Citation

Pridemore WA. Soc. Sci. Med. 2003; 57(8): 1343-1354.

Affiliation

Department of Sociology, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK 73019, USA. pridemore@ou.edu

Copyright

(Copyright © 2003, Elsevier Publishing)

DOI

unavailable

PMID

12927465

Abstract

The Russian homicide rate more than tripled between 1988 and 1994 and is now among the highest in the world. This dramatic increase, together with newly available data from a post-Soviet Russian government that is becoming more transparent, has led to a growing number of studies of homicide in Russia. As of yet, however, there has been no systematic evaluation of the homicide reporting systems in the country. This article examines the comparability of the two main sources of homicide estimates in Russia, crime data from the Ministry of the Interior and mortality data from the vital statistics registration system. These estimates are compared annually and by administrative region. Annual estimates from the vital statistics reporting system have reported an average of nearly 40% more homicides than the crime reporting system over the last decade and a half. Regionally, mortality estimates are higher than crime estimates in 66 of 78 regions, and eight of the 12 regions where crime estimates are higher are in areas where previous validation procedures suggest mortality data are suspect. As the regional homicide rate increases, so does the gap between the two estimates. Case definitions of these sources lead us to expect small discrepancies between them, but this does not account for the large differences revealed here. Both systems under-report, for different reasons, and some of the under-enumeration in both systems is purposeful and/or results from a lack of human and monetary resources. Mortality data are probably better for most purposes, especially when comparing Russia to other nations and when estimating causal models. Both systems should be used with caution, however, and the choice between them should depend on the nature of each study.

Language: en