Media Releases

3 April 2007

New Zealand Crime & Safety Survey 2006 (NZCASS)
Key Findings report

News media fact sheet 5: About the Survey

1. What was the point of the survey?

The NZCASS is conducted in order to understand crime and its effects on victims, families and communities. It aims to highlight issues where more crime prevention or victims’ support is necessary, and to inform the development of policy and operational practice across the justice sector.

The more we know who the main victims are and the circumstances in which victimisation occurs, the better we can target interventions to reduce it, and the negative effects that it has on victims, their families and communities.

The NZCASS is the latest victimisation survey carried out in New Zealand. Led by internationally-renowned researcher, Pat Mayhew OBE, Director of the Crime & Justice Research Centre at Victoria University of Wellington. It offers insights into the incidence and prevalence of crime in our communities. For the first time, victims in New Zealand have been asked to rate what happened to them with a ‘seriousness’ score—a powerful way of looking at the relationship between reporting and the seriousness of an offence. New questions have been added to explore victims’ experience of the Police, such as whether they were kept waiting, whether the Police had shown interest in what they had to say, showed respect, or kept them informed about the investigation.

Crime victimisation surveys, self-report studies and official police and court statistics are the four main ways of obtaining information on crime and crime rates. All of them have limitations and it is important that we continue to obtain data from as many sources as possible in order to build a more comprehensive picture of crime in New Zealand.

One of the most important flow-on effects of the NZCASS is that policy measures can be more effectively targeted when they use accurate and current information about what is happening to New Zealand residents. These policy initiatives will then be more cost-effective, in that they are more likely to achieve the desired result of reducing crime. However, it is important to note that the NZCASS does not explain the causes of crime.

Further analysis of the survey data over the coming year will explore: community safety, family violence; high risk of victimisation among sole parent families; the main determinants of victimisation risk; information on the needs of victims; victimisation through e-crime; and the cost of crime to victims.

2. Why was the survey design changed?

The NZCASS differs in survey methodology from the two previous surveys (known as the New Zealand National Survey of Crime Victims 2001 and 1996). These methodological changes were made because the Principal Researcher, Pat Mayhew OBE, was able to see where recent innovations internationally could be applied to the New Zealand survey to improve its measurement of victimisation. The number of changes eventually made was significant, making direct comparison between previous surveys difficult.

Pat Mayhew, Director of the Crime & Justice Research Centre at Victoria University of Wellington, was previously at the British Home Office. She has been supported by James Reilly, who has been the statistician for all three victimisation surveys in New Zealand, and Charles Sullivan formerly of ACNielsen Ltd. This consortium of researchers, with input from Māori research consultants, substantially revised the survey in line with international best practice, and to reflect changes to legislation since the previous survey (e.g., the new definition of burglary introduced in 2003 and changes to the Sentencing Act in 2002). They also introduced some new questions, such as a measure of confidence in the criminal justice system, as well as understanding victims’ perceptions of seriousness of offences, and their experiences when reporting crime to the Police.

It is anticipated that future surveys will replicate the 2006 survey’s methodology and that direct comparisons will be more straightforward in future.

3. What crimes does the survey cover?

The survey covers personal and household crime as experienced by respondents, regardless of whether they had been reported to Police.

Many of the offences reported to interviewers (40%) were not considered by the victim to be a crime, despite fitting the legal definitions of criminal offences.

The survey does not cover commercial crime, crimes against people aged under 15 years, and those who may be victims living in institutional environments, or ‘victimless’ crimes, such as alcohol or drug offending.

4. What is the difference between incidence and prevalence?

The incidence rate refers to the number of offences per 100 adults or households. The incidence rate is used to estimate the full volume of crime taking into account that some people are victimised more than once.

The prevalence rate shows the percentage of households or adults who were victimised once or more in 2005. The prevalence rate does not take into account the number of times one person has been victimised.

5. What changes have occurred since the previous survey?

I nterviewing period The most significant change has been interviewing people earlier in the year in 2006 than they were in 2001. This will have improved recollection of offences, and therefore the total number of offences recorded by the survey, as people were asked to think back 13-18 months earlier, whereas in the previous survey it was 18-23 months earlier.

Assaults Additional coding inspection in 2006 reduced the number of uncoded offences, particularly threats and assaults.

Threats There were changes to the screener questions in 2006. In effect, there were additional questions distinguishing threats of force, and threats to damage personal property. This would have promoted recall of more incidents.

Vandalism A new screener question was included in 2006 to elicit offences of vandalism to household property that would have helped people remember incidents of household vandalism.

Burglary The legal definition changed from the previous survey. Burglary no longer requires forced entry so that thefts from an ‘enclosed space’ such as a yard are now more likely to count as burglary.

Sexual offences Changes in measuring sexual victimisation in the 2006 survey has produced a higher number of sexual offences that the two previous surveys. There were four ‘screener’ questions, whereas in the 2001 survey there was just one. Questions in 2006 reflected the legal definition of sexual offences (sexual intercourse, attempted sexual intercourse, being touched in a way that was found sexually distressing, sexually violent incidents, or threats of sexual violence), whereas in 2001 they were more general.

6. What is the difference between the NZCASS, Police Crime Statistics and the International Crime and Victims Survey (ICVS)?

Police Crime Statistics cover all reported crime within a 12 month period. The latest Police Crime Statistics, released on 2 April 2007, relate to the 2006 year.

The NZCASS covers reported and unreported personal and household crime experienced by those aged 15 years or over, but not commercial crime, crimes against people living in institutions, nor ‘victimless’ crimes such as drug and alcohol offences. It involves a survey of 5,416 people. The data relates to the 2005 year.

The ICVS provides a victimisation rating for 10 crime types, including household and personal crimes. It includes reported and unreported crime experienced by New Zealand residents. The sample sizes are small, usually 2,000 adults. The latest ICVS carried out in New Zealand relates to the 2003 year and results are expected later this year.