Tourism is vital to employment in most places and destinations are taking many steps to make their places clean and safe and mostly, they are and always have been. Policing in popular tourist enclaves is very good and, in 99.5%1 of cases, as long as visitors do not attract undue attention, crime is rare. Where most tourists go, and currently there are about 1.4 BILLION of them Worldwide, violent crime against them is almost non-existent. It is rare that reports of violence against tourists anywhere in the World are made because, despite the BILLIONS of travellers, a single report will attract immediate attention on a massive scale and they clearly do a lot of damage.
Reporting of crime in news media, particularly in tourist destinations, may show a high crime situation but rarely mentions that the crimes committed are not committed against tourists. This reporting leaves a very negative impression of destinations for visitors when the reality is that visitors are rarely the victim. However, one of the side benefits of the reporting of high crime is to develop a sense in visitors that protecting one's self is always the first order of business. So, to be clear, there is no inference here that anyone should be any less vigilant. Crime is a problem everywhere and common sense in taking precautions is required no matter where you are.
While there is a 'perception' of Public Safety in the home markets, this is not the case when people travel. Often, the expectation is that the level of criminal behaviour will be higher in the destination even when it is not. People in different cultural surroundings, do not possess the same set of values or circumstances so they are judging based on different criteria. Also, information is coming from sources that may have a distinct bias. Where crime is more likely, it is almost always related to income inequality along with high population density. These factors present both the motivation and the increased opportunities for crimes to occur.
In many destinations, visitors arrive with the perception already implanted that there are safety or crime issues. All-inclusives, cruise and tour companies, along with official travel advisories, often propogate information about safety or crime issues. This may be intended to help protect the guest (and the hotel/resort/tour company) from potential harm. But what it does is to create a 'walled garden' outside of which visitors are discouraged from venturing. Just the mere mention of potential threats of violence, unscrupulous taxi drivers, drug gangs or whatever is enough to make this a concern. Often, the traveller is discouraged from going to such a 'high-crime' place. This has a highly negative impact on many destinations where the real risk of crime in the popular tourist areas is actually quite low. For many people, it may actually be safer to travel than to stay at home.
The Caribbean, as a region, has gotten a bad reputation for high crime levels but undeservedly so! Caribbean crime is a serious problem and Trinidad, in particular, has been singled out as a high crime destination. While it is true that crime is a significant problem in Port-of-Spain, it is not tourists that are being targeted.
"Crime is a factor here like in every other country in the world – but unfortunately the media scandalizes it and creates a negative image. For the larger part, crime is limited to specific areas of the capital which are easily avoided. If you can survive in any major city in the world you can survive and enjoy Port of Spain – just let your common sense prevail!"- Tourism in Trinidad – a whole world in a single island by Gunda Busch-Harewood, Director of Island Experiences, Port of Spain, Trinidad.
It is important to consider that there are more than 50 MILLION visitors to the Caribbean region annually and reports of violent crimes against them are rare. Most reporting of crime is about crimes committed against local people such as drug gang or domestic violence that almost never involve visitors.
As it currently stands, many all-inclusive resorts along with cruiselines impart the feeling that destinations are NOT safe. This enables a greater level of control over their clients activities and basically to give themselves a higher probability - virtual exclusivity - to make money off of them. In other words, the visitors and passengers, because they don't feel safe, are much less likely to shop or buy beverages or meals or tours away from their chosen cruise ship, hotel or resort.
It is necessary to dispel myths of un-safety, such as those propogated by the very cruiselines that bring passengers to their port-of-call. It begs the question that IF the cruiseline, or the tour company, felt it was safe enough to travel there, why are they telling their customers that the place may be unsafe? If cruiselines are selling excursions in these so-called unsafe places, why do they tell their passengers not to venture out on their own? It is often the same taxi drivers and tour guides who are providing the service, regardless of where the tour was purchased. The answer is really easy, they want that passenger NOT to feel too comfortable so they will be more likely to buy their excursion from the cruiseline and to promptly return to the ship or resort to consume food or beverages, &tc. Fear-factor is hard at work.
The fact is that if visitors do not participate in risky or criminal behaviour, the likelyhood that they could fall victim to crime in any of these places is very low to zero. It does happen but it is rare. There is no greater likelyhood than in many places in Europe where it is a standing joke that pick-pockets or other petty criminals are well-known to target tourists.
The protection afforded by a responsible tour guide or taxi driver almost completely removes the possibility of being victimised, unless the guide or the driver themselves are the criminal and this almost never happens. The majority of these guides are professionals and carry valid certification and insurance which is verifiable. Given this, what are the real chances that a visitor might be any any less safe with a tour guide from the place as opposed to one the cruiseline has chosen?
Foreign visitors to many places go with their preconceived notions of public safety based on their experience in their home countries. Many visitors come from American cities where the risk of crime is actually quite high. Gun violence, personal attacks, drug wars and robberies are fairly common. If a person has been exposed to crime than they are more likely to expect it, wherever they are. Conversely, people who have not been exposed to crime are less likely to expect it.
A crime is the product of a perpetrator, a victim and an opportunity resulting from a lapse of protective measures. Crimes against visitors may be no different than crime against any other wealthy citizen. That is, when a perpetrator, a victim and an opportunity are present, crime is more likely to occur. Take away one of these things and the likelyhood of a crime diminishes.
To be specific, most crimes against tourists are crimes of opportunity and are rarely violent. This may seem obvious when written out but, for mysterious reasons, people on vacation often forget to take practical, common-sense steps to protect themselves to avoid un-necessary loss. This is a lapse on the visitor's part and criminals are looking for such lapses. So, activities such as walking alone at night or openly displaying wealth carry a higher probability of presenting an opportunity.
The important difference is that some people engage in riskier behaviour while on vacation without even realizing that this exposes them as an opportunity. Again, criminals are watching for such opportunities or for careless people. Tourists who practice risky behaviour, such as buying drugs or sex, are fairly easy marks. They are obviously not from the place, have money and are taking chances. They are not likely to report the crime and even if they do, they are going to return home before the police investigate and most visitors will not come back to give evidence. So, the chance of being convicted is almost nothing. Tourists depend on travel insurance to cover any substantial loss. All in all, the tourists, themselves, may not be taking appropriate steps to avoid risky behaviour.
So, some action on the part of visitors to find out about areas where crime is a problem or ways to protect themselves when travelling is necessary. This, and avoiding getting involved in risky activities such as buying drugs or sex, will help to insure a safe and trouble free travel experience.
At the same time, police presence is fairly high in most tourist areas and criminals can see this too. Weapons are usually very visible. But there are further steps that police or safety authorities could take.
For instance, why protect criminals and allow them the possibility to victimise? Criminals are a limited group of individuals that are likely known to the police or security authorities. These authorities need to enable sharing of crime information, including information specific to these known high-crime-potential individuals.
This information needs to be available publicly. Security personnel should be encouraged to inform visitors about the various potential risks. This would include unlicensed vendors, shops or stalls that do not fit a typical retail profile, individuals who approach visitors, and so on. Advising about 'high-crime' areas to avoid would also contribute to better safety. Any apparent aggressive or unpatterned action from locals should trigger a protective response. Particularly to sell illicit goods. If it wouldn't fit in a home place why should it fit in a place away?
There should be no safe harbour for criminals. Someone who chooses a criminal lifestyle exposes themselves to the full scrutiny of Society. Laws protecting privacy should be suspended for someone who has been convicted of crime, particularly violent crime, proportional to the type of crime. In practice, it actually doesn't work this way and it seems that criminals are afforded more privacy and protection than they legitimately deserve. This provides opportunity for individuals who choose to operate outside the law. Law enforcement authorities should be enabled to distribute information about known criminals.
Smartphone apps such as 'geo-fenced' warnings about 'high-crime' areas to avoid would also provide an additional level of safety. Visitors are always advised to read reports about recent criminal activity and to take note of the area where it occurred, and to avoid such areas.
The unfortunate outcome of perceived risks of crime while travelling is that there are high levels of leakage from relatively poor destinations. This is mostly because visitors either don't go there or are simply not venturing outside all-inclusive suppliers to explore or shop or eat. So, very little money enters the economy or makes it outside these vaunted 'walled gardens'. Secondly, ownership is often foreign - the money spent does not stay there for very long. Thirdly, credit-card processing is usually through the resort and there is limited credit card handling elsewhere. This requires visitors to carry more cash than they might otherwise need. Fourth, these companies don't hire locals, except in menial low-paying jobs. Fifth, their food and consumables are largely supplied from outside and they buy very little locally. These last two contribute to the inequality that local people face. Visitors have little need to venture outside and the leakages cause serious social and economic damage. Any reports of crime against tourists vastly magnifies these impacts. Destinations will make every effort to avoid any such exposure in international media. Ironically, richer countries end up providing aid, charity and other supports to these places which, in part, ends up covering the costs of these leakages.
The result is that local people, mostly young men with low incomes and little opportunity, who are motivated to better their life circumstances are not afforded opportunities to do so. Petty crime becomes an attractive option because risk of getting apprehended or prosecuted is low. But this crime is rarely violent and rarely impacts visitors.
Note 1: Precise data is hard to come by but one study stated: "In absolute terms the risk of violent crime, that is assault or robbery (including threatened/attempted assault or robbery), is low, experienced by 0.5 per cent of the tourists surveyed". Crimes Against International Tourists by Jacqui Allen, Crime and Justice Bulletin, 1999 (PDF)
"McElroy (2006), using data from the Caribbean, found that foreign tourists are to a greater extent victims of property crime than the domestic population, i.e. three times more when looking at crime offences such as robbery and theft. The domestic population is more likely to become a victim of violent crime such as attacks, rapes and murders". Quoted in The impact of crime on security in tourism by Hrvoje Mataković and Ivana Cunjak Mataković, Security and Defence Quarterly 2019;27(5):1–20.