The nonpartisan Urban Institute publishes studies, reports, and books on timely topics worthy of public consideration. The views expressed are those of the authors and should not be attributed to the Urban Institute, its trustees, or its funders.
The text below is an excerpt from the complete document. Read the policy brief in PDF format.
Abstract
Agricultural crime, including theft of farming-related commodities, supplies, and equipment, causes billions of dollars of losses each year to farmers, insurers, and consumers. Drawing on analyses of law enforcement, farm survey, site visit, and interview data, the Urban Institute and Florida State University evaluated the theory and impacts of a promising initiative in California—the Agricultural Crime, Technology, Information, and Operations Network (ACTION) project—aimed at addressing this problem. ACTION collects and analyzes agricultural crime data; encourages and enables information-sharing among law enforcement agencies and prosecutors within and across counties; educates the public and farmers about agricultural crime and how to combat it; marks equipment with owner applied numbers (OANs); and promotes aggressive law enforcement and prosecution. ACTION's activities appear to have reduced victimization and to have increased agricultural crime arrests and prosecutions, recovery of stolen property, and farmers' investment in crime prevention. This policy brief summarizes the study's key findings and its policy, theory, and research recommendations.
Highlights of the Evaluation
What the Study Did
Agricultural crime, including theft of farming-related commodities, supplies, and equipment, causes
billions of dollars of losses each year to farmers, insurers, and consumers. Drawing on analyses of law
enforcement, farm survey, site visit, and interview data, the Urban Institute and Florida State University
evaluated the theory and impacts of a promising initiative in California—the Agricultural Crime,
Technology, Information, and Operations Network (ACTION) project (www.agcrime.net)—aimed at
addressing this problem. ACTION collects and analyzes agricultural crime data; encourages and enables
information-sharing among law enforcement agencies and prosecutors within and across counties;
educates the public and farmers about agricultural crime and how to combat it; marks equipment with
owner applied numbers (OANs); and promotes aggressive law enforcement and prosecution.
What the Study Found
-
Program theory. ACTION is guided by well-established criminological theories, including
opportunity, situational crime prevention, and deterrence theories. The analyses suggest that these
theories help predict agricultural crime and that efforts like ACTION can reduce crime.
- Impacts. ACTION's activities appear to have reduced victimization and to have increased agricultural
crime arrests and prosecutions, recovery of stolen property (over $6.3 million in 2004 and 2005), and
farmers' investment in crime prevention.
- Transferability. The results of the study suggest that one or more of the activities that collectively
comprise ACTION could easily be adopted in many other places, and that jurisdictions across the
country are greatly in need of and interested in efforts like ACTION.
Program and Policy Recommendations
The full set of policy recommendations are detailed in Section 10 of the report.
- Continue ACTION's efforts and consider expansion. In 2005, agricultural crime victimization
resulted in an estimated $101 million in losses across the nine ACTION counties examined in this
study. However, only $8 million of these losses were reported to law enforcement agencies. In
addition, only 12 percent of agricultural crime victimization is reported. Considerable reductions in
agricultural crime could be produced through increased reporting and crime prevention efforts.
- Monitor and improve ACTION's operations. ACTION's effectiveness ultimately depends on its
ability to implement each of a set of diverse activities efficiently and with fidelity to program design.
At the same time, the program operates with limited resources. For these reasons, it should continue
to monitor program operations, taking corrective steps where necessary, and seek additional funding.
- Test the feasibility of implementing ACTION in other places. Because of the diverse activities that
comprise ACTION, other jurisdictions in California and throughout the country may find it possible
to adopt or modify the program to fit their unique circumstances and needs. Ultimately, however,
research will be needed to assess the extent to which that holds true, especially in places where
agricultural production differs. Future efforts should be guided by lessons gleaned from ACTION.
The complete paper is available in PDF format.
The nonpartisan Urban Institute publishes studies, reports, and books on timely topics worthy of public consideration. The views expressed are those of the authors and should not be attributed to the Urban Institute, its trustees, or its funders.
Usage, posting and reprint of materials on the UI web site:
Most publications may be downloaded free of charge from the web site in PDF format. This information may be used and copies made for research, academic, policy or other non-commercial purposes. Proper attribution is required.
Copyright of the written materials contained within the Urban Institute website is owned or controlled by the Urban Institute. Posting UI research papers on other websites is permitted subject to prior approval from the Urban Institute—contact paffairs@urban.org.
If you are unable to access or print the PDF document please contact us or call the Publications Office at (202) 261-5687.
Latest Research
Browse by Topic:
PDF
Printer-friendly summary
