What is the impact of crime on victims? Are, for example, the psychological, physical, or financial consequences more severe for one person or group than for another? Insight into this can lead to better support from, among others, caregivers from Veilig Thuis or Victim Support Netherlands. This is one of the ambitions that CBS researcher Elke Moons has with her chair. Since April 1 of this year, she has been an extraordinary professor of Crime Statistics at Leiden University.
Until the spring of 2030 Moons claims to fulfill ‘a bridging function between the goldmine of data from CBS and research questions and educational needs within the Leiden University’. For one day a week, she is affiliated with the Institute of Criminal Law & Criminology at the Faculty of Law. On the other days, Moons works within CBS as an account specialist for the surveys Safety Monitor, Domestic, Sexual and Gender-related Violence.

Rich tradition

CBS has a rich tradition in the field of crime statistics and related data. Moons: ‘As early as the last century, we conducted the Livability and Safety Survey, the Victimization Survey, and the Police Monitor population. These were merged in 2005 into the Safety Monitor: a population survey on safety, livability, and victimization of common crime.’ There is also a long joint history of CBS and the Leiden University, although it was not formally established until recently. Maarten Kunst, professor of Criminology at that knowledge institution, gives an example: ‘In the last century, professors Wouter Buikhuisen and Jan Dijk developed the first victimization surveys. These would soon be conducted by CBS.’

Impact of burglary

The impact of crime on the victim. This is an important focus area of Moons’ chair. Are there, for example, differences to be distinguished between victims after a similar offense in the experienced impact? Can vulnerable groups perhaps be identified for which specific support is needed? Moons: ‘Take the family where a burglary has occurred. Perhaps for the man, the matter is settled when the new locks are arranged and the case is settled with the insurer. But the partner may have had poor sleep for months because she relives the burglary over and over again.’

Experienced severity of an offense

‘The Criminal Code prescribes penalties for certain behaviors. The penalties are based on assumptions regarding the severity of those offenses,’ says Kunst. ‘For example, murder or manslaughter has a higher penalty than theft. And a different penalty scale applies to burglary than to a violent crime. But we actually do not know whether the assumptions about the experienced severity of the offense correspond to what victims actually experience. And perhaps individuals from one socio-demographic group experience a violent crime as less severe or more severe than people from another group. Research will hopefully provide insight into this.’

Crime Harm Index

Moons: ‘In the Netherlands, you have the Crime Harm Index. This makes clear which offenses receive the heaviest penalties on average. We want to attach a similar weight to the psychological consequences of a crime for victims and survivors: which offenses lead to the most severe psychological consequences on average? Subsequently, we will ask victims whether they were assisted by caregivers, how that occurred, and whether they would have preferred it to be different. This should result in better, more targeted assistance.’ Kunst: ‘I also hope that thanks to the chair, more victims will gain access to the judicial chain and find their way better within it.’

Strengthening safety

What benefits does the chair provide for CBS? Moons: ‘We can extract more knowledge from our data. Since 2021 we have been asking about the impact of crime on victims, for example. Through the chair, we can ensure better reach and better utilize this data for science. And through new scientific insights, CBS will be able to improve its own products, for example by adjusting questionnaires. Also, see my chair in the context of the CBS multi-year program 2024–2028. It states, among other things, that strengthening safety is one of the major challenges that the Netherlands faces. Undermining crime, for example, leads to the undermining of the rule of law. CBS therefore wants to make even more data available on various facets of the safety domain.’

Narrowing the gap

Kunst explains what the chair can yield for the Leiden University and ultimately society. ‘Many citizens are concerned about how criminal law plays out in practice. They often do not understand judicial decisions. One possible explanation for this is that penalties do not always align with the impact that victims or survivors experience or with the opinion of the general public. There is a legitimacy gap. An important research theme within our faculty is the legitimacy of criminal law. The chair makes it possible to answer research questions about this, for example by determining what the impact of crime is. You can then compare this with the Crime Harm Index: how does the penalty of an offense relate to the impact of the offense on the victim or survivors? I expect that this can help narrow the legitimacy gap.’

Greater awareness

In this context, Kunst mentions the future criminologists and jurists being trained at the Leiden University. ‘We are talking about people who will soon deal professionally with victimization. One in execution and the other as a policymaker. Perhaps the greatest benefit of the chair is that they will become more aware of the impact of crimes on citizens.’ Moons: ‘And ideally, there should be a kind of parallel stream of assistance alongside the judiciary, so that victims do not only deal with the judiciary but lead the process themselves and are less merely spectators.’

Better scientific substantiation

In recent years, victims have gained more rights. For example, the right to be informed about assistance opportunities. Kunst: ‘These rights are often created under the assumption that the government knows what is good for the victims. But often the procedures are not scientifically well-founded and it is unclear whether the needs of victims are truly being met. It is desirable that the working method is more evidence-based. The new chair can contribute to that.’