acase@tulane.edu / I present three essays in applied microeconomics. In the first, I use police records to explore whether changing self defense policies, known as Stand Your Ground, have differential effects across race. I find that implementing these policies leads to an additional 1.611 monthly killings of black Alleged Perpetrators of Crimes, 70.8 percent of whom are killed by black citizens, while only causing an additional 0.345 monthly killings of white Alleged Perpetrators, 97.7 percent of whom are killed by white citizens. In the second, I examine the causal relationship between waterborne uranium exposure and birth outcomes in order to more fully understand the external costs of the activities that increase the probability of human exposure to uranium. I find that waterborne uranium contamination does not cause an observable decrease in human capital endowment proxies. In the third, I estimate the national average passive use value for Alaskan National Parks. I find that respondents are willing to pay $115 to $409 for a 5 percent expansion of the Denali National Park. / 1 / Michael Steven Spanbauer

In 2012, the fatal shooting of Trayvon Martin brought national attention to Florida’s Stand Your Ground (SYG) law. As of 2012, more than 20 states have enacted SYG laws. Previous studies suggest that these laws increase homicide, particularly justifiable homicide. However, these studies ignore race and/or gender. This study seeks to fill this gap in the literature by examining the effect of SYG laws on the number of homicide and justifiable homicide victims and offenders of a given race or gender. Using data from the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Supplementary Homicide Reports between 2000 and 2012, we create a generalized least squares model with random and fixed effects and controls for time-varying state effects and year fixed effects to empirically examine this impact. We find that while SYG laws have no effect on the number of homicide victims or offenders of any race or gender, they significantly increase the number of black and male justifiable homicide victims by 32 percent and 26 percent respectively and the number of white and female justifiable homicide offenders by 34 and 25 percent respectively. These findings suggest that, in terms of justifiable homicide, SYG laws differentially affect racial and gender groups.

In 2005, Florida enacted the Justifiable Use of Deadly Force legislation, known as Stand Your Ground (SYG) laws, in response to the Workman case. The aftermath of that case led to the expansion of the laws that removed the duty to retreat principle and allowed citizens to employ deadly force when imbued with fear. The SYG laws as written appeared to imply state-sanctioned violence, with an increase in homicides, coupled with racial disparities. This study employed a quantitative inquiry with a causal-comparative design to explore whether a relationship existed between racial socialization and fear of crime in SYG states compared to non-SYG states, using the lens of critical race theory, contact theory and policy learning theory. The study included 112 participants recruited through social media, they were ages 18 years and older, from Florida, Maryland, North Carolina, and Virginia who had no connections to an SYG case. The data were analyzed using analysis of covariance and indicated statistical significance between the state of residency and an individual's decision to fight back when presented with a scenario similar to the Trayvon Martin case. The results also yielded a statistical significance between gender, ethnicity, and an individual'€™s decision to fight back in the SYG scenario. The findings of this study confirm that the state of residency may impact the decision to employ deadly force or fight back. However, other results are not consistent with previous research. This study provides legislatures with a means for reforming the SYG rhetoric, as well as decrease the public'€™s misconceptions about the SYG laws.

Thesis advisor: Arthur Lewbel / This dissertation consists of three related chapters. A unifying feature throughout all is a focus on the issues in the economics of crime, specifically in how different factors affect different types of index crimes. The first chapter, a collaboration with Abby Hong, examines the role of the stand-your-ground law in driving first-degree and second-degree murder rates. The second chapter, a collaboration with Benjamin Ferri, examines how the two ends of the income distribution impact emotional gain crime and financial gain crime. Both chapters one and two examine how different variables affect crime, and both have a theoretical part and an empirical part. The third chapter looks into measurement issues in crime. Specifically, it considers the impact of a change in data collection methods on the Uniform Crime Report (UCR). The first chapter, “Self-defense Regulations and Crime: Evidence from the Stand Your Ground Law,” provides a theoretical model of crime escalation when governments relax self-defense regulations. We then test the model with an empirical analysis of the “stand-your-ground” (SYG) laws’ impact on planned and unplanned murders. The game theoretical model shows that relaxing self-defense regulations can increase the arming of crime victims. It also increases the arming of offenders in crimes that lead to unplanned murders. If planned murder offenders are over-confident, then their level of arms increases as well. We then use a difference-in-differences (DiD) model to test these implications. We find that consistent with the model, SYG laws in the US increase the planned murder rate by 7.6% and the unplanned murder rate by 10.4%, on average. Also, the effect size increases over time, highlighting the persistence of the impact. The paper illustrates how interactions between victims and offenders result in unintended consequences of self-defense regulations. It also encourages policymakers to take into account criminal behavior when making policy decisions. The second chapter, “The Distinct Roles of Poverty and Higher Earnings in Motivating Crime,” develops a new model that articulates how Poverty (the lower tail of the earnings distribution) and Earnings (the upper tail) enter into equilibrium crime rates. In our model, individuals in Poverty have less to lose in the context of criminal punishment, so are less averse to committing crimes in general. The presence of high Earnings (therefore things worth stealing) heightens the expected gain to offenders per crime - but specifically in terms of financial gain, not emotional gain. We estimate our model on a comprehensive panel of U.S. Commuting Zones (1980-2016), deploying novel Shift-Share instruments to correct for reverse causality (of crime on the earnings distribution). Corroborating our hypothesis, we find that high Earnings plays a much larger role in driving crimes that yield financial gain to the offender (various forms of theft) than it does for crimes of emotional gain; while Poverty is a driving force equally across both types of crime. In each case, not accounting for reverse causality would underestimate both effects, often by more than double. The third and final chapter, “Crime Reporting Standards and Reported Crime,” This paper explores data discrepancies in the Uniform Crime Report (UCR) before and after the adoption and conversion of the National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS). The FBI starts publishing the UCR in 1930 to understand crime trends in the United States. The UCR is published under the Summary Reporting System (SRS) until the 1990s, when the NIBRS is developed to collect more detailed data. The NIBRS is then converted to “synthetic SRS” and concatenated to historical SRS data when it enters the UCR. It uses a staggered event study design based on the year in which the agency switches from the SRS to the NIBRS. I find two factors that contribute to a large and statistically significant increase in reported crime for agencies that adopt the NIBRS compared with agencies that have not: the data conversion process and a change in reporting practices. When I convert the NIBRS to synthetic SRS based on published criteria, I observe a smaller and statistically insignificant increase in assault cases. However, this alternative conversion process does not improve the difference-in-differences (DiD) effects for total crime, murder, robbery, burglary, and theft, highlighting the fact that data from the NIBRS is more complete and more timely. / Thesis (PhD) — Boston College, 2023. / Submitted to: Boston College. Graduate School of Arts and Sciences. / Discipline: Economics.

In 2005, Florida became the first state to pass the heavily National Rifle Association, NRA, supported "Stand Your Ground" law. The most notable components of the law were abolishing the duty to retreat for someone who is not engaged in lawful activity and is in a place where he has the right to be, granting civil and criminal immunity to those using lawful force, and presuming that a person who is attacked in his dwelling, residence, and occupied vehicle has a reasonable fear of death or great bodily harm. The law was subject to a substantial amount of criticism because it was a significant departure from Florida's more than a century old common law principles regarding self-defense. Possibly due to Florida not having any precedents for these cases, Florida courts would have conflicting decisions in these matters and law enforcement agencies would enforce the law differently in similar incidents. Regardless of the issues faced by Florida, over twenty states would adopt their own versions. A significant number of these states are in the Southeastern region of the United States and are neighbors to Florida or border Florida's neighbors, such as Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Louisiana. Because of this interesting pattern, the study examines the idea of southern culture playing a role in the passage of "Stand Your Ground" via the "Culture of Honor" theory and the researcher decided to use these jurisdictions and Florida as this study's sample. The researcher also wanted to include these jurisdictions because the existing "Stand Your Ground" literature mainly focuses on Florida and the researcher wanted to add something new to the discussion. The intent of this study to examine Florida's influence on the other jurisdictions, note any commonalties between the statutes of the jurisdictions, compare justifiable homicide statistics for the jurisdictions that provided such data, predict the future of these laws, and explore the "Culture of Honor" Theory as a possible explanation for "Stand Your Ground" laws in the states discussed. The study accomplished these goals by examining how each jurisdiction handled self-defense before "Stand Your Ground," looking at the motives behind the jurisdictions adopting "Stand Your Ground," comparing justifiable homicides in the four jurisdictions that provided them in the years immediate preceding the passage of "Stand Your Ground" to the subsequent years, and looking at amendments and proposals that were presented after the passage of "Stand Your Ground." The results uncovered that all the jurisdictions, except for Georgia and Tennessee, show a very strong Florida influence based on their similarities to Florida's law and legislators in the jurisdictions clearly mentioning Florida as their inspiration for proposing their own versions. In the jurisdictions that provided justifiable homicides, all showed an increase in the number of justifiable homicides after the passage of "Stand Your Ground." The jurisdictions in this study have also shown a strong resistance to any amendments or the complete repeal of this law. Therefore, any drastic amendment or the complete repeal seems unlikely in the future. The "Culture of Honor" Theory does explain why a few of the jurisdictions in the study adopted "Stand Your Ground" but Florida and the NRA's influence explain why others chose this course of action.

No description available.

No description available.

A person's level of fear of crime or even their perceived fear of crime can affect how they view the Stand Your Ground Law and whether it is seen as beneficial or harmful to the general public. I begin with a discussion of the Stand Your Ground Law. Next, I report on research that examines the fear of crime and how it may shape opinions on the law as well as an individual’s level of fear. My research explores the relationship of these variables using survey data. I examine the attitudes of college students regarding their fear of crime to explore variables that impact their levels of fear and their opinions regarding the Stand Your Ground Law.