(...) the most robust and significant results in relation to the core variables are the following: First, the business cycle effect (...) is statistically significant and shows that, as expected, crime is counter-cyclical; stagnant economic activity induces heightened homicide rates. Second, higher income inequality (...) increases the incidence of homicide rate (...) In addition, the combination of significant effects of the business cycle and income distribution tells us that the rate of poverty reduction may be associated with declines in crime rates. Third, higher drug related activity (...) induces a higher incidence of intentional homicide (...) Fourth, the lagged homicide rate has a positive and significant impact on current rates, which is evidence of criminal inertia (...)
When a country's educational stand is proxied by the secondary enrollment rate, its effect on homicide rates is significantly positive. However, when the average years of schooling in the adult population is used to proxy for the country's educational position, it has a significant crime-reducing impact. The contrast between the results obtained using secondary enrollment rates and average years of schooling may indicate that the efforts to educate the young may not reduce crime immediately but eventually lead to a reduction of crime, especially of the violent
In regressions (4) and (5) we examine the effect of the strength of the police and judicial system in deterring crime. The proxies we use are, in turn, the rate of policemen per inhabitant in the country and the homicide conviction rate (...) we conclude that the negative and significant coefficient on both proxies means that a stronger police and judicial system does lead to a lower incidence of homicides.