BECKER WOULD HAVE JUMPED THE SIGNAL
Executive Summary:
Most people assume poverty causes crime. Gary Becker’s 1968 economic model of crime offers a different explanation. People commit crimes the same way they make any economic decision, by weighing expected benefits against expected costs. When you apply Becker’s four variables to petty and white collar crime in India, something uncomfortable emerges. The numbers have been pointing in one direction for a very long time.
The Parking Lot That Started It All
Gary Becker was late for an exam at the University of Columbia and had to decide quickly whether to pay for a parking or risk a fine by parking illegally on the street. He did the mental arithmetic in thirty seconds, parked illegally, and made his exam on time. Then he went on to win a Nobel Prize partly by writing down that thirty-second calculation as a formal economic model of crime.
Becker’s insight, published in 1968, was simple and scandalous in equal measure. People commit crimes the same way they make any other economic decision. The expected benefit weighed against the expected cost, where the cost is not just the punishment but the punishment multiplied by the probability of actually getting caught.
This framework does not require criminals to be evil merely human. We encounter this every single morning : the red light jumper. The fine for jumping a signal in most Indian cities is, say, five hundred rupees, and the probability of a traffic cop actually being present, attentive, and willing to chase is perhaps one in twenty on a normal day. The effective cost of jumping that signal is therefore twenty-five rupees. At that price, and with three minutes of waiting time on the other side of the ledger, the calculation seems not even close. Becker would have jumped the signal too.
The Four Variables That Actually Matter
Becker argued that any decision to commit a crime is governed by four variables : expected benefit, probability of detection, severity of punishment, and the opportunity cost of the act itself.
Run those four variables through white collar crime in India and something uncomfortable emerges. The benefits have historically been large; detection patchy, and punishment delayed. A harsh punishment that takes fifteen years to arrive is worth very little to someone making a decision today. Whether that has changed in recent years as enforcement has tightened is a genuinely open question. Nevertheless for a long time, the numbers were not discouraging anyone.
The Question Worth Asking
Gary Becker parked on the street and made his exam. The question for anyone designing a business, a regulation, or an economy is not how to make people more honest. The question is whether the four variables: benefit, detection, punishment, and opportunity cost, have been set correctly. In India it appears for a very long time, they have not been.
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are solely those of Sridhar Vaidyanath and do not necessarily represent the views of Cedrus Wealth Partners or its affiliates. The content is based on publicly available information believed to be reliable and is intended solely for general informational purposes. It should not be construed as investment, legal, or tax advice. Readers are advised to exercise discretion and seek professional counsel before acting on any information contained herein. Neither the author nor Cedrus Wealth Partners shall be responsible for any loss arising from reliance on this material.
Comments
Post a Comment