IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cpp/issued/v47y2021i1p117-129.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

On Reducing the Sexual Assault of Women: What Can Economists Contribute to the Debate?

Author

Listed:
  • Mukesh Eswaran

Abstract

In Canada, it is estimated that only about 5 percent of sexual assaults are reported to police and fewer than 1 percent of assaults result in convictions. The reasons for this are discussed in this commentary using results from a formal model in economic theory. In the model, if police overestimate the probability that women's reports of assault are false, as the evidence clearly documents, they under-investigate. This in turn reduces the reporting of actual assaults and reduces the conviction rate. The attrition rate of active files (as women drop out as a result of the challenges within and outside the system) may further reinforce the incentive effects of police disbelief. These effects are compounded by the fact that, in common law, the Crown prosecutor represents not the victim but rather the society at large. Policy recommendations that stem from the model include an emphasis on victim advocates, who can increase police belief and hence spur police efforts and reduce attrition rates, leading to more reports and convictions and fewer assaults. In considering punishments for false reports, it is argued that due consideration must also be given to the effect such a punishment may have in reducing truthful reports and hence in increasing the number of assaults.

Suggested Citation

  • Mukesh Eswaran, 2021. "On Reducing the Sexual Assault of Women: What Can Economists Contribute to the Debate?," Canadian Public Policy, University of Toronto Press, vol. 47(1), pages 117-129, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:cpp:issued:v:47:y:2021:i:1:p:117-129
    DOI: 10.3138/cpp.2019-067
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.3138/cpp.2019-067
    Download Restriction: access restricted to subscribers

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.3138/cpp.2019-067?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cpp:issued:v:47:y:2021:i:1:p:117-129. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Iver Chong (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.utpjournals.press/loi/cpp .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.