DNA Registration Lowers Recidivism—A Bit

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

A few days ago Tyler Cowen linked to a study from Denmark about the effect of a new law that adds criminal offenders to a DNA database. The abstract says that the law “reduces recidivism within the following year by as much as 43%,” which I found both impressive and a little scary. Impressive because that’s a big result. Scary because it points the way toward an ever more efficient surveillance society.

But once I plowed through the paper and finally understood all the different tables,¹ I’m a little less impressed by the power of DNA registration. First, here’s a chart showing the general approach that the authors took:

The general idea is simple: some crimes are more likely to get you into the DNA register than others. As this chart shows, after 12 months the probability of committing a new crime is lower among those who knew for sure that their DNA was now registered. Here’s a chart showing the actual reduction in recidivism for various crime types:

The most obvious result here is that the effect on recidivism is fairly high during the first year, but steadily decreases after that. By the third year, the effect on property crimes remains significant but the effect on other crimes is fairly modest, and on violent crimes has shrunk to only 2 percent. The reduction in committing any crime was about 10 percent by year three.

Now, 10 percent isn’t nothing, but it’s not huge either. I would certainly like to see studies of other countries that have done this, as well as a follow-up study in Denmark a few years from now to see if the effect lasts.

¹Thanks to co-author Anne Sofie Tegner Anker for helping me out with this.

We've never been very good at being conservative.

And usually, that serves us well in doing the ambitious, hard-hitting journalism that you turn to Mother Jones for. But it also means we can't afford to come up short when it comes to scratching together the funds it takes to keep our team firing on all cylinders, and the truth is, we finished our budgeting cycle on June 30 about $100,000 short of our online goal.

This is no time to come up short. It's time to fight like hell, as our namesake would tell us to do, for a democracy where minority rule cannot impose an extreme agenda, where facts matter, and where accountability has a chance at the polls and in the press. If you value our reporting and you can right now, please help us dig out of the $100,000 hole we're starting our new budgeting cycle in with an always-needed and always-appreciated donation today.

payment methods

We've never been very good at being conservative.

And usually, that serves us well in doing the ambitious, hard-hitting journalism that you turn to Mother Jones for. But it also means we can't afford to come up short when it comes to scratching together the funds it takes to keep our team firing on all cylinders, and the truth is, we finished our budgeting cycle on June 30 about $100,000 short of our online goal.

This is no time to come up short. It's time to fight like hell, as our namesake would tell us to do, for a democracy where minority rule cannot impose an extreme agenda, where facts matter, and where accountability has a chance at the polls and in the press. If you value our reporting and you can right now, please help us dig out of the $100,000 hole we're starting our new budgeting cycle in with an always-needed and always-appreciated donation today.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate