What Is the Bottom Line?

Aos, Steve

doi:10.1111/1745-9133.12164

Cited by 16 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Cost–benefit analysis has had limited application in socio-legal fields, although crime-prevention programmes and interventions are one area of exception to this, with cost–benefit analyses increasing in prevalence and influence over the past two decades, in particular in the US (Welsh and Farrington, 2000; Nagin, 2001; Farrington and Koegl, 2015; Welsh et al ., 2015; Aos, 2015). Such studies have primarily focused on calculating the costs for victims of crime and on ascertaining the cost benefit of a particular programme or intervention as an offset to those costs rather than on estimating the broader costs of apprehension, conviction and punishment.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The economic case for improving legal outcomes for accused persons with cognitive disability: an Australian study

McCausland

Reeve

Gooding

2019

International Journal of Law in Context

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

People with cognitive disabilities face specific forms of discrimination and disadvantage in the criminal justice system, including in legal proceedings. While unfitness-to-stand-trial provisions are intended to assist in avoiding unfair trials, in application, such laws can exacerbate disadvantage. A recent research project sought to increase the participation of accused persons with cognitive disabilities in legal proceedings by developing, implementing and evaluating a model in which disability support workers were embedded in legal services in three Australian jurisdictions. This paper details the findings of a cost–benefit analysis undertaken of that model compared with the common outcomes for accused persons with cognitive disability, including a finding of unfitness to stand trial. The analysis provides evidence of how a tailored programme intervention at a critical point can provide savings in police, courts and custody costs in addition to improving the timeliness and quality of outcomes for people with cognitive disabilities.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The economic case for improving legal outcomes for accused persons with cognitive disability: an Australian study

McCausland

Reeve

Gooding

2019

International Journal of Law in Context

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Despite its utility and drawbacks, interpretation of benefit-cost findings requires that stakeholders revisit the intended goals within their local context (Aos, 2015). The findings presented by Cowell et al (2018) will likely contribute to important, albeit much different discussions within each of the four HOPE DFE sites.…”

mentioning

confidence: 98%

“…Last, Drake () included criminal justice system costs as well as victimization costs (tangible and intangible), and thus, she found SCF to produce net benefits that are four to eight times greater, per participant, compared with the findings of the other two studies. For benefit–cost analysis to have meaningful utility for policy makers, understanding what the bottom‐line estimate represents is crucial (Aos, ).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Benefits and Costs of “Swift, Certain, and Fair” Supervision

Drake

2018

Criminology & Public Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Although the norm in the world is to refer to cost-benefit analysis, or CBA, we follow the lead of this journal, and refer to BCA. The reason should be apparent: if there are no discernible benefits, costs are irrelevant, and so one starts with benefits(Aos, 2015). That said, if quantifying the benefits is difficult, but the costs are measurable, a form of breakeven analysis may be the way to go (Aos, 2015)…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Benefit-Cost Analysis of Public Safety: Facing the Methodological Challenges

Ponomarenko¹,

Friedman²

2017

J. Benefit Cost Anal.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:Although more than 100 billion dollars is spent each year on policing, we know very little about what works, and still less about whether the benefits of various policing policies and practices outweigh the costs. In particular, although there has been some important work done to assess the effects of various practices, and even to monetize some of the benefits of reducing crime, there has been virtually no attention paid to the other side of the benefit-cost equation: the social costs that particular policing practices potentially can impose. In February 2017, the Policing Project at NYU School of Law held a conference aimed at jumpstarting the use of benefit-cost analysis to assess policing practices, and to begin to tackle the many methodological challenges to doing so. Here, we provide an overview of the existing literature, identify the serious gaps that remain, and sketch out a research agenda for moving forward.

show abstract

What Is the Bottom Line?

Cited by 16 publications

References 1 publication

The economic case for improving legal outcomes for accused persons with cognitive disability: an Australian study

The economic case for improving legal outcomes for accused persons with cognitive disability: an Australian study

Benefits and Costs of “Swift, Certain, and Fair” Supervision

Benefit-Cost Analysis of Public Safety: Facing the Methodological Challenges

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About