An Empirical Analysis of Health and Safety in Employment Sentencing in New Zealand
AbstractApparent inconsistency in criminal sentencing at District Court level in New Zealand (NZ) might also be expected for health and safety in employment (HSE) offences. We review relevant legislation and the guidelines established in the de Spa appeal case, and estimate a model of HSE sentencing variability distinguishing the de Spa criteria (and a subset similar to those used in the formal U.S. criminal sentencing guidelines) from a more comprehensive list of sentencing factors routinely used. When the de Spa case-mix variables are controlled for, a weak increase in inter-district sentencing variability is observed but with a reduction in intra-district variability, while both inter and intra-judge variability is mitigated. We show that a number of the de Spa (and other) criteria are significant determinants of sentencing variation, although some results (e.g., for the presence of remorse) are puzzling. The results seem quite robust to the choice between a dataset including the common s 6 offences only and a dataset of cases as a whole as well as to several other sensitivity checks. We also show that the model retrospectively predicts the sentence in the de Spa appeal case well, and suggest how the model might be used as a basis for more consistent future sentencing decisions.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by University of Canterbury, Department of Economics and Finance in its series Working Papers in Economics with number 09/17.
Length: 37 pages
Date of creation: 11 Nov 2009
Date of revision:
Contact details of provider:
Postal: Private Bag 4800, Christchurch, New Zealand
Phone: 64 3 369 3123 (Administrator)
Fax: 64 3 364 2635
Web page: http://www.econ.canterbury.ac.nz
More information through EDIRC
Health & Safety Offences; Judicial Guidelines; Sentencing Determinants;
Find related papers by JEL classification:
- K32 - Law and Economics - - Other Substantive Areas of Law - - - Environmental, Health, and Safety Law
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
You can help add them by filling out this form.
CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
- Alan Woodfield & Stephen Hickson & Andrea Menclova, 2013. "An Empirical Analysis of Changing Guidelines for Health and Safety in Employment Sentences in New Zealand," Working Papers in Economics 13/14, University of Canterbury, Department of Economics and Finance.
- Alan Woodfield & Stephen Hickson & Andrea Menclova, 2013. "Forecasting Fines for Health and Safety in Employment Offences in New Zealand," Working Papers in Economics 13/15, University of Canterbury, Department of Economics and Finance.
- Alan Woodfield & Andrea Menclova & Stephen Hickson, 2013. "An Empirical Analysis of Sentencing Starting Points for HSE Offences," Working Papers in Economics 13/34, University of Canterbury, Department of Economics and Finance.
- Andrea Menclova & Alan Woodfield, 2013. "The Composition of Health and Safety in Employment Sentences in New Zealand: An Empirical Analysis," Working Papers in Economics 13/13, University of Canterbury, Department of Economics and Finance.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Albert Yee).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.