Search

Homicides occur the world over, but they are not homogeneously distributed by geographical areas (continents, countries, regions), either over long or short periods of time, or in social groups, namely age, gender, social class or ethnicity. Why are there more homicides in some countries than in others? Why do killings increase in some countries, while they decrease in others? There are two fundamental schools of thought for social explanations of crime and violence: those attributing its origins to poverty and inequality and those blaming institutionalization or social norms. To discuss these theories, this paper analyzes and compares the changes in Colombia, Venezuela and Brazil in the first decade of the twenty-first century, where the homicide rate has decreased, increased and remained the same, respectively. Using the measurement of six variables (poverty, inequality, unemployment, national wealth, human development and the rule of law) and the technique of trajectory analysis, the results revealed that institutionalization is more to blame for the change than poverty and inequality. The text concludes that poverty and inequality affect crime and homicides, although not directly, but mediated by the institutions instead.

The production of articles resulting from biomedical, clinical, and public health studies that originated in Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Cuba, Mexico, and Venezuela from 1973 through 1992 was analyzed to discover trends in health research in Latin America. From the database of the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI), 41,238 articles with first authors who resided in those countries were extracted. These articles were analyzed by subject area, type of study, country, number of authors and institutions that participated in the investigation, and citations received by each article. Also analyzed were 95 articles in epidemiology selected from a pool of 570 published by authors from the six countries in 11 public health journals that enjoy international prestige. The results showed that the number of published works increased by 117% between the first and last five-year periods within the study period. Clinical research was distributed the most evenly among the countries, and public health research was the most concentrated (60.7% originated in Brazil). The numbers of biomedical and public health research articles showed relatively more growth than those reporting on clinical research throughout the period. A relative decrease was found in articles by only one author, which suggests a greater frequency of team efforts, and an increase was seen in articles with authors tied to two or more national or foreign institutions, which indicates greater cooperation between institutions and countries. The average number of citations received by each article was 3, which was less than half the number received by the articles in the ISI database (7.78). Regarding the subset of 95 articles in epidemiology, the great majority (96%) dealt with infectious diseases or maternal and child health, while in the international literature 78% of such articles were about chronic diseases. This group of articles gave evidence of more cooperation with international institutions and had a citation index of 4.36 per article. It is concluded that, despite the inherent limitations, this type of study reveals some general trends in the development of research in the six Latin American countries with the greatest scientific production and makes it possible to formulate hypotheses on the factors that influence these trends. Taken with the paper caution, the results of studies like this one can be of great value in defining health science and technology policies.