Research Summary In this article, we review the theoretical paradigm underlying cost–benefit analysis and address some of the critiques of this framework that have arisen within criminal justice circles and other policy areas. We also review existing studies devoted to estimating the costs of specific crimes. We offer a brief discussion categorizing the alternative costs of crime and the various methodological approaches taken (hedonic analysis, contingent valuation, and accounting methods), with an explicit discussion of the relative strengths and weaknesses of each approach and debates within the economics profession pertaining to these methodologies. We argue that cost considerations broadly defined should be of central importance in criminal justice policy debates. However, we also highlight the potential for cost‐consideration and important equity criteria to come into conflict. Policy Implications Policy makers should consider careful cost–benefit analysis as an important criterion in criminal justice policy. Given some features of criminal justice policy choices such as the unequal distribution of the costs of criminal victimization, anti‐crime enforcement, and the potential for perceived illegitimacy of the criminal justice system to undermine various public institutions, we argue that equity considerations also deserve careful attention. In practice, we place greater confidence in the use of cost‐of‐crime estimates to judge the relative effectiveness of alternative interventions, and we are cautious regarding policy prescriptions emanating from benefit–cost ratios that are marginally greater than one.

No abstract

The Covid-19 pandemic has reached almost every corner of the world. Despite the historical development, approval, and distribution of vaccines in some countries, non-pharmaceutical interventions will remain an essential strategy to control the pandemic until a substantial proportion of the population has immunity. There is increasing evidence of the devastating social and economic effects of the pandemic, particularly on vulnerable communities. Individuals living in urban informal settlements are in a structurally disadvantaged position to cope with a health crisis such as the Covid-19 pandemic. Estimates of this impact are needed to inform and prioritize policy decisions and actions. We study employment loss in informal settlements before and during the Covid-19 pandemic in Chile, using a longitudinal panel study of households living in Chile’s informal settlements before and during the health crisis. We show that before the pandemic, 75% of respondents reported being employed. There is a decrease of 30 and 40 percentage points in May and September 2020, respectively. We show that the employment loss is substantially higher for individuals in informal settlements than for the general population and has particularly affected the immigrant population. We also show that the pandemic has triggered neighborhood cooperation within the settlements and that targeted government assistance programs have reached these communities in a limited way. Our results suggest that individuals living in informal settlements are facing severe hardship as a consequence of the pandemic. In addition to providing much-needed support, this crisis presents a unique opportunity for long-term improvements in these marginalized communities. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11524-021-00575-6.

Crime Time: how ambient light affects crime / Patricio Dominguez and Kenzo Asahi. p. cm.-(IDB Working Paper Series ; 991) Includes bibliographic references. 1. Crime-Economic aspects-Chile. 2. Criminal statistics-Chile. 3. Crime prevention-Chile. 4. Daylight saving-Chile. I. Asahi, Kenzo. II. Inter-American Development Bank.

No abstract