Trust and safety
Trust and safety in a society reflect how people feel that their freedom of movement and their property are protected. A high level of personal trust and safety can promote openness and transparency in society, social interaction and cohesion.
People, in general, feel safe walking alone at night: over 70% of people in the Asia/Pacific region and OECD countries would agree (Figure 6.7). However, there is a gender gap as in all countries women are less likely to report feeling safe walking alone at night. The gender gap accounts for close to or less than 5 percentage points in Hong Kong (China), Singapore and Tajikistan, while Australian and New Zealand women are much less likely (by around 30 percentage points) than men to report they feel safe walking home at night. On average, the difference is about 15 percentage points in OECD countries and 13 percentage points in the Asia/Pacific region.
Almost 96% of Singaporeans feel comfortable being on the street at night, which is close to 90% in China, Tajikistan and Turkmenistan. By contrast, less than 60% of the population in Bhutan, Malaysia and Nepal feel safe walking home at night. (Figure 6.7).
The crime rate has decreased in some countries in the Asia/Pacific region (Figure 6.8): on average the reported crime rates in countries for which data are available have decreased by about 30 percentage points since 2008. However, this masks considerable variation in country experiences; reported crime rates declined significantly in New Zealand and Sri Lanka since 2008 whereas they increased most in Armenia, India and Kazakhstan.
Confidence in law enforcement is relatively high overall (Figure 6.9). Over 70% of the population in the Asia/Pacific region and OECD countries trust the local police. This proportion is highest at over 85% of respondents in Indonesia, Singapore and Uzbekistan. Less than 60% of respondents in Armenia trust their local police, but this is nowhere as low as in Kyrgyzstan and Pakistan where only half of the respondents have faith in the police.
Data on trust in local police and safety comes from the Gallup World Poll undertaken in more than 150 countries as based on a common questionnaire, translated into the predominant languages of each country. In general, samples are probability based and nationally representative of the resident population aged 15 years and over. While this ensures a high degree of comparability across countries, results may be affected by sampling and non-sampling error, and variation in response rates. Hence, results should be interpreted with care. These probability surveys are valid within a statistical margin of error, also called a 95% confidence interval. This means that if the survey were conducted 100 times using the exact same procedures, the margin of error would include the “true value” in 95 out of 100 surveys. Sample sizes vary across countries from 1 000 to 4 000, and as the surveys use a clustered sample design the margin of error varies by question. The margin of error declines with increasing sample size: with a sample size of 1 000, the margin of error at a 95% confidence interval is 0.98/ or 3%, with a sample size of 4 000, this is 1.5%. To minimise the effect of annual fluctuations in responses related to small sample sizes, results are averaged over a three-year period, or two-year period in case of missing data. If only one observation in a three-year period is available, this finding is not reported.
Indicators on trust and safety are based on the following questions: “Do you feel safe walking alone at night or in the city or area where you live? In the city or area where you live, do you have confidence in the local police force, or not?”
Data on crime rates are taken from the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crimes (UNDOC) Database. UNODC collects administrative data on crime and the operation of criminal justice systems in order to make policy-relevant information and analysis available in a timely manner (www.unodc.org/). The index (2008 = 100) concerns data on the total number of persons brought into formal contact with the police and/or criminal justice system, all crimes have taken together. “Formal contact” with the police and/or criminal justice system may include persons suspected, arrested or cautioned. Cross-national comparisons should be interpreted with care because of the differences that exist between the legal definitions of offences in countries or the different methods of counting and recording offences.