Neighborhood characteristics and the spatial concentration of crime: Evidence for Bogotá

Using a unique neighborhood crime dataset for Bogotá in 2011, this study uses a spatial econometric approach and examines the role of socioeconomic and agglomeration variables in explaining the variance of crime. It uses two different types of crime, violent crime represented in homicides and property crime represented in residential burglaries. These two types of crime are then measured in non-standard crime statistics that are created as the area incidence for each crime in the neighborhood. The existence of crime hotspots in Bogotá has been shown in most of the literature, and using these non-standard crime statistics at this neighborhood level some hotspots arise again, thus validating the use of a spatial approach for these new crime statistics. The final specification includes socioeconomic, agglomeration, land-use and visual aspect variables that are then included in a SARAR model an estimated by the procedure devised by Kelejian and Prucha (2009). The resulting coefficients and marginal effects show the relevance of these crime hotspots which is similar with most previous studies. However, socioeconomic variables are significant and show the importance of age, and education. Agglomeration variables are significant and thus more densely populated areas are correlated with more crime. Interestingly, both types of crimes do not have the same significant covariates. Education and young male population have a different sign for homicide and residential burglaries. Inequality matters for homicides while higher real estate valuation matters for residential burglaries. Finally, density impacts positively both crimes.

Does the unemployment benefit institution affect the productivity of workers? evidence from a field experiment

We investigate whether and how the type of unemployment benefit institution affects productivity. We designed a field experiment to compare workers’ productivity under a welfare system, where the unemployed receive an unconditional monetary transfer, with their productivity under a workfare system, where the transfer is received conditional on the unemployed spending some time on ancillary activities. First, we find that having an unemployment benefit institution, regardless of whether it makes transfers conditional or unconditional, increases workers’ productivity. Second, we find that productivity is higher under Welfare than under Workfare. Becoming unemployed under Welfare comes at the psychological cost of a drop in self-esteem, presumably due to the shame or stigma associated with receiving an unconditional unemployment benefit. We document the empirical relevance of precisely this channel. The differences we observe in productivity suggest that this psychological cost acts as an extra nonmonetary incentive for workers under Welfare to put a higher effort in their work.

Inequality of opportunity in educational achievement in Latin America: evidence from PISA 2006-2009

We assess inequality of opportunity in educational achievement in six Latin American countries, employing two waves of PISA data (2006 and 2009). By means of a non-parametric approach using a decomposable inequality index, GE(0), we rank countries according to their degree of inequality of opportunity. We work with alternative characterizations of types: school type (public or private), gender, parental education, and combinations of those variables. We calculate incremental contributions of each set of circumstances to inequality. We provide rankings of countries based on unconditional inequalities (using conventional indices) and on conditional inequalities (EOp indices), and the two sets of rankings do not always coincide. Inequality of opportunities range from less than 1% to up to 27%, with substantial heterogeneity according to the year, the country, the subject and the specificication of circumstances. Robustness checks based on bootstrap and the use of an alternative index confirm most of the initial results.