Crime Rates and Public Expenditures for Police Protection
A Reply
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 13693237 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Michael J Greenwood (Arizona State University, corresponding author), Walter J Wadycki (University of Illinois System) |
| Year | 1975 |
| Volume | 33 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 81-84 |
| Publication date | 1975-04-01 |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Review of Social Economy (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0034-6764 • E-ISSN: 1470-1162 |
| Publisher | Routledge (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1080/00346767500000007 |
| OpenAlex | W1978435572 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 3 |
| References cited | 3 |
Gary Becker's suggestive work on crime leads to the prediction that increased police protection results in decreased crime rates by increasing the cost of crime to the perpetrator. However, certain recent studies that have attempted to explain crime rates using cross-sectional data for the United States have arrived at the unanticipated result that increased police protection results in increased measured crime rates. One pro? posed explanation for this observed tendency is that simultaneity bias is inherent in the coefficient of the police protection variable in a crime-rate equation because localities with high crime rates tend to allocate more resources to police protection. In our original paper we have actually specified a simultaneous-equations model that accounts for such hypoth? esized feedbacks, and still our results indicate that increased police pro? tection results in increased measured crime. Our explanation for this finding is that police perform two primary functions, crime detection and crime prevention. Moreover, we have formulated a simple numerical example to demonstrate the notion that if the efficiency of a marginal policeman is greater in crime detection than in crime prevention, mea? sured crime could rise with increases in police inputs. In their recent comment on our paper Zipin, Mabry, and Dyer (ZMD) make three important points. First, they argue that we have re? versed the causal direction of the typically specified relationship between police and crime. Second, they suggest that for the types of crimes we have analyzed police perform no detection function. Finally, they assert that the positive causal relationship we find between police and crime rates is the result of our using inappropriate, 1962 expenditures data to explain 1960 crime rates. In our reply we respond in order to each of these points. By no means do we reverse the causal direction of the typically specified (inverse) relationship between police and crime. As a matter 81
Crime prevention · Crime rate · Criminology · Economics · Function (biology · Simultaneity · Crime Patterns and Interventions · Law, Economics, and Judicial Systems · Psychology · Regulation and Compliance Studies
| Citations per year | 0.09 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 1994 - 2011 (18) |
| Highly cited | No |