Crime in Thailand : a sociological study of its trends and area variations (1931-1977)

Abstract

Crime statistics have been recorded at the national level in Thailand for several decades. But as is in the case in many developing countries, limited resources restrict the accumulation of systematic research on such data. Even simple questions about regional variations in crime or about distinctions between short-term fluctuations and long-term trends remain unanswered. The purpose of this dissertation is (a) to compile a national data base of crime indicators for major offences in order to facilitate regional and cross-national coraparisions; (b) to bring evidence to bear on the nature and trends of crime during 1931-1977; (c) to delineate locations of crime and (d) to interpret the research findings, in so far as is possible, in the light of sociological theory on criminality most of which has been the product of the study in western, developed nations. Chapter one presents the argument for a macro analysis of crime trends and variations. The social and economic costs of crime are specified, and the current explanations of crime by authorities concerned with the problem are evaluated. Chapter two makes explicit basic methodological approaches in this macro study of crime. It gives an overview as to how Thai criminal justice statistics, particularly police statistics, are collected and processed, factors affecting non-reporting and non-recording of crime, its reliability and other factors that affect the accuracy of knowledge about crime in Thailand. By means of factor analysis, a time-based crime index, consisting of three indicators: index crime, non-index crime and statutory crime, is invented to measure trends and variations of overall criminality in Thailand during 1931-197?. The same chapter outlines how the problem of statistical validity and reliability associated with the use of crime statistics in a macro sociological study of crime is overcome. Chapter three examines national crime trends in the context of Thailand's demographic, socioeconomic and political developments during 1931-1977. Despite pronounced periodic fluctuations, there was a long-term increase in index crime (eg. homicide, gang robbery), and statutory crime (eg. drug offences, illicit gambling, illegal possession of firearms); and a long-term decline in non-index crime (eg. burglary-theft, snatching, bodily harm). Demographic factors appeared to have negligible effects on the pronouced changes in crime trends. The chapter presents an argument that the long-term trends of these crime indicators were related to the accumulative effects of various aspects of structural changes, and the short-term fluctuations were largely determined by the governments' periodic crime suppression campaigns which were most significant during the post-military coup periods. (see Appendix I. for data on total crimes reported to the police in Thailand, 1931-1977, pp. 209/1-2). The fact that crime is not evenly distributed throughout the nation suggests a need to examine local variations in crime. Chapter four examines regional crime trends and variations from 1957 to 1977. Urbanised regions such as Bangkok and the Central region have more non-index crimes and statutory crimes while the North and the Northeast have low rates for most offences. The South has an outstandingly high rate of index crime. The observed regional disparity in crime distribution is explained in terms of regional socioeconomic disparities and as evidence permits, their differential police concentration and insurgency activity. The significance of population mobility as a predictor of most criminal offences is illustrated in Chapter five when crime is studied at a provincial level. Using factor analysis and multiple regression techniques, four types of provincial criminogenic areas are delineated with their distictive clusters of offences: urban areas, rural areas with a high immigration rate, depressed areas and areas with a high proportion of non-Buddhists. The first three indicators prove to be significant predictors of many of the 24 criminal offences selected for the analysis. Besides, the multivariate analysis reveals that socioeconomic effects are stronger determinants of crime than criminal justice (deterrent) effects. Chapters six and seven present an argument that population movement is a key variable in understanding crime in Thailand in both spatial and temporal terms. The underlying cause of population movement is population pressures on land which result in landlessness, land-tenancy, unemployment and under-employment among rural peasants, and increasing income disparity between agricultural (rural) and non-agricultural (urban) populations. Migratory movements of rural peasants lead to development of the first three criminogenic areas. The chapters draw upon existing theories of crime to explain why the first three criminogenic provincial areas generate their unique cluster of official deviance. Since crime is basically a structural problem, attempts to control crime must be directed to redressing economic malaise and not to dealing with the crime symptoms. Show more