Patterns and trends in crime

Crime patterns refer to the ways in which offences occur across different times, places, and groups, while trends show how these patterns change over time. Understanding these helps sociologists analyse the causes and impacts of crime in society. Data on crime comes from two main sources: police-recorded statistics, which capture offences reported to and recorded by the police, and victim surveys like the Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW), which asks people about their experiences of crime whether reported or not.

Historical trends in police-recorded crime

Police-recorded crime provides official figures on offences that come to the attention of law enforcement. These trends can be influenced by changes in reporting practices, laws, or counting rules.

Key trends in police-recorded crime:

• Crime levels rose steadily through most of the 1980s.
• From 1992 to 1997, there was a consistent yearly decline.
• A change in crime counting rules in 2002 caused a temporary increase in recorded figures.
• Between 2004 and 2014, crime generally fell each year, with a small exception in 2012 due to updated criteria for fraud offences.

Recent trends from the Crime Survey for England and Wales

The CSEW is a large-scale victimisation survey that estimates crime levels by interviewing adults about incidents they have experienced. It often captures unreported crimes, providing a broader picture than police data alone.

Recent CSEW findings:

• In 2016, the CSEW estimated approximately 6.3 million crime incidents experienced by adults aged 16 and over.
• This represented a 6 per cent decrease compared with the 2015 estimate.

Recent trends in police-recorded crime

Police data for the year ending March 2016 showed some contrasting patterns to the CSEW, highlighting differences between reported and unreported crime.

Police-recorded crime findings:

• Police recorded approximately 4.5 million offences, marking an 8 per cent rise from the previous year.
• This increase occurred in 40 out of 44 police forces (including the British Transport Police).
• The rise was mainly driven by higher recordings of violence against the person and sexual offences.

Social distribution of crime by social class

Social distribution of crime examines how offending and victimisation vary across different social classes, which are groups defined by factors like income, occupation, and education. Lower social classes often face higher risks, linked to deprivation (a lack of resources and opportunities). However, direct data on class and crime is limited because official records rarely include socio-economic details.

Links between social class and offending

Offending refers to the act of committing crimes. While police and survey data do not routinely record offenders' social class, insights come from studying the backgrounds of convicted individuals, such as those in prisons or youth detention centres. These suggest a strong connection between deprivation and criminal behaviour.

Characteristics of prisoners from disadvantaged backgrounds:

• About 11 per cent ran away from home as children or were homeless or in care before conviction.
• Educational exclusion is common, with about one-third of female prisoners and half of male prisoners having been excluded from school; most have no qualifications, compared with 15 per cent in the general population.
• Many experienced trauma, such as 41 per cent witnessing domestic violence as children and nearly one-third facing abuse.
• Socio-economic patterns show that 74 per cent of prisoners come from the poorest 20 per cent of the population; before conviction, most were unemployed or in semi-skilled or unskilled manual jobs.

These clues indicate that lower social classes, marked by deprivation, are over-represented among offenders, possibly due to limited opportunities leading to crime as a response to inequality.

Links between social class and victimisation

Victimisation occurs when individuals or groups experience crime. Research shows that lower social classes are more likely to be victims, often repeatedly, which compounds their disadvantages.

Key findings from the Crime Survey for England and Wales

The CSEW is a national survey that gathers data on crime experiences. Results show that poorer households face a higher risk of burglary than higher-income households.

Insights from local crime surveys

Local studies provide detailed views of victimisation in specific areas.

Islington crime survey:

• Results - Poorer communities experienced higher rates of victimisation than more affluent areas.
• Findings on repeat victimisation - Poor people were often victimised multiple times in a year, such as through repeated muggings or burglaries.

Merseyside crime survey:

• Results - Similar to Islington, it found poorer communities at greater risk of crime than wealthier ones.
• Findings on repeat victimisation - Low-income individuals were frequently targeted more than once annually.

Additional challenges for poorer victims

Being a victim is often more damaging for those in lower social classes due to limited resources.

Why victimisation impacts poorer people more severely:

• They may lack insurance to replace stolen items, making recovery harder.
• Affording security measures like locks, alarms, or lights is difficult, leaving them vulnerable to further crimes.
• Poor relationships with police can worsen the experience: many in deprived areas hesitate to report crimes, believing officers do not take them seriously or respond effectively.