Study Shows Throwing Money At Law Enforcement Doesn’t Result In Lower Crime Rates
from the but-don't-even-think-about-cutting-their-budgets dept
Pretty much every law enforcement agency gets exactly what it wants during budget discussions. The spending on policing always seems to increase, despite years of diminishing returns. The money flows in, but very little flows back out in terms of community relations, accountability, or transparency.
In recent years, there have been discussions about “defunding” law enforcement agencies. Very little of this talk meant much of anything. Only a few legislators seriously considered dismantling police departments. In most cases, “defunding” just meant moving some cop money to other areas where people might be better served by other social services, like mental health professionals or medical personnel.
In an era of historically low crime rates, it might seem intuitive to keep spending more and more on law enforcement. But looking at clearance rates for major crimes shows that while budgets continue to increase, the quality and quantity of investigations isn’t.
On top of the money spent on just keeping police boots on the ground, so to speak, is the money cities and states shell out to settle civil lawsuits involving officers, ranging from rights violations to wrongful deaths. That money is never considered to be part of the budget, but it’s a real expense that should always be added to whatever’s being spent to keep cop shops operational.
This is how it works in the United States. But, as the Toronto Star’s Emily Fagan reports, this is also how it works just across the border.
There is “no consistent correlation” between police spending and crime rates in Canada, a new study has found.
The paper, published in the journal Canadian Public Policy, examined a decade of data from Canada’s 20 largest municipalities, finding no clear relationship between higher police budgets and crime, and no association between increasing spending and reducing crime rates. This, even as spending on policing increased steadily over the study period.
“We didn’t find a consistent association between police spending and crime rates,” lead author Mélanie Seabrook told the Star, noting that the finding can help decision-makers figure out spending priorities, knowing “there are other factors at play.”
The report [PDF] from Canadian Public Policy only runs 16 pages. It may be short, but it’s detailed. And it opens with a few paragraphs showing that law enforcement’s ongoing transparency problem may actually be worse in Canada.
Data on police budgets are notoriously difficult to access in Canada, thwarting research into even the most rudimentary questions about how governments spend money in the pursuit of public safety. Compared with countries such as the United States, what data on police budgets and expenditures can be accessed in Canada tend be incomplete and insufficiently disaggregated, greatly limiting the insight they can offer. Because of barriers to accessing quality data on police budgets, systematic analysis of the economics of policing in Canada is exceptionally rare. Given that increases in police budgets have long been rationalized as an investment in fighting crime, it is surprising that so little is known about the relationship between police budgets and public safety in Canada.
To quote every elementary school math class: show your work. If you want the public to trust that their money is being well-spent, you need to open the books. And if that data shows the money is being misspent, then it’s time to start tightening belts, rather than seek more opacity.
Crime rates in Canada have mirrored those in the United States. Rates peaked in the 1990s before beginning a long, precipitous two-decade decline. Meanwhile, budgets continue to expand, with law enforcement officials claiming additional funds are needed to fight crime, even when there’s less crime to go around.
Sure, correlation does not equal causation. But, in this study, there’s not even correlation. What’s reported here shows there’s no reason to believe spending more on policing will have any effect on crime rates. And if that’s still open to debate, municipalities should be a bit more skeptical of law enforcement officials’ claims during budget discussions. This study makes it clear that throwing more money at this particular problem is extremely unlikely to solve it.
Filed Under: crime, defund the police, law enforcement, police
Comments on “Study Shows Throwing Money At Law Enforcement Doesn’t Result In Lower Crime Rates”
You say 'Extra training budget', they hear 'Even more settlement funds'
Probably the biggest problem with the idea of ‘more money in police pockets = better police work’ is that that requires them to want to improve. No amount of extra budget for ‘training’ for example is going to help if it’s not taken advantage of or is just ignored because following the rules/laws is ‘too much work’ and it’s easier to just violate rights/laws and throw taxpayer dollars at the resulting lawsuit(s) via ‘we admit to no wrongdoing’-settlements.
Re: Funny part of Learning
Is Practice makes things better.
But How do you practice, when the incidents arent happening?
Which would mean a way to get them to practice something they arnt using/doing/needing.
For all the slings and arrows
What can be done to keep Crime low?
That has been explored many times and has a few solutions.
#1 is to look at other nations and What they have down.
Mostly is Getting assistance WHERE and when its needed or Even Before.
There are Causes for Most crimes and Causes that Force it to increase.
The real problem tends to be the Extra- forces that Create conditions and situations where Crime is the best way to help themselves.
MOST grocery stores, have a policy NOT to stop anyone stealing less than $25 worth of materials. Its not worth the pain or hassle. AS it Could be 1 person sacrifices themself, as MANY raid the store for MORE then that $25. And considering a 5+ pound Roast, costs more then that? A Cart full of veggies?
And for Some reason, unlike it was done in the past a few times, Thinks it has no control over Prices.
I think the best data to point to is how, as crime has gone down, so have clearance rates. We don’t just solve less crime, we solve a smaller percentage of crime, despite the bigger budgets. We spend more in real terms and inflation adjusted dollars, per solved case, than we used to.
leaded gas ban in the 90s
Re:
https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2118631119
But what I find fascinating is that this loss is concentrated in one major group, conservatives with politicians in general coming in second.
Re: Re:
IQ is pseudoscience and should be rightfully dismissed as such.
Re: Re:
Not all politicians are stupid, some just know that they can make a lot of money by pandering to those who are while being paid by lobbyists to ignore their morals.
Re:
So much this. The correlation between environmental lead levels and violent crime, with about a 20 year lag, is astonishing.
“Study Shows Throwing Money At Law Enforcement Doesn’t Result In Lower Crime Rates”
Other studies show increased minimum wage results in decreased crime.
Re:
Please, link to those studies because they sound like the basis of an excellent argument for diverting funding to where it can do more good.
Re: Re:
I mean, I don’t know about specific studies but it should be clear that if someone isn’t desperate for the basics of living, they’re less likely to commit crimes to access it. There will always be some kind of criminal underclass, but someone who can work a job and still afford food, shelter and transport is going to be less likely to commit a crime than someone who does all that and can’t afford the basics or has to still find a hospital bill.
I’m sure the studies are out there, but this one seems clear on its face. Especially since other countries manage to have higher minimum wages and more benefits along with lower crime rates.
Re: Re: Re:
There are many studies about income inequality/poverty and crime were it is shown there is a strong correlation between these factors. There of course other things that affect this correlation, like regional or cultural specifics or social security nets. Direct causation is harder to quantify though, but there are some studies showing this.