Socioeconomic Determinants for Regional Variation of Crime in Germany

Umbach, Tim (2017): Socioeconomic Determinants for Regional Variation of Crime in Germany.

Abstract

This work explores which spatial patterns of crime exist in Germany and what their socio-economic determinants are. This is done using the PKS crime statistic for six types of crime on the county level for the years 2003-2014. To the authors knowledge, this is the first time crime in Germany has been studied with such granular data on such a broad scale. Due to the granularity of the data set, spatial dependencies of crime and its covariates became very apparent, which made it necessary to use a random effects spatial durbin model (SDM) to model regional variation of crime. With this, I was able to show that the factors explaining crime in one county also spill-over and affect crime in a neighboring one. To my knowledge, this hasn't been done before either for Germany. Also, I was able to confirm earlier findings that the Becker-Ehrlich model works well explaining property crime in Germany and the social disorganization theory explaining violent and drug crime, with the routine activity mostly working in both cases. Also as a first for Germany, there is some evidence that the broken-window theory applies and that disorder can drive crime to an extend.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: Crime, Germany, Spatial Econometrics, Spatial, Spillover
• Subjects: C - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods > C2 - Single Equation Models ; Single Variables > C23 - Panel Data Models ; Spatio-temporal Models; J - Labor and Demographic Economics > J6 - Mobility, Unemployment, Vacancies, and Immigrant Workers > J68 - Public Policy; K - Law and Economics > K4 - Legal Procedure, the Legal System, and Illegal Behavior; K - Law and Economics > K4 - Legal Procedure, the Legal System, and Illegal Behavior > K42 - Illegal Behavior and the Enforcement of Law

References

Andresen, M. (2006). A Spatial Analysis of Crime in Vancouver, British Columbia: A synthesis of social disorganization and routine activity theory. In: The Canadian Geographer/Le Géographe canadien 50.4, pp. 487-502.

Anselin, L. (1988). Spatial Econometrics: Methods and Models. Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Baller, R., L. Anselin, S. Messner, G. Deane, and D. Hawkins (2001). Structural covariates of US county homicide rates: Incorporating spatial e ects. In: Criminology 39.3, pp. 561-588.

Becker, G. (1968). Crime and Punishment: An Economic Approach. In: Journal of Political Economy 76, pp. 169-217.

Entorf, H. and H. Spengler (2000). Socioeconomic and demographic factors of crime in Germany: Evidence from panel data of the German states. In: International Review of Law and Economics 20.1, pp. 75-106.

Kelling, G. and C. Coles (1997). Fixing broken windows: Restoring order and reducing crime in our communities. Simon and Schuster.

Messner, S., R. Teske, R. Baller, and H. Thome (2013). Structural covariates of violent crime rates in Germany: Exploratory spatial analyses of Kreise. In: Justice Quarterly 30.6, pp. 1015-1041.

Sampson, R. J., S. W. Raudenbush, and F. Earls (1997). Neighborhoods and violent crime: A multilevel study of collective efficacy. In: Science 277.5328, pp. 918-924.

Weisburd, D. et al. (2006). Does crime just move around the corner? A controlled study of spatial displacement and diffusion of crime control benefits. In: Criminology 44.3, pp. 549-592.