What causes violent crime?

This study uses a new data set of crime ratesfor a large sample of countriesfor the period 1970- 1994, based on information from the United Nations World Crime Surveys, to ana/yze the determinants ofnational homicide and robbery rates. A simple model of the incentives to commit crimes is proposed, which explicit/y considers possible causes of the persistence of crime over time (criminal inertia). Several econometric mode/s are estimated, attempting to capture the . determinonts of crime rates across countries and over time. The empirical mode/s are first run for cross-sections and then applie'd to panel data. The former focus on erplanatory variables that do not change markedly over time, while the panel data techniques consider both the eflect of the business cyc1e (i.e., GDP growth rate) on the crime rate and criminal inertia (accountedfor by the inclusion of the /agged crime rate as an explanatory variable). The panel data techniques a/so consider country-specific eflects, the joint endogeneity of some of the erplanatory variables, and lhe existence of some types of measurement e"ors aJjlicting the crime data. The results showthat increases in income inequality raise crime rates, dete"ence eflects are significant, crime tends to be counter-cyclical, and criminal inertia is significant even after controlling for other potential determinants of homicide and robbery rates.

The impact of public capital and public investment on economic growth: an empirical investigation

in this anicle we measure the impact of public sector capital and investment on economic growth. Initially, traditional growth accounting regressions are run for a cross-country data set. A simple endogenous growth model is then constructed in order to take into account the determinants of labor, private capital and public capital. In both cases, public capital is a separate argument of the production function. An additional data-set constructed with quarterly American data was used in the estimations of the growth mode!. The results indicate lhat public capital and public investment play a significant role in determining growth rates and have a significant impact on capital and labor returns. Furthermore, the impact of public investment on productivity growth was found to be positive and always significant for bolh samples. Hence. in a fully optimizing modelo we confmn previous results in the literature that lhe failure of public investment to keep pace with output growlh during the Seventies and Eighties may have played a major role in the slowdown of lhe productivity growth in the period. Anolher main outcome concems the output elasticity wilh respect to public capital. The coefficiem estimates are always positive and significant but magnitudes depend on each of lhe two data set used.

Testing production functions used in empirical growth studies

We estimate and test two alternative functional forms representing the aggregate production function for a panel of countries: the extended neoclassical growth model, and a mincerian formulation of schooling-returns to skills. Estimation is performed using instrumentalvariable techniques, and both functional forms are confronted using a Box-Cox test, since human capital inputs enter in levels in the mincerian specification and in logs in the extended neoclassical growth model. Our evidence rejects the extended neoclassical growth model in favor of the mincerian specification, with an estimated capital share of about 42%, a marginal return to education of about 7.5% per year, and an estimated productivity growth of about 1.4% per year. Differences in productivity cannot be disregarded as an explanation of why output per worker varies so much across countries: a variance decomposition exercise shows that productivity alone explains 54% of the variation in output per worker across countries.