The Effects of Local Police Surges on Crime and Arrests in New York City

John M. MacDonald · Jeffrey Fagan · Amanda Geller

145 citations0/0 files storedPLoS ONE

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Policing Practices and Perceptions Criminal Justice and Penology Crime Patterns and Interventions

Abstract

The New York Police Department (NYPD) under Operation Impact deployed extra police officers to high crime areas designated as impact zones. Officers were encouraged to conduct investigative stops in these areas. City officials credited the program as one of the leading causes of New York City's low crime rate. We tested the effects of Operation Impact on reported crimes and arrests from 2004 to 2012 using a difference-in-differences approach. We used Poisson regression models to compare differences in crime and arrest counts before and after census block groups were designated as impact zones compared to census block groups in the same NYPD precincts but outside impact zones. Impact zones were significantly associated with reductions in total reported crimes, assaults, burglaries, drug violations, misdemeanor crimes, felony property crimes, robberies, and felony violent crimes. Impact zones were significantly associated with increases in total reported arrests, arrests for burglary, arrests for weapons, arrests for misdemeanor crimes, and arrests for property felony crimes. Impact zones were also significantly associated with increases in investigative stops for suspected crimes, but only the increase in stops made based on probable cause indicators of criminal behaviors were associated with crime reductions. The largest increase in investigative stops in impact zones was based on indicators of suspicious behavior that had no measurable effect on crime. The findings suggest that saturating high crime blocks with police helped reduce crime in New York City, but that the bulk of the investigative stops did not play an important role in the crime reductions. The findings indicate that crime reduction can be achieved with more focused investigative stops.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 145 citations exist upstream.

References

2004Understanding Why Crime Fell in the 1990s: Four Factors that Explain the Decline and Six that Do Not 1995General deterrent effects of police patrol in crime “hot spots”: A randomized, controlled trial 1985Using the Longitudinal Structure of Earnings to Estimate the Effect of Training Programs 1984Using the Longitudinal Structure of Earnings to Estimate the Effect of Training Programs 2004Do Police Reduce Crime? Estimates Using the Allocation of Police Forces After a Terrorist Attack 2008POLICING CRIME AND DISORDER HOT SPOTS: A RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL*1998Turnaround: how America's top cop reversed the crime epidemic 2003REFORMING TO PRESERVE: COMPSTAT AND STRATEGIC PROBLEM SOLVING IN AMERICAN POLICING*

Cited by

2019Hot spots policing of small geographic areas effects on crime 2021Reducing Crime Through Environmental Design: Evidence from a Randomized Experiment of Street Lighting in New York City 2017Does Stop and Search Deter Crime? Evidence From Ten Years of London-wide Data 2019Police Presence, Rapid Response Rates, and Crime Prevention 2020

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.