IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/crimin/v61y2021i1p187-208..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Beyond Carrot and Stick: The Effect of Conflict Resolution on Crime Control in China
[In School and Out of Trouble? The Minimum Dropout Age and Juvenile Crime’]

Author

Listed:
  • Zheng Su
  • Xun Cao

Abstract

The question of what works in crime control has been frequently discussed over the past few decades. However, knowledge about and evidence from China is limited. This paper evaluates the effectiveness of three strategies of crime control—the ‘stick policy’, the ‘carrot policy’ and conflict resolution—in China, using a provincial panel data from 1988 to 2014. The results suggest that (1) the ‘carrot policy’ with social welfare provision helps to prevent crime, while the ‘stick policy’ with increasing judicial expenditure does not have a significant effect; (2) conflict resolution functions as an effective strategy of crime control. The policy implication is that, to prevent crime and maintain social order in a transitional society like China, government might need to shift its policy orientation away from strengthening coercive power to focussing on improving people’s livelihood and facilitating conflict resolution.

Suggested Citation

  • Zheng Su & Xun Cao, 2021. "Beyond Carrot and Stick: The Effect of Conflict Resolution on Crime Control in China [In School and Out of Trouble? The Minimum Dropout Age and Juvenile Crime’]," The British Journal of Criminology, Centre for Crime and Justice Studies, vol. 61(1), pages 187-208.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:crimin:v:61:y:2021:i:1:p:187-208.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/bjc/azaa056
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:crimin:v:61:y:2021:i:1:p:187-208.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/bjc .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.