodged an FIR were satisfied with the police. Of those who registered an FIR, about 52% and 55% of the victims were satisfied in Delhi and Mumbai, respectively. The reasons for satisfaction were attentiveness and promptness with which the police dealt with the situation. Dissatisfaction was primarily due to the long wait in registering the FIR or refusal from the police while registering the FIR.
The US and the UK created victimisation surveys in 1973 and 1982, respectively, while others like, Australia institutionalised them more recently in 2008-09. Such data can complement official crime records by identifying unreported crimes, recognising those most vulnerable to crime, evaluating people’s attitude towards the police, and assessing the impact of crime on quality of life.
Better policing and safer streets start with better data.