More crime in cities? On the scaling laws of crime and the inadequacy of per capita rankings -- a cross-country study

Abstract

Crime rates per capita are used virtually everywhere to rank and compare cities. However, their usage relies on a strong linear assumption that crime increases at the same pace as the number of people in a region. In this paper, we demonstrate that using per capita rates to rank cities can produce substantially different rankings from rankings adjusted for population size. We analyze the population-crime relationship in cities across 12 countries and assess the impact of per capita measurements on crime analyses, depending on the type of offense. In most countries, we find that theft increases superlinearly with population size, whereas burglary increases linearly. Our results reveal that per capita rankings can differ from population-adjusted rankings such that they disagree in approximately half of the top 10 most dangerous cities in the data analysed here. Hence, we advise caution when using crime rates per capita to rank cities and recommend evaluating the linear plausibility before doing so.

arXiv comment21 pages, 5 figures

References in corpus (12)

• Constructing cities, deconstructing scaling laws
• Paradoxical Interpretations of Urban Scaling Laws
• Distance to the scaling law: a useful approach for unveiling relationships between crime and urban metrics
• Is this scaling nonlinear?
• Explaining the Prevalence, Scaling and Variance of Urban Phenomena
• Scaling: Lost in the smog
• A.-M. Guerry's Moral Statistics of France: Challenges for Multivariable Spatial Analysis
• Scaling laws in the dynamics of crime growth rate
• Rural to urban population density scaling of crime and property transactions in English and Welsh Parliamentary Constituencies
• The hypothesis of urban scaling: formalization, implications and challenges
• Modeling the origin of urban output scaling laws
• Spatio-temporal variations in the urban rhythm: the travelling waves of crime