Financial penalties as an alternative criminal sanction: Evidence from panel data
This paper explores whether financial penalties can be a viable alternative to traditional sanction methods. Given that the annual cost of operating jails and prisons is approximately $40 billion in the U.S., any increase in the efficiency of the criminal justice system will lead to substantial savings. Using a panel model to control for jurisdictional heterogeneity, results indicate that financial penalties provide a significant deterrent effect similar to those provided by other sanctions. As such, policy makers should reconsider alternative sanctions as part of a larger sentencing policy. While financial penalties are not options in all cases, the large number of nonviolent offenders currently incarcerated suggests that opportunities exist for financial punishment to reduce criminal justice expenditures. Copyright International Atlantic Economic Society 2001
If 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.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 29 (2001)
Issue (Month): 4 (December)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.springer.com|
Postal:Suite 650, International Tower, 229 Peachtree Street, N.E., Atlanta, GA 30303
Phone: (404) 965-1555
Fax: (404) 965-1556
Web page: http://www.iaes.org/
More information through EDIRC
|Order Information:||Web: http://www.springer.com/economics/journal/11293/PS2|
References listed on IDEAS
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.:
- Gneezy, Uri & Rustichini, Aldo, 2000.
"A Fine is a Price,"
The Journal of Legal Studies,
University of Chicago Press, vol. 29(1), pages 1-17, January.
- Uri Gneezy & Aldo Rustichini, 2000. "A fine is a price," Natural Field Experiments 00258, The Field Experiments Website.
- Gary S. Becker, 1974. "Crime and Punishment: An Economic Approach," NBER Chapters,in: Essays in the Economics of Crime and Punishment, pages 1-54 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Gary S. Becker, 1968. "Crime and Punishment: An Economic Approach," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 76, pages 169-169.
- Block, Michael Kent & Nold, Frederick Carl, 1981. "The Deterrent Effect of Antitrust Enforcement," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 89(3), pages 429-445, June.
- Chu, C. Y. Cyrus & Jiang, Neville, 1993. "Are fines more efficient than imprisonment?," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(3), pages 391-413, July.
- Lott, John R, Jr, 1992. "Do We Punish High Income Criminals Too Heavily?," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 30(4), pages 583-608, October.
- Todd Cherry, 1999. "Unobserved heterogeneity bias when estimating the economic model of crime," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 6(11), pages 753-757.
- Levitt, Steven D., 1997. "Incentive compatibility constraints as an explanation for the use of prison sentences instead of fines," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 179-192, June.
- Cornwell, Christopher & Trumbull, William N, 1994. "Estimating the Economic Model of Crime with Panel Data," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 76(2), pages 360-366, May. Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)