Author:  Robert Jantzen, Iona College, New Rochelle, NY   10801

Objective:  New York City has experienced a dramatic decrease in crime since 1990.  Some studies have attributed much of the credit for the decline to the Guiliani Administration’s adoption of an aggressive policy toward deterring petty crime, which then lead to reduced levels of major crime.  Other studies have argued that policing changes were only secondary to changes in the local economy, school quality, the end of the crack epidemic and a decline in the 16-24 year old age cohort.  This study plans to assess whether the Guiliani “zero tolerance“ policy towards minor crimes was responsible for the changes in major crime rates that also occurred.

Data and Method:  The FBI’s Uniform Crime Reports contain time-series data for New York City for both violent crimes (murder, rape, assault) and property crimes (thefts, burglaries and stolen cars).  Because preliminary analysis has shown that the crime rates for the differing types of crime have unit roots, this study will utilize vector error correction models to assess whether the propensities to commit differing types of crime are cointegrated.   Cointegration analysis gauges whether the propensities to commit differing crimes are related to one another in the long run.  Augmented Granger causality tests will also be utilized to assess whether the observed decreases in minor crime rate were responsible for the changes in the major crime rates.

Expected Results:  This study’s results can inform public policy by assessing whether variations in minor crimes are a bellwether factor determining the behavior of major crimes.  If minor crimes prove to be a causal factor, then enforcement efforts intended to reduce minor crimes may be particularly warranted as an efficient method for reducing both minor and major crimes.   In contrast, absent a causal role for minor crimes, then enforcement efforts should be targeted specifically towards those crime types that society desires to control.