SUÇUN EKONOMİK ANALİZİ: GENEL BİR DEĞERLENDİRME

Yıl 2008, Sayı: 20, - , 20.06.2015

Mustafa Ünver İbrahim Bakırtaş

Öz

This paper purposes to analyze crime and its general components with basic equipments of economics. Crime’s economic models in crime literature guide to achieve this destination. Existing literature in this paper contains crime supply-demand, economic models of crime and costs of crime. Exiting models and working papers show that economic indicators adjust crime supply. Also, costs of crime adjust economy as well. There are five sections in working. First of all is introduction; second section contains crime supply, demand and equilibrium; next section is generated by analyzed models from economics tools of crime. Fourth section defines costs of crime. In the last section, a general evaluation is made in light of given literature

Anahtar Kelimeler

Crime, Supply of Crime, Social Strain Theory, Social Control, Costs of Crime

SUÇUN EKONOMİK ANALİZİ: GENEL BİR DEĞERLENDİRME

Öz

Bu çalışma; suç ve suç bileşenlerinin, ekonomi biliminin temel araçlarıyla analizini amaçlamaktadır. Bu amaca ulaşmada, suçun ekonomik modellerinden yararlanılmıştır. Mevcut literatür temelinde hazırlanan çalışmada suç arzına ve talebine, suçun ekonomik modellerine ve suçun maliyetlerine yer verilmiştir. Suçun ekonomik modelleri, ekonomik göstergelerin suç arzını belirlediğine işaret etmektedir. Ayrıca bu modellerde suç maliyetlerinin de ekonomiyi etkilediğine vurgu yapılmaktadır. Genel bir literatür değerlendirilmesi niteliğindeki çalışma beş kısımdan oluşmaktadır. Birinci kısımda girişe; ikinci kısımda suç arzı, talebi ve dengesi kavramlarına; üçüncü kısımda suçu ekonomik modellerine, dördüncü kısımda ise literatür bağlamında suçun bireysel ve toplumsal maliyetlerine yer verilmiştir. Son kısımda ise mevcut literatür ışığında genel bir değerlendirme yapılmıştır

Anahtar Kelimeler

Suç, Suç Arzı, Sosyal Gerginlik Teorisi, Sosyal Kontrol, Suçun Maliyetleri

Kaynakça

• Arvanites, Thomas M. ve Defina Robert H. (2006), “Business Cycles and Street Crime”, Criminology, 44(1): 139-164.
• Bayley, David H. (1978), “The Future of Social Control in Japan”, Pacific Affairs, 51(1): 24-40.
• Becker, Gary S. (1968), “Crime and Punishment: An Economic Approach”, Journal of Political Economy, 73: 169-217.
• Becsi, Zsolt (1994), “Economics and Crime in the States”, Economic Review-Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta, 84(1): 38-56.
• Berk, Richard A.; Lenihan Kenneth J. ve Rossi, Peter H. (1980), ”Crime and Poverty: Some Experimental Evidence from Ex-Offenders”, American Sociological Review, 45(5): 766-786.
• Carnis, Laurent (2005), “Coase and Economics of Crime”, New Perspectives on Political Economy, 1(2):1-31.
• Clotfelter, Charles T. (1977), “Public Services, Private Substitutes, and the Demand for Protection against Crime”, The American Economic Review, 67(5): 867-877.
• Cohen, Mark A. (2005), The Cost of Crime and Justice. New York: Routledge, Taylor and Francis Group.
• Cohen, Lawrence E.; Kluegel James R. ve Land, Kenneth C. (1981), “Social Inequality and Predatory Criminal Victimization: An Exposition and Test of a Formal Theory”, American Sociological Review, 46(5): 505- 524.
• Cohen, Mark A., Ted R. Miller, ve Shelli B. Rossman. (1994). “The costs and consequences of violent behavior in the United States”, In Understanding and preventing violence, Volume 4: Consequences and control, (Albert J. Reiss, Jr., and Jeffrey A. Roth tarafından düzenlenmiştir.) Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.
• Cohen, Mark A. (2000), “Measuring the Costs and Benefits of Crime and Justice Justice”, www..ncjrs.org/criminal_justice2000/vol_4/04f.pdf. 2000, 4: 263-316.
• Donohue, John J. (2007), “Economic Models of Crime and Punishment”, Social Research, 74(2): 379-412.
• Doyle, Joanne M.; Ahmet, Ehsan ve Horn Robert N. (1999), “The Effects of Labor Markets and Income Inequality on Crime: Evidence from Panel Data”, Southern Economic Journal, 65(4): 717-738.
• Ehrlich, Isaac (1973), “Participation in Illegitimate Activities: A Theorical and Emprical Investigation”, The Journal of Political Economy, 81(3): 521-565.
• Ehrlich, Isaac (1981), “On the Usefulness of Controlling Individuals: An Economic Analysis of Rehabilitation, Incapacitation and Deterrence”, The American Economic Review, 71(3): 307-322.
• Ehrlich, Isaac (1996), “Crime, Punishment, and the Market for Offenses”, The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 10(1): 43-67.
• Evans, Robert (1977), “Changing Labor Markets and Criminal Behavior in Japan”, The Journal of Asian Studies, 36(3): 477-489.
• Fadaei-Tehrani, Reza ve Green, Thomas M. (2002), “Crime and Society”, International Journal of Social Economics, 29(9/10): 781-795.
• Fajnzylber, Pablo; Lederman, Daniel ve Loayza, Norman (2000), “Crime and Victimization: An Economic Perspective”, Economia, 1(1): 219- 302.
• Fleisher, Belton M. (1963), “The Effect of Unemployment on Juvenile Delinquency”, The Journal of Political Economy, 71(6): 543-555.
• Gibbons, Steve (2004), “The Costs of Urban Property Crime”, The Economic Journal, 114: 441-463.
• Glaeser, Edward L.; Sacerdote, Bruce ve Scheinkman, José A. (1996), “Crime and Social Interactions”, The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 111(2): 507-548.
• Greenberg, David F. (1985), “Age, Crime, and Social Explanation”, The America Journal of Sociology, 91(1): 1-21.
• Grogger, Jeff (1998), “Market Wages and Youth Crime”, Journal of Labor Economics, 16(4): 756-791.
• Hoffman, Joan (2003), “Legal Responsiveness: A Contribution to Structural Theory of Economic Crime”, International Journal of Social Economics, 30(3): 255-274.
• Lochner, Lance ve Moretti, Enrico (2004), “The Effect of Education on Crime: Evidence from Prison Inmates, Arrests, and Self-Reports”, The American Economic Review, 94(1): 155-189.
• Öncü, Fatih ve diğerleri (2007), “Sosyoekonomik Etmenlerin ve Sosyodemografik Özelliklerin Psikotik Olguların Suç İşlemesinde Etkisi”, Türk Psikiyatri Dergisi, 18(1): 4-12.
• Pazarlıoğlu, M. Vedat ve Turgutlu, Timur (2007), “Gelir, İşsizlik ve Suç: Türkiye Üzerine Bir İnceleme”, Finans Politik ve Ekonomik Yorumlar, 44(513): 63-70.
• Piliavin, Irving ve diğerleri (1986), “Crime, Deterrence and, Rational Choice”, American Sociological Review, 51(1): 101-119.
• Pudney, Stephen; Deadman, Derek ve Pyle, David (2000), “The Relationship between Crime, Punishment and Economic Conditions: Is Reliable Inference Possible When Crimes Are Under-Recorded?”, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 163(1): 81-97.
• Riemer, Svend (1942), “Theory and Quantitative Analysis in Criminological Research”, The American Journal of Sociology, 48(2): 188-201.
• Sah, Raaj K. (1991), “Social Osmosis and Patterns of Crime”, The Journal of Political Economy, 99(6): 1272-1295.
• Shavit, Yossi ve Rattner, Arye (1988), “Age, Crime, and Early Life Course”, The American Journal of Sociology, 93(6): 1457-1470.
• Sherman, Lawrance W.; Smith, Douglas A.; Schmidt Janell D. ve Rogan Dennis P. (1992), “Crime, Punishment, and Stake in Conformity: Legal and Informal Control of Domestic Violence”, American Sociological Review, 57(5): 680-690.
• Tella, Rafael Di; Schargrodsky, Ernesto, (2004), “Do Police Reduce Crime Estimates Using The Allocation of Police ForcesAfter a Terrorist Attack”, The American Economic Review, 94(1): 115-133.
• Welsh, Brandon C. (2000), “Economic Analysis of Crime Prevention”, International Centre for the Prevention of Crime and the National Crime Prevention Centre’in düzenlediği Consultation on Cost-Benefit Analyses of Crime Prevention Programs’da yayınlanan bildiri, Ottowa, Canada, January 24-25.
• Witte, Ann Dryden ve Witt, Robert (2000), “Crime Causation: Economic Theories”, (Preprint, 2000-07-19, Encyclopedia of Crime and Justice).
• htpp://www.econ.survey.ac.uk/WorkingPapers/econ300.pdf, 27/12/2007.
• http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2006/documents/offensedefinitions.pdf, 03/01/2008.