Accurate Crime Data – Brennan Center for Justice

Analysis of US Crime Trends in the Context of Sustainable Development Goals

Crime Rate Fluctuations and SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

An examination of crime statistics in the United States reveals a complex landscape that directly impacts the pursuit of Sustainable Development Goal 16, which aims to promote peaceful, just, and inclusive societies. While a significant long-term reduction in crime was achieved over the past three decades, a recent increase during the Covid-19 pandemic has presented new challenges to public safety and institutional stability.

• Long-Term Decline: A multi-decade drop in crime rates established a positive trajectory toward achieving SDG Target 16.1 (Significantly reduce all forms of violence and related death rates).
• Pandemic-Era Increase: The recent rise in certain crimes threatens this progress and highlights vulnerabilities in public safety systems.
• Threat of Misinformation: Misleading claims and disproven theories regarding the causes of this increase risk undermining the development of effective, evidence-based policy, thereby impeding progress on SDG Target 16.6 (Develop effective, accountable and transparent institutions at all levels).

Policy Implications for SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities) and SDG 16

The response to current crime trends carries significant implications for social equity and justice. There is a documented risk of reverting to misguided policies that do not enhance public safety and conflict with core SDG principles.

1. Avoiding Ineffective Policies: A return to strategies that previously drove mass incarceration must be avoided. Such policies have been shown to exacerbate societal divisions and disproportionately impact marginalized populations, directly contradicting the aims of SDG 10 (Reduce inequality within and among countries).
2. Building Fairer Systems: The primary objective for policymakers must be the dual pursuit of crime reduction and the construction of a more equitable and effective criminal justice system. This approach is essential for fulfilling SDG Target 16.3 (Promote the rule of law at the national and international levels and ensure equal access to justice for all).
3. Community Impact: Policies that have historically decimated communities without providing measurable safety benefits are antithetical to the holistic and people-centered approach of the Sustainable Development Goals.

A Framework for Advancing Public Safety and Sustainable Communities (SDG 11)

To effectively address public safety challenges while advancing sustainable development, a commitment to data-driven and reliable analysis is paramount. This ensures that all stakeholders, including government officials and the public, are equipped with the necessary information to build safer and more resilient communities.

• Utilize Authoritative Analysis: Incorporate the best available information and authoritative analyses to ensure a clear and accurate understanding of crime trends, which is foundational for sound policymaking.
• Inform All Stakeholders: Provide government officials and the public with comprehensive data to effectively understand and confront threats to public safety. This supports the creation of safe, inclusive, and sustainable communities as envisioned in SDG 11.
• Integrate Justice and Safety: Promote strategies that reduce crime while simultaneously building a fairer criminal justice system, thereby reinforcing the interconnected goals of public safety, justice, and institutional integrity (SDG 16).

SDGs Addressed in the Article

SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

• The article’s core focus on crime rates, public safety, and the development of a “fairer and more effective criminal justice system” directly aligns with the objectives of SDG 16. It addresses the need for effective institutions to manage public safety and ensure justice, while also highlighting the challenge of misinformation that can undermine these institutions.

Specific SDG Targets Identified

1. Target 16.1: Significantly reduce all forms of violence and related death rates everywhere.

   • The article is centered on the discussion of “crime rates” and “threats to public safety.” The analysis of whether crime has increased or decreased is a direct reflection of efforts to achieve this target.

2. Target 16.3: Promote the rule of law at the national and international levels and ensure equal access to justice for all.

   • The text explicitly mentions the goal of building a “fairer and more effective criminal justice system” and warns against “misguided policies that drove mass incarceration.” This directly relates to promoting the rule of law and ensuring that justice is administered fairly, rather than through policies that lead to disproportionate outcomes.

3. Target 16.6: Develop effective, accountable and transparent institutions at all levels.

   • The article highlights the Brennan Center’s role in providing “authoritative and reliable analyses” to counter “misleading claims and disproven theories.” This effort to ensure that government officials have the “best available information” contributes to making the criminal justice system a more effective and accountable institution, one that operates on facts rather than political rhetoric.

Indicators for Measuring Progress

1. Crime Rates

   • The article directly uses “crime rates” as the primary metric for discussing public safety. It states that “Crime rates in the United States dropped sharply over the last three decades but rose during the Covid-19 pandemic.” This is a clear, though general, indicator for measuring progress towards Target 16.1.

2. Incarceration Rates

   • The article implies the use of incarceration rates as an indicator of a just system by warning against policies that “drove mass incarceration.” A high or rapidly increasing incarceration rate can be seen as an indicator of an unfair or ineffective justice system, making it relevant for measuring progress toward Target 16.3.

3. Use of Data and Analysis in Policymaking

   • The article implies a qualitative indicator related to institutional effectiveness (Target 16.6). By emphasizing the need for “authoritative and reliable analyses” and “the best available information” to guide policymakers, it suggests that the extent to which policies are based on evidence versus “misleading claims” is a measure of institutional quality and accountability.

Summary Table: SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: brennancenter.org