work is licensed under a Creative Commons IGO 3.0 AttributionNonCommercial-NoDerivatives (CC-IGO BY-NC-ND 3.0 IGO) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/igo/ legalcode) and may be reproduced with attribution to the IDB and for any non-commercial purpose, as provided below. No derivative work is allowed.Any dispute related to the use of the works of the IDB that cannot be settled amicably shall be submitted to arbitration pursuant to the UNCITRAL rules. The use of the IDB's name for any purpose other than for attribution, and the use of IDB's logo shall be subject to a separate written license agreement between the IDB and the user and is not authorized as part of this CC-IGO license.Following a peer review process, and with previous written consent by the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB), a revised version of this work may also be reproduced in any academic journal, including those indexed by the American Economic Association's EconLit, provided that the IDB is credited and that the author(s) receive no income from the publication. Therefore, the restriction to receive income from such publication shall only extend to the publication's author(s). With regard to such restriction, in case of any inconsistency between the Creative Commons IGO 3.0 Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives license and these statements, the latter shall prevail.Note that link provided above includes additional terms and conditions of the license. This paper examines how an infrastructure investment policy, implemented nationwide at the local level, has affected local crime rates. This policy, developed in the wake of the global recession of 2008-09, was designed to boost local economies through job creation. Using monthly figures from the Spanish region of Catalonia's more than 900 municipalities, the paper exploits geographic and time variation in the Spanish Ministry of Public Administration's random approvals of local investment policies, to estimate their impact on both (un)employment and crime. The combination of difference-in-differences and IV estimates makes it possible to precisely assess both the size and timing of the policy's impact on the local labor market and on municipal-level crime rates. While the policy apparently did not tackle the economic recession over the long run, local public finances did experience a boost over the short term, resulting in a temporary reduction in local unemployment rates (as legally required by the policy), as well as a significant drop in crime rates.JEL classifications: K42, R53, H54, J40