The Engine Immobilizer: A Non-Starter for Car Thieves
We provide evidence for a beneficial welfare impact of a crime policy that is targeted at strengthening victim precaution. Regulation made application of the electronic engine immobilizer, a simple and low-cost anti-theft device, mandatory for all new cars sold within the European Union as of 1998. We exploit the regulation as source of exogenous variation in use of the device by year of manufacture of cars. Based on detailed data at the level of car models, we find that uniform application of the security device reduced the probability of car theft by an estimated 50 percent on average in the Netherlands during 1995-2008, accounting for both the protective effect on cars with the device and the displacement effect on cars without the device. The costs per prevented theft equal some 1,500 Euro; a fraction of the social benefits of a prevented car theft.
|Date of creation:||2013|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Poschingerstrasse 5, 81679 Munich|
Phone: +49 (89) 9224-0
Fax: +49 (89) 985369
Web page: http://www.cesifo-group.de
More information through EDIRC
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.:
- Shavell, Steven, 1991. "Individual precautions to prevent theft: Private versus socially optimal behavior," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 11(2), pages 123-132, September.
- Florian Baumann & Tim Friehe, 2012.
"Private Protection against Crime when Property Value is Private Information,"
CESifo Working Paper Series
3888, CESifo Group Munich.
- Baumann, Florian & Friehe, Tim, 2013. "Private protection against crime when property value is private information," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 73-79.
- Baumann, Florian & Friehe, Tim, 2013. "Private protection against crime when property value is private information," DICE Discussion Papers 91, Düsseldorf Institute for Competition Economics (DICE), University of Düsseldorf.
- Helsley, Robert W. & Strange, William C., 2005. "Mixed markets and crime," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(7), pages 1251-1275, July.
- Christine Neill, 2010.
"Do Gun Buybacks Save Lives? Evidence from Panel Data,"
American Law and Economics Review,
Oxford University Press, vol. 12(2), pages 462-508.
- Leigh, Andrew & Neill, Christine, 2010. "Do Gun Buybacks Save Lives? Evidence from Panel Data," IZA Discussion Papers 4995, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
- Ben Vollaard & Jan C. van Ours, 2011.
"Does Regulation of Built‐in Security Reduce Crime? Evidence from a Natural Experiment,"
Royal Economic Society, vol. 121(552), pages 485-504, 05.
- van Ours, Jan C & Vollaard, Ben, 2010. "Does Regulation of Built-In Security Reduce Crime? Evidence from a Natural Experiment," CEPR Discussion Papers 7817, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Vollaard, B.A. & van Ours, J.C., 2010. "Does Regulation of Built-In Security Reduce Crime? Evidence From a Natural Experiment," Discussion Paper 2010-45, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
- Helsley, Robert W. & Strange, William C., 1999. "Gated Communities and the Economic Geography of Crime," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 80-105, July.
- Philip J. Cook & John MacDonald, 2011. "Public Safety through Private Action: an Economic Assessment of BIDS," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 121(552), pages 445-462, 05.
- Ian Ayres & Steven D. Levitt, 1998.
"Measuring Positive Externalities from Unobservable Victim Precaution: An Empirical Analysis of Lojack,"
The Quarterly Journal of Economics,
Oxford University Press, vol. 113(1), pages 43-77.
- Ian Ayres & Steven D. Levitt, 1997. "Measuring Positive Externalities from Unobservable Victim Precaution: An Empirical Analysis of Lojack," NBER Working Papers 5928, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Ehrlich, Isaac, 1981. "On the Usefulness of Controlling Individuals: An Economic Analysis of Rehabilitation, Incapacitation, and Deterrence," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 71(3), pages 307-22, June.
- Robert Meyer, 2012. "Failing to learn from experience about catastrophes: The case of hurricane preparedness," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 45(1), pages 25-50, August.
- Lacroix Guy & Narceau Nicolas, 1995. "Private Protection against Crime," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 72-87, January.
- Cook, Philip J. & Ludwig, Jens, 2006. "The social costs of gun ownership," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(1-2), pages 379-391, January.
- McClellan, Chandler & Tekin, Erdal, 2012. "Stand Your Ground Laws and Homicides," IZA Discussion Papers 6705, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
- Hui-Wen, Koo & Png, I. P. L., 1994. "Private security: Deterrent or diversion?," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 14(1), pages 87-101, March.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ces:ceswps:_4092. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Klaus Wohlrabe)
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.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.