01-02-2018 WS - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

While the alcohol outlets that make the news are typically "mom and pop" liquor stores located in low socioeconomics status (SES) neighborhoods, the liquor licensing data' I use includes not only liquor stores, but also supermarkets, specialty wine stores, grocery stores and gas stations. Moreover, a liquor store located in a low -SES neighborhood is very different from a liquor store located in a high -SES neighborhood in terms of the physical appearance of the store interior and exterior, their clientele and the range of products sold. In view of the vast heterogeneity that exists between outlets located in different neighborhoods, I group outlets by using the average of the 1990 and 2000 levels of median household income of the census tract in which the outlet is located. I then considered outlets belonging to the top 2 and bottom 2 SES quintiles separately. One common complaint against some alcohol outlets is that because they tend to be the only stores open till late at night or even into the early morning hours, they serve as a neighborhood congregation place for people involved in illicit activities. In addition, it is common knowledge that different types of crime occur at varying frequencies during different times of the day. To determine how an entry or exit of an alcohol outlet affects crime during different times of the day, I split up my crime database into four categories of equal time intervals. Assuming externalities stemming from alcohol outlets are fully capitalized into property prices, we can use the change in residential property transaction prices as a measure of the costs (benefits) alcohol outlets impose on communities through urban decay (development). By integrating a difference -in -difference model into a hedonic regression framework, the marginal impacts of recent (within 12 months) alcohol outlet openings and closings on the residential property transaction values in its neighborhood are estimated. As before, I examine the differential effect of outlets in low and high -SES neighborhoods separately. Upon the opening of alcohol outlets in low -SES neighborhoods, I find that the estimated increase in property crime density (number of property crimes per square mile per month) is much higher than when I considered all outlet openings together. Within 0.1 miles of new outlets in low -SES neighborhoods, property crime density increases as ' Previous studies that examine the relationship between alcohol outlet density and crime (e.g., Scribner et al., 1995; Scribner et al., 1999; Gorman et al., 1998) do not distinguish between outlets situated in different neighborhoods. 4