Valuing the public’s demand for crime prevention programs: a discrete choice experiment

Picasso, Emilio; Cohen, Mark A.

doi:10.1007/s11292-019-09378-x

Cited by 12 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It excludes the cost of avoidance behaviors (e.g., burglar alarms or avoiding certain high-risk neighborhoods) and the fear of crime to the public at large (see e.g., Cohen, 2020). Thus, costs estimated here are notably smaller (as much as 50-80 % less) than one would obtain using more comprehensive willingness-to-pay estimates from contingent valuation surveys (see e.g., Cohen et al, 2004;Cohen, 2015) or discrete choice experiments (see e.g., Carson & Louviere, 2017;Picasso & Cohen, 2019;Picasso & Grand, 2019). However, the method used in this paper has the advantage of identifying individual cost components and who bears those costsas opposed to the more aggregate approaches based on willingness-to-pay.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 78%

Incidence and Costs of Personal and Property Crimes in the USA, 2017

Miller

Cohen

Swedler

et al. 2021

J. Benefit Cost Anal.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Total cost estimates for crime in the USA are both out-of-date and incomplete. We estimated incidence and costs of personal crimes (both violent and non-violent) and property crimes in 2017. Incidence came from national arrest data, multi-state estimates of police-reported crimes per arrest, national victimization and road crash surveys, and police underreporting studies. We updated and expanded upon published unit costs. Estimated crime costs totaled $2.6 trillion ($620 billion in monetary costs plus quality of life losses valued at $1.95 trillion; 95 % uncertainty interval $2.2–$3.0 trillion). Violent crime accounted for 85 % of costs. Principal contributors to the 10.9 million quality-adjusted life years lost were sexual violence, physical assault/robbery, and child maltreatment. Monetary expenditures caused by criminal victimization represent 3 % of Gross Domestic Product – equivalent to the amount spent on national defense. These estimates exclude the additional costs of preventing and avoiding crime such as enhanced lighting and burglar alarms. They also exclude crimes against businesses and most white-collar and corporate offenses.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 78%

Incidence and Costs of Personal and Property Crimes in the USA, 2017

Miller

Cohen

Swedler

et al. 2021

J. Benefit Cost Anal.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The value is significantly lower as expected. (The reader is referred to Picasso and Cohen (2019) for criminology discussion. )…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The use of CE for valuing policing policies was proposed in Carson and Louviere (2017). To our knowledge, Picasso and Cohen (2019) is the only academic publication that values policies to fight against crime, and this is the only article that employs the CE method to value VSL in the context of crime. It is worth mentioning that direct methods go beyond active value (lower risk for the individual or her friends and family) as they are capable of measuring the passive value (altruistic idea of a better society regardless of a personal impact).…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Value of the Risk to Life in the Context of Crime

Picasso

Grand

2019

J. Benefit Cost Anal.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The value of the risk to life is a key element for benefit-cost analysis, enabling more rational public policy decisions in diverse areas as environmental, health, and crime. We value the risk to life in the context of crime using a discrete choice experiment (CE). The method has clear advantages in that it applies to the whole population and does not require vast data from labor markets, for example. Such data are not always available even in developed economies. Combining the stated preference approach with contingent valuation (CV), CE offer advantages yet to be explored in the context of crime. We demonstrate the application in a developing economy, where similar valuations are not available. The best estimate obtained for Argentina is an average of 1.5 million in 2015 US dollars per statistical life with a confidence interval ($1.1–$2.3). This result is consistent with estimates for the developed world, after appropriate transfer. We also analyze demographic factors in the risk to life, finding a positive influence of income, risk aversion, previous victimization experience and family size on the value of a statistical life, as well as a negative impact of individualism.

show abstract

“…Within the realm of criminal justice policy, WTP has been used by Nagin et al (2006) and Piquero and Steinberg (2010), who compare the public's demand for incarceration versus rehabilitation for juvenile offenders while holding constant the level of crime reduction. More recently, Picasso and Cohen (2017) compared the public's demand for two policy approaches to reduce crime (more police or more punishment) using a discrete choice experiment where respondents choose between varying combinations of tax payments, crime reductions, and policy programs (see also Carson and Louviere, 2017).…”

Section: Measuring Preferences For Victim Compensation Through Willinmentioning

confidence: 99%

Victim Compensation Policy and White‐Collar Crime

Galvin

Loughran

Simpson

et al. 2018

Criminology & Public Policy

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research Summary We use survey data from a nationally representative sample to explore public support for taxpayer‐funded victim compensation programs for financial fraud, consumer fraud, identity theft, and burglary. We use contingent valuation (willingness‐to‐pay) methodology to infer preferences for compensation programs and explore predictors of those preferences. Overall, our findings reveal that the public strongly supports the implementation of victim compensation programs. Our results also indicate, however, that this support may be driven in part by perceptions of benefiting from this program directly in the future. Additionally, a small but notable minority of respondents exhibit preferences for programs without compensation. Policy Implications Our findings suggest that the general public is supportive of restitutive compensation programs, not only as paid for by offenders but also as paid for by the government. We suggest that policy makers may seek to extend victim compensation funds to white‐collar crimes, which may otherwise be more financially damaging than traditional crimes.

show abstract

Valuing the public’s demand for crime prevention programs: a discrete choice experiment

Cited by 12 publications

References 44 publications

Incidence and Costs of Personal and Property Crimes in the USA, 2017

Incidence and Costs of Personal and Property Crimes in the USA, 2017

The Value of the Risk to Life in the Context of Crime

Victim Compensation Policy and White‐Collar Crime

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About