Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Economic Evaluation of Policing Activity: An Application of a Hybrid Methodology

  • Published:
European Journal of Law and Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper advances a hybrid police cost function that synthesises the proactive/preventive and response/reactive methodologies from the criminology literature. The model presents a coherent estimation process that can help in the allocation of scarce resources to police forces and also enable economists, government organisations and criminologists to assess the scale and technical efficiency of forces. This hybrid model uses response survey data for a sample of English and Welsh police forces in which relative efficiency rankings are contrasted with relative performance measures produced by the Audit Commission. We find that there are considerable divergences in police force's scale and technical efficiency during 1997/98 and 1998/99 utilising non-parametric techniques.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Audit Commission. (1990). “Effective Policing—Performance Review in Police Forces.” Police Paper No. 8, London, UK.

  • Audit Commission. (1998). “Local Authority Performance Indicators 1996/97: Police and Fire Services.” London, UK.

  • Audit Commission. (1999). “Local Authority Performance Indicators 1997/98: Police and Fire Services.” London, UK.

  • Audit Commission. (1999). “Stations: Improving the Management of the Police Estate.” London, UK.

  • Banker, R. D., Charnes, A. & Cooper, W. W. (1984). “Some Models for Estimating Technical and Scale Ef.ciencies in Data Envelopment Analysis.” Management Science. 30, 1078–1092.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burrows, J. (1989). “Achieving ‘Value for Money’ from Police Expenditures: The Contribution of Research.” In M. Weatheritt (ed.), Police Research: Some Future Prospects, Chapter 2. Aldershot, England, Avebury.

    Google Scholar 

  • Byrne, D., Dezhbakhsh, H. & King, R. (1996). “Unions and Police Productivity: An Econometric Investigation.” Industrial Relations.35(4), 566–584.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chalos, P. & Cherian, J. (1995). “An Application of Data Envelopment Analysis to Public-Sector Performance —Measurement and Cccountability.” Journal of Accounting and Public Policy. 14, 143–160.

    Google Scholar 

  • Charnes, A., Cooper, W. W. & Rhoades, E. (1978). “Measuring the Ef.ciency of Decision-Making Units.” European Journal of Operational Research. 2, 429–444.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, R. V. & Hough, M. (1984). “Crime and Police Effectiveness.” Home Of.ce Research Study No.97, UK.

  • Correa, H. & Wakefield, K. (1996). “An Application of Input- Output Analysis to the Administration of a Police Department.” Policing and Society. 6, 15–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • DeYoung, R. (1998). “Management Quality and X-Inef.ciency in National Banks.” Journal of Financial Services Research. 13, 5–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Drake, L. & Simper, R. (1999a). “Productivity Estimation and the Size-Ef.ciency Relationship in English and Welsh Police Forces: An Application of DEA and Multiple Discriminant Analysis.” International Review of Law and Economics, forthcoming.

  • Drake, L. & Simper, R. (1999b). “X-Ef.ciency and Scale Economies in Policing: A Comparative Study Using the Distribution Free Approach and DEA.” Economic Research Paper No. 99/07, Department of Economics, Loughborough University.

  • Drake, L. & Weyman-Jones, T. G. (1996). “Productive and Allocative Inef.ciencies in U.K. Building Societies: A Comparison of Non-parametric and Stochastic Frontier Techniques.” Manchester School of Economic and Social Studies. 114, 22–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fare, R., Grosskopf, S. & Lovell, C. A. K. (1985). The Measurement in Ef.ciency Production, Boston, MA, Kluwer Nijhoff.

    Google Scholar 

  • Farrell, M. J. (1957). “The Measurement of Productive Efficiency.” Journal of the Royal Statistical Association. Series A, CXX, 253–281.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferrier, G. D. & Lovell, C. A. K. (1990). “Measuring Cost Ef.ciency in Banking: Econometric and Linear Programming Evidence.” Journal of Econometrics. 46, 229–245.

    Google Scholar 

  • HMIC. (1995). Obtaining Value from Money in the Police Service, London, UK.

  • HMIC. (1997). Inspection Report: The National Criminal Intelligence Service, London, UK.

  • HMIC. (1998). What Price Policing, London. UK.

  • HMIC. (1999a). Inspection Report: Warwickshire Constabulary, London, UK.

  • HMIC. (1999b). Inspection Report: Metropolitan Police Service Specialist Operations, London, UK.

  • Home Office. (1993). Police Reform. The Government' Proposals for the Police Service in England and Wales, CM 2281. HMSO, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jorgensen, F., Pedersen, P. A. & Volden, R. (1998). “Estimating the Inef.ciency in the Norwegian Bus Industry From Stochastic Frontier Models.” Transportation. 24, 421–433.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levit, S. D. (1998). “The Relationship between Crime Reporting and Police: Implications for the Use of Uniform Crime Rates.” Journal of Quantitative Criminology. 14, 61–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • O'Brien, R. M. (1996). “Police Productivity and Crimes Rates: 1973- 1992.” Criminology. 34, 183–207.

    Google Scholar 

  • PedrajaChaparro, F. & SalinasJiménez, J. (1996). “An Assessment of the Ef.ciency of Spanish Courts Using DEA.” Applied Economics. 28, 391–1403.

    Google Scholar 

  • Police Research Group. (1993). “Opportunities for Reducing the Administrative Burdens on the Police.” Police Research Series, Paper No. 3. Home Office Police Department, London, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Police Research Group. (1999). “Applying Economic Elevation to Policing Activity.” Police Research Series, Paper No. 103, Home Office Police Department, London, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Redshaw, J., Mawby, R. I. & Bunt, P. (1997). “Evaluating Core Policing in Britain: The Views of Police and Consumers.” International Journal of the Sociology of Law. 25, 283–301.

    Google Scholar 

  • SalinasJimenez, J. & Smith, P. (1996). “Data Envelopment Analysis Applied to Quality in Primary Health Care.” Annals of Operations Research. 67, 141–161.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sarrico, C. S., Hogan, S. M., Dyson, R. G. & Athanassopoulos, A. D. (1997). “Data Envelopment Analysis and University Selection.” Journal of the Operational Research Society. 48, 1163–1177.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, P. & Whitte, A. (1984). An Economic Analysis of Crime and Justice: Theory, Methods, and Applications, Orlando, FL, Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shaw, M. & Williamson, W. (1972). “Public Attitudes to the Police.” The Criminologist. 7, 18–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sheehy Report. (1993). Police Responsibilities and Rewards, CM 2280, HMSO, London, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skogan, W. G. (1996). “The Police and Public Opinion in Britain.” American Behavioral Scientist. 39, 421–432.

    Google Scholar 

  • Southgate, P. (1985). “Police Output Measures: Past Work and Future Possibilities.” In K. Heal, R. Tarling and J. Burrows (eds.), Policing Today, Chapter 4, UK, Home Office Research and Planning Unit Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stephens, M. (1994). “Care and Control: The Future of British Policing.” Policing and Society. 4, 237–251.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sullivan, R. R. (1998). “The Politics of British Policing in the Thatcher/Major State.” The Howard Journal. 37, 306–318.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thanassoulis, E., Boussofianeane, A. & Dyson, R. G. (1996). “A Comparison of Data Envelopment Analysis and Ratio Analysis as Tools for Performance Assessment.” Omega-International Journal of Management Science. 24, 229–244.

    Google Scholar 

  • Todd, R. & Ramanathan, K. V. (1994). “Perceived Social Needs, Outcomes, Measurements, and Budgetary Responsiveness in a Not-For-Pro.t Setting; Some Empirical Evidence.” The Accounting Review. 69, 122–137.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vitalino, D. F. & Toren, M. (1994). “Cost and Ef.ciency in Nursing Nomes: a Stochastic Frontier Approach.” Journal of Health Economics. 13, 281–300.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waddington, P. A. J. & Braddock, Q. (1991). “‘Guardians’ or ‘Bullies’? Perceptions of the Police Amongst Adolescent Black, White and Asian Boys.” Policing and Society. 2, 31–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walker, M. A. (1992). “Do We Need a Clear-up Rate?” Policing and Society. 2, 293–306.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zuckerman, S., Hadley, J. & Iezzoni, L. (1994). “Measuring Hospital Ef.ciency with Frontier Cost Functions.” Journal of Health Economics. 13, 255–280.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Economics, Loughborough University, Loughborough, LE11 3TU, England

    Leigh Drake

  2. Department of Economics, Loughborough University, Loughborough, LE11 3TU, England

    Richard Simper

Authors
  1. Leigh Drake
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Richard Simper
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Drake, L., Simper, R. The Economic Evaluation of Policing Activity: An Application of a Hybrid Methodology. European Journal of Law and Economics 12, 173–192 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1012857523734

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1012857523734

Search

Navigation