Open data on femicide: a fundamental step in the fight against violence against women

Femicide, defined as the gender-based murder of women, remains one of the most extreme forms of violence. In 2023, it is estimated that approximately 85,000 women and girls were murdered in the world and of these, 60% died at the hands of intimate partners or family members, which is equivalent to 140 victims per day in their immediate environment. According to the United Nations (UN), femicide occurs in a context of inequality, discrimination and asymmetrical power relations between men and women.

However, the above figures are an estimate, since obtaining data on this subject is not easy and involves a series of challenges. In this article we are going to comment on these challenges, and present examples and good practices of citizen associations that work to promote their quality and quantity.

Challenges in collecting data on femicides

The international comparison of femicide mainly faces two major issues: the absence of a common definition and the lack of standardization.

1. Absence of a common definition

There are important legal and conceptual differences between countries in terms of the definition of femicide. In Latin America, many countries have incorporated femicide as a specific crime, although with substantial variations in the legal criteria and in the breadth of the definition. In contrast, in Europe there is still no homogeneous definition of femicide, as underlined by the European Institute for Gender Equality (EIGE). In many cases, gender-based killings of women are recorded as general homicides or domestic violence, making the phenomenon invisible and making international comparison difficult.

This absence of a common legal and conceptual definition prevents direct comparison of figures as well as regional analysis.  In addition, the lack of methodological homogeneity causes femicide figures to be diluted among those of general homicides, underestimating the real magnitude of the problem and making it difficult to design effective public policies.

In this sense, an international effort is needed to standardize definitions. In this way, it will be possible to measure the true scope of the problem and combat it effectively.

2. Lack of standardization

The lack of standardization in data collection and publication generates profound differences in the availability, openness, and quality of information between countries. As in many other areas, open and standardized data on femicides could help to understand the phenomenon and facilitate the implementation of effective public policies. However, today there is disparity in data collection and publication.

Currently, the availability of data on femicide is uneven between countries. We find cases in which the data refer to different periods, or that present variations due to the different methodologies, definitions and sources:

• There are countries that offer data accessible through government platforms and/or official observatories. In these cases, the data come from public bodies such as ministries, national statistical institutes, gender-based violence observatories and supreme courts, which guarantees greater reliability and continuity in the publication of statistics, although their coverage and methodology vary widely.
• In other cases, the data are partial or come from non-governmental organizations (NGOs), independent observatories, journalistic and academic networks. These agencies usually resort to newspaper counts or media monitoring to complete institutional data. Multilateral organizations such as the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC),  UN Women and European data journalism networks try to harmonize and compare figures, although they recognize the limitations derived from the diversity of definitions and methodologies.

This lack of a unified system generates the need for a triangulation of information and produces discrepancies in the reported figures. In addition, it makes it difficult to obtain a more complete view of the phenomenon.

Therefore, standardization in data collection is necessary  to provide reliable and comparable data to know the real magnitude of the problem, evaluate the effectiveness of public policies or design effective prevention strategies.

To these challenges, we should add:

• Lack of technological infrastructure: disconnected judicial and police systems generate duplication or omissions.
• Irregular updates: very few publish quarterly data, essential for preventive policies.

Examples of citizen initiatives that collect data on femicide

In order to respond to global problems, citizen and academic initiatives have emerged that build alternative databases, making gender violence visible. To this end, feminist organizations and activists have adopted technological tools to track femicides.

One example is the Data Against Feminicide (DAF), which equips activists with email alert systems based on machine learning algorithms. The platform develops machine learning algorithms that help scan more than 50,000 daily news sources in multiple languages to identify potential cases of femicide, prioritizing activists' regions of interest and allowing them to add local sources. Unlike generic systems, DAF's approach is collaborative: participants train algorithms, review results, and correct biases, including identifying transfemicides or interpreting biased language in the media. Thus, technology does not replace human analysis, but reduces the workload and allows efforts to be focused on the verification and contextualization of cases.

Although transparency and open data are a first step, citizen projects such as those supported by the DAF operate with additional criteria that enrich the results:

1. Data with memory: each record includes name, personal history and community context.
2. Radical transparency: they use open-source methodologies and tools.
3. Restorative justice: data feeds advocacy campaigns and accompaniment to families.

The DAF also highlights the need to protect and care for the people who collect this data, given the emotional impact of their work. Thus, the human and ethical dimension of work is also made visible with data on femicide.

Another example is Feminicidio Uruguay, which has documented cases since 2001 through press monitoring and collaboration with the Coordinator of Feminisms. Their key findings include that  78% of the aggressors were known to the victim; that 42% of femicides occurred in the home, and that only  15% of the victims had made a previous complaint. This project inspired the creation of the National Registry of Femicides of the Argentine Justice, which since 2017 has published annual open data with details of victims, aggressors and context of the cases.

In addition to country initiatives, we also find supranational initiatives that seek to unify data in various regions. Initiatives such as the Regional Femicide Data Standard (ILDA) seek to overcome these barriers by:

• Unified collection protocols.
• Collaborative technical training platforms.
• Intergovernmental partnerships for legal validation.

The case of Spain

In view of this international situation, Spain is presented as a pioneering case in the field. Since 2022, all types of femicides have been officially counted, not only those committed by partners or ex-partners, but also family, sexual, social and vicarious ones. The main Spanish portal for statistical data on femicide is the statistical portal of the Government Delegation against Gender Violence, available on a dedicated website . This space brings together official data on femicides and gender-based violence, allowing information to be consulted, cross-referenced and downloaded in different formats, and is the institutional reference for the monitoring and analysis of these crimes in Spain. This new methodology responds to compliance with the Istanbul Convention and seeks to reflect the totality of extreme violence against women.

Collaboration with civil society and experts has been key to defining typologies and improving the quality and openness of the data. Citizen access is widespread, and data is disseminated in reports, datasets, and public bulletins.

Conclusion

In short, the opening and standardization of data on femicide are not only technical tools, but also acts of justice and collective memory. Where States work with civil society, data is more complete, transparent and useful for prevention and accountability. However, the persistence of gaps and disparate methodologies in many countries continue to hinder an effective global response to femicide. Overcoming these challenges requires strengthening international collaboration, adopting common standards, and ensuring the participation of those who document and accompany victims. Only in this way can data transform outrage into action and contribute to eradicating one of the most extreme forms of gender-based violence.

Content created by Miren Gutiérrez, PhD and researcher at the University of Deusto, expert in data activism, data justice, data literacy, and gender disinformation. The content and views expressed in this publication are the sole responsibility of the author.