犯罪危害测量的操作化路径述评  

Narrative Review of Operational Paths of Crime Severity

作　　者：杨学锋[1] YANG Xue-feng(Public Security Basic Teaching and Researching Department,Criminal Investigation Police University ofChina,Shenyang Liaoning 110035,China)

机构地区：[1]中国刑事警察学院公安基础教研部

出　　处：《辽宁警察学院学报》2019年第3期50-57,共8页Journal of Liaoning Police College

摘　　要：为了促进实证犯罪学与循证犯罪对策的研究,梳理并比较了中外学术界及官方犯罪统计部门对于犯罪危害测量的不同操作化路径。综合而言,在具体的权重设计上,出现了三种不同的方法,其中,“社会判断法”更多地被用于检验罪刑相称原则;“宣告刑期法”“法定刑期法”则得到了更加广泛的应用——除了用于学术研究之外,亦成为某些西方国家的官方犯罪统计部门在编制“犯罪危害指数”时的基本依据。相比之下,本土学术界与实务部门尚未充分关注犯罪危害测量的操作化问题,亟需更多的学术探索与官方犯罪统计的试点实践。For the purpose of researching the patterns of crime and evaluating the effectiveness of evidence-based strategies, the operational paths of crime severity have been systematically delineated and reviewed. Overall, there were three distinct ways of weights assigned in calculating crime severity index or alike. Among these, the way of social judgement is mostly exclusively applied for testing proportionality of punishments;weights based upon either legislations or sentencing guidelines have been used in Western countries for either academic research or another form of official statistics such as Crime Severity Index. By contrast, both intellectual explorations and official pilots should be much urged since native criminological community paid only a little attention to the operationalization of crime severity.

关 键 词：犯罪数量 犯罪危害 权重设计 官方犯罪统计 危害聚焦警务 

分 类 号：DF792.3[政治法律—诉讼法学]