By Birzhan Batkeyev David R. DeRemer

We find that air pollution increases crime in a city that ranks in the worst two percentiles worldwide for dirty winter air. Our identification strategy employs distinct geographic features of Almaty, Kazakhstan: cleaner mountain winds and frequent temperature inversions. Using these variables to instrument for PM2.5 air pollution, we estimate a PM2.5 elasticity of the expected crime rate more than four times as large as similar estimates from cleaner cities. Among crime types, we estimate statistically significant effects of air pollution on property crime, and we find no evidence of an effect on violent crime. These results are consistent with theory that air pollution induces higher discounting rather than aggression. We extend this theory and find that whether air pollution has distinct effects on crimes of varying severity depends on whether the population is more heterogenous in the outside option or in the discount factor. Using microdata on crime severity, we find statistically significant increases in both major and minor crime rates from air pollution, and we fail to reject common PM2.5 elasticities of minor and major crime rates. The greater scale of major crimes implies that they contribute more to the total crime rate increase from air pollution. 

Accepted manuscript for the Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization 2023.  

By Marie Henshaw, Chelsea Arnold, Rajan Darjee, James RP Ogloff and Jonathan A Cloug

Recent research suggests that child sexual abuse material (CSAM) offenders have distinct characteristics and intervention needs when compared to contact sexual offenders. As such, many sexual offender treatment programs may not be suitable for CSAM offenders without a history of contact offences. This paper describes the development of the CEM-COPE (Coping with Child Exploitation Material Use) Program. We discuss CSAM offender characteristics, recidivism rates and treatment considerations, before outlining the rationale, specifications and underpinnings of the CEM-COPE Program. Challenges in this research area and considerations for future research are also addressed.

Trends & issues in crime and criminal justice no. 607. Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology. 2020. 14p.

By Fredrik Kärrholm, Peter Neyroud & John Smaaland

Research Question -  Which method for deriving a Crime Harm Index (Policing 10:171 183, 2016) for Sweden from criminal justice sources offers the best evidence for providing a sensitive indicator of differences in harm levels across offence categories? Data The number of days of imprisonment for each offence category associated with five different kinds of scales were extracted and compared: consensus by an expert panel of judges, the statutory maximum penalties, statutory minimum penalties, the average of maximum and minimum penalties and the average of actual sentences imposed in a recent time period for each crime type. Unlike the UK, for which the Cambridge Crime Harm Index draws on sentencing guidelines, Sweden has no such guidelines to offer. Methods - The data were compared for sensitivity defined as the difference in length of imprisonment days between high and low severity crimes, as well as other characteristics of the data sources. Findings - Given the available alternatives, the sentencing data average of actual sentences handed down by crime type provided the greatest reliability and sensitivity across the penalties for offences of high and low severity. Applying that method to both crime trends and crime mapping produces substantially different results from counting all crimes with equal weight and can be used by police and others to allocate resources with greater precision in relation to harm prevention. Conclusions - On both empirical and normative grounds, the average sentences in a recent time period for each crime category provides the most sensitive and democratic method for establishing an officially recognized Swedish Crime Harm Index.  

Cambridge Journal of Evidence-Based Policing 4(1): 15–33. 2021.