2020
DOI: 10.1162/rest_a_00834
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Universal Cash and Crime

Abstract: We estimate the effects of universal cash transfers on crime from Alaska's Permanent Fund Dividend, an annual lump-sum payment to all Alaska residents. We find a 14% increase in substance-abuse incidents the day after the payment and a 10% increase over the following four weeks. This is partially offset by an 8% decrease in property crime, with no changes in violent crimes. On an annual basis, however, changes in criminal activity from the payment are small. Estimated costs comprise a very small portion of the… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

3
42
1

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 50 publications
(46 citation statements)
references
References 50 publications
3
42
1
Order By: Relevance
“…This may appear to contrast with Watson et al. (2019) who find the (negative) marginal effect on property crime of an increase in the Dividend to be non‐significant. However, as noted already, their analysis addresses a different question—the effect of Dividend receipt rather than the Dividend per se —and sensitivity to the size of the Dividend is considered only in the week of receipt, rather than over a longer period.…”
Section: Resultscontrasting
confidence: 75%
“…This may appear to contrast with Watson et al. (2019) who find the (negative) marginal effect on property crime of an increase in the Dividend to be non‐significant. However, as noted already, their analysis addresses a different question—the effect of Dividend receipt rather than the Dividend per se —and sensitivity to the size of the Dividend is considered only in the week of receipt, rather than over a longer period.…”
Section: Resultscontrasting
confidence: 75%
“…We classify products as SNAP-eligible or SNAP-ineligible based on the retailer's taxonomy and the guidelines for eligibility published on the USDA website. 25 Among all nonfuel purchases in our data, 71 percent of spending goes to SNAPeligible products, 25 percent goes to SNAP-ineligible products, and the remainder goes to products that we cannot classify. 26 We use our detailed payment data for purchases made in SNAP months in March 2009 or later to validate our product eligibility classification.…”
Section: B Product Characteristicsmentioning
confidence: 79%
“…Calculations in the online Appendix show that in the 2008 Survey of Income and Program Participation(Roth 2008), households are on SNAP in 9.0 to 11.9 percent of survey months, and 17.2 to 21.7 percent of households are on SNAP at some point during the panel 25. Grocery and prepared food items intended for home consumption are generally SNAP-eligible (FNS 2017a).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although they were published too recently to be included, new studies have used the Alaska Permanent Dividend Fund-which annually distributes a small but universal basic income of one to two thousand dollars to (almost) every citizen-to study the impact on crime. See Watson, Guettabi, and Reimer (2019) and Dorsett (2019).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%