There is general agreement that burglary produces social costs over and beyond the damage done to the victim if a crime raises other potential victims' subjective estimates of being robbed and thus increases their investments in protecting themselves (e.g., purchasing more locks). Economists traditionally view the marginal investment in locks by neighboring houses as a negative externality produced by a burglary. This article shows that it is wrong to view third-party expenditures as a negative externality. Instead, they are usually an indicator that third parties are benefiting from the mistakes of others. We first show how this reasoning applies to burglary and then to fraud. Copyright 1995 by the University of Chicago.
Download Info
To our knowledge, this item is not available for
download. To find whether it is available, there are three
options:
1. Check below under "Related research" whether another version of this item is available online.
2. Check on the provider's web page
whether it is in fact available.
3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be
available.
Contact details of provider: Postal: The University of Chicago Press, Journals Division, P.O. Box 37005 Chicago, IL 60637 Fax: (773) 753-0811 Email: Web page: http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/JLS/
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Christopher F. Baum).
Related research
Keywords:
Cited by: (explanations, Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.)