Comments on Domínguez and Raphael

• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9133.12169
• Author: Robert M. Solow,Lowell J. Taylor,Dan A. Black
• Date: 01 November 2015
• Published date: 01 November 2015

COMMENTARY

ROLE OF THE COST-OF-CRIME

LITERATURE

Comments on Dom´

ınguez and Raphael

Dan A. Black

University of Chicago

Robert M. Solow

Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Lowell J. Taylor

Carnegie Mellon University

Dom´

ınguez and Raphael (DR, henceforth; 2015, this issue) have written an

interesting article that is both informative and judicious. As such, it will be

of use to researchers for years to come. But DR also offer more fundamental

critiques of methods used to evaluate anticrime policies, and we will focus our attention on

these fundamental critiques. In doing so, we will suggest areas in which we think additional

work needs to be done in assessing the costs and benefits of our criminal justice policies.

An essential element for understanding the benefits of crime-reduction policies is

determining how citizens value the reduction of crime. In assessing the value of a good,

say a Honda Accord, we can look to the marketplace to see what consumers were willing

to pay, and this forms a lower bound for the needed valuation. In contrast, when it comes

to crime, consumers are making decisions in markets in which implicit prices are opaque.

Since the seminal work of Thaler and Rosen (1976), social scientists have attempted to use

hedonic analysis to value amenities that are not traded directly in the market. DR (2015)

explain the central idea well:

The principal challenge faced by researchers striving to place a dollar value on

criminal victimization is that individuals do not directly buy and sell victim-

ization. However, consumers and producers buy and sell goods that bundle

together the services of the good with other attributes, some of which may

involve risk of injury or risk of personal victimization. For example, working

the night shift at a convenience store may entail an elevated risk of victimization

relative to working during the day. Living in a high-crime neighborhood may

Direct correspondence to Dan A. Black, University of Chicago, 1155 E. 60th Street, Suite 193, Chicago, IL 60637

(e-mail: danblack@uchicago.edu).

DOI:10.1111/1745-9133.12169 C2015 American Society of Criminology 639

Criminology & Public Policy rVolume 14 rIssue 4