Scholarlink

Objectives <p>Our study examines whether prioritizing vacant properties for demolition or rehab based on their criminal histories is a worthwhile endeavor in terms of reducing crime.</p> Methods <p>Using a difference-in-differences design, we analyzed the effects of demolitions and rehabs on drug, lower-level, property, violent, and total crimes in Cleveland, Ohio (2015–2017). Treatment effects were estimated at the parcel and network levels, with spatially relevant buffer sizes selected using the Network Cross K-function.</p> Results <p>Rehabs were associated with modest but statistically significant reductions in violent and drug-related crimes at the parcel level, though only for select quarters. Demolitions showed no crime reduction benefits. The analysis provided no support for prioritizing properties for remediation based on their past criminal histories.</p> Conclusions <p>Rehabs may offer greater potential for reducing crime than demolitions, though their effects are modest and context dependent. We discuss the limitations of our study and identify areas for future inquiry.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Do the criminal histories of vacant properties matter? Evidence from demolition and rehab interventions in Cleveland, Ohio

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2025年9月11日

查看全文
  • Alaina De Biasi,
  • Francisca García-Cobián Richter,
  • Michael Henderson,
  • Rose Kagawa

摘要

Objectives

Our study examines whether prioritizing vacant properties for demolition or rehab based on their criminal histories is a worthwhile endeavor in terms of reducing crime.

Methods

Using a difference-in-differences design, we analyzed the effects of demolitions and rehabs on drug, lower-level, property, violent, and total crimes in Cleveland, Ohio (2015–2017). Treatment effects were estimated at the parcel and network levels, with spatially relevant buffer sizes selected using the Network Cross K-function.

Results

Rehabs were associated with modest but statistically significant reductions in violent and drug-related crimes at the parcel level, though only for select quarters. Demolitions showed no crime reduction benefits. The analysis provided no support for prioritizing properties for remediation based on their past criminal histories.

Conclusions

Rehabs may offer greater potential for reducing crime than demolitions, though their effects are modest and context dependent. We discuss the limitations of our study and identify areas for future inquiry.