IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/jleorg/v39y2023i3p722-746..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Fighting Organized Crime by Targeting their Revenue: Screening, Mafias, and Public Funds

Author

Listed:
  • Gianmarco Daniele
  • Gemma Dipoppa

Abstract

Repressive policies to fight criminal organizations are often met with a violent response from criminal groups. Are non-repressive strategies more effective? Targeting criminal revenues can be a powerful tool if the threat of investigation is credible and if criminals are unable to displace their activity to avoid controls. We study an Italian policy designed to tackle mafia misappropriation of public funds by screening companies applying for subsidies over 150,000 Euros. Using all subsidies to firms co-financed by the European Union from 2008 to 2015, we find that a group of firms starts self-selecting below the threshold immediately after its introduction. Those firms are concentrated in mafia-affected cities, are lower performing, operate in typical mafia sectors, and have balance sheet indicators of money laundering. While avoiding violence, non-repressive strategies might have different unintended consequences: criminal organizations react with an immediate strategic displacement which reduces states’ capacity to detect them, highlighting the importance of designing policies that anticipate the sophistication of criminal organizations.

Suggested Citation

  • Gianmarco Daniele & Gemma Dipoppa, 2023. "Fighting Organized Crime by Targeting their Revenue: Screening, Mafias, and Public Funds," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 39(3), pages 722-746.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:jleorg:v:39:y:2023:i:3:p:722-746.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/jleo/ewac002
    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.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • H00 - Public Economics - - General - - - General
    • D72 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Political Processes: Rent-seeking, Lobbying, Elections, Legislatures, and Voting Behavior

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:jleorg:v:39:y:2023:i:3:p:722-746.. 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/jleo .

    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.