The Effect of Gun Violence on Local Economies

We already know that gun violence exacts enormous costs. The fear of gun violence, and people's perceived risk, has been shown to impose heavy social, psychological, and monetary burdens on individuals that translate into monetary costs to society. We also know the health care costs of treating gunshot injuries: just under $630 million i n 2010 (Howell and Abraham 2013). American society collectively pays all these costs. Yet we know comparatively little about the relationship between gun violence and the economic health of neighborhoods at the most grassroots levels ; we don't know how businesses, jobs, and many more indicators of economic health respond to increased levels of gun violence. Could gun violence cause economic downturns? In communities and neighborhoods most affected by gun violence, does the presence of gun violence hold back business growth?To answer these important research questions at the neighborhood level, we assemble d gun violence and establishment data at the census tract level in six US cities. This report presents the initial findings of an in - depth analysis of the relationship bet ween gun violence and local economic health in Minneapolis, Minnesota; Oakland, California; and Washington, DC . Our findings indicate a significant relationship between gun violence and the ability of businesses to open, operate, and grow in the affected communities. The data and research findings from this study can lend a new, economically driven lens to the debate on gun safety and gun contro

Gun Violence Affects the Economic Health of Communities

Despite broad interest in estimating the economic costs of gun violence at the national and individual levels, we know little about how local economies respond to increased gun violence, especially sharp and sudden increases (or surges) in gun violence. This brief summarizes findings that surges in gun violence can significantly reduce the growth of new retail and service businesses and slow home value appreciation. Higher levels of neighborhood gun violence can be associated with fewer retail and service establishments and fewer new jobs. Higher levels of gun violence were also associated with lower home values, credit scores, and homeownership rates

A Neighborhood-Level Analysis of the Economic Impact of Gun Violence

Despite broad interest in estimating the economic costs of gun violence at the national and individual levels, we know little about how local economies respond to increased gun violence, especially sharp and sudden increases (or surges) in gun violence. Our report found that surges in gun violence can significantly reduce the growth of new retail and service businesses and slow home value appreciation. Higher levels of neighborhood gun violence can be associated with fewer retail and service establishments and fewer new jobs. Higher levels of gun violence were also associated with lower home values, credit scores, and homeownership rates. Interviews with local stakeholders (homeowners, renters, business owners, non-profits, etc.) in six cities across the United States confirmed that the findings match their experience. Business owners in neighborhoods that experience heightened gun violence reported additional challenges and costs, and residents and business owners alike asserted that gun violence hurts housing prices and drives people to relocate from or avoid moving to affected neighborhoods. Some of the report's key findings include: Impact of Gun Violence Surges on Local Business Growth, Home Values, Homeownership Rates, and Credit Scores across Cities      Gun homicide surges in census tracts reduced the growth rate of new retail and service establishments by 4 percent in Minneapolis, Oakland, San Francisco, and Washington, DC.Gun homicide surges in census tracts slowed home value appreciation by 3.9 percent in Baton Rouge, Minneapolis, Oakland, San Francisco, and Washington, DC.Gunshot surges in census tracts slowed home value appreciation by 3.6 percent in Oakland, Rochester, San Francisco, and Washington, DC.Neither gun homicide nor gunshot surges were observed to reduce homeownership rates or credit scores in these cities. Homeownership rates might not fall as quickly as home values in response to sudden surges in gun violence because selling a home and moving may take a long time or may simply not be feasible for some residents.Relationships between Gun Violence and Business Outcomes, Home Values, Homeownership Rates, and Credit Scores within Cities     In Minneapolis, each additional gun homicide in a census tract in a given year was associated with 80 fewer jobs the next year.In Oakland, each additional gun homicide in a census tract in a given year was associated with 5 fewer jobs in shrinking businesses the next year.In Washington, DC, every 10 additional gunshots in a census tract in a given year were associated with 20 fewer jobs among new establishments, one less new business opening, and one more business closing the same year.In San Francisco, there was no association between levels of gun violence in census tracts in a given year and business outcomes the next year.    Analysis of gun homicides in 2014 and home values, homeownership rates, and credit scores in 2015 demonstrated that each additional gun homicide in a census tract was associated with the following outcomes:        A $22,000 decrease in average home values in Minneapolis census tracts and a$24,621 decrease in Oakland census tracts.A 20-point decrease in average credit scores in Minneapolis census tracts and a 9-point decrease in Oakland census tracts.A 3 percent decrease in homeownership rates in Washington, DC, census tracts and a 1 percent decrease in Baton Rouge census tracts.There were no associations between gun homicides in a given year and home values, homeownership rates, and credit scores the next year in Minneapolis, Oakland, San Francisco, or Washington, DC, census tracts from 2009 to 2014 or in Baton Rouge census tracts from 2011 to 2014

Who benefits from bus rapid transit? Evidence from the Metro Bus System (MBS) in Lahore

Bus rapid transit (BRT) is a popular mode for government investment in public infrastructure, particularly in developing countries where capital resources are scarce. Enthusiastic evaluations of BRT systems worldwide are perhaps premature given that most such systems have been operational for only a short time. Further, little research on BRT systems from the user perspective is evident in the literature. The latter is problematic because one justification for government investment in BRT is the social benefit such systems bestow on groups who are traditionally without access to private modes of transportation. In order to explore the purported social benefits of a BRT system two series of multiple logistic regression models are fit. The first uses disaggregate data from inside a BRT service area and the second uses disaggregate data from inside and from outside a BRT service area. The rider and the commuter data sources, respectively, help to understand who benefits from the new Metro Bus System (MBS) in Lahore and how. To that end, descriptive results show that women are less representative of riders and of commuters, but inferential results show that females are more likely to commute via the MBS. In addition, usage patterns show that females are more habitual users and that they benefit greatly from the fare subsidy. Finally, efforts to further integrate the MBS with the greater public transportation network in Lahore will help to mitigate the monetary and the temporal costs of MBS usage which more so affect females