Journal of Quantitative Criminology

, Volume 25, Issue 1, pp 25–49 | Cite as

New Evidence on the Monetary Value of Saving a High Risk Youth

Original Paper

Abstract

There is growing interest in crime prevention through early youth interventions; yet, the standard United States response to the crime problem, particularly among juveniles, has been to increase the use and resource allocation allotted toward punishment and incapacitation and away from prevention and treatment. At the same time, longitudinal studies of delinquency and crime have repeatedly documented a strong link between past and future behavior and have identified a small subset of offenders who commit a large share of criminal offenses. These findings suggest that if these offenders can be identified early and correctly and provided with prevention and treatment resources early in the life course, their criminal activity may be curtailed. While researchers have studied these offenders in great detail, little attention has been paid to the costs they exert on society. This paper provides estimates of the cost of crime imposed on society by high risk youth. Our approach follows and builds upon the early framework and basic methodology developed by Cohen (J Quant Criminol 14: 5–33, 1998), by using new estimates of the costs of individual crimes, ones that are more comprehensive and that significantly increased the monetary cost per crime. We also use new estimates on the underlying offending rate for high risk juvenile offenders. We estimate the present value of saving a 14-year-old high risk juvenile from a life of crime to range from $2.6 to $5.3 million. Similarly, saving a high risk youth at birth would save society between $2.6 and $4.4 million.

Keywords

Costs of crime Criminal careers Crime policy 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors gratefully acknowledge funding for this research from YouthBuild USA through a grant from the Skoll Foundation. Mark Cohen also acknowledges support from the Dean’s Fund for Summer Research, Owen Graduate School of Management, Vanderbilt University.

References

  1. Abrams DS, Rohlfs C (2007) Optimal bail and the value of freedom: evidence from the Philadelphia bail experiment. Univ. of Chicago Working Paper, (August). Available at http://ssrn.com/abstract=id=995323.
  2. Alexandre PK, French MT (2004) Further evidence on the labor market effects of addiction: chronic drug use and employment in metropolitan Miami. Contemp Econ Policy 22:382–393CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Anderson DA (1999) The aggregate burden of crime. J Law Econ 42:611–642CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Aos S, Phipps P, Bamoski R, Lieb R (2001) The comparative costs and benefits of programs to reduce crime, vol 4.0. Washington State Institute for Public Policy, Olympia, WAGoogle Scholar
  5. Aos S, Lieb R, Mayfield J, Miller M, Pennucci A (2004) Benefits and costs of prevention and early intervention programs for youth. Washington State Institute for Public Policy, Olympia, WAGoogle Scholar
  6. Aos S, Millar M, Drake E (2006) Evidence-based public policy options to reduce future prison construction, criminal justice costs and crime rates. Washington State Institute for Public Policy, Olympia, WAGoogle Scholar
  7. Blumstein A, Cohen J (1979) Estimation of individual crime rates from arrest records. J Crim Law Criminol 70:561–585CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Blumstein A, Cohen J, Roth JA, Visher CA (eds) (1986) Criminal careers and “career criminals”, vol 1. National Academy of Sciences, National Academy Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  9. Bureau of Justice Statistics (2004a) State prison expenditures, 2001. NCJ 202949 (June)Google Scholar
  10. Bureau of Justice Statistics (2004b) Profile of Jail Inmates, 2002. NCJ 201932 (July)Google Scholar
  11. Bureau of Justice Statistics (2006a) Violent felons in large urban counties. NCJ 205289 (August)Google Scholar
  12. Bureau of Justice Statistics (2006b) Felony defendants in large urban counties, 2002. NCJ 210818 (February) http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/fdluc02.pdf
  13. Bureau of Justice Statistics (2007) State court sentencing of convicted felons, 2004. http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/html/scscf04/tables/scs04105tab.htm
  14. Chaiken J, Chaiken M (1982) Varieties of criminal behavior. Rand Report R-2814-NIJ. Rand Corporation, Santa Monica, CAGoogle Scholar
  15. Cohen J (1986) Appendix B: research on criminal careers: individual frequency rates and offense seriousness. In: Blumstein A, Cohen J, Roth JA, Visher CA (eds) Criminal careers and “career criminals” , vol 1. National Academy of Sciences, National Academy Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  16. Cohen MA (1988) Pain, suffering and jury awards: a study of the cost of crime to victims. Law Soc Rev 22:537–555CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Cohen MA (1998) The monetary value of saving a high risk youth. J Quant Criminol 14:5–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Cohen MA (2005) The costs of crime and justice. Routledge, New York, NYGoogle Scholar
  19. Cohen MA (2008) Valuing crime control benefits using stated preference approaches. In Dunworth T (ed) Cost and benefits of crime. Urban Institute Press, Washington, DC (forthcoming)Google Scholar
  20. Cohen MA, Rust RT, Steen S, Tidd S (2004) Willingness-to-pay for crime control programs. Criminology 42:86–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Cohen MA, Rust RT, Steen S (2006) Prevention, crime control or cash? Public preferences towards criminal justice spending priorities. Justice Q 23:317–335CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Cullen FT, Gendreau P (2000) Assessing correctional rehabilitation: policy, practice, and prospects. In Horney J (ed) Criminal justice 2000: volume 3-policies, processes, and decisions of the criminal justice system. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  23. DeLisi M, Gatling JM (2003) Who pays for a life of crime? An empirical assessment of the assorted victimization costs posed by career criminals. Crim Justice Stud: Crit J Crim Law Society 16:283–293Google Scholar
  24. Dolan P, Loomes G, Peasgood T, Tsuchiya A (2005) Estimating the intangible victim costs of violent crime. Br J Criminol 45:958–976CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Donohue JJ III (2007) Assessing the relative benefits of incarceration: the overall change over the previous decades and the benefits on the margin. Yale Law School and NBER Working Paper (October)Google Scholar
  26. Farrington DP (2003) Developmental and life-course criminology: key theoretical and empirical issues—the 2002 Sutherland award address. Criminology 41:221–255CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Farrington DP, Welsh BC (2007) Saving children from a life of crime. Westview, Boulder, COGoogle Scholar
  28. Farrington DP, Jolliffe D, Hawkins JD, Catalano RF, Hill KG, Kosterman R (2003) Comparing delinquency careers in court records and self-reports. Criminology 31:933–958CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Federal Bureau of Investigation (2007) Crime in the United States, 2006. Federal Bureau of Investigation, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  30. Figlio RM, Tracy PE, Wolfgang ME (1994) Delinquency in a birth cohort II: Philadelphia, 1958–1988 [Computer file]. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research, Ann Arbor, MIGoogle Scholar
  31. French MT, Roebuck MC, Alexandre PK (2001) Illicit drug use, employment, and labor force participation. Southern Econ J 68:349–668CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Greenwood P (2006) Changing lives: delinquency prevention as crime control policy. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  33. Lengyel TE (2006) Spreading the pain: the social cost of incarcerating parents. Healing the divide, New York. Available at: http://www.alliance1.org/Research/articlearchive/Spreading_Pain_Sept06.pdf
  34. Loeber R, Farrington DP (1998) Serious & violent juvenile offenders: risk and protective factors. Sage, Newbury Park, CAGoogle Scholar
  35. Ludwig J, Cook PJ (2001) The benefits of reducing gun violence: evidence from contingent-valuation survey data. J Risk Uncertainty 22:207–226CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Miller TR, Cohen MA, Wiersema B (1996) Victim costs and consequences: a new look. National Institute of Justice, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  37. Miller TR, Levy DT, Cohen MA, Cox KLC (2006) Costs of alcohol and drug-involved crime. Prevent Sci 7:333–342CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Moore SC (2006) The value of reducing fear: an analysis using the European social survey. Appl Econ 38:115–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Nagin DS (2001) Measuring economic benefits of developmental prevention programs. In: Welsh BC, Farrington DP, Sherman LW (eds) Costs and benefits of preventing crime. Westview Press, Boulder, COGoogle Scholar
  40. Nagin DS, Paternoster R (1991) On the relationship between past and future criminality. Criminology 29:163–189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Nagin DS, Piquero AR, Scott ES, Steinberg L (2006) Public preferences for rehabilitation versus incarceration of juvenile offenders: evidence from a contingent valuation survey. Crim Pub Pol 5:627–652CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Office of National Drug Control Policy (2000) What America’s users spend on illegal drugs, 1988–1999, www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov/publications/pdf/spending_drugs_1988_1998.pdf
  43. Office of National Drug Control Policy (2004) The economic costs of drug abuse in the United States, 1992–2002, http://www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov/publications/economic_costs/economic_costs.pdf
  44. Office of National Drug Control Policy (2007) National drug control budget: FY 2008 budget summary, http://www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov/publications/policy/08budget/index.html
  45. Peterson MA, Braiker HB (1980) Doing crime: a survey of California prison inmates. Report R-2200-DOJ. Rand Corporation, Santa Monica, CAGoogle Scholar
  46. Piquero AR, Blumstein A (2007) Does incapacitation reduce crime? J Quant Criminol 23:267–286CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Piquero AR, Farrington DP, Blumstein A (2003) The criminal career paradigm. In: Tonry M (ed) Crime and justice: a review of research, vol 30. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  48. Skoog GR, Ciecka JE (2001) A Markov (increment-decrement) model of labor force activity: extended tables of central tendency, variation, and probability intervals. J Legal Econ 11:1–22Google Scholar
  49. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (“SAMHSA”) (2007a) Results from the 2006 national survey on drug use and health: national findings, http://www.oas.samhsa.gov/nsduh/2k6nsduh/2k6results.pdf
  50. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (“SAMHSA”) (2007b) National expenditures for mental health services and substance abuse treatment, 1993–2003, http://download.ncadi.samhsa.gov/prevline/pdfs/SAMHSA_NatExp2006final.pdf
  51. Tracy PE, Kempf-Leonard K (1996) Continuity and discontinuity in criminal careers. Plenum, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  52. Tracy PE, Wolfgang ME, Figlio RM (1990) Delinquency careers in two birth cohorts. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  53. Welsh BC, Loeber R, Stevens BR, Stouthamer-Loeber M, Cohen MA, Farrington DP (2008) Costs of juvenile crime in urban areas: a longitudinal perspective. Youth Viol Juvenile Justice 6(1):3–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Widom CS (1989) The cycle of violence. Science 244:160–166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Wolfgang ME, Figlio RM, Sellin T (1972) Delinquency in a birth cohort. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Vanderbilt Owen Graduate School of ManagementNashvilleUSA
  2. 2.Department of Criminology and Criminal JusticeUniversity of MarylandCollege ParkUSA

Personalised recommendations