|
on Law and Economics |
| By: | Tobias Auer; Tom Kirchmaier |
| Abstract: | In this paper we focus on how the criminal history of a household affects juvenile reoffending. Using detailed administrative data from Greater Manchester Police for 2007-2018, we construct a matched sample of 15, 548 juvenile first-time offenders. We show causally that juveniles from a household with a previous criminal record are 26.4 to 29.8 percentage points more likely to reoffend within three years, with the greatest additional risk being in the first year after the initial offence. We show that social learning, co-offending by siblings, and differential processing contribute to this effect. Our findings highlight household criminality as an important driver of criminal persistence, underscoring the need to move beyond individual-level predictors and address the criminogenic dynamics within the home. |
| Keywords: | Criminal families, youth crime, repeat offenders |
| Date: | 2025–11–03 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:cep:cepdps:dp2132 |
| By: | Justus Haucap; Mehmet Karacuka; Hakan Inke |
| Abstract: | Utilizing Connor’s International Cartel Database and employing difference-in-differences methodology, we find that market concentration, the number of buyers and cartel duration have significant impacts on cartel overcharges. We also find that the European Commission's 2006 guidelines on the method of setting fines for cartel infringements seems to have decreased cartel overcharges in the EU. In addition, the EU’s cartel damages directive of 2014 (2014/104/EU) appear to have increased private damage payments. Overall, we find support that these two changes in EU competition policy have a reversing impact on the otherwise increasing trend of cartel overcharges, as making the infringement more costly at least in the EU. |
| Keywords: | cartel fines, cartel damages, EU guidelines, competition law, antitrust |
| JEL: | L41 K21 |
| Date: | 2025 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:ces:ceswps:_12259 |
| By: | Moors, Annelies |
| Abstract: | In this contribution, I focus on the shifting assemblages of evidencing that become visible during the public court cases and in the verdicts of Dutch women returnees from Syria. Evidencing emerged as a particularly salient problem, since in the large majority of cases there was not even a suspicion that these women had participated in violent acts. What soon appeared was what I call, following one of the lawyers, the doctrine of the common household. Engaging in housework and childcare for men who were IS-fighters became a ground for conviction for participation in a terrorist organization and/or for involvement in preparatory acts enabling terrorism. These men were, as it were, tried in absentia. As the doctrine of the common household was a new legal invention, judges were often inconsistent in how they considered such “evidence.” What, then, was running a common household evidence of, and what counted as evidence of running a common household? How did this focus of attention emerge and develop, and what was left outside the frame? How did the courts deal with IS doctrine on housework and childcare, and with women’s own accounts as evidence? How did these positions intersect with particular turns in public opinion? These various issues also raise questions of temporality, not only in terms of how sequencing is taken to imply causality, but also in terms of how a particular historical moment matters, with judges developing, and in appeal cases often rejecting, such new interpretations. |
| Date: | 2025–10–26 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:osf:socarx:7r25v_v1 |
| By: | Tomaso Duso; Martin Peitz |
| Abstract: | Trade conflicts, geopolitical tensions, digital disruption, and the climate crisis pose major challenges for the European Union (EU) and its member states. As called for in the Draghi Report, industrial policy measures can increase competitiveness, strengthen resilience, and facilitate the twin transformation. This article explores ways in which competition policy can be realigned to better accommodate industrial policy objectives. Using German competition law as a reference point, it presents options with which legislatures and competition authorities can respond to current challenges, reconcile conflicting objectives, and adapt the decision-making framework. It then considers elements of a competition-oriented industrial policy, understood as an evidence-based, targeted approach in which competition serves both as a guiding principle and as a control variable. |
| Keywords: | industrial policy, protection of competition, competition, regulation, competition policy, competitiveness, internal market |
| JEL: | L40 L50 L52 K21 |
| Date: | 2025–11 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:bon:boncrc:crctr224_2025_710 |