ENVIPE - unodc-inegi [PDF]

Sep 1, 2015 - Estimate the “Dark Figure” of crime and its causes. • Measure citizens' .... /a This rate is defined

0 downloads 3 Views 3MB Size

Recommend Stories


download pdf Creează PDF
You have survived, EVERY SINGLE bad day so far. Anonymous

Abstracts PDF Posters [PDF]
Nov 11, 2017 - abstract or part of any abstract in any form must be obtained in writing by SfN office prior to publication. ..... progenitor marker Math1 (also known as Atoh1) and the neuronal marker Math3 (also known as. Atoh3 and .... Furthermore R

Ethno_Baudin_1986_278.pdf pdf
You can never cross the ocean unless you have the courage to lose sight of the shore. Andrè Gide

Mémoire pdf .pdf
Everything in the universe is within you. Ask all from yourself. Rumi

BP Dimmerova pdf..pdf
Don’t grieve. Anything you lose comes round in another form. Rumi

pdf Document PDF
What we think, what we become. Buddha

Ethno_Abdellatif_1990_304.pdf pdf
Just as there is no loss of basic energy in the universe, so no thought or action is without its effects,

PDF HyperledgerRockaway01March18.pdf
Life is not meant to be easy, my child; but take courage: it can be delightful. George Bernard Shaw

[PDF] Textové PDF
Keep your face always toward the sunshine - and shadows will fall behind you. Walt Whitman

Folder 2018.pdf - pdf
Don’t grieve. Anything you lose comes round in another form. Rumi

Idea Transcript


National Survey on Victimization and Perception of Public Safety

(ENVIPE) 2015 Basic Findings

September, 2015

Context • INEGI presents the 2015 edition of the National Survey on Victimization and Perception of Public Safety (ENVIPE). • ENVIPE focuses on providing relevant information for the design and implementation of public policies in the Victimization and Public Safety areas. • INEGI, along with the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) continues to share the experience of Mexico in the design of victimization surveys, both at households and economic units, for the development of regional and national surveys.

• ENVIPE 2015 has steadily strengthened its methodological aspects in order to measure with greater certainty victimization and crime, as well as wider aspects than these phenomena,. • ENVIPE has become an international best practice for measuring victimization and crime.

ENVIPE 2015 Main Objectives •

Estimate the number and gender of victims of crime during 2014.



Estimate the number of crimes that occurred during 2014.



Estimate the “Dark Figure” of crime and its causes.



Measure citizens’ perception about the safety level of where they live and where they go about their daily activities.



Measure citizens’ confidence in public safety institutions and their perception of the authorities’ effectiveness.



Identify and measure changes in citizen activities and habits due to fear of crime.



Estimate the costs of crime on citizens and households



Estimate the number of households with victims and personal victimization.



Estimate the consequences of crime on victims.



Identify and measure the victims’ behavior and experiences with public safety institutions and public attorneys.

Sample Design Reference period

January – December 2014

Sample Design

Probabilistic: Cross sectional, Multi-staged, Stratified and Clustered

Sample Unit

Selected households, household residents and the household selected person

Target Population

18 years and older

National Sample Size

95,561 households

Collection of information Period

March 2nd – April 24th, 2015

Geographic Scope

National level, Urban-National, Rural-National, and by State.

Victimization Crime Prevalence and Incidence

Prevalence of Crime on Households 33.2% of the country’s households1 had at least one victim of a crime2 during 2014.

Timeline

1 2

Year

Households victims of crime (%)

2010

36.0

2011

30.4

2012

32.4

2013

33.9

2014

33.2

That represents 10,801,044 households with victims from a total of 32,505,399 estimated households. ENVIPE measures crimes affecting directly victims or households, such as Total vehicle theft, Theft of vehicle parts, Domestic burglary, Robbery, Other kinds of theft (as pickpocketing, break-in, cattle rustling and other), Fraud, Extortion, Verbal threats, assault and Crimes other than those aforementioned (including kidnaping, sexual offenses and other kind of offenses).

Prevalence of Crime on Individuals ENVIPE allows to estimate 22.8 millions1 18-year and older victims2 of crime, which represents a rate of 28,200 victims per 100 000 population during 2014, a figure statistically higher than the estimated for 2013.

Timeline

1

Victims by sex (%)

Year

Victims of Crime (Millions)

Year

Men

Women

2010

18.1

2010

53.0

47.0

2011

49.2

50.8

2012

50.8

49.2

2011

18.8

2012

21.6

2013

49.9

50.1

2013

22.5

2014

48.6

51.4

2014

22.8

In ENVIPE 2014 with 2013 as year of reference, this level represented 22.5 millions of victims. ENVIPE measures crimes affecting directly victims or households, such as Total vehicle theft, Theft of vehicle parts, Domestic burglary, Robbery, Other kinds of theft (as pickpocketing, break-in, cattle rustling and other), Fraud, Extortion, Verbal threats, injuries and Crimes other than those aforementioned (including kidnaping, sexual offenses and other kind of offenses). Note: Indicator VII.1.2 “Rate of Victimization” from Mexico’s National Development Plan 2013-2018 2

States

Crime Prevalence 2013-2014 (Rate of victims) Victims per 100,000 population considering the 18 years or older population for 2013 and 2014, by state.

Downward

3

Upward

9

Unchanged State

Victims 2013

Victims 2014

Pct. Change (Δ %)

NATIONAL

28,224

28,200

-0.1

Aguascalientes

26,784

33,376

24.6

State

Victims 2013

Victims 2014

Pct. Change (Δ %)

/a

/a

Morelos

26,146

29,647

13.4

Nayarit

18,535

22,052

19.0

Nuevo León

26,516

24,250

-8.5

Oaxaca

16,291

20,061

23.1

Puebla

23,585

23,741

0.7

Querétaro

23,554

25,660

8.9

Quintana Roo

26,519

28,638

8.0

San Luis Potosí

25,710

25,873

0.6

Sinaloa

23,588

22,063

-6.5

Baja California

39,507

37,583

-4.9

Baja California Sur

24,746

30,310

22.5

Campeche

23,710

22,639

-4.5

Coahuila

24,040

17,080

-29.0

Colima

22,059

21,562

-2.3

Chiapas

16,445

15,352

-6.6

Chihuahua

27,344

22,395

-18.1

Mexico City

33,068

36,019

8.9

Durango

22,157

22,949

3.6

Sonora

27,395

24,246

-11.5 /a

Guanajuato

27,293

31,659

16.0

Tabasco

22,725

24,759

8.9

Guerrero

26,002

27,721

6.6

Tamaulipas

17,570

23,339

32.8

Hidalgo

19,890

18,420

-7.4

Tlaxcala

21,924

26,012

18.6

Veracruz

20,246

17,208

-15.0

Yucatán

18,438

22,860

24.0

Zacatecas

20,863

22,924

9.9

Jalisco Estado de México Michoacán

33,029 47,778 20,002

/a /a

/a

-5.0

45,139

-5.5

21,311

/a

/a

31,375

/a /a /a /a

6.5

20

/a

/a

/a /a /a /a /a

/a

/a

/a According to hypothesis testing, in these cases there is no statistical difference from the estimated level for the previous year. The margins of error of the estimates by state for the reference year 2014 are on average 7 percent, with a maximum error of up

to 9 percent for 3 cases and a minimum margin of error of 4 percent for one case. For more details, see ENVIPE 2015 Basic Tables at www.inegi.org.mx.

Crime Prevalence by State 2014 Victims per 100,000 population considering the 18 years or older population for 2014, by state.

Crime Incidence — Crimes by Type ENVIPE allows to estimate 33.7 millions of crimes1 in 2014, associated with 22.8 millions of victims. This represents a rate of 1.5 crimes per victim (the same rate to the estimated for 2013).

Distribution

11.7%

In 94.7% (94% in 2013) of cases the extortion was by telephone. In 5.4% (6.4% in 2013) of cases the victim delivered what was demanded by criminals.

10.2%

Extortion payment timeline

28.6% 23.6%

Year

9.9% 6.1% 3.5%

2

3.4% 3

3.0%

1

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Paid Extortions (%)

9.3 9.6 7.5 6.4 5.4

ENVIPE 2015 measures the most representative local crimes. Crimes related to organized crime, drug trafficking, possession of weapons for exclusive use of the Army, illegals trafficking, among others, are not likely to be captured in a victimization survey such as ENVIPE. 2 Refers to thefts other than robbery, vehicle theft and theft of vehicle parts, and domestic burglary 3 Includes crimes such as kidnapping or express kidnapping, sexual offenses and other crimes

Crime Incidence — Kidnapping of a household member ENVIPE allows to estimate 102,883 household members kidnappings nationwide, related with 99,747 victims during 2014.

Kidnappings Victims (Prevalence)

Crimes

(Incidence) /a

Rate p/ 100,000 pop./a 2012

2013

2014

80

103

83

89

110

85

This rate is defined from a universe of 120,738,843 population.

Duration of kidnappings

2012 (%)

2013 (%)

2014 (%)

Less than 24 hrs

57.0

64.8

59.8

1 - 3 days

18.9

/b

17.4

23.2

4 days or more

18.6

/b

13.2

14.8

5.5

/b

4.6

Not specified

Nota: The estimate of kidnap victims for 2012 has a confidence interval of (78.095, 110.781); for 2013 of (102.017, 144.923); and for 2014 of (83.183, 116.311). On the other side, the estimation of kidnapping for 2012, has a confidence interval of (84.605, 126.759); for 2013, of (105.252, 158.640); and 2014, of (86.107, 119.659). /b The use for quantitative conclusions from these data is not recommended because their coefficients of variation are higher than 25 percent, they are presented only for qualitative analysis.

/b

2.2

/b

Crime Incidence on Individuals 2010 - 2014 ENVIPE allows to estimate a rate of 41,655 crimes per 100 000 population during 2014. Hypothesis tests show that there is no significant difference from the figure of 2013, although these levels are still higher than those observed in 2010 to 2012.

Timeline

Year

Crimes (Millions)

2010

23.1

2011

22.6

2012

27.8

2013

33.1

2014

33.7

States

Crime Incidence 2013-2014 (Rate of Crimes)

Downward

Rate of Crimes per 100,000 population for 18 years and older population in 2013 and 2014, by state, and by place of occurrence of crimes. State

Crimes 2013

Crimes 2014

Pct Change (Δ %)

41,563

41,655

0.2

Aguascalientes

24,711

59.7

Baja California

57,066

Baja California Sur

23,747

Campeche

30,597

Coahuila

25,451

Colima

26,309

Chiapas

19,215

Chihuahua

31,669

Mexico City

51,786

Durango

22,512

Guanajuato

34,110

Guerrero

35,366

39,453 56,632 34,700 29,306 18,318 30,535 19,160 24,295 59,545 30,080 40,737 42,690 23,211 43,076 83,566 26,340

NATIONAL

Hidalgo

23,468

Jalisco

47,278

State of México

93,003

Michoacán

25,126

State

Crimes 2013

36,524

Nayarit

26,609

46.1

Nuevo León

32,552

-4.2 /a

Oaxaca

20,749

Puebla

31,662

Querétaro

27,975

Quintana Roo

35,245

San Luis Potosí

39,558

15.0

Sinaloa

30,287

33.6

Sonora

31,155

19.4

Tabasco

32,037

Tamaulipas

19,417

Tlaxcala

26,660

Veracruz

28,101

Yucatán

23,728

Zacatecas

27,290

/a

-28.0 16.1 /a -0.3

/a

-23.3

20.7 -1.1

Upward

12

Unchanged

17

Crimes 2014

Pct Change (Δ %)

43,584 32,936 28,720 29,073 32,690 31,572 41,381 41,384 29,139 26,384 29,508 33,414 33,700 20,832 31,857 30,058

19.3

/a

Morelos

-0.8

3

/a

-8.9 /a -10.1 /a 4.8 /a

23.8 -11.8 /a 40.1 /a 3.2 /a 12.9 /a 17.4 4.6 /a -3.8 /a -15.3 /a -7.9

/a

72.1 26.4 -25.9 34.3 10.1 /a

/a According to hypothesis testing in these cases there is no statistical difference from the estimated level for the previous year. The margins of error of the estimates by state for 2014 are on average 11 percent, with a maximum error of up to 26 percent for one case, and a minimum margin of error of 8 percent for 7 cases. For more details, see ENVIPE 2015 basic tables at www.inegi.org.mx

Crime Incidence List of the three most frequent crimes by State in 2014. State

1st Most Frequent

2nd Most Frequent

3rd Most Frequent

NATIONAL

Robbery

Extortion

Fraud

Aguascalientes

Theft of vehicle parts

Extortion

Threats

Baja California

Extortion

Theft of vehicle parts

Domestic burglary

Baja California Sur

Fraud

Theft of vehicle parts

Extortion

Campeche

Extortion

Threats

Fraud

Coahuila

Robbery

Theft of vehicle parts

Fraud

Colima

Extortion

Threats

Fraud

Chiapas

Extortion

Robbery

Threats

Chihuahua

Extortion

Robbery

Theft of vehicle parts

Mexico City

Robbery

Extortion

Fraud

Durango

Extortion

Robbery

Theft of vehicle parts

Guanajuato

Robbery

Extortion

Theft of vehicle parts

Guerrero

Extortion

Robbery

Fraud

Hidalgo

Extortion

Robbery

Fraud

Jalisco

Extortion

Theft of vehicle parts

Robbery

State of Mexico

Robbery

Extortion

Threats

Michoacán

Extortion

Robbery

Theft of vehicle parts

Crime Incidence List of the three most frequent crimes by State in 2014. State

1st Most Frequent

2nd Most Frequent

3rd Most Frequent

NATIONAL

Robbery

Extortion

Fraud

Morelos

Extortion

Robbery

Threats

Nayarit

Extortion

Threats

Theft of vehicle parts

Nuevo León

Robbery

Theft of vehicle parts

Extortion

Oaxaca

Threats

Robbery

Extortion

Puebla

Extortion

Robbery

Theft of vehicle parts

Querétaro

Extortion

Fraud

Theft of vehicle parts

Quintana Roo

Extortion

Robbery

Fraud

San Luis Potosí

Extortion

Robbery

Other crimes

Sinaloa

Extortion

Robbery

Fraud

Sonora

Other kinds of theft

Theft of vehicle parts

Robbery

Tabasco

Robbery

Extortion

Other kinds of theft

Tamaulipas

Extortion

Robbery

Threats

Tlaxcala

Extortion

Robbery

Threats

Veracruz

Extortion

Robbery

Fraud

Yucatán

Extortion

Other kinds of theft

Fraud

Zacatecas

Extortion

Threats

Theft of vehicle parts

Crime Incidence by State 2014 Rate of crimes per 100,000 population for 18 years and older population in 2014, by state, by place of crime occurrence.

Crime Incidence — Characteristics From the 33.7 millions of estimated crimes, the victim was present1 in 53.4%2 of cases, which represents 18 millions of crimes.

Crimes with the victim present and assaulted Year

Victim was Assault & present battery

2010

55.8

43.1

2011

52.8

26.2

2012

59.2

17.7

2013

55.0

16.3

2014

53.4

17.9

From those crimes where the victim was present, the 17.9% 3 of them also involved some kind of assault 2. 1

Corresponds to those crimes where the victim was present at the moment when that crime was committed, considering that the victim was conscious about the crime execution. refers to the situation where the victim was deliberately hurt by the criminal(s) (assault and battery aggravating the main crime).

2 Assault

Crime Incidence — Characteristics From the 18 millions of estimated crimes where the victim was present, the criminals carried a weapon1 in 48.6% of the cases.

Crimes carrying weapons

Year

Percentage Percentage

2010

40.6

27.6

2011

48.4

30.5

2012

44.1

28.8

2013

50.2

34.2

2014

48.6

33.0

From the crimes where the criminals carried a weapon, 9.7%2 of the cases resulted in a weapon assault. 1 2

Includes firearms, knives and blunt objects such as sticks, rods, tubes and the like. In 2013 this figure was 8.1 percent.

Crimes with firearms

Crime Incidence – Crimes Carrying Weapons by State 2014 (Percentage)

Crime Incidence – Number of criminals From the 18 millions of estimated crimes where the victim was present, in 39.6% of the cases the victim declared that just one criminal was involved. The national mean rate of criminals per victim was 1.9. (in 2013 this rate was 2.0).

Crimes by gender of criminals involved 1

Note: The option “Not specified” is excluded. Nationwide, this represented 3.0% in 2014. 1 The option “Not specified” is excluded. Nationwide, this represented 2.3% in 2014.

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

Men Only

87.8

90.2

86.5

85.9

85.1

Women Only

5.1

3.3

5.3

5.0

6.1

Men & Women

7.1

6.5

5.5

7.2

6.5

Costs of Crime ENVIPE allows to estimate that in 2014 there was a total cost of crime for households of 226.7 billion pesos1 (1.27% of GDP) that is, 17.05 billion dollars2. This represents a rate of 5,861 pesos (440.7 dollars) per person due to insecurity and crime.

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

1.53

1.38

1.34

1.27

1.27

(billions of US Dollars)

Costs of Crime2

16.7

17.0

16.3

16.7

17.1

Costs of Security Measures2

3.8

4.2

4.2

5.0

4.8

Costs of Crime (% of GDP)

(billions of US Dollars)

3

Preventive security measures represented an estimated spending for households of 63.6 billion pesos (4.8 billion dollars). 1

In ENVIPE 2014 were estimated 213.1 billion pesos (16.7 billion dollar), that is, 1.27% of GDP; while the estimated spending in preventive measures for households was 64 billion pesos (5 billion dollar). The average cost per person affected because of insecurity and crime was 5,560 pesos (435.5 dollars). 2 The mean exchange rates considered were: 12.6367 USD/MXN for 2010; 12.4273 USD/MXN for 2011; 13.1685 USD/MXN for 2012; 12.7674 USD/MXN for 2013; and 13.2983 USD/MXN for 2014. Source: Banco de México. 3 Refers to the countrywide percentage of households in which the measure was conducted. A household might have made more than one measure.

Average cost of crime The Average cost of crime per 18 years and older person, as a result of spending on security measures and losses because of crime during 2014 was 5,861 pesos (440.7 dollars). State NATIONAL

/a /b

Average cost of crime 2013

5,560

Aguascalientes

8,618 /a

Baja California

5,861

Baja California Sur

6,384

Campeche

4,500

Coahuila

5,631

Colima

3,997

Chiapas

3,081

Chihuahua

4,720

Mexico CIty

5,576

Durango

3,750

Guanajuato

3,536

Guerrero

4,744

Hidalgo

4,012

Jalisco

6,484

State of Mexico

6,983

Michoacán

4,475

Average cost of crime 2014

5,861 5,338 6,769 7,918 5,350 4,548 4,341 4,957 /a 3,747 8,014 /a 5,636 4,549 7,086 4,508 6,456 6,091 7,506

Pct Change (Δ %)

State

Average cost of crime 2013

Average cost of crime 2014

Pct Change (Δ %)

5.4 N.D /b Morelos

5,604

15.5

Nayarit

7,518 /a

24.0

Nuevo León

4,861

18.9

Oaxaca

3,709

-19.2

Puebla

4,379

Querétaro

5,868

8.6

N.D /b Quintana Roo -20.6

San Luis Potosí

5,146 5,726

N.D /b Sinaloa

5,296

50.3

Sonora

5,256

28.6

Tabasco

4,829

49.4

Tamaulipas

4,327

12.4

Tlaxcala

3,366

-0.4

Veracruz

5,351

-12.8

Yucatán

2,918

Zacatecas

6,533 /a

67.7

5,454 2,840 4,236 3,389 4,786 7,720 4,943 4,121 4,690 5,387 4,857 5,664 4,006 5,985 3,643 5,685

The use of these data to obtain quantitative conclusions is not recommended because their coefficients of variation are higher than 25 percent, they are presented only for qualitative analysis. Not available since there is no statistical quality in some of the figures to define the percent change of the indicator.

-2.7

N.D /b -12.9 -8.6 9.3 31.6 -3.9 -28.0 -11.4 2.5

0.6 30.9 19.0 11.9 24.8 N.D /b

Dark Figure

Dark Figure With ENVIPE is estimated that in 2014 only 10.7% of crimes were reported to the Public Attorney, of which 67.5% lead to an official prosecution*. From the total amount of crimes, 7.2% were prosecuted. That represents 92.8% of crimes that were NOT reported to the authority or were reported but a preliminary inquiry was NOT started.

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

Reported crimes

12.3

12.8

12.2

9.9

10.7

Preliminary Inquiry

65.2

65.5

64.7

62.7

67.5

8.0

8.4

7.9

6.2

7.2

Preliminary Inquiry (from the total of crimes)

Dark Figure

92.8% * Note: An official prosecution is considered whenever a preliminary inquiry is placed .

Dark Figure ENVIPE estimates the “Dark Figure”, which represents 92.8% of crimes committed in 2014 that were NOT reported to the authority or were reported but a preliminary inquiry was NOT started.

Crimes with a higher dark figure

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

Extortion

97.6

96.6

97.8

98.5

99.0

Fraud

94.9

92.2

92.1

95.2

95.3

Theft of vehicle parts

94.4

95.0

95.2

95.7

95.1

Robbery

93.5

94.8

94.4

95.9

93.6

Dark Figure by State 2014 (%) Percentage of crimes that were NOT reported to the authority or were reported but a preliminary inquiry was NOT started during 2014.

Dark Figure From the total of crimes reported to the Public Attorney, in 53.8% of the cases the result was Nothing happened or Not resolved.

Preliminary Inquiry Result (Timeline)

Year

Nothing or not resolved

2010

43.7

2011

62.1

2012

53.2

2013

49.9

2014

53.8

Nota: The percentage of crimes that resulted from “Having recovered their property”, “Having put the criminal on trial” or “Forgiveness was granted” represents 1.5 of total crimes (1.3 in 2013).

Dark Figure — Reasons for NOT reporting Among the reasons for NOT reporting crimes to the authorities by the victims were the Waste of time response with 32.2% and the Distrust of authorities response with 16.8%, both of which are attributable to the authorities.

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

Causes attributable to the authorities

61.2

63.2

61.9

65.6

63.1

Other Causes

36.3

35.9

37.7

33.9

36.5

Not Specified

2.5

0.9

0.4

0.5

0.4

By causes attributable to the authorities we mean: fear of being extorted, waste of time, long and difficult paperwork, distrust of authority, or a hostile authority. By other causes we mean: fear of the aggressor, crime of little importance, or had no evidence.

Dark Figure — Reporting Time Half of the estimated victims said it took less than 2 hours to report a crime to the Public Attorney. 28.9%1,2 spent 4 hours or more reporting.

3

1. 2. 3.

This figure varies widely from state to state, for example, while in Sonora, Nayarit and Michoacán is 9.5, 9.9 and 14.0 respectively, in State of Mexico, Tabasco and Campeche is 41.4, 42.1 and 46.0 respectively. For ENVIPE 2014, with 2013 as year of reference, this figure was 29.1 percent. Excludes the option "Not specified" which represents 1.1% nationwide. For the sum of the different response options reaches 100%, it should be calculated including all decimal in each figure.

Public Safety Perception

Public Safety Perception — Main concerns ENVIPE allows to estimate that 58% of the 18 years and older population considers Insecurity and crime as the most important problem affecting them at the state level, followed by Unemployment with 44.1% and Rising Prices with 33.2%.

Public Safety Perception — Main concerns States reporting Insecurity and Crime as a higher concern, compared with those reporting other problems before, all this from a list of 10 concerns.

Public Safety Perception 2011 – 2015 Percentage of population perceiving itself as insecure with the current1 situation at the Neighborhoods or Localities, Municipalities or Boroughs and the States, compared with the levels estimated from 2011 to 2015.

1

Current estimation represents the period of March – April, 2015.

Public Safety Perception 2011 – 2015 ENVIPE allows to estimate that 73.2% of 18-years and older population considers the State where they live as insecure due to insecurity and crime in 2015, this figure is statistically higher than the estimated for 2014.

1

1

Current estimation represents the period of March – April, 2015.

States

Public Safety Perception 2014 - 2015 Public perception regarding the current1 situation of insecurity by state.

Downward

9

Upward

8

Unchanged

State NATIONAL Aguascalientes Baja California

Baja California Sur Campeche Coahuila Colima Chiapas Chihuahua Mexico City Durango Guanajuato

Guerrero Hidalgo Jalisco State of Mexico Michoacán

State Insecurity (ENVIPE 2014)

State Insecurity (ENVIPE 2015)

Pct. Change (Δ %)

73.3

73.2

-0.1

49.1 53.7 39.3 58.9 78.5 56.9 62.1 75.2 77.6 73.5 64.8 78.9 65.5 68.0 92.6 82.0

43.2 53.2 61.8 53.7 74.9 56.5 54.6 73.6 78.5 68.0 64.8 86.8 62.1 69.6 90.6 79.8

-12.1 -0.8

State

Morelos /a

Nayarit

Nuevo León

-8.9

Oaxaca

-4.6

Puebla /a

-12.0

Querétaro Quintana Roo

-2.1

/a

San Luis Potosí

1.1

/a

Sinaloa

-7.5 0.0

Sonora /a

9.9

Tabasco

Tamaulipas

-5.2

/a

Tlaxcala

2.5

/a

Veracruz

-2.2 -2.7

State Insecurity (ENVIPE 2015)

Pct. Change (Δ %)

86.3 55.5 70.7 77.7 67.4 50.7 61.0 69.2 70.5 62.5 88.9 86.9 59.2 80.5 33.8 80.9

-3.1

/a

57.5

-0.6

State Insecurity (ENVIPE 2014)

15

Yucatán /a

Zacatecas

89.0 51.1 73.0 77.1 63.6 38.5 67.0 73.1 72.1 57.2 86.1 83.9 60.0 80.7 29.5 80.3

8.6

-3.1 0.8

/a /a /a

6.0 31.4 -8.9 -5.4 -2.2

/a

9.2 3.3

3.6 -1.3

/a

-0.2

/a

14.7 0.7

/a

1 Current estimation represents the period of March – April, 2015. /a According to hypothesis testing in these cases there is no significant statistical difference from the estimated level for the previous year. The margins of error of the estimates by state for 2014 are on average 3 percent, with a maximum error of up to 5

percent in 2 cases; and a minimum margin of error of 1 percent in 4 cases. For more details, see ENVIPE 2015 basic tables at www.inegi.org.mx.

Public Safety Perception by State 2015 (Percentage) Public perception regarding the current1 situation of insecurity by state.

1 Current

estimation represents the period of March – April, 2015.

Public Safety Perception by Metropolitan Area 2015 (Percentage) Public perception regarding the current1 situation of insecurity by Metropolitan Area.

1 Current

estimation represents the period of March – April, 2015.

Public Safety Perception and other factors Public perception regarding the current situation of insecurity by state and other factors.

State NATIONAL Aguascalientes Baja California Baja California Sur

Campeche Coahuila Colima Chiapas Chihuahua Mexico City

Durango Guanajuato Guerrero Hidalgo Jalisco State of Mexico

Michoacán /a

State Insecurity 2015 (%)

73.2 43.2 53.2 61.8 53.7 74.9 56.5 54.6 73.6 78.5 68.0 64.8 86.8 62.1 69.6 90.6 79.8

Victims 2014

(Rate per 100,000 population)

28,200 33,376 37,583 30,310 22,639 17,080 21,562 15,352 22,395 36,019 22,949 31,659 27,721 18,420 31,375 45,139 21,311

Deaths by Homicide 2014/a

Crimes carrying weapons 2014 (%)

Extortion Crimes 2014

16 4 21 12 9 15 20 9 46 12 17 14 48 7 13 17 20

48.6 17.6 26.2 25.7 23.7 51.7 22.6 34.1 34.6 58.7 29.3 33.8 43.7 31.3 33.7 69.1 24.8

9,850 7,252 13,723 6,238 5,271 1,413 10,510 5,092 6,081 12,356 9,007 7,787 18,399 5,967 9,952 17,802 10,052

(Rate per 100,000 population)

(Rate per 100,000 population)

State

State Insecurity

Morelos Nayarit Nuevo León Oaxaca Puebla Querétaro Quintana Roo San Luis Potosí

Sinaloa Sonora Tabasco Tamaulipas Tlaxcala Veracruz Yucatán Zacatecas

Vital Statistics. Deaths by homicide. INEGI. Preliminary figures to July 9th, 2015 and published in Press Release no. 276/15. July 20, 2015.

2015 (%)

86.3 55.5 70.7 77.7 67.4 50.7 61.0 69.2 70.5 62.5 88.9 86.9 59.2 80.5 33.8 80.9

Victims 2014

(Rate per 100,000 population)

29,647 22,052 24,250 20,061 23,741 25,660 28,638 25,873 22,063 24,246 24,759 23,339 26,012 17,208 22,860 22,924

Deaths by Homicide 2014/a

Crimes carrying weapons 2014 (%)

Extortion Crimes 2014

23 13 11 18 9 5 8 10 38 23 10 25 7 11 2 13

48.7 21.3 49.2 23.3 27.7 30.0 28.2 28.4 36.4 42.9 37.3 35.4 23.2 31.1 20.7 27.3

12,318 13,274 4,307 5,988 8,474 9,019 7,359 11,404 7,655 989 4,368 12,307 10,676 6,244 8,340 10,999

(Rate per 100,000 population)

(Rate per 100,000 population)

Public Safety Perception Nationwide, the place where the majority of people feels unsafe, with 81.3%, is at the ATMs placed on a public thoroughfare.

Note: Interviewed people might have given more than one answer.

Public Safety Perception 64.5% of the 18 years and older population identifies alcohol consumption on the public thoroughfare around their households, as the main criminal or antisocial behavior.

Note: Interviewed people might have given more than one answer.

Witnessing of criminal behavior 2015 Criminal or antisocial behavior identified by 18-years and older population around their households in 2015, by State.

State

NATIONAL

1st Most Frequent Drinking alcohol on the public thoroughfare

Baja California

Drinking alcohol on the public thoroughfare Drinking alcohol on the public thoroughfare

Baja California Sur

Drug consumption

Aguascalientes

Campeche Coahuila Colima Chiapas Chihuahua Mexico CIty

Durango Guanajuato Guerrero Hidalgo Jalisco State of Mexico Michoacán

Drinking alcohol on the public thoroughfare Drinking alcohol on the public thoroughfare Drinking alcohol on the public thoroughfare Drinking alcohol on the public thoroughfare Drinking alcohol on the public thoroughfare Drinking alcohol on the public thoroughfare Drinking alcohol on the public thoroughfare Drinking alcohol on the public thoroughfare Drinking alcohol on the public thoroughfare Drinking alcohol on the public thoroughfare Drinking alcohol on the public thoroughfare Drinking alcohol on the public thoroughfare Drinking alcohol on the public thoroughfare

2nd Most Frequent

3rd Most Frequent

4th Most Frequent

5th Most Frequent

Frequent thefts and robberies

Drug consumption

Gangs

Drug selling

Drug consumption

Frequent thefts and robberies

Gangs

Drug selling

Frequent thefts and robberies

Drug consumption

Drug selling

Gangs

Drinking alcohol on the public thoroughfare

Frequent thefts and robberies

Drug selling

Gangs

Drug consumption

Frequent thefts and robberies

Gangs

Illegal sale of alcohol

Frequent thefts and robberies

Gangs

Drug consumption

Quarrel between neighbors

Drug consumption

Frequent thefts and robberies

Drug selling

Gangs

Illegal sale of alcohol

Frequent thefts and robberies

Drug consumption

Gangs

Drug consumption

Frequent thefts and robberies

Gangs

Frequent firearm shots

Drug consumption

Frequent thefts and robberies

Piracy

Drug selling

Drug consumption

Drug selling

Frequent thefts and robberies

Gangs

Drug consumption

Frequent thefts and robberies

Gangs

Drug selling

Drug consumption

Frequent thefts and robberies

Frequent firearm shots

Illegal sale of alcohol

Frequent thefts and robberies

Drug consumption

Gangs

Piracy

Drug consumption

Frequent thefts and robberies

Drug selling

Gangs

Frequent thefts and robberies

Drug consumption

Gangs

Frequent firearm shots

Drug consumption

Frequent thefts and robberies

Drug selling

Gangs

Witnessing of criminal behavior 2015 Criminal or antisocial behavior identified by 18-years and older population around their households in 2015, by State.

State

NATIONAL Morelos Nayarit

Nuevo León Oaxaca Puebla Querétaro Quintana Roo San Luis Potosí Sinaloa

Sonora Tabasco Tamaulipas Tlaxcala Veracruz Yucatán Zacatecas

1st Most Frequent Drinking alcohol on the public thoroughfare Drinking alcohol on the public thoroughfare Drinking alcohol on the public thoroughfare Drinking alcohol on the public thoroughfare Drinking alcohol on the public thoroughfare Drinking alcohol on the public thoroughfare Drinking alcohol on the public thoroughfare Drinking alcohol on the public thoroughfare Drinking alcohol on the public thoroughfare Drinking alcohol on the public thoroughfare Drinking alcohol on the public thoroughfare Drinking alcohol on the public thoroughfare Drinking alcohol on the public thoroughfare Drinking alcohol on the public thoroughfare Drinking alcohol on the public thoroughfare Drinking alcohol on the public thoroughfare Drinking alcohol on the public thoroughfare

2nd Most Frequent

3rd Most Frequent

4th Most Frequent

5th Most Frequent

Frequent thefts and robberies

Drug consumption

Gangs

Drug selling

Frequent thefts and robberies

Drug consumption

Gangs

Kidnappings

Drug consumption

Drug selling

Frequent thefts and robberies

Quarrel between neighbors

Frequent thefts and robberies

Gangs

Drug consumption

Drug selling

Frequent thefts and robberies

Drug consumption

Gangs

Illegal sale of alcohol

Frequent thefts and robberies

Gangs

Drug consumption

Piracy

Drug consumption

Frequent thefts and robberies

Gangs

Drug selling

Frequent thefts and robberies

Gangs

Drug consumption

Drug selling

Gangs

Frequent thefts and robberies

Drug consumption

Quarrel between neighbors

Drug consumption

Frequent thefts and robberies

Drug selling

Frequent firearm shots

Drug consumption

Frequent thefts and robberies

Drug selling

Gangs

Frequent thefts and robberies

Drug consumption

Gangs

Illegal sale of alcohol

Frequent thefts and robberies

Frequent firearm shots

Drug consumption

Drug selling

Frequent thefts and robberies

Gangs

Drug consumption

Illegal sale of alcohol

Frequent thefts and robberies

Drug consumption

Gangs

Illegal sale of alcohol

Frequent thefts and robberies

Drug consumption

Gangs

Illegal sale of alcohol

Frequent thefts and robberies

Drug consumption

Gangs

Drug selling

Changes in Lifestyle In 2014, daily activities that the 18 years and older population stopped doing were Allowing children to go out and Wearing jewelry, with 67.9% and 64.8% respectively.

Note: Interviewed people might have given more than one answer.

Social Cohesion 18-years and older population who said that there is a problem in their community and their ability to agree on the solution. The problem most frequently faced by their communities are thefts and robberies, with 54.3% of population that expresses their existence. However, from this 54.3%, only 29.6% of the cases agreed to resolve.

Note 1: Interviewed people might have given more than one answer. Note 2: For each problem, the choice “Not specified if they were able to join and solve the problem” is excluded.

Social Cohesion The states with the highest and lowest social cohesion in the face of a problem. With higher social cohesion

With lower social cohesion

Note 1: Interviewed people might have given more than one answer. Note 2:The choice “Not specified if they agreed to solve the problem” is excluded in all cases.

Perception about Authorities’ Performance

Perception about Authorities’ Performance Level of trust in authorities in charge of public security, national security, prosecution and justice enforcement. 81.6% of the 18 years and older population identifies the Navy as the authority they trust the most, followed by the Army with 77.6 percent.

Perception about Authorities’ Performance Perception of corruption of authorities in charge of public safety, homeland security, public prosecution and justice enforcement. 77.9% of the 18 years and older population considers that the Traffic Police is corrupt, followed by the Municipal Police with 66.5%.

Perception about Authorities’ Performance Knowledge of society about actions taken to improve public safety in each municipality (Nationwide). 51.2% of the population identifies Street lighting improvements, followed by more police patrols and surveillance with 47.7%.

Vandalism

Prevalence of Vandalism on Households ENVIPE allows to estimate that 7.8% of the country’s households suffered from vandalism (graffiti, car scratches or another kind of vandalism) during 2014. This represents 2.5 millions of households with 3.8 millions of acts of vandalism associated with them, that leads to an average rate of 1.5 acts of vandalism per household affected (in 2013 this rate was 1.7).

Knowing Mexico Conociendo México 01 800 111 46 34 www.inegi.org.mx [email protected]

@inegi_informa

INEGI Informa

Smile Life

When life gives you a hundred reasons to cry, show life that you have a thousand reasons to smile

Get in touch

© Copyright 2015 - 2024 PDFFOX.COM - All rights reserved.