Skip to main content
Log in

The decomposition and graphical analysis of crime and sanctions data: A cross-national application

  • Published:
Journal of Quantitative Criminology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This article attempts to illustrate the utility of isoquant map analysis from the field of production theory in microeconomics for the analysis of criminal justice data. Cross-national comparisons of aggregate crime and justice data are used to demonstrate the ability of this technique to reveal important patterns that are often obscured by simple rate comparisons and multivariate treatments such as pooled time-series analysis. For each jurisdiction, aggregate trends in criminal justice processing rates are systematically analyzed as a sequence of two-input production processes: gross imprisonment rates (prison population divided by resident population) can be partitioned in terms of the crime rate and punitiveness (prison population divided by the number of offenses); punitiveness can, in turn, be partitioned in terms of severity and certainty of punishment; certainty of punishment can then be partitioned, seriatim, in terms of the incarceration rate, the conviction rate, and the arrest or clearance rate and the rate at which citizens report crimes. Cross-national data collected by Farrington, Langan, and Wikström are used to illustrate the utility of the method for displaying comparisons of the decomposition of aggregate criminal justice data for the United States, England, and Sweden.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Blumstein, A., Cohen, J., and Nagin, D. (eds.) (1978).Deterrence and Incapacitation, National Academy of Sciences, Washington, DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bureau of Justice Statistics (1988).Report to the Nation on Crime and Justice, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cunningham, W., Strauchs, J., and Van Meter, C. (1991).Private Security: Patterns and Trends, National Institute of Justice, Washington, DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Farrington, D. P., and Langan, P. A. (1992). Changes in crime and punishment in England and America in the 1980s.Just. Q. 9: 5–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Farrington, D. P., and Wikström, P.-O. H. (1993). Changes in crime and punishment in England and Sweden in the 1980s.Studies on Crime and Crime Prevention 2: 142–170.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kalish, C. (1988).International Crime Rates, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Washington, DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • LaFranier, S. (1991). U.S. has most prisoners per capita in the world: One million are behind bars, study says.Wash. Post Jan. 5: A3.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lynch, J. P. (1988). A comparison of prison use in England and Wales, Canada, the United States and West Germany: A limited test of the punitiveness hypothesis.J. Crim. Law Criminol. 79: 180–217.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lynch, J. P. (1993). A cross-national comparison of the length of custodial sentences for serious crimes.Just. Q. 10: 639–659.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lynch, J. P. (1995). Crime in international perspective. In Wilson, J. Q., and Petersilia, J. (eds.),Crime, ICS Press, San Francisco, pp. 11–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maurer, M. (1991).Americans Behind Bars: A Comparison of International Rates of Incarceration, The Sentencing Project, Washington, DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayhew, P. (1985).Residual Burglary: A Comparison of the United States, Canada, and England and Wales (Final report to the National Institute of Justice), U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moitra, S. D. (1986). Crime and imprisonment trends: An analysis by individual crime-types.Int. J. Comp. Appl. Crim. Just. 10: 95–106.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ohlin, L. E., and Remington, F. J. (eds) (1993).Discretion in Criminal Justice: The Tension Between Individualization and Uniformity, SUNY Press, Albany, NY.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skogan, W. (1993). Reactions to crime in a cross-national perspective. In Alvazzi del Frate, A., Zvekic, U., and van Dijk, J. (eds.),Understanding Crime: Experiences of Crime and Crime Control, United Nations Inter-regional Crime and Justice Institute, Rome,

    Google Scholar 

  • van Dijk, J. and Mayhew, P. (1993). Criminal victimization in the industrialized world: Key findings of the 1989 and 1992 International Crime Surveys. In Alvazzi del Frate, A., Zvekic, U., and van Dijk, J. (eds.),Understanding Crime: Experiences of Crime and Crime Control, United Nations Inter-regional Crime and Justice Institute, Rome.

    Google Scholar 

  • Viderhous, G. (1978). Methodological problems confronting cross-cultural criminological research using official data.Hum. Relat. 3: 229–247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weston, J. F. and Brigham, E. F. (1978).Managerial Finance, 6th ed., Dryden Press, Hinsdale, IL.

    Google Scholar 

  • Young, W. and Brown, M. (1993). Cross-national comparisons of imprisonment. In Tonry, M. (ed.).Crime and Justice: A Review of Research, Vol. 17, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Forst, B., Lynch, J.P. The decomposition and graphical analysis of crime and sanctions data: A cross-national application. J Quant Criminol 13, 97–119 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02221304

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02221304

Key words

Navigation