Writing in the New York Times, Spencer Bokat-Lindell argues that some of the most promising ideas for reducing crime “work more indirectly” than “interventions — police-based or not — that promise to prevent crimes on an individual and relatively immediate basis.” Here’s the TL; DR:
“A 2002 meta-analysis of 13 studies found that improved street lighting can decrease crime by 20 percent … In Philadelphia, cleaning up vacant lots produced a 22 percent decrease in burglaries, a 29 percent reduction in gun violence and a much improved sense of community safety …. the Readi program in Chicago, which attempts to identify young men at risk of gun violence and offers them employment, job training and cognitive behavioral therapy … In a randomized controlled trial carried out in Chicago, teenagers who were given summer jobs were 43 percent less likely to be arrested for violent crimes for over a year after their jobs ended… [H]ousing can be an important factor too: In Denver, a five-year randomized control trial of a program that provides housing subsidies to people at risk of homelessness found a 40 percent reduction in arrests.”