University of New Mexico UNM Digital Repository Economics ETDs Electronic Theses and Dissertations 8-27-2009 Park Amenities and Crime: Do Neighborhood Parks Contribute to Crime? Elizabeth Cota Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/econ_etds Recommended Citation Cota, Elizabeth. "Park Amenities and Crime: Do Neighborhood Parks Contribute to Crime?." (2009). https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/econ_etds/36 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Electronic Theses and Dissertations at UNM Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Economics ETDs by an authorized administrator of UNM Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. PARK AMENITIES AND CRIME: DO NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS CONTRIBUTE TO CRIME? BY Elizabeth Cota PREVIOUS DEGREES B.B.A., Economics, Kennesaw State University, 2006 THESIS Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts Economics The University of New Mexico Albuquerque, New Mexico July, 2009 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I warmly acknowledge the guidance given me by my co-chairs Dr. Krause and Dr. Thacher. Dr. Krause consistently guided and supported me as I worked as her assistant, and she was also a source of encouragement in my professional and personal writings. Dr. Thacher has an uncanny knack for pushing me to achieve more and to learn more simultaneously. I’m proud of how this paper has grown under her guidance. I would also like to thank my final chairperson, Dr. Chermak. Without her enthusiasm, constant energy, and encouragement economics would be a heck of a lot more difficult. I have to thank my husband, Keith, for the roof over my head, my car, my motorcycle, and all of the things that most full-time college students don’t have, including love. iii PARK AMENITIES AND CRIME: DO NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS CONTRIBUTE TO CRIME? BY ELIZABETH COTA ABSTRACT OF THESIS Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts Economics The University of New Mexico Albuquerque, New Mexico July, 2009 PARK AMENITIES AND CRIME: DO NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS CONTRIBUTE TO CRIME? by Elizabeth Cota B.B.A., Economics, Kennesaw State University, 2006 M.A. Economics, University of New Mexico, 2009 ABSTRACT Municipal parks are often assumed to be associated with crime, but if parks do foster crime, the specific relationships are unclear. Park data were collected for a national and a city sample, recognizing four typical amenities in parks: sports, family, ornamental, and undeveloped. These four variables were regressed on eight different categories of crime for both samples. Percent male, percent aged fifteen to twenty-four, and percent white were used as control variables. Given the expected signs on the control variables, the city sample provided more likely results. In that sample, parks with sports, family, and ornamental amenities were associated with an increase in seven of the eight crimes. Undeveloped space showed no significant relationship to crime. The city sample results were used to create a framework for park development decision-makers. Considering samples of the existing literature on parks externalities and on the costs of crime to victims, the potential gains from particular park amenities are compared to the new victim costs associated with those amenities. This analysis shows sports amenities to be unfavorable, while victim costs associated with the family and ornamental amenities may be offset by gains to housing. Undeveloped space is favored in this framework. v TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 1.................................................................................................... 1 Introduction............................................................................................................... 1 Chapter 2.................................................................................................... 4 Literature Review: Parks.......................................................................................... 4 Literature Review: Crime......................................................................................... 6 Chapter 3...................................................................................................11 Theory...................................................................................................................... 11 Empirical Model...................................................................................................... 14 Chapter 4...................................................................................................16 Empirical Analysis .................................................................................................. 16 National Data........................................................................................................... 16 National Analysis: Murder................................................................................... 22 National Analysis: Rape....................................................................................... 23 National Analysis: Larceny.................................................................................. 24 National Analysis: Additional Comments............................................................. 24 National Versus Denver Analysis ........................................................................... 25 Denver Data............................................................................................................. 27 Denver Analysis: Murder ..................................................................................... 29 Denver Analysis: Sexual Assault.......................................................................... 30 Denver Analysis: Aggravated Assault................................................................... 31 Denver Analysis: Burglary ................................................................................... 32 Denver Analysis: Larceny .................................................................................... 33 vi Denver Analysis: Auto Theft ................................................................................ 34 Denver Analysis: Arson........................................................................................ 35 Denver Analysis: Additional Comments............................................................... 35 Analysis Summary: Denver and National.............................................................. 36 Chapter 5...................................................................................................41 Application .............................................................................................................. 41 Chapter 6...................................................................................................46 Summary ................................................................................................................. 46 Appendices ................................................................................................48 Appendix A. National Data..................................................................................... 48 Appendix B. National Results, n=42..................................................................... 134 Appendix C.1 Denver Data................................................................................... 138 Appendix C.2 Denver Park Map .......................................................................... 146 Appendix C.3 Denver Neighborhoods Map ......................................................... 147 Appendix C.4 Denver 2001 Neighborhood Crime Statistics................................ 148 Appendix D. Denver Results, n=65....................................................................... 152 References ...............................................................................................156 vii Chapter 1 Introduction Park systems across the United States provide physical, social, and spiritual inspiration to surrounding residents and to visitors. National forests and major parks also draw tourism dollars to communities (Young 1995). There is a rich historical connection between Americans and parks. One of the oldest public municipal parks in America is the Boston Common, which was originally founded in 1634 as a common pasture (The Official). In 1853 and 1854, Central Park in New York City, Elm Street in Worcester, Massachusetts, and Bushnell Park in Hartford, Connecticut were established at the forefront of the parks movement (Bushnell; Public). Though the history is long, the value of municipal parks is often dependent on community involvement and on local politics. Low community involvement in park maintenance can turn a park into an eyesore. Community members are likely to feel insecure near such parks, and the space will more easily be associated with deviant social behavior (Crewe 2001; Mansfield, Pattanayak, McDow, McDonald, and Halpin 2002). In order to justify the opportunity cost of maintaining parks, the association between parks and crime needs to be understood. On the other hand, a well-maintained and monitored park can be a boon for social and family welfare activities. Despite this risk, a history of demand for park services spanning from conservation to recreation is evidence of the public’s desire for park systems. Having a clear understanding of the potential costs and benefits of a few of the amenities commonly provided in parks can better inform