Ecatepec manages more than 50 parks and schools to be “adopted” by businessmen
July 9, 2019
New poisoning of dogs is reported in the Xinantécatl
July 9, 2019Edomex the worst evaluated in Index of Reliability of Criminal Statistics
TRANSPARENCY
Edomex the worst evaluated in Index of Reliability of Criminal Statistics
The state of Mexico is the entity with the worst confidence in homicide statistics revealed the Index of Reliability of Criminal Statistics (ICEC) conducted by Mexico Evaluates
The index measures the possible correlation between culpable and malicious homicides by means of four pillars revealed that of the 32 entities that make up the country and the State of Mexico have serious problems in three of the four variables.
These four variables are murder figures that come from official sources (INEGI and SESNSP) seeking divergences; number of anomalous events recorded that, due to the nature of the data, would have to be very improbable.
The relationship between intentional and culpable homicides, two events that should not be related, but which are related when reclassification cases are carried out and an incentive detection exercise is carried out to erroneously report the homicidal figures.
First, the entity shows the third largest difference between homicide deaths and intentional homicides reported by the SESNSP (even considering the average factor of victims per research portfolio). Second, it has the highest number of irregularities among the guilty homicides it reports. Third, its error term is below zero, which points to a sub-area of culpable homicides and possibly crimes in general.
The under-reporting of accidental homicides is an unusual situation because different incentives may act to do so. But with the available information it is not possible to ensure with precision the incentive that motivates it. The index finds that, during the period 2009-2018, the SESNSP reported 16 thousand 352 investigation folders for intentional homicide in the State of Mexico. Multiplying this figure with the average number of victims per research portfolio (2015-2018), approximately 18,445 victims are obtained.
On the other hand, INEGI reported 24 thousand 226 deaths due to homicide. The difference is 5 thousand 772 victims of intentional homicide. These are 31% higher than those reported by the Secretariat, making the quality of homicide data basically zero. In addition, the levels of oscillation in culpable homicides are too random. In the evolution from 1997 to 2017, there is a too dramatic decline in reports of intentional homicides from 2007 onwards. This means that many more guilty homicides were reported between 1997 and 2007.
Finally, the State of Mexico presents considerably fewer culpable homicides than the regression model would predict, which translates into a systematic undercutting of culpable homicides and probably also of other crimes.
In other words, the margin of error in the entity is so great that everything points to a manipulation of data to pass as fraudulent homicides. Mexico Evaluates proposes in its index to audit the data of this entity to discover the real reason for said subreporte (political incentives, institutional goals, lack of capacities, etc).
In short, there are a lot of intentional murders that are being classified as accidental, but due to the same manipulation of figures and lack of transparency, it is impossible to determine exactly how many and which ones.
Staff
Translator: Martín Caballero
These four variables are murder figures that come from official sources (INEGI and SESNSP) seeking divergences; number of anomalous events recorded that, due to the nature of the data, would have to be very improbable.
The relationship between intentional and culpable homicides, two events that should not be related, but which are related when reclassification cases are carried out and an incentive detection exercise is carried out to erroneously report the homicidal figures.
First, the entity shows the third largest difference between homicide deaths and intentional homicides reported by the SESNSP (even considering the average factor of victims per research portfolio). Second, it has the highest number of irregularities among the guilty homicides it reports. Third, its error term is below zero, which points to a sub-area of culpable homicides and possibly crimes in general.
The under-reporting of accidental homicides is an unusual situation because different incentives may act to do so. But with the available information it is not possible to ensure with precision the incentive that motivates it. The index finds that, during the period 2009-2018, the SESNSP reported 16 thousand 352 investigation folders for intentional homicide in the State of Mexico. Multiplying this figure with the average number of victims per research portfolio (2015-2018), approximately 18,445 victims are obtained.
On the other hand, INEGI reported 24 thousand 226 deaths due to homicide. The difference is 5 thousand 772 victims of intentional homicide. These are 31% higher than those reported by the Secretariat, making the quality of homicide data basically zero. In addition, the levels of oscillation in culpable homicides are too random. In the evolution from 1997 to 2017, there is a too dramatic decline in reports of intentional homicides from 2007 onwards. This means that many more guilty homicides were reported between 1997 and 2007.
Finally, the State of Mexico presents considerably fewer culpable homicides than the regression model would predict, which translates into a systematic undercutting of culpable homicides and probably also of other crimes.
In other words, the margin of error in the entity is so great that everything points to a manipulation of data to pass as fraudulent homicides. Mexico Evaluates proposes in its index to audit the data of this entity to discover the real reason for said subreporte (political incentives, institutional goals, lack of capacities, etc).
In short, there are a lot of intentional murders that are being classified as accidental, but due to the same manipulation of figures and lack of transparency, it is impossible to determine exactly how many and which ones.
Staff
Translator: Martín Caballero
By: Héctor Castañeda
