COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL  Measuring Crime in the EU: Statistics Action Plan 2011- 2015
Date: 2012-01-18
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU statistics, criminal court, data collection, delinquency, disclosure of information, judicial cooperation in criminal matters in the EU, prevention of delinquency

EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Brussels, 18.1.2012 
COM(2011) 713 final 

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN 
PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL 

 Measuring Crime in the EU: Statistics Action Plan 2011- 2015 

 
 
 
 
  
 
COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN 
PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL 

 Measuring Crime in the EU: Statistics Action Plan 2011- 2015 

INTRODUCTION 

1. 

PURPOSE 

Statistics on crime and criminal justice are indispensable tools for developing evidence-based 
policy at EU level. Impact assessments, evaluations of the implementation of EU legislation 
from  the  Member  States  and  assessment  of  the  effectiveness  of  new  laws  are  only  some 
examples  of  the  use  of  statistical  information.  While  the  need  for  factual  statistics  has  long 
been recognised by the Member States and the European Commission, there is still a lack of 
reliable and comparable statistical information.  

The  purpose  of  this  Communication  is  to  inform  stakeholders  of  the  progress  made  in 
measuring crime and criminal justice over the last five years and to set out the main actions 
for the next five years in the form of an Action Plan 2011-2015. 

2. 

STATE OF PLAY 

2.1. 

Action Plan 2006-2010 - Background 

In August 2006, the Commission adopted a 5-year EU Action Plan for the development of a 
comprehensive and coherent EU strategy to measure crime and criminal justice. DG Justice 
Freedom  and  Security  (JLS)  and,  as  of  2010,  DG  Home  Affairs  (HOME)  in  close 
collaboration with Eurostat, were responsible for its implementation. 

At  the  same  time,  an  Expert  Group  on  the  Policy  Needs  for  Data  on  Crime  and  Criminal 
Justice  was  established1  to  assist  the  Commission,  in  order  to  identify  the  policy  needs  for 
data at EU level and to advise on the effective development and use of indicators in the area 
of  crime  and  criminal  justice.  This  Expert  Group  consists  of  Police,  Justice  or  Interior 
officials  from  each  EU  Member  State,  and  Candidate  and  EFTA2  countries,  as  well  as  the 
relevant  EU,  European,  and  international  organisations  and  agencies3.  Academia  and  the 
private sector are also represented. The group has met five times since 2006. 

In  parallel,  a  Eurostat  Working  Group  was  established  to  implement  the  findings  and 
recommendations  of  the  Expert  Group.  All  Member  States  are  represented  on  the  Working 
Group  by  government  experts  from  the  National  Statistical  Institutes.  Other  participants 

1 
2 
3 

By Commission decision (2006/581/EC) 
European Free Trade Association: Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway and Switzerland 
EUCPN,  EMCDDA,  EUROJUST,  EUROPOL,  FRA,  Council  of  Europe,  European  Sourcebook, 
UNODC, UNECE and UNICEF 

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
                                                 
represent EFTA and candidates countries, as well as numerous international bodies active in 
the area. Further experts are invited on an ad-hoc basis to discuss topics which are related to 
their specific areas of expertise. The Expert Group on Policy Needs sets the priorities, and the 
Eurostat  Working  Group  discusses  their  feasibility  and  implementation,  assesses  the  quality 
of collected data and, when necessary, defines the methodologies and procedures to be used. 
Additionally,  a  number  of  Expert  sub-groups  and  Task  Forces  were  established  to  examine 
particular Action Plan tasks. DG HOME established five sub-groups4 and Eurostat two Task 
Forces5. 

2.2. 

Action Plan 2006-2010 – Achievements  

Significant  efforts  have  been  made  by  both  the  Commission  and  the  Member  States  to 
implement  a  far-reaching  Action  Plan  .  The  main  achievements  can  be  summarised  as 
follows: 

International cooperation - Data collection mechanism: Particular focus was placed on setting 
up  the  basis  for  cooperation  with  Member  States  authorities,  European  agencies  and 
international  institutions  by  establishing  networks  of  experts  and  identifying  contact  points. 
The  outcome  of  this  cooperation  was  the  development  of  a  functional  mechanism  for  the 
collection  of  data  which  covers  all  stages  of  the  process,  from  the  identification  of  the 
common indicators to the actual publication of the collected data. 

Better understanding of the needs: Equally important was the improvement of the knowledge 
with regard to the needs, the gaps and the limitations in collecting and analysing crime data at 
EU  level.  The  exchange  of  information  at  expert  meetings,  the  experience  gained  from 
collecting  data  throughout  this  period  and  the  outcomes  of  research  projects  have  made  a 
significant contribution to this effort.  

Development  of  indicators  and  data  collections:  Since  2007  Eurostat  has  produced,  on  an 
annual  basis,  a  Statistics  in  Focus6  publication  on  crime  statistics  containing  data  on  the 
following:  total  crime,  homicides,  violent  crime,  robberies,  domestic  burglary,  theft  of  a 
motor  vehicle,  drug  trafficking,  prison  population  and  the  number  of  police  officers.  In 
November  2010,  the  first  working  paper  on  Money  Laundering  was  issued7.  Statistics  were 
based  on  the  indicators  identified  by  the  Commission's  expert  sub-group  on  Money 
Laundering.  Other  lists  of  indicators  produced  so  far  concern  Trafficking  in  Human  Beings 
and Cybercrime.  

EU  Safety  (victimisation)  Survey:  Police  and  court  statistics  should  be  complemented  by 
statistics on victims, particularly in crime areas where the incidents are not always reported. 
Moreover,  victimisation  surveys  are  a  valid  source  of  fully  comparable  data,  as  long  as  a 
common methodology is applied. The development of a common methodology and a survey 
module on victimisation was therefore another important outcome of this Action Plan . The 
implementation  of  the  survey  has  been  scheduled  for  the  period  2013-2014  and  it  will 

4 

5 
6 
7 

Sub-groups  on  Planning,  Money  Laundering,  Criminal  Justice,  Trafficking  in  Human  Beings,  Police 
Cooperation and Cybercrime 
Task Forces on Victimisation and on Crime Data Availability 
http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/crime/publications 
http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/product_details/publication?p_product_code=KS-
RA-10-003 

EN 

3 

   EN 

 
                                                 
provide,  for  the  first  time  in  EU27,  comparable  information  on  the  prevalence  rates 
(victimisation  rates)  of  specific  types  of  crime  and  on  aspects  related  to  citizens'  feelings 
about their safety. The active involvement of the National Statistical Institutes at every stage 
(from the design of the module to the field work and the estimations of the prevalence rates) 
guarantees  full  responsibility  for  the  data  quality,  and  this  is  particularly  important  for 
countries that do not conduct national surveys on victims, as they can use this opportunity to 
build up their own capacities.  

Support  for  relevant  research:  Research  activities  in  the  field  of  Justice  and  Home  Affairs 
were  strongly  supported  through  the  programme  “Prevention  of  and  Fight  against  Crime” 
which  provided  the  opportunity  to  a  large  number  of  research  groups  from  all  27  Member 
States to carry out studies in areas of particular interest for the Commission. A characteristic 
example of the use of research results is the list of indicators on Trafficking in Human Beings, 
which is based on the suggestions and recommendations of relevant studies.  

2.3. 

Action Plan 2006-2010 – Lessons learned  

While  significant  work  has  been  achieved  in  research,  coordination  and  networking,  only  a 
few results are actually visible. This is particularly true regarding the objectives which require 
not  only  the  development  of  common  indicators,  but  also  the  actual  collection  of  data.  The 
latter  issue  has  been  the  slowest  and  most  problematic  aspect  of  the  implementation  of  the 
Action Plan. 

The  main  reasons  for  the  limited  progress  in  the  collection  of  comparable  and  harmonised 
data  at  EU  level  were  summarised  in  the  study  on  “The  development  of  an  EU-level 
classification system” initiated by the Commission in 20078. They are as follows: 

Differences in the offence definitions and the classification systems: Across the EU, at least 
128  national  authorities  are  involved  in  the  collection  and  production  of  crime  statistics, 
whereas at least 52 distinct offence classification systems have been identified. 

Cumbersome data flow: Coordination at national level has proved difficult, especially in the 
case  of  multiple  data  sources.  Even  when  national  contact  points  exist,  they  do  not  always 
have access to data covering every stage of the criminal justice system. As a result, all data 
collections encounter significant delays before achieving an integrated dataset.  

Differences in the reporting systems: Different Member States apply different counting rules9 
to  measure  crime,  which  limits  the  comparability  and  often  leads  to  double  counting. 
Differences  in  the  point  in  time  at  which  offence  data  are  recorded  and  the  wide  range  of 
reporting practices across the EU create additional obstacles. 

Proliferation  of  data  collections  by  EU  and  international  organisations:  The  collection  of 
crime  data  at  international  level  largely  depends  on  the  scope  and  the  mandate  of  the 
organisation  involved.  As  a  result,  Member  State  authorities  frequently  face  similar  but 

8 

9 

Tender JLS/D2/2007/03. Study on the development of an EU- level offence classification system and an 
assessment  of  its  feasibility  to  supporting  the  implementation  of  the  Action  Plan  to  develop  an  EU 
strategy to measure crime and criminal justice. 
Based either on offenders or on offences. 

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
                                                 
slightly different requests for data, which adds to confusion and increases their administrative 
burdens. 

Other sources of delay in implementing the actions described in the Action Plan were the lack 
of interest or different prioritisation for some activities at national level, budgetary and staff 
constraints  and,  finally,  the  increase  in  the  administrative  burdens  due  to  new  requests  for 
data. As a result, only 50% of the objectives have been met10. 

It remains true that information on traditional forms of crime – considered to lie outside EU 
competency – is more robust, more comparable and generally of better quality than in the area 
of  cross-border  organised  crime  which  relates  more  closely  to  EU  policy  needs.  However, 
progress can be seen in complex new areas such as Money-Laundering, Trafficking in Human 
Beings  and  Cybercrime.  Yet  the  fact  remains  that  data  on  both  traditional  and  cross-border 
organised crime depend on the quality and efficiency of the domestic structures underpinning 
the collection and provision of data. 

3. 

POLITICAL COMMITMENTS 

In the Stockholm Programme11, the European Council invites the Commission to 

"continue developing statistical tools to measure crime and criminal activities and reflect on 
how  to  further  develop,  after  2010,  the  actions  outlined  and  partly  implemented  in  the  EU 
Action plan 2006-2010 on developing a comprehensive and coherent EU strategy to measure 
crime  and  criminal  justice,  in  view  of  the  increased  need  for  such  statistics  in  a  number  of 
areas within the field of freedom, security and justice." 

Fighting and preventing Serious and  Organised  Crime as  well as Cybercrime are within the 
five  strategic  objectives  of  the  Internal  Security  Strategy12  which  sets  the  basis  for  a  more 
effective  cooperation  between  the  Member  States  and  the  EU  Institutions  aiming  at  a  more 
secure Europe. The exchange of information and the collection of statistics in particular areas 
like Trafficking in Human Beings, Money Laundering, Cybercrime and Corruption are in line 
with the proposed actions of the Internal Security Strategy.  

4. 

FUTURE WORK  

4.1. 

Action Plan 2011 – 2015 - Objectives 

Given that its main focus was on setting up the necessary mechanisms, the Action Plan 2006-
2010  must  be  seen  as  the  first  step  in  a  long-term  process.  It  has  set  the  basis  for  an  EU 
strategy  to  measure  crime  and  criminal  justice  by  developing  and  testing  a  functional 
mechanism for the smooth flow of information from and to the Member States. Building on 
lessons learned, it is now possible to apply this mechanism more effectively. 

10 
11 
12 

Another 30% were partially achieved or they are still in process. 
OJ C 115/1, 4.5.2010, pp.21 
The  EU  Internal  Security  Strategy  in  Action:  Five  steps  towards  a  more  secure  Europe.  COM(2010) 
673 final 

EN 

5 

   EN 

 
                                                 
The aim of the new Action Plan 2011-2015 is to continue and take forward the work started in 
2006 and to focus on delivering results. The objectives presented in this Action Plan are based 
on the priorities set by the Internal Security Strategy with regard to specific crime areas and 
on  the  recommendations  from  the  Expert  Group  on  Policy  Needs,  as  received  in  a  written 
consultation during summer 2010. The main message of this consultation, which reflects the 
priorities of a wide range of stakeholders, was the need for a focused and feasible Action Plan 
with the emphasis on the quality of the collected data, the analysis and dissemination of the 
results, and a better coordination and collaboration of all the actors involved (Member States, 
EU  Institutions,  EU  Agencies,  International  Organisations,  Academia).  In  response  to  this 
request, the objectives of the Action Plan 2011-2015 are divided into the following four areas: 

(1) 

(2) 

(3) 

(4) 

Cooperation and Coordination at EU and International level  

Data quality 

Data analysis and dissemination of results 

Development of indicators and specific data collections 

Cooperation at EU and International level 
The  objectives  under  this  category  respond  to  the  experts’  recommendations  for  better 
mapping  of  the  needs  of  the  policy  makers,  better  communication  of  the  stakeholders, 
promotion of the work on crime and criminal justice statistics among the EU institutions and 
better  collaboration  at  EU  and  international  level,  in  order  to  avoid  duplication  of  the 
collection exercises. Some of the actions proposed to achieve these objectives are as follows: 

• 

• 

• 

• 

establishment of a new and wider expert group  

regular updates of the relevant Council working groups on the implementation of the 
Action Plan  

promotion  and  dissemination  of  best  practices  applied  by  Member  States  and 
international organisations, for collecting and reporting data 

data  collections  organised  jointly  with  international  organisations  and/or  EU 
agencies. 

Data quality 
The objectives of this category are set in order to improve the comparability of the data that 
are  already  being  produced  in  a  regular  basis.  Since  the  main  reasons  for  not  having 
comparable  data  are  the  differences  in  the  criminal  codes  and  the  reporting  systems,  the 
emphasis is on the development of an International Crime Classification System for statistical 
purposes,  taking  account  of  multilingual  needs.  According  to  the  experts  consulted  on  the 
content of this Action Plan, improvement of the quality of the statistics published annually by 
Eurostat in Statistics in Focus should be the first priority. The suggested actions include the 
following:  

• 

continue  and  promote  the  work  of  the  UNODC-UNECE  Task  Force  on  Crime 
Classification  by  providing  funding  to  those  Member  States  that  wish  to  test  the 
proposed classification, 

EN 

6 

   EN 

 
• 

• 

• 

decrease the level of aggregation and increase the list of crimes (in the Statistics in 
Focus  on  Crime  and  Criminal  Justice)  so  as  to  achieve  more  homogeneous 
categories, 

introduce  demographic  variables  (such  as  gender,  nationality,  age  group)  where 
appropriate, 

draft guidelines and common definitions, in particular for the new data collections on 
non-traditional types of crimes. 

Data analysis and dissemination of results 
The need to invest more in the analysis of the collected data was mentioned by the majority of 
the  experts  during  their  consultation.  Because  of  the  differences  in  recording,  reporting  and 
classifying  crime  across  the  Member  State,  comparisons  of  crime  levels  can  be  misleading, 
especially if absolute figures are not accompanied by additional information on their quality 
(metadata) - for example, if there are deviations from the instructions and guidelines received 
at the beginning of the process. 

At  the  same  time,  the  need  for  an  EU  Crime  Report,  which  would  pull  together  data  and 
reports  on  Crime  and  Criminal  Statistics,  has  long  been  recognised.  The  development  of  a 
framework for producing such a report was already among the objectives of the Action Plan 
2006-2010 and also the subject of a study which was concluded in December 2010. However, 
there is still a need for further reflection on the feasibility of the proposed options.  

Dissemination  and  open  access  to  data,  studies,  reports  and  good  practices  were  also 
requested by several stakeholders. To accommodate the above requests, the following actions 
have been planned: 

• 

• 

• 

Systematic  compilation  and  publication  of  metadata  and  contextual  information, 
following the example of Statistics in Focus 

Development  of  an  EU  Crime  Report  based  on  the  recommendations  of  the 
preliminary study and the assessment of the feasibility of the proposed options 

Production of working papers and explanatory notes for every new data collection. 

Development of indicators and specific data collections 
The objectives of this category reflect the general consensus on a concise and feasible action 
plan and they comply with the request of the Member States regarding additional workload. 
At the same time, they are based on the priorities set through the Internal Security Strategy 
with regard to specific crime areas.  

Two types of activities have been planned:  

• 

• 

Ongoing  activities,  which  started  under  the  previous  Action  Plan  ,  such  as  the 
implementation of the EU Safety Survey, the Business Victimisation Survey and the 
third Money Laundering data collection.  

Activities included in the previous Action Plan which have not advanced sufficiently, 
such  as  the  data  collection  on  Cybercrime,  or  have  never  started,  such  as  the 
development of indicators on Corruption. 

EN 

7 

   EN 

 
The collection of crime statistics should as from 2012 be further facilitated through the timely 
implementation  by  Member  States  of  the  (third  pillar)  decision  establishing  a  European 
Criminal Record System (ECRIS)13. 

4.2. 

Action Plan 2011 – 2015 – Challenges 

The successful implementation of the Action Plan requires intensive and continuous work at 
all levels (national, EU and international). 

At  national  level  there  is  a  need  to  improve  domestic  coordination  amongst  the  various 
governmental  and  non-governmental  users  and  providers  of  data  on  crime.  Experience  has 
shown that this lack of coordination is a major source of delays in the collection exercises.  

The financial crisis has forced some Member States to reduce their administrative costs and 
hence  their  ability  to  participate  in  expert  groups  and  committees.  The  Commission  being 
aware of the situation will seek to minimise the number of meetings and will also look into 
other means of communication, such as video and teleconferences. 

At EU level the main challenge remains the comparability of the collected data. This is why a 
consistent  approach  to  the  classification  of  crime  data  is  required.  The  need  for  a  common 
classification system applies not only to the Member States, but also to EU agencies. Effort 
must be put into ensuring against the risk of replicating the current situation within some of 
the  Member  States,  where  multiple  and  often  divergent  crime  classifications  add  an  extra 
layer of complexity to the collection of comparable data.  

At  European  and  international  level  the  focus  is  on  coordination  and  exchange  of  good 
practices. Common data collections (i.e. Commission, UN bodies, the Council of Europe, etc.) 
would clearly lessen the burden on the statistical institutes of the Member States and thereby 
reduce  the  time  needed  for  the  collection,  checking  and  transmission  of  the  statistical 
information.  

5. 

IMPLEMENTATION AND FOLLOW-UP 

DG  HOME  will  be  responsible  for  the  implementation  of  the  Action  Plan  2011-2015. 
Eurostat will continue the activities started under the previous Action Plan and will provide 
technical advice on the new tasks when needed. 

The re-establishment of an expert group to support the Commission in identifying the policy 
needs  for  data  on  crime  will  help  avoid  the duplication  of  work  on  organised  and  volume14 
crime across the Commission, EU bodies and agencies and international organisations active 
in the field.  

Subgroups  and  Tasks  Forces  will  be  set  up  to  carry  out  particular  tasks  subject  to  the 
agreement of the expert group at its annual meeting. 

The  Action  Plan  will  be  updated  as  this  work  develops,  and  the  activities  identified  will  be 
included  in  the  relevant  Commission  work  programmes,  as  well  as  in  the  Community 

13 
14 

OJ L 93, 7.4. 2009, p.33 
Volume crime includes : Burglary, Robbery, Vehicle Theft, Assault, Vandalism etc. 

EN 

8 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Statistical  Programme  and  its  annual  work  programmes.  The  Action  Plan  may  also  need  to 
cover measuring data related to the effective implementation of EU policies through criminal 
measures, as well as possible new instruments relating to crime and criminal justice. The new 
financial perspectives will reflect the need for support to Member States in implementing the 
action plan. 

The Commission will inform the relevant Council working groups annually of the progress in 
the  implementation  of  the  Action  Plan.  In  2013  the  Commission  will  prepare  a  mid-term 
review, and at the end of 2015 a final report will be submitted to the European Parliament and 
the Council on the achievements and the limitations in the implementation of the Action Plan. 

EN 

9 

   EN 

 
TABLE OF ACTIONS FOR THE EU ACTION PLAN 2011 – 2015 ON MEASURING CRIME IN THE EUROPEAN UNION  

1. 

COOPERATION AND COORDINATION AT EU AND INTERNATIONAL LEVEL 

Responsible 
Party 

COM 
(HOME) 

Objectives 

1.1  Set 

up 

a 

between 
makers 

communication 
channel 
policy 
(Commission 
included), 
data 
providers  and  end 
users 

COM 
(HOME) 

1.2  Raise 

improve 
of 

awareness 
the 
and 
the 
visibility 
work 
crime 
on 
statistics  among  the 
EU institutions 

Timeframe 

Specific Actions 

Commission 
Decision  in 
2011  

Annual 
meetings, 
starting 
from 2012 

Continuous 

a. Re establishment and enlargement15 of an expert group to consult the Commission on 
the implementation of this Action Plan.  
b. Definition and regular update of the policy need through discussions and written 
consultations.  
c. Feedback from the users of the collected crime statistics for better understanding of 
the type of data required for policy and decision making. 

a. Annual updates of the relevant Council working group on the progress in the 
implementation of the Action Plan.  
b. Promotion and dissemination of best practices from the Member States and 
international organisations 

1.3  Improve 

COM 

Continuous  Common access to meeting reports, presentations and supporting documents.  

15 

EN 

So as to cover the 27 MSs, Acceding and Candidate countries, the Council secretariat, EU agencies, the Council of Europe, UN bodies, the European Sourcebook and 
representatives from the Academia 

10 

EN 

 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
(HOME, 
ESTAT) 

cooperation 
between 
the  new 
expert  group  and 
the 
Eurostat 
Working Group  

COM 
(ESTAT, 
HOME. 
JUST) 

the 

2011 
first 
common 
data 
collection 

UNODC – EUROSTAT common data collection. Explore other possibilities.  

Commission – Council of Europe on prison population (SPACE I and II) 

COM 
(HOME, 
ESTAT, 
JUST, 
RTD, 
ENTR) 

Continuous 

a. Substantial representation of the Academia in the relevant Commission’s expert 
group and sub-groups. 
b. Dissemination of information regarding research opportunities under the 7th and the 
8th Framework Research Programme.  
c. Wide communication of final results and deliverables of the projects funded through 
ISEC Programme. 

1.4  Avoid  proliferation 
of  statistical  data 
and  duplication  of 
by 
information 
data 
organising 
in 
collections 
common  with  other 
International 
Institutions  and/or 
EU agencies.  

1.5  Work 

close 
in 
collaboration  with 
academic 
the 
and 
community 
research 
promote 
with 
activities 
policy  relevance  in 
the  priority  crime 
areas 
DG 
of 
HOME. 

2. DATA QUALITY  

2.1  Follow  up  and  continue  the  work  on  the  COM 

(HOME,  Continuous 

a. Contribute to the development of such 

EN 

11 

EN 

 
  
development  of  an  International  Crime 
Classification  System 
statistical 
purposes  in  collaboration  with  UNODC 
and UNECE 

for 

ESTAT),  UNODC, 
UNECE 

2.2  Continue 

and 

advance 

annual 
publication  of  data  on  Crime  and 
Criminal  Justice  (Statistics  in  Focus)  so 
as to provide more information 

the 

COM 
HOME, JUST, ) 

(ESTAT, 

Continuous 

2.3 

Improve  the  comparability  of  the  data 
collected and published so far. 

(ESTAT  and 

COM 
HOME) 

Continuous 

3. DATA ANALYSIS AND DISSEMINATION OF RESULTS  

classification and promote the final 
outcome to the relevant groups. 
b. Provide funding, through the ISEC 
programme, to the Member States that 
wish to test the proposed classification.  
a. Introduction of demographic variables 
(e.g. sex and age groups).  
b. Inclusion of information on nationality 
and residence for prison populations. 
c. Extend the publication to other types of 
crime. 
a. Disaggregation of the general classes 
of crimes into more homogeneous crime 
categories when possible.16 
b. Development of common definitions 
and guidelines particularly for the data 
collections concerning Eurocrimes where 
there is no previous experience. 

3.1  Develop  a  coherent 

for 
reporting  EU  27  data  on  crime  avoiding 
misleading comparisons.  

framework 

First  print  edition 
2013-2014 

in 

COM  (HOME)  with 
from 
contributions 
other 
and 
international 
stakeholders 

DGs 

Development of a European Crime 
Report based on the recommendations of 
the preliminary study performed under 
the Action Plan 2006-2010 and the 
assessment of the feasibility of the 
proposed options. 

16 

EN 

Very much depended on the outcome of objective 2.1:development of an International Crime Classification System for statistical purposes 

12 

EN 

 
  
 
 
 
                                                 
3.2  Compile  and  publish  metadata  and 
contextual  information  on  a  systematic 
basis.  

COM 
HOME) 

(ESTAT, 

Continuous 

3.3  Publish  working  papers  and  explanatory 

notes  

COM (HOME) and/or 
external 
experts 
depending on the case 

Continuous 

4. DEVELOPMENT OF INDICATORS AND SPECIFIC DATA COLLECTIONS 

4.1  Measuring Money Laundering 

COM 
ESTAT) 

(HOME, 

Data Collection in 2011. 

Publication of results first 
half of 2012 

4.2  Measuring Trafficking in Human Beings  COM 

ESTAT 
collection) 

(HOME, 
the 

for 

First  data  collection  in 
2011-2012 

Each data collection will be accompanied 
by  a  set  of  metadata  and  comments  as 
provided by the Member States. 

For  each  of  the  specific  data  collections 
(objectives  4.1-  4.6)  results  will  be 
presented  and,  if  possible,  analysed  in  a 
working  paper  that  will  be  publicly 
accessible.  

a. Third collection of Money Laundering 
Statistics based on the indicators 
developed under the Action Plan 2006-
2010.  
b. Assessment of the need for a regular 
collection every two years.  
a. First data collection on a small number 
of indicators in collaboration with the 
Network of National Rapporteurs.  
b. Assessment of the feasibility and the 

EN 

13 

EN 

 
  
4.3  Measuring Cybercrime 

COM  (HOME,  with 
technical  advice  from 
ESTAT) 

First  data  collection  in 
2012 

need for regular collection.  
a. First data collection on the offences of 
the proposed EU directive on attacks 
against information systems17.  
b. The gradual expansion of the list to 
cover other computer-facilitated crimes, 
such as high-volume online fraud, will be 
assessed and discussed. 

4.4  Measuring Corruption 

4.5  Measuring  victimisation  rates  and  safety 

feelings in a common EU survey 

(EU SASU) 

COM  (HOME  with 
technical  advice  from 
ESTAT, OLAF) 

COM 
HOME. 
Member States 

(ESTAT, 
JUST), 

Implementation  of 
survey 
Publication  of 
2014-2015 

in 

the 
2013. 
results 

First  data  collection  in 
2013 

Development of indicators followed by a 
pilot data collection. 

a. Implementation of a 
household/personal survey in the 
European Union; the model was 
developed in close cooperation with the 
Member States and it covers the 
prevalence of specific types of crime 
(victimisation rates) and other aspects 
relating to citizens’ feelings about their 
safety. 
b. Analysis and publication of the results  
Business 
of 
Implementation 
Victimisation 
the 
feasibility  study  performed  under  the 
Action Plan 2006-2010. 

survey  based  on 

a 

First collection of data based on study on 
regarding 
legislation 

practice 

and 

4.6  Measuring  the  extent  and  the  type  of 
victimisation in the Business Sector 

COM (HOME) 

Survey in 2011 – 2012 

Results in 2013 

4.7  Measuring  the  impact  of  EU  legislation  COM (JUST) 

Results in 2013 

17 

As adopted by the Commission on 30 September 2010 (COM(2010)517 final). 

EN 

14 

EN 

 
  
                                                 
on criminal sanctions on national practice 

criminal sanctions. 

EN 

15 

EN