Abstract

This paper is the first study to examine whether capital punishment’s impact is different among U.S. states. Studies by economists, including myself, have typically used large data sets of all 50 states or all U.S. counties to show that executions, on average, deter murders. In contrast, studies by sociologists, criminologists, and law professors have often examined only one or a few jurisdictions and usually find no evidence of deterrence. Using a well-known data set and commonly-used empirical methods, I find that the impact of executions differs substantially among the states. Executions deter murders in six states, executions have no effect on murders in eight states, and executions increase murders in thirteen states. Additional empirical analyses indicate that there is a threshold effect that explains the differing impacts of capital punishment. On average, the states with deterrence execute many more people than do the states where executions increase crime or have no effect. The results of this paper help to explain the contrasting conclusions of earlier papers: the deterrence or no-deterrence conclusion depends on the jurisdiction examined. My results also have important policy implications: to achieve deterrence, states must execute several people. If states are unwilling to establish such a large execution program, it may be better to perform no executions.

Disciplines

Criminal Law | Criminal Procedure | Law and Economics | Law Enforcement and Corrections

Date of this Version

October 2004