Documento 20 Homicides PDF
He creado un directorio aparte para guardar todos los pdfs sobre mi tema.
20.1 Corpus
Creamos un corpus con la colección de ficheros de textos.
Usaremos el paquete tm de R que permite la manipulación de corpus.
## [1] ".//homicide-pdfs"Mostramos todos los pdfs:
## [1] "homicides1.pdf" "homicides10.pdf" "homicides11.pdf" "homicides12.pdf"
## [5] "homicides13.pdf" "homicides14.pdf" "homicides15.pdf" "homicides2.pdf"
## [9] "homicides3.pdf" "homicides4.pdf" "homicides5.pdf" "homicides6.pdf"
## [13] "homicides7.pdf" "homicides8.pdf" "homicides9.pdf"## [1] 15#Leer los nombres de los ficheros
list.files <- DirSource(directorio.textos)
texts <- lapply(list.files, pdf_text) ## PDF error: Invalid Font Weight
## PDF error: Invalid Font Weight
## PDF error: Invalid Font Weight
## PDF error: Invalid Font Weight
## PDF error: Invalid Font Weight
## PDF error: Invalid Font Weight
## PDF error: Invalid Font Weight
## PDF error: Invalid Font Weight
## PDF error: Invalid Font Weight
## PDF error: Invalid Font Weight
## PDF error: Invalid Font Weight
## PDF error: Invalid Font Weight
## PDF error: Invalid Font Weight
## PDF error: Invalid Font Weight
## PDF error: Invalid Font Weight
## PDF error: Invalid Font Weight
## PDF error: Invalid Font Weight
## PDF error: Invalid Font Weight
## PDF error: Invalid Font Weight
## PDF error: Invalid Font Weight
## PDF error: Invalid Font Weight
## PDF error: Invalid Font Weight
## PDF error: Invalid Font Weight
## PDF error: Invalid Font Weight
## PDF error: Invalid Font Weight
## PDF error: Invalid Font Weight
## PDF error: Invalid Font Weight
## PDF error: Invalid Font Weight
## PDF error: Invalid Font Weight
## PDF error: Invalid Font Weight
## PDF error: Invalid Font Weight
## PDF error: Invalid Font Weight
## PDF error: Invalid Font Weight
## PDF error: Invalid Font Weight
## PDF error: Invalid Font Weight## [1] 6## $encoding
## [1] " 2019\r\nGLOBAL STUDY ON HOMICIDE\r\nExecutive summary\r\n"
## [2] ""
## [3] "UNITED NATIONS OFFICE ON DRUGS AND CRIME\r\n Vienna\r\n GLOBAL STUDY ON HOMICIDE\r\n Executive summary\r\n 2019\r\n"
## [4] ""
## [5] "© United Nations, July 2019. All rights reserved worldwide.\r\nThis publication may be reproduced in whole or in part and in any form\r\nfor educational or non-profit purposes without special permission from\r\nthe copyright holder, provided acknowledgement of the source is made.\r\nThe United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) would appreciate\r\nreceiving a copy of any publication that uses this publication as a source.\r\nSuggested citation: UNODC, Global Study on Homicide 2019 (Vienna, 2019)\r\nNo use of this publication may be made for resale or any other commercial\r\npurpose whatsoever without prior permission in writing from UNODC.\r\nApplications for such permission, with a statement of purpose and intent of the\r\nreproduction, should be addressed to the Research and Trend Analysis Branch of UNODC.\r\nDISCLAIMER\r\nThe content of this publication does not necessarily reflect the views or\r\npolicies of UNODC or contributory organizations, nor does it imply any endorsement.\r\nComments on the report are welcome and can be sent to:\r\nDivision for Policy Analysis and Public Affairs\r\nUnited Nations Office on Drugs and Crime\r\nPO Box 500\r\n1400 Vienna\r\nAustria\r\nTel: (+43) 1 26060 0\r\nFax: (+43) 1 26060 5827\r\n"
## [6] ""
## [7] " Executive summary\r\nPREFACE\r\nThe Global Study on Homicide is a search for solutions. By bringing together the available data, the United\r\nNations Office on Drugs and Crime seeks to shed light on different phenomena, from lethal gang violence\r\nand the role of firearms to links with inequalities and gender-related killings, and in this way support\r\ntargeted action. I hope that the research and analysis contained in the study are used in this spirit – not to\r\ndesignate “murder capitals” but to learn, understand and strengthen prevention.\r\nCriminal activity is responsible for many more deaths worldwide than armed conflict and terrorism\r\ncombined. Unless the international community takes decisive steps, targets under Sustainable\r\nDevelopment Goal 16 to significantly reduce all forms of violence and related death rates by 2030 will not\r\nbe met.\r\nThe Americas continue to report high homicide rates. Young men are especially at risk, with a homicide\r\nrate for men aged 18 to 19 estimated at 46 per 100,000 – far higher than the risk faced by their peers in\r\nother regions. Firearms are also involved far more often in homicides in the Americas than in other parts\r\nof the world.\r\nBy contrast, Europe has seen a decline in the homicide rate by 63 per cent since 2002 and by 38 per cent\r\nsince 1990. The rate in Asia has fallen by 36 per cent since 1990. Data collection overall has improved since\r\nthe previous Global Study on Homicide, but there remain serious gaps in the availability of reliable data for\r\nAfrican countries. There are also indications that homicide is underreported in the official statistics in\r\nPacific countries.\r\nThis study offers particular insights into the gender-related killing of women and girls. “Femicide”\r\nrepresents just a small percentage of the overall number of homicides, but our analysis indicates that the\r\ndrivers of this type of lethal violence require tailored responses. Killings carried out by intimate partners\r\nare rarely spontaneous or random, and should be examined as an extreme act on a continuum of gender-\r\nrelated violence that remains underreported and too often ignored.\r\nThe Global Study on Homicide 2019 also documents successes in preventing and addressing lethal violence.\r\nIn particular, the study offers examples of effective community-based interventions in settings afflicted by\r\nviolence, gangs and organized crime. These accounts show that with targeted interventions backed by\r\nsustained engagement and trust between communities and law enforcement, bringing down homicide\r\nrates is possible.\r\n Yury Fedotov\r\n Executive Director, United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime\r\n 1\r\n"
## [8] ""
## [9] " Executive summary\r\n ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS\r\n The Global Study on Homicide 2019 was prepared by the Research and Trend Analysis Branch, Division for\r\n Policy Analysis and Public Affairs, United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, under the supervision of Jean-\r\n Luc Lemahieu, Director of the Division, and Angela Me, Chief of the Research and Trend Analysis Branch.\r\n General coordination and content overview\r\n Angela Me\r\n Andrada-Maria Filip\r\n Analysis and drafting\r\nErik Alda Kristiina Kangaspunta\r\nJoseph Boyle Theodore Leggett\r\nTommaso Comunale Marieke Liem\r\nJonathan Gibbons Hanneke Schönberger\r\nMichael Jandl Antoine Vella\r\nAlexander Kamprad Irmgard Zeiler\r\n Editing\r\n Luis Sundkvist\r\n Data management and estimates production\r\nOualid Akakzia Stefanie Mavrakou\r\nKaren Avanesyan Beatriz de Moraes Rodrigues\r\nEnrico Bisogno Lea Ruiz Taladriz\r\nDiana Camerini Umidjon Rakhmonberdiev\r\nSarika Dewan Mateus Rennó Santos\r\nSalomé Flores Sierra Vania Salgadinho\r\nSmriti Ganapathi Fatma Usheva\r\nKirsty MacAulay Lorenzo Vita\r\n Cover design and production\r\n Anja Korenblik\r\n Suzanne Kunnen\r\n Kristina Kuttnig\r\n Fabian Rettenbacher\r\n Administrative support\r\n Iulia Lazar\r\n Review and comments\r\n The Global Study on Homicide 2019 benefited from the expertise of, and invaluable contributions from,\r\n UNODC colleagues in all divisions and field offices. Particular thanks are owed to the Justice Section of the\r\n Division for Operations. The Research and Trend Analysis Branch also acknowledges the helpful feedback\r\n provided by UNICEF and the expert contributions of:\r\n Murray Ackmann Manuel Eisner Robert Muggah\r\n Katherine Aguirre Renata Giannini Tapio Lappi-Seppälä\r\n Myrna Dawson Anine Kriegler Martti Lehti\r\n The research for this booklet was made possible by the generous contribution of Sweden.\r\n 3\r\n"
## [10] ""
## [11] " Executive summary\r\nCONTENTS\r\nPreface ................................................................................................................................................. 1\r\nAcknowledgements .............................................................................................................................. 3\r\nIntroduction to the concept of intentional homicide ............................................................................. 7\r\nExecutive summary ............................................................................................................................. 11\r\n 1. Latest trends ......................................................................................................................................... 11\r\n 2. Victims and perpetrators ...................................................................................................................... 23\r\n 3. Reasons for killing and drivers of homicide .......................................................................................... 26\r\nConclusions and policy implications .................................................................................................... 35\r\n 5\r\n"
## [12] ""
## [13] " Executive summary\r\nINTRODUCTION TO THE CONCEPT OF\r\nINTENTIONAL HOMICIDE\r\nIntentional homicide is the ultimate crime and has ripple effects that go far beyond the original loss of\r\nhuman life. For homicide also blights the lives of the victim’s family and community, who may therefore be\r\ndescribed as “secondary victims”. It creates a violent environment that has a negative impact on society,\r\nthe economy and government institutions. Homicide is not limited to people living on the margins of\r\nsociety; rather, it can affect all people, irrespective of their age, sex, ethnicity and socioeconomic\r\nbackground. Since homicide has an impact on people from all walks of life, all facets of homicide need to\r\nbe analysed.\r\nThe study of intentional homicide is relevant not only because of the gravity of the offence, but also\r\nbecause intentional homicide is one of the most measurable and comparable indicators for monitoring\r\nviolent deaths. Because of its lethal outcome, homicide is particularly amenable to temporal (longitudinal)\r\nand cross-national (geographic) comparisons: it tends to have greater definitional specificity than other\r\ncrimes in different historical and national contexts.1 Homicide is an act that meets with virtually universal\r\ncondemnation, and homicide statistics are accordingly considered to be relatively reliable and valid – both\r\nat the national level and for longitudinal and cross-national comparisons. 2 As a readily measurable\r\nindicator, homicide is both a reasonable proxy for violent crime and a robust indicator of levels of violence\r\nwithin States.3\r\nWhen attempting to measure the scale of homicide it is important to have a clear definition that provides\r\nguidance on which specific acts of killing are to be considered intentional homicide. Certain contextual\r\nchallenges may arise when intentional killings have to be disentangled from other killings during situations\r\nof collective violence, such as armed conflict or civil unrest.\r\nThe International Classification of Crime for Statistical Purposes (ICCS),4 developed by the United Nations\r\nOffice on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), provides a framework for the definition and classification of unlawful\r\nkillings, both in conflict and non-conflict situations. Homicide is defined in ICCS as “unlawful death inflicted\r\nupon a person with the intent to cause death or serious injury”. This statistical definition contains three\r\nelements that characterize the killing of a person as “intentional homicide”:\r\n 1. The killing of a person by another person (objective element)\r\n 2. The intent of the perpetrator to kill or seriously injure the victim (subjective element)\r\n 3. The unlawfulness of the killing (legal element)\r\nFor recording purposes, all killings that meet the criteria listed above are to be considered intentional\r\nhomicides, irrespective of definitions provided by national legislations or practices. Killings as a result of\r\nterrorist activities are also to be classified as a form of intentional homicide.\r\nICCS also provides a statistical framework for disentangling homicides from other conflict-related deaths.\r\nWhen applying this framework and aggregating the various forms of lethal victimization perpetrated\r\nglobally, it transpires that a relatively small share is attributable to conflict deaths. The greatest burden of\r\nlethal victimization ultimately stems from homicidal violence.\r\nAmong the various forms of violent death, the core element of intentional homicide is the complete liability\r\nof the perpetrator, which differentiates it from killings related to armed conflict and war, self-inflicted\r\ndeath (suicide), killings due to legal interventions and justifiable homicide (such as self-defence), and from\r\ndeaths caused by reckless or negligent actions, which were not intended to take a human life\r\n(non-intentional homicide).\r\n1\r\n Johnson, B. D., Van Wingerden, S. and Nieuwbeerta, P., “Sentencing homicide offenders in the Netherlands: offender, victim, and\r\n situational influences in criminal punishment”, Criminology, vol. 48, No. 4 (November 2010), pp. 981–1018.\r\n2\r\n Marshall, I. H. and Summers, D. L., “Contemporary differences in rates and trends of homicide among European nations”, Handbook of\r\n European Homicide Research: Patterns, Explanations, and Country Studies (New York, Springer, 2012).\r\n3\r\n UNODC, Global Study on Homicide 2013 (United Nations publication, Sales No. 14.IV.1).\r\n4\r\n UNODC, International Classification of Crime for Statistical Purposes (ICCS): Version 1.0 (Vienna, 2015).\r\n 7\r\n"
## [14] "Global study on homicide 2019\r\nSource: UNODC.\r\nVarious circumstances, motivations and relationships can act as driving forces of homicide, and they are\r\noften overlapping and multifaceted. Although it can sometimes be difficult to distinguish between the\r\ndifferent elements that drive homicide, the Global Study on Homicide uses a classification of homicide into\r\nthree main typologies: homicide related to interpersonal conflict, homicide related to criminal activities\r\nand homicide related to sociopolitical agendas.\r\nBy improving understanding of the underlying patterns and trends related to homicide at the global,\r\nregional and national levels, this study can support governments in their efforts to address root causes and\r\nenhance public health and criminal justice responses to violence. This aim is also enshrined in the\r\nSustainable Development Goals, target 16.1 of which reads: “Significantly reduce all forms of violence and\r\nrelated death rates everywhere”, while the associated indicator 16.1.1 is defined as: “Number of victims of\r\nintentional homicide per 100,000 population, by sex and age”. A summary of the interplay between the\r\nSustainable Development Goals and homicidal violence is provided below.\r\n Summary of the interplay between homicidal violence\r\n and the Sustainable Development Goals\r\n Poverty is a risk factor associated with violent crime and victimization at both the\r\n individual and national level. At the individual level, people may resort to violent crime\r\n as a means of survival. At the national level, a shrinking economy may be accompanied\r\n by reduced investment in law enforcement systems, leading to a state of lawlessness, in\r\n which citizens are more exposed to violent crime. High levels of violence can also drive\r\n property values down and undermine business growth, thus exacerbating poverty,\r\n which can in turn lead to further violence. Large-scale violence hinders efforts to reduce\r\n poverty.\r\n Target 1.4 …access to basic services, ownership and control over land…\r\n Insecure land tenure and access to land in the context of an inadequate legal framework\r\n that does not enforce individual property rights can create disputes and produce a high\r\n level of violence.\r\n Homicide is among the leading causes of death among young people (aged 15 to 29) in\r\n some countries and, in general, results in millions of years of life being lost annually.\r\n High levels of violence, including homicide, put a heavy strain on public health services,\r\n particularly in developing countries where resources are already scarce. Moreover,\r\n mental health issues are more common in countries with comparatively high levels of\r\n lethal violence, which places a further burden on public health services. On the whole,\r\n a high level of violence shortens life expectancy significantly.\r\n 8\r\n"
## [15] " Executive summary\r\nHigh levels of homicide and violence in general can have a negative impact on schooling\r\nand educational outcomes. Because of the diminished economic opportunities faced by\r\nyoung people who fail to receive a high-quality education, they are more likely to engage\r\nin delinquent and violent behaviour, which can ultimately even lure them into organized\r\ncriminal structures. Education in both formal and informal settings is a key element in\r\nreducing violence because it helps to strengthen key life skills that build resilience to\r\ncrime and victimization, and also to increase employment opportunities, which act as a\r\nprotective factor against crime and violence.\r\nHigh and persistent levels of violence are a threat to achieving gender equality. Societies\r\nwith pronounced gender inequality tend to be characterized by higher levels of\r\ninterpersonal violence against women, including lethal violence. Conversely, the\r\nempowerment of women has been shown to be accompanied by a decrease in the level\r\nof intimate partner violence. Greater autonomy and independence, when also\r\ncombined with a higher social status, help to protect women from the risk of homicide.\r\nLethal violence results in both direct and indirect monetary costs for society and can\r\nimpede economic growth. Sustained economic growth can improve economic\r\nconditions and access to health and social services, and thus reduce some of the risk\r\nfactors associated with a higher level of violence. An increase in the proportion of young\r\npeople who are not economically active (not in employment, education or training) is\r\nlinked to an increase in levels of homicide.\r\nCountries with greater income inequality are more likely to have higher homicide rates\r\nthan countries with less inequality. Economic developments that exacerbate income\r\ninequality both within and between countries can foster criminal violence. Sociopolitical\r\ninequality, notably unequal access to resources, is known to be a root cause of violent\r\nbehaviour. Marginalized people are more likely to become victims of violence, which\r\nmakes their efforts to enjoy equal rights even more arduous. Unequal access to\r\neducation and health services has also been found to be linked to higher levels of\r\nhomicide, as have higher infant mortality rates.\r\nTarget 10.7…facilitate orderly, safe, and responsible migration and mobility of\r\npeople…\r\nThere is some evidence pointing to a zero or negative correlation between homicide and\r\nmigration at the macro level, whereas other findings suggest that they are positively\r\ncorrelated. Migration may therefore increase or decrease levels of crime depending on\r\nspecific national and subnational contexts, which in turn may either hinder or facilitate\r\nthe integration of migrants in host countries. For example, migration can sometimes\r\nreduce aggregate levels of crime, including violent crime, by increasing labour market\r\nopportunities for both native- and foreign-born populations\r\nAlthough cities provide opportunities, jobs and services for their inhabitants, they are\r\nalso rife with direct and indirect risks of violence. A poorly managed high population\r\ndensity, high levels of income inequality, high prevalence of mental illness and drug\r\ndependence, the potential for anonymity, and the existence of gangs and organized\r\ncrime groups are among the factors that increase those risks in urban areas. On the\r\nother hand, cities can offer protection against violence because they tend to be more\r\naffluent, have higher policing levels and provide better access to medical services and\r\neducational facilities than non-urban areas. Such protective factors can offset the risk\r\nfactors mentioned earlier, but it is worth emphasizing that every city, and indeed every\r\nneighbourhood, has unique characteristics that shape and influence homicide rates.\r\n 9\r\n"
## [16] "Global study on homicide 2019\r\n Conflict over resources has always been a major driver of violence, both at interpersonal\r\n and national level. Climate scientists estimate that changes associated with the global\r\n increase in temperatures and other forms of environmental degradation will greatly\r\n exacerbate violent conflicts in the future. High temperatures have been independently\r\n associated with violent aggression, but potentially more important are the effects that\r\n climate change could have on the economy and migration.\r\n There is a clear link between prevalence of the rule of law and levels of homicidal\r\n violence. Strengthening the rule of law and making criminal justice systems fairer and\r\n more effective can prevent violence by reducing recidivism, serving as a deterrent to\r\n violent behaviour, and promoting trust in public authorities and values that increase\r\n social cohesion. A high level of homicide can place an additional burden on criminal\r\n justice systems with already limited resources, and is one of the factors behind prison\r\n overcrowding, depending on specific national contexts. Measures that increase the\r\n efficiency of criminal justice systems – notably by improving access to legal aid,\r\n eliminating inhuman prison conditions, avoiding excessive and lengthy pre-trial\r\n detention, and reducing the degree of impunity of perpetrators – can bring down\r\n homicide rates. Conversely, a low homicide rate can help maintain effective and fair\r\n criminal justice institutions.\r\n 10\r\n"
## [17] " Executive summary\r\nEXECUTIVE SUMMARY\r\n1. Latest trends\r\nHomicide rates are falling, but not quickly enough to achieve the relevant targets\r\nunder Sustainable Development Goal 16\r\nThe overall risk of suffering a violent death as a result of intentional homicide has been declining\r\nsteadily for a quarter of a century. In 2017, there were 6.1 homicide victims per 100,000\r\npopulation worldwide, compared with a rate of 7.4 in 1993. While gaps still remain in terms of\r\nthe quality and availability of national data, these estimates are based on the latest and most\r\ncomprehensive data submitted by Member States to UNODC up to 2017.\r\nHomicide rate (victims of intentional homicide per 100,000 population), by region, 2017\r\n World\r\n Global 6.1\r\n Americas 17.2\r\n Africa 13.0\r\n Asia 2.3\r\n Europe 3.0\r\n Oceania 2.8\r\n 0 5 10 15 20\r\n Victims of intentional homicide per 100,000 population\r\nSource: Estimates based on UNODC homicide statistics.\r\nNote: Error bars represent the regional/global sum of lower and upper estimates at the national level.\r\nHowever, the global homicide rate is calculated as a proportion of the population and it has declined only\r\nbecause the global population has risen. This means that the increase in the global population has been\r\nhigher than the increase in the overall number of homicide victims recorded worldwide. The overall\r\nnumber of people killed in homicides increased from 362,000 in 1990 to 464,000 in 2017.\r\nTotal number of homicide victims, by region, 2017\r\n 173,000\r\n Americas\r\n 37.4%\r\n 163,000\r\n Africa\r\n 35.1%\r\n 104,000\r\n Asia\r\n 22.5%\r\n 22,000\r\n Europe\r\n 4.7%\r\n 1,000\r\n Oceania\r\n 0.2%\r\n 0 40,000 80,000 120,000 160,000 200,000 240,000\r\nSource: Estimates based on UNODC homicide statistics.\r\nNote: Error bars represent the regional sum of lower and upper estimates at the national level.\r\n 11\r\n"
## [18] "Global study on homicide 2019\r\nCrime kills far more people than armed conflict\r\nCriminal activity causes many more deaths than conflicts and terrorism combined. The 464,000 victims of\r\nhomicide surpass by far the 89,000 killed in armed conflicts and the 26,000 fatal victims of terrorist violence\r\nin 2017. Organized crime alone can be a significant source of lethal violence; since the start of the twenty-\r\nfirst century, organized crime has resulted in roughly the same number of killings as all armed conflicts\r\nacross the world combined. It is estimated that an average of roughly 65,000 killings every year were\r\nrelated to organized crime and gangs over the period 2000–2017, and that up to 19 per cent of all\r\nhomicides recorded globally in 2017 were related to organized crime and gangs.\r\nOrganized crime kills as many people as all armed conflicts combined\r\nBetween 2015 and 2017 the total number of homicide victims worldwide increased by 4 per cent, or around\r\n19,000 victims. If this trend continues, target 16.1 (“significantly reduce all forms of violence and related\r\ndeath rates everywhere”) under Sustainable Development Goal 16, which was set in 2015, will not be met\r\nby 2030.\r\n 12\r\n"
## [19] " Executive summary\r\n Current trend indicates that sustainable Development Goal\r\n target 16.1may not be reached by 2030\r\nRisk of becoming a victim of homicide varies widely according to region\r\nThe 2017 global homicide rate masks dramatic regional variations. Countries in the Americas reported\r\n173,000 victims of intentional homicide – 37 per cent of the global total in a region that accounts for only\r\n13 per cent of the world’s population. The homicide rate of 17.2 victims per 100,000 population in the\r\nAmericas was the highest recorded in the region since reliable records began in 1990. Africa was the only\r\nother region with a homicide rate exceeding the global average, with 13.0 victims per 100,000 population,\r\nor 163,000 victims in total.\r\n Homicide rate and population size\r\nSource: Estimates based on UNODC homicide statistics.\r\nBy contrast, the homicide rate in Europe was 3.0 per 100,000 population. There were 22,000 homicide\r\nvictims in Europe, 5 per cent of the global total in a region accounting for 10 per cent of the global\r\npopulation. The lowest regional rate of homicide in 2017 was reported in Asia, with 104,000 victims\r\nrepresenting a rate of 2.3 per 100,000 population. Asia, which contains 60 per cent of the global population,\r\naccounted for 23 per cent of total homicide victims worldwide.\r\n 13\r\n"
## [20] "Global study on homicide 2019\r\nHomicide rate, by country or territory, 2017\r\nThe boundaries and names shown and the designation used on this map do not imply official endorsement or acceptance by the United\r\nNations. Dashed lines represent undetermined boundaries. The dotted line represents approximately the Line of Control in Jammu and\r\nKashmir agreed upon by India and Pakistan. The final status of Jammu and Kashmir has not yet been agreed upon by the parties. The final\r\nboundary between the Republic of Sudan and the Republic of South Sudan has not yet been determined.\r\nSource: UNODC homicide statistics.\r\nKilling of women by intimate partners or family members is rising\r\n Homicide victims, by sex and region (rates and counts), 2017\r\nSome 87,000 women and girls were intentionally killed in 2017, a decrease from 2012. The share of women\r\nkilled by intimate partners or other family members, however, rose from 47 per cent of all female homicide\r\nvictims in 2012 to 58 per cent in 2017, and the overall number who lost their lives to this type of homicide\r\nrose from 48,000 victims in 2012 to 50,000 in 2017. The home remains the most dangerous place for\r\nwomen, who continue to bear the heaviest burden of lethal victimization as a result of inequality and\r\ngender stereotypes.\r\n 14\r\n"
## [21] " Executive summary\r\n Although women and girls account for a far smaller share of victims of homicide in\r\n general than men, they bear by far the greatest burden of intimate partner/family-\r\n related homicide, and intimate partner homicide.\r\nNumber of children killed in homicides has remained stable for a decade\r\nChildren aged 14 years or under make up a small share of the total number of homicide victims recorded\r\nworldwide. Thus, in 2017 some 21,540 children in that age group were killed in homicides, which is less\r\nthan 5 per cent of the global total for that year. The trend appears to be broadly stable, with data from the\r\nUnited Nations Survey of Crime Trends and Operations of Criminal Justice Systems suggesting that roughly\r\n21,000 children in this age group have lost their lives in homicides each year since 2008.\r\nGlobally, the risk faced by children aged 14 years or under of falling victim to homicide has not changed\r\nsignificantly: the homicide rate for girls stood at 0.9 per 100,000 in both 2008 and 2017, while the rate for\r\nboys fell from 1.3 in 2008 to 1.2 in 2017.\r\nIn Europe, the risk faced by children has decreased considerably in recent years – for boys aged 14 or under,\r\nthe overall rate dropped from 2.0 in 2008 to 1.4 in 2017, while for girls in the same age group it fell from\r\n1.2 to 0.8 over the same period. Notably, the homicide rates for both boys and girls aged 0 to 14 years\r\nrecorded in Europe were higher than the global average.\r\nIn the Americas, a slight increase in the homicide rate for boys aged 14 and under was recorded – from 1.6\r\nin 2008 to 1.7 in 2017. For girls in the same age group, the homicide rate in 2017 was 1.0, the same level\r\nrecorded in 2008.\r\nHomicide rate of males aged 0–14 years and 15–29 years, worldwide, 2008–2017\r\n 18.0\r\n Homicide rate per 100,000\r\n 16.0\r\n 14.0\r\n 12.0\r\n population in the corresponding\r\n 10.0\r\n 8.0\r\n 6.0\r\n age group\r\n 4.0\r\n 2.0\r\n 0.0\r\n 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017\r\n Male victims aged 0-14 years Male victims aged 15-29 years\r\nSource: Estimates based on UNODC homicide statistics.\r\n 15\r\n"
## [22] "Global study on homicide 2019\r\nHomicide rate of females aged 0–14 years and 15–29 years, worldwide, 2008–2017\r\n 3.0\r\n Homicide rate per 100,000\r\n 2.5\r\n 2.0\r\n population in the corresponding age\r\n 1.5\r\n 1.0\r\n group\r\n 0.5\r\n 0.0\r\n 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017\r\n Female victims aged 0-14 years\r\n Female victims aged 15-29 years\r\nSource: Estimates based on UNODC homicide statistics.\r\nSome cities in the Americas have registered falling homicide rates even though\r\nnational rates have risen\r\nUNODC analysis of trends in 68 cities across 66 countries shows an average 34 per cent drop in homicide\r\nrates between 2003 and 2016 in those cities, compared with a 16 per cent decrease in the corresponding\r\nnational rates. In the Americas, the difference in trends between urban and national homicide rates is even\r\nmore striking. Over the same period there was an average drop of 29 per cent in the 17 largest cities, while\r\nnational homicide rates rose by 2 per cent. These figures suggest that the increases in homicidal violence\r\nreported in some countries in the Americas have happened outside the big cities.\r\nJournalists are increasingly targeted outside conflict zones\r\nThe number of journalists killed each year between 2007 and 2017 fluctuated from a low of 46 in 2008 to\r\na high of 124 in 2012, according to estimates by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural\r\nOrganization (UNESCO). The vast majority were local journalists and most of the killings took place in\r\ncountries experiencing armed conflict. However, more than half of the 80 journalists killed in 2017 lost\r\ntheir lives in countries not affected by armed conflict as such.\r\n 16\r\n"
## [23] " Executive summary\r\nCity homicide in Central America and South America\r\nCities with a population smaller than 250,000 are not displayed on the map. The boundaries and names shown and the designation used on\r\nthis map do not imply official endorsement or acceptance by the United Nations.\r\nSource: UNODC homicide statistics.\r\nReflecting the recent shifts in war zones, the largest share of killings in 2017 was recorded in Asia and the\r\nPacific, which accounted for 40 per cent of the total. In 2016, the most dangerous geographical area for\r\njournalists had been the Arab States, where 34 per cent of that year’s total number of victims lost their\r\nlives. Those States include Iraq, the Syrian Arab Republic and Yemen, all three of which were experiencing\r\narmed conflicts in 2016 and 2017. Overall, the UNESCO figures show that journalists faced a slightly lower\r\nrisk in the period 2015–2017 than they did in the period 2012–2014. Fourteen fewer journalists were killed\r\nin the period 2015–2017 than in the earlier three-year period – a drop of 5 per cent. This contrasts with\r\nthe situation for aid workers, who faced a slightly increasing risk between the same two periods. Data from\r\n 17\r\n"
## [24] "Global study on homicide 2019\r\nthe Aid Worker Security Database show that the number of aid workers killed rose by 1 per cent from\r\n2012–2014 to 2015–2017.\r\nNumber of journalists killed, by region, 2012–2016\r\n Asia and the Pacific 107\r\n Central and Eastern Europe 17\r\n Arab States 191\r\n Africa 73\r\n Western Europe and North America 17\r\n Latin America and the Caribbean 125\r\n 0 50 100 150 200 250\r\nSource: UNESCO and University of Oxford, World Trends in Freedom of Expression and Media Development: 2017/2018 Global Report\r\n(Paris, UNESCO, 2018).\r\nHomicide rates remain high in the Americas even as they plummet elsewhere\r\nHomicide rates have been consistently high in the Americas for three decades. The region’s average rate\r\nremained at more or less the same level between 1990 and 2016, fluctuating slightly from a low of 14.5 to\r\na high of 16.7 per 100,000 people – compared with a global average that varied between 6.0 and 7.4 over\r\nthe same period. The rate in the Americas jumped to 17.2 in 2017, reaching the highest level since at least\r\n1990.\r\n Male homicide rate in the Americas is almost 10 times that of females\r\nThe picture varies hugely within the region and within individual countries. In Central America, for example,\r\nthe country with the highest homicide rate in 2017 had a rate of 62.1, more than seven times that of the\r\ncountry with the lowest. In South America, the country with the highest homicide rate had a rate of 56.8,\r\nmore than 16 times that of the country with the lowest. Within countries, high homicide levels are\r\n 18\r\n"
## [25] " Executive summary\r\nclustered, with some local populations facing homicide rates comparable to death rates in conflict zones\r\nand others having a negligible risk.\r\nIn contrast to the Americas, the homicide rate in Europe has declined by 63 per cent since 2002, and by 38\r\nper cent since 1990. In Asia the rate has fallen by 36 per cent since 1990. The limited data available for\r\nAfrican countries suggest a declining trend followed by stagnation at a high level.\r\nYoung men are particularly at risk in the Americas\r\nOlder teenagers living in the Americas face a high risk of becoming homicide victims. According to data\r\nfrom 15 countries in the region in 2016, the homicide rate for adolescents aged 18–19 years was 46 per\r\n100,000 – far outstripping the risk faced by people in that age group in other regions and worldwide. Young\r\nmen aged 15–29 years in the Americas are also disproportionately affected by homicide in comparison to\r\ntheir peers in other regions and worldwide. The estimated homicide rate in 2017 for men in that age group\r\nin the Americas was 64 per 100,000.\r\nFirearm-related homicides predominate in the Americas\r\nShooting has long been the most common cause of death in homicide cases worldwide. In 2017, slightly\r\nmore than half of all homicides were carried out with firearms, whereas only one fifth involved sharp\r\nobjects.\r\nIn the Americas, firearms were involved in roughly three quarters of homicides in 2017, which accounted\r\nfor more than one quarter of the homicides worldwide that year. Some countries with high proportions of\r\nfirearm-related deaths tend to have high rates of homicide, which may indicate that firearms and high\r\nhomicide levels are linked.\r\n Firearms were involved in more than half\r\n of all homicides worldwide in 2017\r\nNote: The number of homicide victims shown in the infographic above excludes those killed by unknown mechanisms, which amount to\r\nroughly 23,500 victims.\r\n 19\r\n"
## [26] "Global study on homicide 2019\r\nMost prevalent mechanism* used in the perpetration of homicide in the Americas and Europe,\r\n2013–2016\r\nThe boundaries and names shown and the designation used on this map do not imply official endorsement or acceptance by the United\r\nNations. A dispute exists between the Governments of Argentina and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and North ern Ireland concerning\r\nsovereignty over the Falkland Islands (Malvinas).\r\nSource: UNODC homicide statistics.\r\nNote: *The calculation presupposes three categories of mechanism (firearms, sharp objects and other); only cases where a reliable\r\nbreakdown into these three categories was available are considered. The calculation adjusts for homicides of “unknown mechanism”.\r\nElsewhere in the world, firearm killings are less common than in the Americas – measured both on a per\r\ncapita basis and as a proportion of all homicides. Still, in Asia firearm-related deaths constitute the largest\r\nshare of homicide cases, although on a smaller scale overall. The limited data for Africa suggest that\r\nfirearms are also a prominent mechanism for perpetrating homicide in the region, roughly on a par with\r\nmechanisms other than sharp objects and firearms. Countries where sharp objects are the main\r\nmechanism of killing tend to have low homicide rates.\r\nGangs and organized crime drive homicide rates in parts of Central America\r\nAs homicide rates are frequently associated with slow-changing social and economic indicators they also\r\nchange slowly. When there are rapid shifts in homicide rates, the explanation often has to do with\r\norganized crime. The relationship between organized crime and violence is complex. There are parts of the\r\nworld with a high prevalence of organized crime but low rates of homicide. Sudden spikes in homicide rates\r\nare often associated with changes in the power relationships between competing organized crime groups.\r\nThese changes can be brought about by many factors, such as the sudden appearance of a lucrative\r\ncontraband flow, which can cause the groups involved to come into conflict. This could be observed\r\nrecently in parts of Brazil, Honduras and Mexico, where an increase in the cocaine flow caused homicide\r\nrates to spike in some localities, whereas other areas saw stable or declining homicide rates. Street gangs\r\nare a special kind of organized crime group, and conflict with rival groups is often key to the identity of the\r\ngang. Parts of the United States have experienced a long-term decrease in gang-related violence, while\r\ngangs are a key driver of high homicide rates in parts of Latin America.\r\n 20\r\n"
## [27] " Executive summary\r\nScale of killings in Africa and in the Pacific is not yet fully understood\r\nThe scale of homicide and long-term trends are difficult to gauge in Africa because the raw statistics for\r\nmany countries are not available. Major upheavals such as the “Arab Spring” disrupted data-gathering in\r\nsome countries, while others have lacked the resources to collect data in the first place.\r\nAlthough the UNODC Global Homicide Statistics data set covers 202 countries and territories, and 96 per\r\ncent of the world population, data coverage is below average in Africa. Some countries have neither reliable\r\ncriminal justice data on homicide nor accurate mortality statistics that can be used as an alternative.\r\nOfficial reports of homicides in Pacific countries tend to deviate substantially from information on violence\r\ncontained in hospital records, suggesting that homicide rates in those countries may be much higher than\r\nsuggested by the official figures. Police in Papua New Guinea, for example, say it is likely that homicide is\r\nsignificantly underreported. Although this can be partially explained by the extreme isolation of some\r\ncommunities, an important factor is that many people in urban areas are still more inclined to report crime\r\nto traditional leaders rather than to the police.\r\nGlobal data on homicide have improved since the previous edition of the Global Study on Homicide in terms\r\nof quality and disaggregation, but many gaps still need to be filled if the different types and drivers of\r\nhomicide are to be fully understood – something that is essential for designing more effective prevention\r\npolicies.\r\nGender-related killing of women and girls is starting to be understood\r\nIn the 1970s, the term “femicide” became widely used to describe the killing of women. However, there is\r\nno consensus on the kind of crimes this label covers, how to record such crimes, or whether they can be\r\nregarded as “gender related” when the motive is often difficult to prove or is not recorded. These issues\r\nmake it challenging to compare global or regional data on “femicide”, particularly for those killings that\r\nhappen outside the family. Instead, UNODC relies on data related specifically to women killed by intimate\r\npartners or other family members. Although the indicators used do not cover all gender-related killings of\r\nwomen and girls, this category does include most of these killings and the data are comparable across\r\ncountries. As a result, using this category makes it possible to disentangle such types of female homicide\r\nfrom the rest, and helps construct a global picture of the scale of gender-related killings of women.\r\nThe death of those killed by intimate partners is not usually the result of a random or spontaneous act, but\r\nrather the culmination of gender-related violence that is rooted in historically unequal power relations\r\nbetween men and women. This gender-based violence is overwhelmingly underreported. Fear of reprisals,\r\neconomic and psychological dependence, and lack of faith in the police may induce women not to report\r\ninstances of gender-related domestic violence. This reluctance is particularly widespread in developing\r\ncountries, where there is often a stigma attached to being a victim of this kind of crime, or it is accepted\r\nthat domestic violence is a part of everyday life.\r\nAsia accounted for the largest number of all women killed worldwide by intimate partners or other family\r\nmembers in 2017, with an estimated 20,000 victims. However, an estimated 19,000 women in Africa also lost\r\ntheir lives in this way. Africa has a much smaller population, meaning that women in Africa run a greater risk of\r\nbeing killed by an intimate partner or other family member than women in Asia.\r\n 21\r\n"
## [28] "Global study on homicide 2019\r\nEven though the largest number of women and girls are killed by intimate partners or\r\nother family members in Asia, they run the greatest risk of falling victim to intimate\r\npartner/family-related homicide in Africa.\r\n 22\r\n"
## [29] " Executive summary\r\n2. Victims and perpetrators\r\nHomicide continues to be a largely male phenomenon\r\nSome 81 per cent of homicide victims recorded in 2017 were men and boys, and the global homicide rate\r\nfor the male population is roughly four times the rate for women and girls. This broad pattern holds true\r\nfor each region, although there are variations. For example, male homicide rates are 8 to 11 times higher\r\nthan female rates in parts of the Americas – a much wider margin than seen in other regions.\r\nWhile men are more likely than women to be victims of homicide, they are even more likely to be the\r\nperpetrators. More than 90 per cent of suspects in homicide cases in 2014, 2015 and 2016 were men. Of\r\njust over 133,500 people brought into formal contact with the criminal justice system for intentional\r\nhomicide in 49 countries and territories in 2016, only 10 per cent were female. The sex ratio of homicide\r\nconvictions followed a similar pattern: in 74 countries with available data between 2010 and 2017, women\r\nmade up just 6 per cent of all people convicted of homicide, with the share in Europe (9 per cent) being\r\nslightly higher than in Africa (5 per cent), the Americas (7 per cent) and Asia (6 per cent).\r\n Men commit about 90 per cent\r\n of all homicides recorded worldwide\r\nYoung men are particularly vulnerable in areas with gang violence and organized crime\r\nMen and male adolescents aged 15–29 are at the highest risk of homicide globally. This is largely due to\r\nthe situation in the Americas, where the drivers of homicidal violence are frequently gangs and organized\r\ncrime, and injuries from firearms are the most frequent cause of death – factors that are known to favour\r\nthe prevalence of young men as victims and perpetrators.\r\nIn other parts of the world, older men run the greatest risk of falling victim to homicide. For example, in\r\nEurope, men aged 30–44 are the most vulnerable population group.\r\nAlthough women generally face a much lower homicide risk than men, the age profile of women and\r\nadolescent victims closely follows the pattern for male victims in each region.\r\n 23\r\n"
## [30] "Global study on homicide 2019\r\nWomen comprise the vast majority of victims of homicide perpetrated by\r\nintimate partners\r\nWomen were the victims in 82 per cent of homicides carried out by intimate partners during\r\n2017, which confirms how women continue to bear the greatest burden of victimization in the\r\ncontext of intimate partner violence.\r\nMen who kill their partners have different profiles to other killers\r\nMen who kill their intimate partners have a markedly different profile to men who kill outside relationships,\r\naccording to studies from several European countries. They tend to have better jobs and enjoy a higher\r\nstandard of living than other perpetrators, and often have no criminal background. One study found that\r\nmen who killed their partners were better educated than other homicide perpetrators and had fewer gaps\r\nin their employment history.\r\nResearchers have frequently identified the causes of such killings as jealousy, possessiveness, fear of\r\nabandonment, and mental illness.\r\nGender disparities depend on age and the overall homicide rate\r\nIn high-homicide countries, males comprise a higher share of homicide victims\r\nCriminologists have understood for almost a century that rising homicide rates almost always go hand in\r\nhand with a widening gender gap: the larger the number of killings, the higher the proportion of male\r\nvictims and perpetrators. This rule still holds true across all regions and countries. It means that a change\r\nin homicide rates can usually be explained as a change in rates of male offending.\r\nIn Central America, for example, eight times as many men as women were killed in 2017. In one country\r\nalone, when the number of murders increased rapidly between 2013 and 2015, over 90 per cent of the\r\nadditional victims were men and boys. The strongest driver of the increase was gang conflict, in which both\r\nperpetrators and victims are highly likely to be male.\r\nOn the other hand, in low-homicide countries in Asia, the odds of falling victim to homicide are not strongly\r\naffected by gender. Some countries in Asia and Europe have roughly equal numbers of women and men\r\nkilled in homicides.\r\nThis highlights the importance of considering more broadly the differences between male-on-male\r\nhomicides and those involving women. Homicides involving men tend to be affected to a greater extent by\r\nsociopolitical developments, drug markets and other volatile factors that cause spikes in killings. Homicides\r\ninvolving women tend to be determined by long-term issues such as gender roles, social norms, the status\r\n 24\r\n"
## [31] " Executive summary\r\nof women in society, discrimination and gender equality. Since these factors are less volatile, the rate at\r\nwhich women are killed tends to be more stable.\r\nGender disparities among victims start to appear during the teenage years\r\nGirls and boys aged 9 and under are killed at roughly equal rates, in marked contrast to all other age groups,\r\nin which males make up more than 50 per cent of homicide victims, according to data from 41 countries.\r\nIn some developing countries girls run a higher risk of infanticide than boys, or of suffering educational and\r\nnutritional neglect. This is linked to cultural and socioeconomic factors that perpetuate son preference and\r\ndiscrimination against girls, causing parents to value girls less than boys.\r\nIn economically advanced countries, the killing of boys and girls by their parents remains an important\r\ncause of child mortality. Young boys generally run a slightly higher risk of being killed, possibly owing to\r\nboys’ perceived aggressiveness calling for harsher discipline. In extreme cases, such discipline may have\r\nlethal results. In developing countries, child mortality is related to disease, infections and poor nutrition to\r\na much greater extent than in developed countries. Consequently, lethal victimization by parents becomes\r\na more significant cause of child mortality in developed, economically advanced countries.\r\nIn all regions, the likelihood of boys becoming victims of homicide increases with age, although this process\r\noccurs at different stages. In the Americas, male victims begin to predominate in the 10–14 age group,\r\nwhile in Europe the turning point is the 18–19 age group.\r\n Global shares of children and adolescent victims of homicide, by age and sex, 2016\r\nYoung children are at risk of falling victim to homicide but can also be\r\nperpetrators\r\nVery young children are more likely to be killed by their mothers, older children by their fathers\r\nEvidence in booklet 6 of this study suggests that while filicide accounts for only a small share of total\r\nhomicides, in economically advanced countries it can be an important cause of death among young\r\nchildren. In the Member States of the European Union, for example, mortality among children is mainly\r\nrelated to conditions originating in the perinatal period and congenital malformations. As advances in\r\npublic health systems have made children less vulnerable to disease and infections, external causes of\r\nmortality such as homicide have become prominent.\r\nWhen a very young child is killed by a family member, one or both parents are responsible in an\r\noverwhelming number of cases. Long-term trends suggest that the mother is the most likely perpetrator\r\nduring the first year of the child’s life, after which the father is more likely to kill the child. Unmarried young\r\nmothers may sometimes kill their newborn because of the social stigma attached to illegitimacy.\r\n 25\r\n"
## [32] "Global study on homicide 2019\r\nThis type of homicide can be explained by factors such as violent parental attitudes and the use of harsh\r\ndisciplinary methods, mental health issues of one or both parents, and social marginalization.\r\nTerrorist and violent extremist groups continue to recruit and use children for combat\r\noperations and suicide attacks\r\nHundreds of children lost their lives as a result of acts of violence carried out by terrorist and violent\r\nextremist groups in 2017. Some of those acts involved children operating as suicide attackers. Security\r\nofficials and policymakers continue to face challenges posed by new strategies adopted by terrorist and\r\nviolent extremist groups – not least their use of social media as a tool of propaganda and recruitment.\r\nAgeing populations can sometimes be linked to falling homicide rates\r\nCountries with ageing populations tend to have low homicide rates, while high levels of homicide occur in\r\ncountries with large youth populations. This broad pattern holds true for the ageing societies in Europe\r\nand Asia, and for the younger populations in the Americas and Africa.\r\nStatistics tracking the homicide rate from 1950 to 2015 in some countries with ageing populations show a\r\nclose relationship between the homicide rate and the proportion of the population aged 15–29. As the\r\nshare of younger people in the population declined, the homicide rate also declined.\r\nHowever, researchers have long questioned the assertion of a direct causal relationship between the\r\nhomicide rate and the proportion of young people in the population. Some countries in Asia, for example,\r\nhave very young populations but low rates of homicide. This suggests that, apart from the number of young\r\npeople, there are other factors, such as poverty and marginalization, that influence the homicide rate.\r\nYouth unemployment may be a factor in rising homicide rates\r\nThere is no clear correlation between unemployment rates and levels of homicide. In fact, most countries\r\nwith high levels of violence have relatively low unemployment rates. However, even when researchers\r\nhave found no correlation in large data sets, the stress related to unemployment appears to be a\r\ncontributing factor to homicide. Indeed, sudden job loss can trigger individual homicide events.\r\nUNODC analysis and other studies have found a link between youth unemployment and levels of violence\r\nand homicide, particularly against a backdrop of violence perpetrated by street gangs and organized crime\r\ngroups.\r\n3. Reasons for killing and drivers of homicide\r\nLessons from history can help to frame strategies for reducing homicide\r\nHomicide rates in Western Europe have broadly been declining for centuries\r\nMuch effort has been expended on explaining the decline in crime, including homicide, in affluent societies\r\nsince the 1990s. Advances in security technology and the transition to cashless societies are among the\r\nmost popular explanations. However, the study of judicial documents in Western Europe going as far back\r\nas the thirteenth century suggests that homicide rates have been declining for more than 600 years. Parts\r\nof medieval and early modern Europe experienced homicide levels roughly comparable to those of the\r\nmost violent places in the world today.\r\nThe reasons for this decline are not entirely clear, but probably include the gradual expansion of the State’s\r\nmonopoly on power, the increasing rule of law, the proliferation of schools and literacy, and the promotion\r\nof self-discipline.\r\n 26\r\n"
## [33] " Executive summary\r\nHomicide rate in selected countries in Europe, 1200–2016\r\nSource: Eisner, M., “From swords to words: does macro-level change in self-control predict long-term variation in levels of homicide?”,\r\nCrime and Justice, vol. 43, No. 1 (2014), pp. 65–134; Eisner, M., “Modernity strikes back? A historical perspective on the latest increase in\r\ninterpersonal violence (1960–1990)”, International Journal of Conflict and Violence, vol. 2, No. 2 (2008), pp. 288–316.\r\nNote: Data until 1850 are estimates based on local and regional studies and averaged for 50-year periods. Data from about 1850 are\r\nnational homicide rates, based on either police statistics or mortality statistics.\r\nSimilar histories can throw up divergent patterns of homicide\r\nAn analysis of historical homicide trends in Singapore and Jamaica included in booklet 2 of this study shows\r\nthat countries with a similar history can display markedly different patterns in homicide. Singapore and\r\nJamaica both went through colonization by the British and experienced similar levels of lethal violence over\r\nthe greater part of their history. The homicide rate in both countries fell during the second half of the\r\nnineteenth century, broadly in line with trends in Western Europe, but then surged in the 1920s. However,\r\nfrom the mid-twentieth century onwards the two countries took divergent paths. While homicide rates in\r\nJamaica increased by an average of 4.4 per cent per year for five decades, Singapore experienced an\r\naverage decline of roughly 4.2 per cent per year over the same period.\r\nResearch suggests that the decline in crime rates in Singapore should be interpreted in the wider context\r\nof improvements in education, health care, life expectancy and wealth. In Jamaica, the steady increase in\r\nhomicide can be traced to the rise of gun and gang violence and feuds between rival political factions.\r\nTargeted crime reduction policies, effective policing and the combating of corruption in the police force,\r\nalong with victim support schemes and rehabilitation programmes, are the key elements of the\r\nSingaporean model of governance that helped bring down levels of violence and crime. In post-\r\nindependence Jamaica, the police force remained politicized and inspired little public confidence, both of\r\nwhich undermined interventions seeking to tackle violent crime.\r\n 27\r\n"
## [34] "Global study on homicide 2019\r\nLong-term trend in homicide rates in Jamaica and Singapore\r\nSources: Singapore, 1855–1940: Tai, W. S., “Murder and other crimes in the Straits Settlements”, MPhil thesis, University of Cambridge,\r\n2010; Singapore, 1955–1964: Ting, S. K. and Tan, K. K., “Post-mortem survey of homicides in Singapore (1955-1964)”, Singapore Medical\r\nJournal, vol. 10, No. 4 (December 1969), pp. 243–247; Singapore, 1965–2016: World Health Organization (WHO) mortality statistics; Colony\r\nof Jamaica, 1870–1961: Blue Book of the Island of Jamaica, later Handbook of Jamaica; Jamaica, 1962–2016: “Crimes known to the police”,\r\nJamaica Constabulary Force annual reports.\r\nNote: Selected years highlighted with homicide rates.\r\nThe male-centric nature of homicide manifested itself globally after the Second World War\r\nBefore the Second World War, the risk of becoming a victim of homicide was roughly the same for men\r\nand women across the world. Since the 1950s, however, the male risk has either fallen at a lower rate than\r\nthe female risk or increased at a faster rate.\r\nThis is true for all regions, particularly during times of armed conflict when the risk of men becoming victims\r\ntends to spike, as seen in France during the Algerian War of 1954–1962, in Northern Ireland during the\r\nTroubles in the 1970s, and in Hungary during the revolution of 1956.\r\nTrend in homicide victims, by sex, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, 1911–\r\n2017\r\n 700\r\n Male victims\r\n 600 Female victims\r\n Number of homicide victims\r\n 500\r\n 400\r\n 300\r\n 200\r\n 100\r\n 0\r\n 1911 1915 1919 1923 1927 1931 1935 1939 1943 1947 1951 1955 1959 1963 1967 1971 1975 1979 1983 1987 1991 1995 1999 2003 2007 2011 2015\r\nSource: Office for National Statistics (United Kingdom).\r\n 28\r\n"
## [35] " Executive summary\r\nDrugs and alcohol can drive certain types of violent crime\r\nDrugs and alcohol are linked to crime through three well-recognized mechanisms. The\r\n“psychopharmacological” mechanism refers to the increased inclination of individuals to commit crime,\r\nnotably violent crime, while under the influence of psychoactive substances. The “economic-compulsive”\r\nmechanism can be observed when individuals who are dependent on substance use engage in acquisitive\r\ncrime in order to fund their habit.\r\nThe relative strength of the association between drug use and acquisitive and violent crimes does appear\r\nto reflect in part the known effects of drugs on the brain and their dependence-inducing character. In\r\ngeneral, there is stronger evidence for a link between drug use and acquisitive crime; however, it should\r\nbe borne in mind that acquisitive crimes may also have a violent character.\r\nIn the case of alcohol, the connection with antisocial behaviour and crime appears most clearly when\r\nconsumption is measured in terms of heavy episodic drinking. The “systemic” mechanism is mainly relevant\r\nto drugs; it refers to crime linked to the activities of drug traffickers. This mechanism is more complex to\r\ndescribe because it involves developments that disrupt the status quo, such as changes to established\r\nroutes and the balance of power among the various actors.\r\nInfluence of psychoactive substances among homicide perpetrators, 2015 or latest available year\r\n Drugs\r\n 6%\r\n No Alcohol\r\n Under the influence\r\n intoxication 37% 90%\r\n 63%\r\n Other\r\n psychoactive\r\n substances…\r\n Drugs Alcohol Other psychoactive substances No intoxication\r\nSource: UNODC homicide statistics.\r\nNote: Data from 17 countries yield an estimate of 37 per cent of homicide perpetrators being under the influence of a psychoactive\r\nsubstance, in most cases alcohol, when committing the offence.\r\nGovernance and economic development can explain homicide rates\r\nSocioeconomic development explains current homicide levels in Asia and Europe, but in other\r\nregions the link is less evident\r\nDifferences in homicide rates across countries in Europe and Asia can be explained mostly in terms of their\r\nlevel of socioeconomic development. Policies aimed at achieving improvements in life expectancy, wealth,\r\neducation and other crucial development areas would be expected to push homicide rates down in those\r\ntwo regions.\r\nIn some countries in Europe and Asia, however, there are exceptionally high and low levels of homicide\r\nthat cannot be explained by socioeconomic development alone. In such instances, factors such as a high\r\nalcohol consumption rate or progress on gender equality can explain, respectively, the relatively higher or\r\nlower homicide rate that may be observed within a given country.\r\n 29\r\n"
## [36] "Global study on homicide 2019\r\nSocioeconomic development fails to explain differences in homicide rates in the Americas and\r\nAfrica\r\nThe wide availability of firearms in the Americas, along with the proliferation of gangs and organized crime\r\ngroups, helps to explain why many countries in the region experience a higher level of homicide than one\r\nwould expect from their development level. Similarly, in Africa armed conflicts are likely to have created\r\nan environment that is conducive to lethal violence, given the resulting political instability, erosion of the\r\nrule of law, poverty and inequality. Furthermore, in many countries in those two regions the benefits of\r\neconomic growth in terms of poverty reduction and increased job opportunities have not translated into a\r\nreduction in violence. In fact, some countries in Africa and the Americas have experienced rising homicide\r\nrates even as their economies have grown.\r\nIncome inequality is more strongly linked to homicide than other aspects of development\r\nCountries with large gaps between rich and poor are likely to have higher homicide rates than those with\r\nless pronounced income inequality. This relationship explains almost 40 per cent of the variation between\r\ncountries. The link holds over time, meaning that increased levels of violence correlate with increased\r\nlevels of inequality, and provides a potential explanation for the fact that economic growth in the Americas\r\nand Africa has been accompanied by rising homicide rates. While high levels of homicide can have a\r\nnegative impact on economic growth, rising prosperity alone does not necessarily lead to lower levels of\r\nviolence. For if the benefits of economic growth are not evenly distributed, those who miss out may well\r\ndecide to resort to violent and criminal activities. In fact, economic growth that exacerbates income\r\ninequality drives criminal violence even more.\r\nThe correlation between inequality and homicide rates is not perfect, however. The evidence for such a\r\ncorrelation is weak in low-income countries, and the relationship is not so pronounced in countries in Asia,\r\nsuggesting that the cultural context plays a role there, too. Also, research in South America points to a link\r\nbetween high homicide rates and broader indicators of inequality, such as higher infant mortality rates or\r\nunequal access to education or health services.\r\nLong-term investment in education policies is associated with a drop in the homicide rate\r\nEducation appears to be a key factor in shaping homicide levels in all regions. Several low-homicide\r\ncountries in Asia have followed strikingly similar trajectories – emphasis on education and training has been\r\naccompanied by a falling homicide rate. This suggests that such policies may play a more significant role in\r\nreducing interpersonal violence than any specific crime prevention or punishment policy. A study of\r\nhomicide statistics between 1990 and 2005 from a range of countries similarly shows that homicide was\r\nmore likely to decline in countries that invested more heavily in education and focused on longer-term\r\npolicymaking in that area.\r\nA study in Latin America and the Caribbean showed that an increase in the share of high-school graduates\r\nby two percentage points was linked to a reduction in the homicide rate by one victim per 100,000 people.\r\nConversely, the “bulging” of the youth population in developing countries can cause challenges for the\r\neducation system and place additional stress on already overstrained labour markets. The combination of\r\nthis youth bulge, poor education and high levels of unemployment may push young people to engage in\r\n 30\r\n"
## [37] " Executive summary\r\ndelinquent and violent behaviour and even to be lured into organized crime structures. These processes\r\ndrive high levels of homicide in some countries.\r\nEnvironmental changes and competition for resources can drive homicide\r\nThere are clear examples in some regions of how resource scarcity can lead to homicidal violence. In\r\nAfghanistan, for example, more than 70 per cent of all serious crime, including homicide, is caused by land\r\ndisputes. This is partly because the authorities do not have the capacity to deal with land-grabbing and\r\ncannot enforce land rights. Similar weak enforcement of land rights and scarcity of resources helped to\r\nexplain killings by cattle raiders in South Sudan, which reached a peak during 2014. In East Africa, climate\r\nchange has caused the waters of Lake Chad to recede, leading to a decline in fish stocks, the disappearance\r\nof arable land, and vanishing opportunities for local people. The African Union has pointed out that these\r\nprocesses are prompting some people to join armed groups as an alternative source of income.\r\nThese isolated cases suggest that violence and homicide can be linked to environmental problems and\r\nresource scarcity, although understanding of the processes involved is still at an early stage. Such factors\r\noften appear to be part of more complex dynamics involving political exclusion, corruption and unequal\r\ndistribution of resources, making it difficult to pinpoint causes and effects.\r\nFatalities resulting from cattle raids in South Sudan, 2011–2015\r\n 7,000 50\r\n 6,389\r\n 6,000\r\n Livestock conflict events\r\n 40\r\n 5,000\r\n Fatalities 4,000 30\r\n 3,079\r\n 3,000 20\r\n 2,000\r\n 1,101 924 10\r\n 1,000 442\r\n 0 0\r\n 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015\r\nSource: Gebreyes, Y. A. et al., The Impact of Conflict on the Livestock Sector in South Sudan (FAO, 2016).\r\nStrengthening the rule of law is central to reducing homicide levels\r\nHomicide cases that are not cleared up by the police, or that do not result in conviction of the perpetrator,\r\nfuel impunity. High levels of impunity may be a consequence of high rates of homicide, which stretch the\r\ncapacity of overburdened law enforcement agencies and prevent them from investigating each case\r\nthoroughly. Impunity also varies depending on the type of homicide. For example, killings carried out by\r\ngangs or organized crime groups tend to be more challenging to investigate than those perpetrated by\r\nintimate partners or other family members.\r\nOne way of measuring impunity for homicide is to compare the homicide rate with the rate of convictions\r\nfor homicide. The gap between high homicide rates and low conviction rates in 2016 was widest in the\r\nAmericas, where there were only 24 convictions per 100 victims. In Europe, there were 53 convictions per\r\n100 victims, and in Asia there were 47. Between 2007 and 2016 in 43 countries with available data, the\r\nnumber of people convicted per 100 homicides decreased from 47 to 39.\r\nBolstering the rule of law has been shown to reduce homicide levels. The key indicator of a strong rule of\r\nlaw is the development of an independent judiciary, which can help to boost the legitimacy of governing\r\ninstitutions, provide dispute-resolution mechanisms that discourage recourse to violence, and reassure\r\ncitizens that individual rights will be protected. In developing countries, where a substantial share of the\r\npopulation is impoverished, a functioning criminal justice system is also essential to protect the poor from\r\nviolence.\r\n 31\r\n"
## [38] "Global study on homicide 2019\r\n The rule of law: making the vicious circle virtuous\r\nNations that fail to establish strong security and justice systems, within a framework of respect for human\r\nrights, are more likely to suffer spirals of chronic violence and insecurity. Weak rule of law leads to impunity\r\nand creates an environment in which criminals can operate more easily.\r\nSustainable Development Goal 16 commits public authorities to improving the rule of law through\r\nmeasures such as widening access to legal aid, improving prison conditions, and reducing the number of\r\nwrongful convictions and the excessive use of pre-trial detention.\r\nPopular theories often fail to explain a complex reality\r\nUrban growth does not seem to cause an increase in homicide\r\nThe rapid growth of cities and the consequent mass movement of people from rural to urban areas have\r\nfrequently been cited as possible drivers of homicide. However, UNODC analysis of data from 68 cities\r\nsuggests that there is no positive correlation between urban growth and increases in homicide rates. In\r\nfact, the population in the sample cities grew by 9 per cent between 2005 and 2016, but the number of\r\nhomicides decreased by 26 per cent. This relationship holds for all regions, with the strongest diverging\r\ntrends in Asia, followed by Europe.\r\nOn the basis of this analysis it can be concluded that cities and rapid urban growth are not risk factors for\r\nrising levels of homicide. As at the national level, it is the presence of organized crime groups, inequality,\r\nand poor governance and infrastructure that contribute to the homicide risk in cities. However, each city,\r\nand even each neighbourhood, has its own risk factors that need to be addressed through careful\r\npolicymaking.\r\nGangs, organized crime and drug trafficking do not always generate high homicide rates\r\nLarge-scale organized criminal activities, including international drug trafficking, can take place without\r\nmuch violence as long as the crime is “well organized”. During the 1990s in South-Eastern Europe, for\r\nexample, the simultaneous shocks of the Yugoslav wars and of transition to a market economy allowed\r\norganized crime groups to operate with relative impunity. Despite this, homicide rates in most States in\r\nSouth-Eastern Europe have been low and declining. The average national rate in those States in 2015 was\r\nabout 1.4 victims per 100,000 people – comparable to the rate in France.\r\nIn Western Europe, the Netherlands has a high level of drug trafficking, yet the homicide rate there is\r\ncomparatively very low. Meanwhile, the authorities in Spain and Italy have reported an influx of migrants\r\nfrom the Americas who claim membership of Latino gangs such as the Latin Kings and Mara Salvatrucha.\r\nAlthough gang members have been implicated in violence and serious crime in those two countries, the\r\neffects on the overall homicide rate are unknown.\r\nBy contrast, in the Americas membership of organized crime groups and gangs is largely responsible for\r\nthe high homicide rates in that region. However, the relationship is not straightforward. As argued in\r\nbooklet 3 of this study, high homicide rates caused by organized crime groups can soar even higher when\r\nsuch groups lose control. An example of this phenomenon is what happened after the crackdown on the\r\n 32\r\n"
## [39] " Executive summary\r\nMexican drug cartels that began in 2007. By 2011, the homicide rate had tripled – a rapid change that\r\ncannot be explained by long-term factors. The homicide rate then stabilized until 2015, when the cartels\r\nbegan to fragment and diversify, and the homicide rate started to rise again, resulting in an all-time high\r\nof more than 30,000 killings in 2017. Jamaica suffered a similar turn of events during the first decade of the\r\ntwenty-first century, when drug routes shifted from the Caribbean to Mexico, causing a spike in the\r\nhomicide rate as organized crime groups imploded.\r\nLaw enforcement officials can be the source of lethal violence as well as its victims\r\nGlobally, there is a lack of reliable data on killings of police officers or on the risks they face. Statistics from\r\na small number of countries suggest a diverse relationship between police officer fatality rates and the\r\nprevalence of lethal force. For example, in Kenya, during 2015, police officers were killed at a rate of 72 per\r\n100,000 police, whereas there were 5 homicide victims per 100,000 people in the general population. This\r\nmeans that the risk faced by Kenyan police officers was 14 times higher than the average. However, in both\r\nJamaica and Brazil the police were less likely to be victims of homicide than the population at large. In some\r\ncountries, for every killing of a police officer there are fewer than 10 killings by police, while in others the\r\nratio can be three or four times as high.\r\nMigrants are more likely to be killed by other migrants\r\nThe relationship between migration and homicide levels has divided researchers – some have found that\r\nlevels of immigration have had no effect on homicide rates, others have found a positive correlation. These\r\ndifferences of opinion may result from a lack of reliable data – the way the authorities record the\r\nbackgrounds of offenders and victims differs between countries.\r\nHowever, if we consider recorded incidents from Western European countries only, the evidence suggests\r\nthat the victims of migrant offenders are often migrants themselves. Homicides in Western Europe are\r\noften perpetrated within communities, among people who share a formal or informal social relationship\r\nor are even members of the same family. This link can be seen in countries such as Germany, where the\r\nshare of foreign victims rose from 20 per cent of all homicide victims in 2015 to 29 per cent in 2016. At the\r\nsame time, the share of foreign offenders grew from 24 per cent to 31 per cent. Other Western European\r\ncountries have recorded similar patterns.\r\nShares of victims of intentional homicide, by citizenship (based on 31 countries), 2016\r\n 97.3 97.7\r\n 100.0 94.5\r\n 90.0\r\n 80.0\r\n 70.0\r\n Percentage\r\n 60.0\r\n 50.0\r\n 40.0\r\n 30.0\r\n 20.0\r\n 10.0 2.7 5.5\r\n 2.3\r\n 0.0\r\n Total Male Female\r\n National Foreign\r\nSource: UNODC homicide statistics.\r\n 33\r\n"
## [40] "Global study on homicide 2019\r\nShares of suspected perpetrators of intentional homicide, by citizenship (based on 32 countries),\r\n2016\r\n 100.0 94.0 94.1 92.1\r\n 90.0\r\n 80.0\r\n 70.0\r\n 60.0\r\n Percentage\r\n 50.0\r\n 40.0\r\n 30.0\r\n 20.0\r\n 6.0 5.9 7.9\r\n 10.0\r\n 0.0\r\n Total Male Female\r\n National Foreign\r\nSource: UNODC homicide statistics.\r\nPeople held in prisons are more at risk of homicide than those outside prison in some countries\r\nPrison populations are reliant on State officials to ensure their security, yet in some countries the homicide\r\nrate among prisoners is substantially higher than in the general population. This relationship holds in\r\ncountries as diverse as Australia, the United Kingdom and Panama.\r\nHomicides in prison per 100,000 prison population, selected countries, average for 2010–2016\r\n 100\r\n 90\r\n 80\r\n 70\r\n 60\r\n 50\r\n 40\r\n 30\r\n 20\r\n 10\r\n 0 Mongolia\r\n Global average (2010-2016)\r\n Montenegro\r\n Australia\r\n Botswana\r\n Chile\r\n El Salvador Philippines\r\n Turkey Republic of Moldova\r\n Argentina Thailand Lithuania\r\n Panama Azerbaijan\r\n New Zealand\r\n Honduras Japan Finland\r\n Colombia China Latvia\r\n Costa Rica Hungary\r\n Brazil France\r\n Jamaica Serbia\r\n Trinidad and Tobago\r\n Mexico United Kingdom (England and Wales)\r\n United States of America Netherlands\r\n Canada Portugal\r\n Romania\r\n Russian Federation\r\n Prison homicide rate 2010-2016 average Spain\r\n Czechia\r\n National homicide rate 2010-2016 average Italy\r\nSource: UNODC homicide statistics.\r\nNote: Excluding countries that reported no homicides in prisons over the reporting period, or for which data on homicide in prisons were\r\nnot available.\r\n 34\r\n"
## [41] " Executive summary\r\nCONCLUSIONS AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS\r\nThe information and data presented in the Global Study on Homicide 2019 illustrate the magnitude of lethal\r\nviolence worldwide. Even though the number of homicide victims recorded worldwide has been steadily\r\nincreasing, the global homicide rate has decreased because of an increase in the overall population. The\r\ndrivers of homicide are manifold, and socioeconomic factors such as inequality, unemployment and\r\npolitical instability can create environments that are conducive to lethal violence. Demographic\r\ncharacteristics, such as the sex and age of an individual, may act as either drivers of, or protective factors\r\nagainst, homicide.\r\nPolicies aimed at tackling homicide should address drivers of homicide both at the individual level (such as\r\nthe age and sex of a person) and at the macro level (such as unemployment, inequality, absence of the rule\r\nof law, the prevalence of gender stereotypes in society and the presence of organized crime). Targeted and\r\nefficient interventions require a comprehensive understanding of the scale of homicide and its various\r\ndrivers, which is essential for ensuring that Sustainable Development Goal targets related to violence can\r\nbe met by 2030.\r\nProgress on target 16.1 of the Sustainable Development Goals (“significantly reduce all forms of\r\nviolence”) is not on track; it is necessary to scale up crime and violence prevention programmes in order\r\nto achieve that target by 2030, in particular by devoting more attention to combating organized crime\r\nSince the adoption of the Sustainable Development Goals in September 2015, the number of homicide\r\nvictims has been increasing. If this trend is not reversed, the target of significantly reducing all forms of\r\nviolence (target 16.1 under Goal 16) will not be achieved by 2030. To achieve this target, it is necessary to\r\nscale up efforts to prevent homicidal violence at all levels: subnational, national, regional and international.\r\nSince the start of the twenty-first century, organized crime has resulted in roughly the same number of\r\nkillings as all armed conflicts across the world combined. Moreover, just like armed conflicts, organized\r\ncrime destabilizes countries, undermines socioeconomic development and erodes the rule of law.\r\nUnfortunately, the financial resources and political attention currently devoted to this problem at the\r\ninternational level are inadequate. At the United Nations, the Security Council, the Economic and Social\r\nCouncil, and the General Assembly have increasingly been discussing issues related to organized crime and\r\nsecurity, but more is still needed in terms of resources and political commitment.\r\nHigh levels of homicidal violence are concentrated in geographic and demographic “pockets”, so\r\nachieving target 16.1 of the Sustainable Development Goals requires interventions within the specific\r\nregions, countries, communities and population groups that are most at risk\r\nWhile in many parts of the world (Europe, Asia) homicide rates have been declining for decades, other\r\nregions (the Americas, Africa) are disproportionately affected by (lethal) violence. Moreover, trend data\r\nspanning nearly three decades show that this “violence gap” is not narrowing but actually widening further.\r\nEfforts to reduce the global number of homicide victims can be more effective if they target those parts of\r\nthe world most affected by homicidal violence, particularly certain countries in South and Central America,\r\nAfrica and Asia. Even in countries with high national rates of homicide, killings are often concentrated in\r\nspecific states, provinces and cities. Bringing down overall homicide rates depends ultimately on tackling\r\nlethal violence in these “hotspots”.\r\nReducing high homicide levels is feasible. The Global Study on Homicide 2019 documents a series of\r\nsuccessful community-based interventions that have successfully curbed homicidal violence in settings\r\nwhere high homicide rates have been driven by general violence, gangs and organized crime. Among the\r\nsuccessful ingredients of these programmes are the engagement of communities and the support provided\r\nby various local and state-level institutions. Another such ingredient is police reform aimed at bringing the\r\nwork of law enforcement closer to the community (e.g. through community policing, strengthening trust\r\nin the police among the local population, police patrols, and crime prevention measures aimed at young\r\npeople that are implemented jointly by the community and the police). High levels of violence are strongly\r\nassociated with young males, both as perpetrators and victims, so violence prevention programmes should\r\nfocus on providing support to young men to prevent them from being lured into a subculture of violence\r\n 35\r\n"
## [42] "Global study on homicide 2019\r\n(e.g. gangs, drug dealing, criminal lifestyle). Similarly, those who are already mired in such a subculture\r\nneed to receive help so that they can extricate themselves from it, for example, through social work,\r\nrehabilitation programmes and raising awareness of non-violent alternatives.\r\nCertain people are at greater risk of being killed at work because of insecure working environments and, in\r\nsome cases, also because of the nature of their profession. The role of journalists in promoting inclusive\r\nand sustainable societies was recognized in the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Significantly,\r\none of the targets of Goal 16 is to ensure public access to information, and one of the indicators associated\r\nwith that target is the number of journalists and other media workers killed, tortured and kidnapped, or\r\nwho have disappeared or been arbitrarily detained. Journalists will need to receive better protection if this\r\ntarget is to be realized.\r\nWhile the level of homicide may drop rapidly when organized crime groups or gangs opt for “truces”, the\r\nonly way of obtaining a long-term and sustainable reduction in the homicide rate is by combating\r\nimpunity, improving the rule of law and governance, and investing in education\r\nThere are examples of homicide rates plummeting briefly when organized crime groups or gangs have\r\nagreed to a truce or become the dominant group in an area and no longer need to impose control through\r\nviolence. However, such drops in the homicide rate cannot secure a lasting reduction in violence by\r\nthemselves.\r\nThere is a strong association between high homicide rates and low levels of convictions for homicide.\r\nHomicide cases that are not “closed” by means of a lawful conviction and sanctioning of the perpetrator\r\nfuel impunity, which in turn can lead to more homicides and overtax the criminal justice system as it\r\nstruggles to bring perpetrators to justice. By virtue of its nominal monopoly on violence, the State has a\r\nduty to protect its citizens from violence and punish wrongdoers. This calls for significant investment in\r\ncriminal justice resources, particularly in those countries where impunity is rife.\r\nHomicides in prisons are widespread: indeed, in many countries the homicide rate within prison walls\r\nexceeds the rate outside them. Since the State is directly responsible for the well-being of persons in its\r\ncustody, high levels of violence and killings perpetrated within a country’s penitentiary system point to a\r\nproblem that must be addressed at the State level. Efforts should be made to establish a physically and\r\nmentally safe environment for inmates in prisons. To that end, prison authorities should ensure that\r\nprisoners have access to education, vocational training and adequate health-care services.\r\nHigh levels of homicide can also be caused by a system that fails to rehabilitate offenders before they are\r\nreleased into society. Accordingly, one of the most efficient measures for curbing levels of crime, violence\r\nand homicide outside prison is to focus on reducing recidivism through investment in rehabilitation\r\nprogrammes. Such programmes have often proved effective in encouraging desistance from crime.\r\nStudies of historical trends in homicide rates serve to highlight the vital role played by good governance\r\nand the rule of law, as well as by trusted and professional police and justice systems, in reducing crime and\r\nviolence. Moreover, such studies also point to the strong positive effect of participatory socioeconomic\r\ndevelopment mediated by policies that promote social cohesion and leave no one behind. As history\r\nteaches us, a governance model centred on the rule of law, control of corruption and investment in human\r\ndevelopment through policies that provide universal education, health care and decent public housing –\r\nthereby minimizing social segregation – always succeeds, in the long run, in bringing down the rate of\r\nviolent crime.\r\nInvestment in socioeconomic development is likely to lead to reduced levels of homicide in Europe and\r\nAsia, but that is not necessarily the case in the Americas\r\nThe link between development and homicide is complex. Investment in socioeconomic development tends\r\nto reduce the homicide rate; conversely, low levels of homicide enable socioeconomic development.\r\nHowever, the relationship is not linear everywhere. In Europe and Asia, the different levels of\r\nsocioeconomic development across countries explain their different homicide rates reasonably well;\r\ntherefore, development policies in such countries are likely to be beneficial in terms of violence reduction.\r\nThis is in contrast to Latin American countries experiencing elevated homicide rates that cannot be\r\nexplained by their level of socioeconomic development alone. In such cases, investment in socioeconomic\r\n 36\r\n"
## [43] " Executive summary\r\ndevelopment would not be sufficient to bring down the high level of violence. Structural changes in\r\ngovernance and consolidation of the rule of law are more likely to be effective in reducing homicide in Latin\r\nAmerica.\r\nGender-related killings of women and girls can be prevented by means of improved coordination across\r\nstate-provided services, and also through the engagement of men\r\nPolicies that seek to prevent and reduce homicidal violence need to take into account the demographics\r\nof victims. Depending on their age and sex, people may be affected by homicide in different ways, and this\r\ncalls for targeted policy responses.\r\nGender-related killings of women and girls, as measured by the rate of female victims of homicide who are\r\nkilled by intimate partners or other family members, have remained stable over the last five years, which\r\nsuggests that women continue to bear the heaviest burden of victimization as a result of gender\r\nstereotypes and inequality.\r\nKillings by intimate partners or other family members predominantly affect women. The levels of such\r\nkillings appear to be relatively stable over time and show less variation across countries than those of other\r\nforms of homicide. Combating this type of homicide requires long-term structural changes that address\r\ndomestic violence through a holistic approach. This involves fostering changes in attitudes to gender roles,\r\nreducing dependency, and protecting women and other vulnerable groups through a policy of zero\r\ntolerance to violence. In countries with relatively low homicide rates, and in which women make up a large\r\nshare or even the majority of homicide victims, reducing homicide rates further will remain an elusive goal\r\nunless such policies are successful in reducing killings by intimate partners or other family members.\r\nPolicies addressing this form of violence against women should actively engage men in combating intimate\r\npartner/family-related violence by disseminating cultural norms and values that promote equality between\r\nwomen and men and the elimination of stereotyped gender roles. Concrete measures to involve men and\r\nboys in ending violence against women, and thus the gender-related killing of women and girls, include:\r\nproviding education to boys and girls from an early age that promotes gender equality; and implementing\r\nprogrammes within local communities aimed at questioning existing gender stereotypes, discussing\r\nnotions of gender and masculinity, and transforming gender roles.\r\nKillings of women by intimate partners represent the culmination of long-term violence and they can be\r\nprevented. Policies need to be implemented to ensure that women have access to a comprehensive range\r\nof services provided by the police, the justice system, and health and social care agencies. Training should\r\nbe given to police and law enforcement officers to sensitize them to the needs of women and ensure they\r\ncan identify and adequately respond to situations of domestic abuse. Impunity for the perpetrators of\r\ndomestic violence should not be tolerated. Moreover, there should also be policies that provide easy access\r\nto specialized support services, such as shelters and helplines, which can give women the support they\r\nneed to leave an abusive relationship.\r\nSupport should be provided to parents in order to prevent the killing of very young children, and a safer\r\nenvironment outside the family should be fostered to prevent the killing of adolescents and young adults\r\nChildren, adolescents and young adults can make up a sizeable share of homicide victims, depending on\r\nthe factors that drive the level of homicide within a country. Very young children are often killed by those\r\nwho are supposed to nurture and protect them: their parents. Policies that seek to tackle the homicide of\r\nvery young children should focus on the health and social support provided to parents, as well as on child\r\nprotection as such. Providing medical assistance to mothers throughout pregnancy, during childbirth and\r\nthroughout the first months of an infant’s life helps reduce the prevalence of infanticide and other forms\r\nof violence against children. Welfare policies can relieve economic stressors faced by families and therefore\r\nhave a positive impact on the safety and well-being of children.\r\nThe risk of children becoming victims of homicide outside the family sphere starts to increase from early\r\nadolescence onwards. Significantly, the risk increases more rapidly for boys than for girls, especially in\r\nregions with high levels of gang violence and organized crime, which take a disproportionate toll on male\r\nadolescents and young men.\r\n 37\r\n"
## [44] "Global study on homicide 2019\r\nYoung males are overwhelmingly affected by homicide when high levels of lethal violence are driven by\r\ngangs, organized crime and violence in communities. In order to tackle child and youth homicide related to\r\nsuch factors, policies should be aimed at strengthening community programmes that focus on limiting the\r\navailability of firearms and building trust between the local population and the law enforcement\r\nauthorities. There should also be policies to ensure that children and young people are able to continue\r\ntheir education and, where appropriate, pursue vocational training that helps them integrate into the\r\nlabour market.\r\nTackling the mechanisms related to homicide, such as firearms, can bring about a significant reduction\r\nin homicide rates\r\nComprehensive data and information about mechanisms that facilitate homicide perpetration can guide\r\npolicymakers in devising more effective, targeted interventions.\r\nFirearms are crucial enablers of high levels of homicide. Civilian possession of firearms is positively\r\ncorrelated with the homicide rate, even though it may become secondary to other factors of a\r\nsocioeconomic nature, most notably income inequality. Stricter regulation of firearm ownership, along\r\nwith efforts to reduce the number of illicitly held firearms, can help lower the rate of firearm-related\r\nhomicide. However, a noticeable reduction in homicide can be obtained only if other factors are addressed\r\nat the same time. While restricting access to firearms may reduce the overall homicide rate, the impact on\r\nthe overall rate may in fact be lower than on that of firearm-related homicide because perpetrators may\r\nstart resorting to other methods.\r\nAlcohol and drugs are important facilitators of violence and homicide\r\nIn terms of absolute numbers, the role of alcohol in homicide cases appears to dwarf that of other\r\nsubstances. In particular, the frequency of heavy episodic drinking is a predictor of violent behaviour.\r\nPolicies that promote responsibility and moderation in the use of alcohol (through educational\r\nprogrammes, awareness-raising and restricting access to alcohol at certain hours) can lead to a meaningful\r\nreduction in alcohol-related violence.\r\nThe link between drug use and different forms of crime is complex, but it emerges most clearly in its\r\nassociation with acquisitive (as opposed to violent) crime. In such cases, an “economic-compulsive\r\nmechanism” forces drug users to look for ways of funding their drug habit. However, the\r\npsychopharmacological properties of certain drugs have also been linked to an increased propensity for\r\nviolent crime. Providing evidence-based treatment to people suffering from drug use disorders and\r\ndependence is beneficial not only for their health but also because it reduces the risk of their becoming\r\ninvolved in crime. This can have positive ripple effects on their lives and on society as a whole.\r\nThere is still a need for comprehensive data to improve understanding of the scale of homicidal violence\r\nin Africa and parts of Asia, and for more refined disaggregation of homicide statistics around the globe\r\nGiven that there is evidence of widespread lethal violence in many parts of Africa and Asia, the gathering\r\nof comprehensive data on intentional homicide – including breakdowns by sex, mechanism and situational\r\ncontext – should be prioritized in those two regions. At the moment, the gathering of such comprehensive\r\ndata is still beyond the capacity of many countries across the world, and particularly so in Africa.\r\nIn the medium to the long term, application of the International Classification of Crime for Statistical\r\nPurposes (ICCS) is an important step towards developing comprehensive and comparable crime statistics,\r\nincluding statistics on intentional homicide. The ICCS classification was developed by UNODC in\r\ncollaboration with experts in a process involving input from over 75 States Members of the United Nations.\r\nICCS helps national authorities to strengthen their data collection capacities and, consequently, to\r\nunderstand the patterns and drivers of crime better. In the context of homicide, ICCS requires the\r\ndisaggregation of victims and offenders by a number of factors (e.g. age, sex, citizenship and victim-\r\noffender relationship). Moreover, disaggregation by event variables (e.g. the situational context in which\r\nthe crime was perpetrated and the mechanism of killing) makes it possible to characterize homicides more\r\neffectively. The sustained and consistent application of ICCS by more and more countries around the world\r\nwill yield abundant high-quality data and facilitate more detailed analysis of homicidal violence in its\r\nvarious dimensions.\r\n 38\r\n"
## [45] ""
## [46] "Vienna International Centre, PO Box 500, 1400 Vienna, Austria\r\nTel: +(43) (1) 26060-0, Fax: +(43) (1) 26060-5866, www.unodc.org\r\nSince the publication of the previous edition in 2014, the Global Study on Homicide has\r\nbeen expanded into a special six-booklet format, five of which are dedicated to thematic\r\nareas relevant to the study of the ultimate crime.\r\nBooklet 1 of the Global Study on Homicide 2019 summarizes the content of the five\r\nsubsequent substantive booklets by reviewing their key findings and highlighting a set of\r\npolicy implications derived from the analyses presented in them. Booklet 2 provides an\r\noverview of international homicide counts, rates, trends and patterns, and of criminal justice\r\nresponses to homicide. Booklet 3 examines drivers and mechanisms of, and contributors\r\nto, homicide, and looks at the different homicide typologies. The latter is done in an effort\r\nto improve understanding of the contexts in which homicide is perpetrated, as this can\r\ninform more effective policymaking. Booklet 4 analyses the relationship between homicide\r\nand development with reference to the Sustainable Development Goals by looking in detail\r\nat the main pillars of development and their reciprocal relationship with homicide and\r\nviolence. Booklet 5 gives an overview of the scope of gender-related killings of women\r\nand girls. It contains an in-depth analysis of killings perpetrated within the family sphere\r\nand also examines forms of gender-related killings perpetrated outside the family sphere.\r\nBooklet 6 deals with the homicide of children, adolescents and young adults, and covers\r\ndifferent types of child killings within and outside the family.\r\nAs in previous years, the Global Study on Homicide 2019 is aimed at improving understanding\r\nof this complex phenomenon and at providing policymakers with an updated dataset of\r\ncross-national data that evaluates the scale of homicide globally.\r\nThe statistical annex is published on the UNODC website: https://www.unodc.org/gsh/\r\n"## $encoding
## [1] 46
##
## $length
## [1] 80
##
## $position
## [1] 1
##
## $reader
## [1] 114
##
## $mode
## [1] 22
##
## $filelist
## [1] 6Creamos el corpus:
## <<VCorpus>>
## Metadata: corpus specific: 0, document level (indexed): 0
## Content: documents: 620.2 Preprocesamiento
20.2.1 Crear TDM
Definimos la función to_TDM que transforma un corpus en una matriz TDM (Term Document Matrix).
El proceso de depuración de los textos es quizás el más largo, hay que dedicar mucho tiempo, inspeccionar, repetir, etc.
to_TDM <- function(my_corpus){
my_tdm <- TermDocumentMatrix(my_corpus,
control =
list(removePunctuation = TRUE,
stopwords = TRUE,
tolower = TRUE,
stemming = FALSE,
removeNumbers = TRUE,
bounds = list(global = c(3, Inf))))
}
# Convertimos a TDM el corpus:
my_tdm <- to_TDM(my_corpus)Inspeccionamos los primeros términos, si se ve alguna cadena, borrar en el corpus, convertir a TDM, y así repetir el proceso
## <<TermDocumentMatrix (terms: 20, documents: 6)>>
## Non-/sparse entries: 71/49
## Sparsity : 41%
## Maximal term length: 16
## Weighting : term frequency (tf)
## Sample :
## Docs
## Terms 1 2 3 4 5 6
## ability 0 2 0 4 3 0
## able 1 2 0 5 2 2
## absence 1 6 0 15 0 0
## absolute 1 1 0 8 0 0
## abuse 1 10 0 11 1 0
## accepted 1 1 0 8 0 0
## access 14 1 0 5 1 0
## according 5 1 0 8 6 1
## accounted 4 3 0 0 0 13
## accounts 3 2 0 1 1 2my_corpus <- tm_map(my_corpus, removePunctuation, ucp = TRUE)
# Eliminar espacios en blanco
my_corpus <- tm_map(my_corpus, stripWhitespace)
my_corpus <- tm_map(my_corpus, content_transformer(tolower))
# Eliminar palabras individuales
my_corpus <- tm_map(my_corpus, removeWords, c("will", "use", "can", "homicides"))
# Prueba paso a paso para ver la estructura
# my_corpus[1]$content$encoding$content
my_tdm <- to_TDM(my_corpus)
inspect(my_tdm[1:20,])## <<TermDocumentMatrix (terms: 20, documents: 6)>>
## Non-/sparse entries: 71/49
## Sparsity : 41%
## Maximal term length: 16
## Weighting : term frequency (tf)
## Sample :
## Docs
## Terms 1 2 3 4 5 6
## ability 0 2 0 4 3 0
## able 1 2 0 5 2 2
## absence 1 6 0 15 0 0
## absolute 1 1 0 8 0 0
## abuse 1 10 0 11 1 0
## accepted 1 1 0 8 0 0
## access 15 1 0 5 1 0
## according 5 1 0 8 6 1
## accounted 4 3 0 0 0 13
## accounts 3 2 0 1 1 220.2.2 Contenedores
20.3 Términos frecuentes
Calculamos los términos frecuentes a partir del TDM.
## [1] "age" "also" "another" "case"
## [5] "cases" "cause" "circumstances" "committed"
## [9] "conviction" "countries" "crime" "criminal"
## [13] "data" "death" "drug" "effect"
## [17] "environment" "even" "evidence" "example"
## [21] "fact" "factors" "facts" "federal"
## [25] "first" "found" "home" "homicide"
## [29] "however" "human" "law" "legal"
## [33] "made" "may" "might" "murder"
## [37] "must" "officer" "officers" "one"
## [41] "per" "person" "police" "public"
## [45] "question" "rate" "rates" "reasonable"
## [49] "right" "rights" "risk" "rule"
## [53] "rules" "scientific" "search" "section"
## [57] "see" "state" "states" "studies"
## [61] "suspect" "time" "trends" "trial"
## [65] "two" "united" "upon" "used"
## [69] "victim" "victims" "violence" "whether"
## [73] "within" "without" "work" "year"
## [77] "years"La estructura de datos TDM es muy importante porque a partir de ella podemos obtener mucho conocimiento oculto.
## Docs
## Terms 1 2 3 4 5 6
## age 22 46 0 22 0 11
## also 33 97 0 94 17 3
## another 2 19 0 104 5 1
## case 3 14 0 206 22 3
## cases 14 71 0 74 16 4
## cause 11 3 0 176 9 1
## circumstances 1 7 0 105 0 0
## committed 0 5 0 97 2 3
## conviction 3 2 0 103 0 0
## countries 95 27 0 1 1 0
## crime 91 138 8 118 36 7
## criminal 23 20 0 139 7 2
## data 39 101 1 17 3 7
## death 14 4 0 78 16 1
## drug 15 79 0 47 2 0
## effect 2 72 0 24 2 0
## environment 5 1 0 115 0 0
## even 18 17 0 75 17 1
## evidence 6 101 0 671 10 0
## example 14 45 0 53 5 1
## fact 6 12 0 137 1 4
## factors 24 79 0 13 1 1
## facts 0 3 0 127 1 4
## federal 0 0 0 92 13 8
## first 5 15 0 73 9 0
## found 6 24 0 97 7 1
## home 1 35 0 84 0 1
## homicide 366 618 0 85 63 13
## however 22 49 0 110 5 4
## human 4 1 0 109 4 0
## law 23 14 1 235 4 4
## legal 5 2 0 164 0 1
## made 6 7 0 94 1 2
## may 29 54 0 375 1 5
## might 0 21 0 76 2 1
## murder 2 15 3 96 23 0
## must 1 10 0 198 0 0
## officer 2 2 0 229 2 0
## officers 4 4 0 218 0 2
## one 15 42 0 159 14 1
## per 75 38 0 4 12 14
## person 5 0 0 440 1 0
## police 23 68 2 306 33 18
## public 11 7 0 46 31 13
## question 0 5 0 98 1 0
## rate 79 80 0 2 2 27
## rates 86 144 0 1 14 5
## reasonable 1 3 0 100 0 0
## right 0 11 0 107 1 0
## rights 7 4 0 136 5 0
## risk 38 51 0 14 0 6
## rule 17 9 0 151 0 0
## rules 0 3 0 160 1 0
## scientific 1 2 0 100 1 0
## search 1 5 0 419 1 1
## section 1 13 0 91 1 2
## see 0 45 0 50 7 7
## state 5 10 1 207 16 3
## states 13 12 0 128 8 2
## studies 6 109 0 10 0 1
## suspect 0 24 0 75 6 0
## time 4 36 0 142 0 3
## trends 15 213 0 0 6 0
## trial 0 2 0 263 4 0
## two 7 34 0 66 5 1
## united 23 11 0 93 1 3
## upon 3 1 0 104 0 0
## used 8 21 1 91 2 6
## victim 13 41 0 62 14 3
## victims 78 42 0 12 12 2
## violence 117 97 0 2 21 2
## whether 1 16 0 147 1 0
## within 15 21 1 61 2 1
## without 3 1 0 124 2 0
## work 3 7 0 119 3 16
## year 10 59 5 18 7 4
## years 21 80 0 78 12 9## [1] 31.32443## search person police may evidence homicide
## 427 446 450 464 788 114520.4 Wordcloud
set.seed(142)
wordcloud(names(freq), freq, scale=c(3,0.5), max.words=60, random.order=FALSE,
rot.per=0.10, use.r.layout=TRUE, colors=brewer.pal(6, "Dark2")) 
- Quitamos los paquetes debido a que surgen conflictos entre funciones que se llaman igual, con el objetivo de que compile el book completo.