Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I created this map using ward level data from the Metropolitan Police. Similar to the Met's own map, but they only show two-year changes. I thought it was interesting to look at a longer-term trend. It shows that compared to the rest of London, crime rates in this area are fairly low. The Lane ward is higher, but has seen one of the fastest rates of decline over the past 5 and 10 years.


Overall crime rate for London is 91 crimes per 1000 population, and Southwark is 110.


Of the 624 London wards, these are the rankings of selected wards...


The Lane, 51st highest rate (150 crimes per 1000 population). 105th highest reduction in crime over 5 years (-28%).

Village, 331st highest rate (74 crimes per 1000 population). 167th highest reduction in crime over 5 years (-24%).

East Dulwich, 375th highest rate (70 crimes per 1000 population). 353rd highest reduction in crime over 5 years (-14%).

South Camberwell, 451st highest rate (63 crimes per 1000 population). 256th highest reduction in crime over 5 years (-19%).

Peckham Rye, 455th highest rate (62 crimes per 1000 population). 219th highest reduction in crime over 5 years (-21%).



http://datacollator.blogspot.co.uk/2013/11/london-crime-statistics-by-ward.html

very interesting - but as rates are given per 1000 of the population which sounds totally fair

wouldn't that result in skewing results against areas where the population may be low but actual numbers of people physically in the streets high. eg places where many people congregate for transport, entertainment or shopping

PeckhamRose Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Wow. This backs up what the police tell us every

> time we attend the Police Ward Panel! Love living

> here!


That's because these figures are invented by Plod itself (see http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-25022680), allegedly according to whatever gets targets met or makes a good case for more funding.


The British Crime Survey is regarded (by government and others, when it suits them) as being more reliable. However, the BCS is done through interviews with about 50,000 randomly-selected people, so won't be directly comparable at ward level, and won't be fine-grained enough to base strategies on. It's also probable that the victims of nastier crimes, such as murder, would be less likely than average to respond.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Yes..that may be the case but membership STARTING at £115 a month is still unafforable for many. Council gyms also have a large range of equipment and I had a  PT at Dulwich leisure centre when I was in Full Time employment who was incredible and even kept in contact during lockdown giving me a program I could do at home and checking in weekly at no charge or personal gain for herself. I dont doubt that Fit For may be a good gym (Its been in situ long enough so must be doing something right) However the cost of membership means it is affordable for the few not the many. If I could afford that kind of fee I would rather get a train to Canary Wharf and go to Virgin active where theres a pool and incredible classes and facilities 
    • This sounds great 👍 
    • We found a red TREK bike yesterday that had clearly been stolen and dumped. Would love to reunite it with its owner. Get in touch if you know whose it is.
    • Hey, I am interested. I had started a club last year however everyone slowly dropped off but I am always up for morning runs and some evening runs too.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...