Abstracts
Résumé
Les crimes ne sont pas tous égaux en termes de conséquences pour les victimes et de dommages pour la société. Pourtant, les décomptes de crimes souvent utilisés ne tiennent compte que de la fréquence des crimes et manquent donc de précision. Certains chercheurs en criminologie ont récemment popularisé une méthode d’estimation de la gravité des crimes qui a le grand avantage de ne pas nécessiter une collecte de données supplémentaires puisqu’elle se base sur les données déjà produites par les tribunaux. Au Canada, la stratégie à la base de l’Indice de gravité des crimes est de combiner les mesures de fréquence et de gravité des crimes enregistrés afin d’obtenir un seul indicateur. Le présent article argumente au contraire qu’il faut développer un indicateur complémentaire aux mesures de fréquence de la criminalité. Après avoir proposé une méthode d’estimation basée sur la médiane des infractions enregistrées, l’article contraste l’évolution temporelle de la fréquence des infractions avec celle de la gravité de celles-ci. Dans un troisième temps, une analyse des variations géographiques de la gravité des infractions enregistrées pour les territoires de toutes les organisations policières municipales du Québec et des postes de la Sûreté du Québec en 2023 est présentée.
Mots-clés :
- Crime,
- gravité,
- police,
- données officielles,
- géocriminologie
Abstract
Not all crimes are equal in terms of their consequences for victims or the damage that they cause to society. Crime counts, however, take into account only the frequency of crimes and therefore lack precision. Recently, certain criminology researchers have popularized a method for estimating the severity of crimes that has the significant advantage of not requiring additional data collection, as it is based on data already produced by the courts. In Canada, the strategy employed by the Crime Severity Index is to combine measures of the frequency of recorded crimes with their severity to obtain a single indicator. This article argues that, to the contrary, it is necessary to develop an indicator that is complementary to measures of crime frequency. After proposing an estimation method based on the median of recorded offences, this article contrasts the temporal evolution of the frequency of offences with that of their severity. Thirdly, an analysis of the geographic variations in the severity of offences recorded in 2023 for both the territories of all municipal police organizations in Quebec, as well as Sûreté du Québec stations, is presented.
Keywords:
- Crime,
- severity,
- police,
- official data,
- environmental criminology
Resumen
No todos los delitos son iguales en cuanto a las consecuencias para las víctimas y los daños a la sociedad. Sin embargo, los recuentos de delitos que se utilizan a menudo sólo tienen en cuenta la frecuencia de los delitos y, por lo tanto, carecen de precisión. Algunos investigadores en criminología han popularizado recientemente un método para estimar la gravedad de los delitos que tiene la gran ventaja de no requerir la recopilación de datos adicionales, ya que se basa en datos ya producidos por los tribunales. En Canadá, la estrategia detrás del Índice de Gravedad del Delito consiste en combinar las medidas de frecuencia y gravedad de los delitos registrados para obtener un único indicador. Este artículo sostiene, por el contrario, que es necesario desarrollar un indicador complementario a las medidas de frecuencia delictiva. Tras proponer un método de estimación basado en la mediana de las infracciones registradas, el artículo contrasta la evolución temporal de la frecuencia de las infracciones con la de su gravedad. En tercer lugar, se presenta un análisis de las variaciones geográficas de la gravedad de las infracciones registradas en los territorios de todas las organizaciones policiales municipales de Quebec y de las comisarías de la Sûreté du Québec en 2023.
Palabras clave:
- Delito,
- gravedad,
- policía,
- datos oficiales,
- geocriminología
Appendices
Références
- Akman, D. D. et Normandeau, A. (1967). The measurement of crime and delinquency in Canada : A replication study. The British Journal of Criminology, 7(2), 129-149.
- Andresen, M. A. (2024). Environmental criminology : Evolution, theory, and practice (3e éd.). Routledge.
- Babyak, C., Alavi, A., Collins, K., Halladay, A. et Tapper, D. (2009). The methodology of the police-reported crime severity index. Statistical society of Canada annual meeting. Statistics Canada.
- Biderman, A. D. et Reiss, A. J. (1967). On exploring the “dark figure” of crime. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 374(1), 1-15.
- Boivin, R. (2013). Une mesure de la gravité moyenne des infractions criminelles enregistrées par la police. Criminologie, 46(2), 221-241.
- Boivin, R. (2014). Prince George is not (and never was) Canada’s most dangerous city : Using police-recorded data for comparison of volume and seriousness of crimes. Social Indicators Research, 116(3), 899-907.
- Boivin, R. (2021). Petit traité d’analyse criminelle. Les Presses de l’Université de Montréal.
- Braga, A. A., Turchan, B. S., Papachristos, A. V. et Hureau, D. M. (2019). Hot spots policing and crime reduction : an update of an ongoing systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 15, 289-311.
- Ceccato, V., Gaudelet, N. et Graf, G. (2022). Crime and safety in transit environments : A systematic review of the English and the French literature, 1970-2020. Public Transport, 14, 105-153.
- Chadee, D., Williams, D. et Bachew, R. (2020). Victims’ emotional distress and preventive measures usage : Influence of crime severity, risk perception, and fear. Community et Applied Social Psychology, 30(1), 14-30.
- Chamberlain, A. W. et Hipp, J. R. (2015). It’s all relative : Concentrated disadvantage within and across neighborhoods and communities, and the consequences for neighborhood crime. Journal of Criminal Justice, 43, 431-443.
- Chamlin, M. B. et Cochran, J. K. (2004). An excursus on the population size-crime relationship. Western Criminology Review, 5(2), 119-130.
- Curtis-Ham, S. et Walton, D. (2017). The New Zealand crime harm index : Quantifying harm using sentencing data. Policing : A Journal of Policy et Practice, 12(4), 455-467.
- David, J.-D. (2022). Satisfaction envers la police dans les communautés rurales et éloignées. Criminologie, 55(1), 215-240.
- Fenimore, D. M. (2019). Mapping harmspots : an exploration of the spatial distribution of crime harm. Applied Geography, 109, 102034.
- Fleming, S. (1981). The closed mind and the judgement of crime : A replication of the Sellin-Wolfgang index. International Journal of Comparative and Applied Criminal Justice, 5(1), 51-64.
- Greenfield, V. et Paoli, L. (2022). Assessing the harms of crime : A new framework for criminal policy. Clarendon Studies in Criminology, Oxford University Press.
- Harinam, V., Bavcevic, Z. et Ariel, B. (2022). Spatial distribution and developmental trajectories of crime versus crime severity : Do not abandon the count‑based model just yet. Crime Science, 11,14.
- Hinckle, J. C., Weisburd, D., Telep, C. W. et Petersen, K. (2020). Problem-oriented policing for reducing crime and disorder : An updated systematic review and meta-analysis. Campbell Systematic Reviews, 16(2), 1089.
- Hipp, J. R. et Williams, S.A. (2020). Advances in spatial criminology : The spatial scale of crime. Annual Review of Criminology, 3, 75-95.
- Hunt, P. E., Saunders, J. et Kilmer, B. (2019). Estimates of law enforcement costs by crime type for benefit-cost analyses. Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis, 10(1), 95-123.
- Ignatans, D. et Pease, K. (2016). Taking crime seriously : Playing the weighting game. Policing, 10(3), 184–193.
- Kwan, Y. K., Ip, W. C. et Kwan, P. (2000). A crime index with Thurstone’s scaling of crime severity. Journal of Criminal Justice, 28, 237-244.
- Macbeth, E. et Ariel, B. (2019). Place-based statistical versus clinical predictions of crime hot spots and harm locations in Northern Ireland. Justice Quarterly, 36(1), 93-126.
- Malleson, N. et Andresen, M. A. (2016). Exploring the impact of ambient population measures on London crime hotspots. Journal of Criminal Justice, 46(1), 52-63.
- Mévellec, A. (2024). Fusion municipale. Dans S. Breux et A. Mévellec (dir.). Dictionnaire politique de la scène municipale québécoise. Presses de l’Université Laval (Collection Études Urbaines)
- Norton, S., Ariel, B., Weinborn, C. et O’Dwyer, E. (2018). Spatiotemporal patterns and distributions of harm within street segments. Policing : An International Journal, 41(3), 352-371.
- Ottaro, P., Ariel, B. et Harinam, V. (2024). Crime dynamics in Edmonton’s train stations : Analysing hot spots, harm spots and offender patterns. Policing : An International Journal, 47(6), 982-1004.
- Parton, D. A., Hansel, M. et Stratton, J. R. (1991). Measuring crime seriousness : Lessons from the National Survey of Crime Severity. The British Journal of Criminology, 31(1), 72-85.
- Pease, K. (1988). Judgements of Offence Seriousness : Findings from the 1984 British Crime Survey. Home Office.
- Pinatel, J. (1964). La criminologie. Sociologie d’aujourd’hui.
- Ratcliffe, J. H. (2014). Towards an index for harm-focused policing. Policing, 9(2), 164-182.
- Rousselet, G.A. et Wilcox, R.R. (2018). Reaction times and other skewed distributions : problems with the mean and the median. bioRxiv preprint
- Schmidt, A.F. et Finan, C. (2018). Linear regression and the normality assumption. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 98, 146-151.
- Sellin, T. et Wolfgang, M. E. (1964). The measurement of delinquency. Wiley.
- Sherman, L., Neyroud, P. W., et Neyroud, E. (2016). The Cambridge Crime Harm Index : Measuring total harm from crime based on sentencing guidelines. Policing, 10(3), 171-183.
- Sweeten, G. (2012). Scaling criminal offending. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 28, 533-557.
- Tonry, M. (2019). Differences in national sentencing systems and the differences they make. Crime and Justice, 45, 1-16.
- van Ruitenburg, T. et Ruiter, S. (2023). The adoption of a crime harm index : A scoping literature review. Police Practice and Research, 24(4), 423-445.
- Weinborn, C., Ariel, B., Sherman, L. W. et O’ Dwyer, E. (2017). Hotspots vs. harmspots : Shifting the focus from counts to harm in the criminology of place. Applied Geography, 86, 226-244.
- Weisburd, D. (2015). The law of crime concentration and the criminology of place. Criminology, 53(2), 133-157.
- Weisburd, D. et Piquero, A.R. (2008). How well do criminologists explain crime ? statistical modeling in published studies. Crime and Justice, 37, 453-502.
- Wheeler, A. P. et Reuter, S. (2021). Redrawing hot spots of crime in Dallas, Texas. Police Quarterly, 24(2), 159-184.
- Wolfgang, M., Figlio, R. M., Tracy, P. E. et Singer, S. I. (1985). The National Survey of Crime Severity. U.S. Dept. of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics.

