Who benefited most from the crime drop? Measuring stability and change in victimization inequality across different socio-demographic groups

Understanding inequality in victimisation across society is crucial to address questions of fairness and justice, even during periods of falling crime. Consequently, a growing body of research has considered how the recent crime drop has affected patterns of victimisation inequality. These studies primarily aim to understand whether different social groups have benefitted equally from overall reductions in rates of victimization; however, much of the existing research is limited by three key methodological shortcomings. Firstly, studies often compare only two discrete points in time, rather than describing longer term changes in victimization. Secondly, they typically focus on either ‘unadjusted’ estimates of victimisation (which measure differences between groups without taking account of any other characteristics) or ‘adjusted’ estimates (which take account of additional characteristics), but rarely both, giving only a partial picture. Finally, few studies of victimization inequality account for uncertainty in the victimization estimates which are inherent in analyses of crime survey data. This paper addresses these shortcomings by applying a robust, simulation-based approach to estimating and visualizing temporal change in both unadjusted and adjusted indicators of victimization inequality using data from the Scottish Crime and Justice Survey collected between 2008/09 and 2021/22. Our analysis focuses on nine socio-demographic variables which include individual, household and community characteristics. While the results show reductions in victimization rates across all groups studied, there was clear evidence of victimization inequality between some groups. Moreover, the extent of victimization inequality and how it changed over time varied considerably depending on whether adjusted or unadjusted estimates was used. Overall, rising inequality was most strongly associated with ethnicity, disability and financial hardship. We argue that our methodological approach provides a more nuanced and informative perspective on stability and change in victimization inequality than previously considered.