Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Asmah Ahmad
School of Social, Development and Environmental Studies
Faculty of Social Sciences and Humanities
Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia
43600 Bangi, Selangor
Abstract
Incidences of killings, robberies, traffic accidents and fires have become regular
newspapers headlines and breaking news on television. They are reminders of the losses
and sufferings of members of the public. All these are indicative of the state of social
well-being experienced by the people of a nation. In Malaysia, these incidences are
discernible during rapid pace of development. It is thus the aim of this article to examine
the trend of social well-being from the perspective of public safety in Malaysia since
independence, and how it affects the overall welfare of the people. Analysis of the status
of public safety in Malaysia is examined from the perspective of road accidents, fire
breakouts and cause of death from homicides and other violence, as well as factors that
contributed to such phenomenal occurrences. Data is obtained from available official
published data, in particular, Population Census, State Data Banks, Social Bulletins etc.
The results of the analysis revealed an increasing threat to public safety in Malaysia, with
the Malaysian public facing greater exposure and falling victim to various crimes that
resulted in injuries, fatalities and property losses. Urbanization, economic and
infrastructural development were contributing factors to increasing threat to public safety.
Abstrak
1
Jilid 2, Bilangan 2, Januari - Disember 2007
peningkatan kejadian jenayah juga diberi perhatian. Hasil analisis menunjukkan bahawa
ancaman ke atas keselamatan awam di Malaysia kian meningkat apabila khalayak awam
lebih terdedah dan menjadi mangsa pelbagai jenayah yang berlaku sehingga
menyebabkan kecederaan, kematian dan kehilangan harta benda. Pembandaran,
pembangunan ekonomi dan prasarana berperanan sebagai faktor penyumbang kepada
peningkatan ancaman ke atas keselamatan awam di Malaysia.
INTRODUCTION
Social well-being is the degree to which a population’s needs and wants are being met
(Johnston et al. 2000). It reflects the quality of life enjoyed by individuals or groups.
Quality of life, on the other hand, is the state of the people’s social well-being as they
perceived it or as it is identified by observable indicators. The latter could be attributed to
the various goods (and bads) enjoyed or endured by the population. Thus studies on
quality of life normally concentrate on aspects of the human condition as it pertains to
their social, economic and psychological lives (Smith 1994; 1996; Yapa 1996; Sutcliffe
2001; Nurizan Yahya 1998; Campbell 1993).
Although social-well being as a term suffers from precise definition, it can be best
understood by decomposing its dependent variables. Some consensus were achieved
regarding its components (Coates et al. 1977; Miller et al. 1967; Smith 1973), the most
comprehensive is the one devised by the United Nations Research Institute for Social
Development (UNRISD 1966) which listed nine basic components of social well-being,
namely, nutrition, shelter, health, education, leisure, security, social stability, physical
environment and surplus income. Whilst the first three denote physical needs, the
following five components encompass cultural needs, and the final component, surplus
income, signifies higher needs. Asmah (2000) in her study on spatial inequality of social
well-being in Malaysia, reiterates the nine components and the importance and
significance of each in understanding well-being and spatial inequality in Malaysia. To
that effect, the orientation of this article is to focus on the attribute of social well-being
and quality of life that pertains to that of fulfilling one of the many human cultural needs
i.e. security.
2
Jilid 2, Bilangan 2, Januari - Disember 2007
3
Jilid 2, Bilangan 2, Januari - Disember 2007
also have some means of evaluating and monitoring their success in terms of maintaining
or increasing social well-being.
The traditional yardsticks used to measure progress in spatial well-being have
been the economist’s indices of production and consumption, supplemented by income
levels and rates of unemployment and industrial growth. But the measuring rod of money
often overlooks the many aspects of social well-being, which are impossible to gauge in
financial terms alone. As a result new yardsticks of social conditions have been found in
measuring social well-being and its various components by aggregate bundles of social
variables namely social indicators. The latter are integrated systems of social reporting
using indicators that could be related to policies in much the same way as the cost of
living index and rates of inflation are related to economic policies. But of interest are
those indicators that aim at some comprehensive measure of well-being, the sort that
Carlisle (1972) calls informative indicators.
There is, however, more to the ‘what’ question (indicators) than establishing lists
of conditions that might satisfactorily define living standards, well-being or some such
state. If anything precise is to be said about well-being and its patterns of incidence,
relevant conditions must be subject to measurement. This requires further clarification of
the meaning of the various components of well-being such as health, education, leisure,
and so on, and their operational definition in the form of specific numerical indicators.
It follows that public safety as a concept is difficult to measure but aspects of
public safety are possible to measure. This leads us to find out which aspects or
conditions of public safety could be measured and are relevant in conveying the meaning
and degree of the incidences. Thus public safety may be measured by the incidence of
criminality as the number of crimes may indicate the degree of risk that the public is
subjected to. But it is seldom the case that the meaning of a condition is so clear as to be
adequately captured by just one indicator, so the measurement of public safety, for
example, may require recourse to a batch of criminality, damages and other acts that
threatened public safety. As such, anything that can put public life at risk either from
bodily injuries or deaths, damage to property and disruption of psychological well-being
that can instill a sense of insecurity among the people such as crimes, assaults, rapes,
4
Jilid 2, Bilangan 2, Januari - Disember 2007
traffic accidents, fire breakouts etc. are indicative of incidences that could jeopardize
security and public safety.
Of late, there has not been a day that passes without news in the media, be it
electronic or print, that conveys the goring incidents of killings, or gruesome but
unnecessary and senseless motor accidents, or the inhalation of toxic fumes from fire
breakouts which more often than not result in not only fatalities but also damage and loss
of property. Headlines in the local dailies have been full of such incidents:
They should have been celebrating…instead they all died. These 26 people
(pictures given) should have been with their families and friends for the festive
season (Deepavali and Eid). Instead, they and 139 others were killed in road
crashes over the last two weeks (New Straits Times November 20, 2004).
Woman found dead with throat cut (New Straits Times November 24, 2004)
All these are but few examples of incidents that made headlines on the front pages
of newspapers in the recent past. They are taken to indicate a state of social well-being
from the perspective of security/insecurity that is being experienced by Malaysians.
There are numerous other goring, shameful and senseless incidents, which are endless to
be quoted here. Some were incidents that occurred on the same day but elsewhere in the
country and were reported in the same dailies.
For the purpose of this article, public safety indicators shall include crime rates,
which shall be broken down further into four different types involving cases of murder,
robbery, narcotic offences and rapes. As traffic accidents and fire breakouts are also
rampant nowadays and pose as risks and hazards to loss of life, and damages to property,
they are also included in our attempt to gauge social well-being from the perspective of
public safety (safety in the public area and at home) in Malaysia. However, in dealing
with the available published statistics, one is faced with frustration, as the coverage was
inconsistent whereby some indicators are omitted for certain years. Hence, only
5
Jilid 2, Bilangan 2, Januari - Disember 2007
information available for the particular years is reported here. The article shall also
explore possible factors that contribute to such phenomenal occurrences.
The article attempts to analyse whether or not the state of public safety in Malaysia is
changing, be it for the worse or for the better. In order to do that, one has to study the
situation over a period of time and shall need a time series data set. With respect to the
latter, the benchmark or the baseline time zero is set to the time when Malaysia, or
Malaya then, first achieved its independence in 1957. It is a time thought to be most
appropriate when the country was self-governing and hence has its own self to fall back
in terms of performance in administering the affairs of the country, be they political,
social, cultural or economic.
6
Jilid 2, Bilangan 2, Januari - Disember 2007
a
Data for Peninsular Malaysia
b
General index for criminality
c
Calculated from data extracted from Lim (2003).
d
Calculated from data extracted Komuniti Veteranian Malaysia (2004)
e
Figure for 1998
Source: Department of Statistics 1981; 1990; 1993; 1999; Berita Harian, October 22,
2004; Komuniti Veteranian Malaysia (2004); Lim (2003).
From Table 1, we can discern the level, pattern and trend of various aspects of
public safety in Malaysia over the years since independence. As can be seen, the level of
public safety in Malaysia varies over the years, which denotes relatively low rates in the
early period and incrementally rising in the later years. This applies to almost all of the
indicators used. The pattern, on the other hand, projected a surge in the rates of several
indicators after 1970, whilst some others showed a gradual increment. Robbery, narcotic
offences and traffic accidents exemplified the former and murder, rape and fire breakouts
are examples of the latter. The rate for robbery, for example, which recorded 8.1 cases
per 100,000 population in 1970 surged to 31.7 cases in 1980, an increment of almost 300
per cent in 10 years. Similarly, narcotic cases quadrupled within the same decade. It is
not definite whether such phenomenal increase is due to genuine increase in the crimes
committed or pointing to a better management of data and statistics or that more people
are coming forward to report the crimes and happenings.
7
Jilid 2, Bilangan 2, Januari - Disember 2007
Whatever it is, the trend is very clear – that criminality is on the increase, traffic
accidents are escalating and fire breakouts are becoming rampant. This trend alone shows
that the condition of public safety is changing and not continuing from the level and
pattern of the early years when the Malaysian public was able to enjoy a safer living
condition, not living in fear of being robbed, assaulted, molested etc., hence having and
enjoying greater psychological well-being.
Comparative analysis by geographic regions reveals that Sabah and Sarawak seem
to be a safer place to live in than Peninsular Malaysia. Data have shown that generally
crime rates in the two eastern regions of Malaysia are relatively lower than Peninsular
Malaysia; so are the threats from road crashes and fire breakouts, which are also
extremely low. For example, robbery and narcotic offences are extremely high
comparatively for Peninsular Malaysia since 1980 with rates culminating to around 40
cases per 100,000 population for robbery and 60 cases per 100,000 for narcotics in 1990
compared to a single digit rate for both Sabah and Sarawak (Table 2). Nevertheless,
threats to murder and rape are highest for Sabah since 1980. It is tempting to relate it to
the presence of aliens in the state as Sabah has been receiving an influx of immigrants
around that time. Sabah hence, is a state to watch and monitor as the trend in the various
crime rates are on the increase although slight but gradual. However, among the three
regions, Sarawak is the safest place to live in when all the risks to public safety hazards
are the lowest comparatively and seem to be on a declining trend especially crime rates
pertaining to murder, rape and narcotic offences.
8
Jilid 2, Bilangan 2, Januari - Disember 2007
Statistics for a more comprehensive public safety indicators in 2000 are unavailable from
the conventional sources. As mentioned earlier, the reporting did not cover crime rates
but only focused on road crashes and fire breakouts, two aspects of safety hazards
considered as of major concerns lately, hence the inclusion of their statistics by the turn
of the century. But from whatever available data that we manage to gather, it is obvious
that their phenomena are on the increase especially that of traffic accidents. For example,
by the turn of the second millennium, traffic accidents had increased by 79.1 per cent for
the nation as a whole compared to a decade before (1990) (Table 1) but more than
twofold from 40 cases per 10,000 population to 110 cases per 10,000 population for
Peninsular Malaysia over the same period of time (Table 3). Likewise, similar
incremental trends are observable for Sabah and Sarawak whereby the increase was more
phenomenal in Sarawak (332 per cent) compared to Sabah, which experienced a 269 per
cent increase in traffic accidents, but nonetheless was even higher than that experienced
by Peninsular Malaysia.
9
Jilid 2, Bilangan 2, Januari - Disember 2007
The position of public safety condition with regards to traffic and fire incidents is
obvious, but what would the position of the other aspects of public safety that are
considered in this article be? Some people even considered them to be more serious and
received wide coverage in most print media. The Canny Ong abduction-rape-murder case
and the Noritta Shamsuddin murder case are but a few of such coverage that gripped and
shocked the whole nation. As official published data are unavailable, we produce
herewith some statistics made known by the Royal Malaysian Police or Polis Diraja
Malaysia (PDRM). It was revealed that in the first five months of the year 2003, on the
average, four women were raped each day whilst three murder cases occurred every two
days in Malaysia, in which Selangor, Johor and Kedah were the top three states having
most such cases.
The crime index for the first six months of the same year (2003) revealed by the
police, such as rape cases, crime and violent crimes had worsened when compared with
similar statistics over the same period the previous year (Table 4). The worsening
scenario was brought about by an increase in the number of crimes committed between
2002 and 2003 - from 10,141 to 12,149 i.e. an increase of about 20 per cent. Armed
robbery and armed gang robbery were the two most frequent crimes committed. This is
10
Jilid 2, Bilangan 2, Januari - Disember 2007
not surprising as their increase over the past decade (1990) was twofold from 32.7 to 63.1
per 100,000 population by the turn of the century (Table 1). What the statistics were
telling us was that the Malaysian public was faced with greater degree of insecurity as
they were exposed to and faced with higher crime rates and other threats to personal
safety.
Table 4 Reported cases of crimes in Malaysia in the first six months (Jan.-
June) of the year 2002 and 2003
The statistics given and projected in the paper are stating the obvious – that the
condition of public safety in Malaysia has changed and worsened over the years. This
worsening condition has affected the quality of life of the people, which is beyond the
scope of this article to justify. Suffice to mention that Asmah (2000) in her study of
spatial inequality of well-being mentioned above, has shown that Selangor which fared
very well or topped the other states in terms of income, health, physical environment and
recreational well-being, has the overall well-being or welfare of its people marred simply
because of the condition of worst public safety that it had, so much so it managed to rank
only second highest after Negeri Sembilan in terms of overall quality of life index in
1990.
11
Jilid 2, Bilangan 2, Januari - Disember 2007
12
Jilid 2, Bilangan 2, Januari - Disember 2007
13
Jilid 2, Bilangan 2, Januari - Disember 2007
killed in crimes. Mangled vehicles account for by far the highest toll of non-natural
deaths; greater than murder and suicide, heart disease and cancer. On the one hand, we
depend on vehicles for transport and convenience of movement, but on the other hand,
we are subjecting ourselves to mishaps, fatal or otherwise. So where do we go wrong?
Do we have ourselves to blame?
A Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia study team on road safety and accidents found
that human factor ranked highest as the causal factor of road accidents in Malaysia
accounting for 94.2 per cent as opposed to the surrounding environment (4.5 per cent)
and mechanical factor (1.3 per cent). The study also found that among the human factors,
negligence topped the list by causing 60 per cent of the accidents followed by the fault of
other motorists with 23.1 per cent (Utusan Malaysia November 18 , 2004).
CONCLUSION
14
Jilid 2, Bilangan 2, Januari - Disember 2007
sectors are to cooperate in crime prevention through planning and designing of safe living
environment (in urban, residential, industrial, recreational, infrastructural development
etc.), community development and education in order to create a more alert and safety
conscious society. Until such time our well-being from the perspective of public safety is
still open to threats.
References
15
Jilid 2, Bilangan 2, Januari - Disember 2007
Muira, A.. 2004. Urbanization spurs crime rate, Japan Today. (Online).
http://www.japantoday.com/e/?content=kuchikomi&id=307&page=2. (09
December 2004).
New Straits Times. November 18, 2004.
New Straits Times. November 20, 2004.
New Straits Times. November 24, 2004.
Nurizan Yahya. 1998. Kemiskinan dan perumahan di bandar. Kuala Lumpur: Dewan
Bahasa dan Pustaka.
Smith, D. M. 1973. The geography of social well-being in the United States. New York:
McGraw Hill.
Smith, D. M. 1994. Geography and social justice. Oxford: Blackwell.
Smith, D. M. 1996. The quality of life: human welfare and social justice. In I. Douglas,
R. Huggett and M. Robinson. (eds.). Companion encyclopedia of geography: the
environment and humankind. London: Routledge. Pp. 772-790.
Sutcliffe, B. 2001. 100 ways of seeing an unequal world. London: Zed Books.
UNRISD. 1966. The level of living index. Report No. 4.United Nation Research Institute
for Social Development, Geneva.
Utusan Malaysia. November 18, 2004.
Yapa, L. 1996. What causes poverty? A postmodern view. Annals of the Assoc. of
American Geographers. 87: 709-16.
16