15.02.2014 Views

The Benefits to Taxpayers from Increases in Students - RAND ...

The Benefits to Taxpayers from Increases in Students - RAND ...

The Benefits to Taxpayers from Increases in Students - RAND ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Educational Atta<strong>in</strong>ment and Spend<strong>in</strong>g on the Corrections System 63<br />

<strong>in</strong>sight <strong>in</strong><strong>to</strong> the nature of this social benefit and potentially provid<strong>in</strong>g guidance <strong>to</strong> more<br />

targeted policies.<br />

We use the Sourcebook of Crim<strong>in</strong>al Justice Statistics, 2003 (Pas<strong>to</strong>re and Maguire,<br />

2003) <strong>to</strong> compute the per-<strong>in</strong>mate costs of <strong>in</strong>carceration. Accord<strong>in</strong>gly, operat<strong>in</strong>g the<br />

state prison system costs roughly $30,000 per prisoner per year (Table 5.2). Similarly,<br />

the local jail system requires expenditures on the order of $27,000 per year per <strong>in</strong>mate.<br />

We assume that sav<strong>in</strong>gs <strong>from</strong> education occur because an <strong>in</strong>dividual with more education<br />

is less likely <strong>to</strong> be <strong>in</strong>carcerated. In other words, cost per <strong>in</strong>mate is assumed <strong>to</strong> be<br />

<strong>in</strong>dependent of an <strong>in</strong>mate’s education level.<br />

For state prisons, we use the 1997 adm<strong>in</strong>istration of the Survey of Inmates <strong>in</strong><br />

State and Federal Correctional Facilities <strong>to</strong> estimate the <strong>in</strong>carcerated population for<br />

each education-age-race/ethnicity-gender comb<strong>in</strong>ation. We also use the 1997 Current<br />

Population Survey <strong>to</strong> estimate general population counts <strong>in</strong> each correspond<strong>in</strong>g subgroup.<br />

Because the Current Population Survey does not <strong>in</strong>clude <strong>in</strong>carcerated persons,<br />

we calculate the probability of <strong>in</strong>carceration as the number of prisoners <strong>in</strong> each population<br />

category divided by the sum of the general population and the number of prisoners<br />

for that category.<br />

We follow the same procedure for county and municipal jails, us<strong>in</strong>g the 2002<br />

Survey of Inmates of Local Jails and, correspond<strong>in</strong>gly, the 2002 Current Population<br />

Survey.<br />

<strong>The</strong> Effect of Educational Atta<strong>in</strong>ment on Crime Rates<br />

Research on the <strong>in</strong>terplay between education and crime dates back at least three decades<br />

(Ehrlich, 1975), although a demonstration of a causal effect of education on crim<strong>in</strong>al<br />

activity is rather recent (for <strong>in</strong>stance, Lochner and Moretti, 2004). Scholars have long<br />

conceptualized why and how education would affect crime and have analyzed nationally<br />

representative data <strong>to</strong> f<strong>in</strong>d evidence of the relationship. Freeman (1996) noted that,<br />

as of 1993, over two-thirds of <strong>in</strong>carcerated men lacked a high school diploma. Pettit<br />

and Western (2004) concluded that <strong>in</strong>carceration risks are “highly stratified by education.”<br />

Not surpris<strong>in</strong>gly, prison <strong>in</strong>mates average less than 12 years of school<strong>in</strong>g. Analyses<br />

of adm<strong>in</strong>istrative data on arrests and survey data us<strong>in</strong>g reports <strong>from</strong> the <strong>in</strong>mates themselves<br />

commonly <strong>in</strong>dicate large differences <strong>in</strong> crime rates among groups of people with<br />

different levels of education.<br />

Basically, education reduces the chance that an <strong>in</strong>dividual will engage <strong>in</strong> crim<strong>in</strong>al<br />

activity, s<strong>in</strong>ce education adds <strong>to</strong> the <strong>in</strong>dividual’s human capital. <strong>The</strong> desirable effects of<br />

<strong>in</strong>creased human capital occur <strong>in</strong> a number of different yet complementary and <strong>in</strong>teract<strong>in</strong>g<br />

channels.<br />

First, a person with more education is less likely <strong>to</strong> be unemployed. An <strong>in</strong>dividual<br />

with a legitimate job has less <strong>in</strong>centive <strong>to</strong> engage <strong>in</strong> crime, everyth<strong>in</strong>g else constant.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!