| Literature DB >> 27708471 |
Charles M Katz1, E C Hedberg2, Luis Enrique Amaya3.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To estimate the effects on homicide rates of the gang truce that was brokered in El Salvador in 2012.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27708471 PMCID: PMC5034635 DOI: 10.2471/BLT.15.166314
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Bull World Health Organ ISSN: 0042-9686 Impact factor: 9.408
Descriptive statistics of data included in the gang truce study, El Salvador, 2010–2013
| Variable | National value | Mean (SD) municipal value ( |
|---|---|---|
| Rented | 13.0 | 8.0 (4.8) |
| Urban | 62.7 | 39.7 (24.6) |
| Born in another municipality | 23.7 | 18.9 (12.2) |
| Educated to at least secondary level | 12.6 | 7.4 (6.6) |
| In female-headed household | 34.8 | 34.3 (5.0) |
| Male aged 10–29 years | 19.1 | 19.6 (1.7) |
| Unemployed | 11.6 | 11.8 (6.9) |
| Eighteenth-Street | ||
| No. of prisoners | 3323.0 | 12.7 (41.0) |
| No. of prisoners per 100 000 residents | 57.9 | 28.7 (57.9) |
| No. of members on the street | 6585.0 | 25.1 (86.2) |
| No. of members on the street per 100 000 residents | 114.6 | 57.9 (160.7) |
| MS13 | ||
| No. of prisoners | 4139.0 | 15.8 (39.6) |
| No. of prisoners per 100 000 residents | 72.1 | 44.7 (51.4) |
| No. of members on the street | 11 000 | 41.5 (106.5) |
| No. of members on the street per 100 000 residents | 189.1 | 114.6 (204.6) |
| 0.1 | 0.0 (0.2) | |
| 789.2 | 546.4 (265.4) | |
| 5 744 113 | 22 000 (38 000) | |
| 0.2 | 0.7 (0.1) |
SD: standard deviation; US$: United States dollars; VFMP: Violence-free Municipality Programme.
Fig. 1Monthly numbers of homicides, El Salvador, 2010–2014
Levels of crime before and after the gang truce, El Salvador, 2010–2013
| Crime | Mean (SD) monthly value per municipality | Difference in means | Autoregressive modelsc | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pre-truce | Post-truce | Difference | ||||
| No. of disappearances | 3.01 (10.39) | 3.31 (8.20) | 0.30 | 0.32 | −2.87 | 0.00 |
| No. of disappearances per 100 000 residents | 8.07 (15.32) | 9.35 (13.00) | 1.27 | 0.10 | −9.03 | 0.00 |
| No. of extortions | 1.16 (3.97) | 0.90 (3.20) | −0.26 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.92 |
| No. of extortions per 100 000 residents | 3.47 (7.69) | 2.65 (6.63) | −0.81 | 0.00 | −0.01 | 0.71 |
| No. of homicides | 1.35 (3.16) | 0.74 (1.76) | −0.61 | 0.00 | −0.07 | 0.00 |
| No. of homicides per 100 000 residents | 4.21 (8.03) | 2.86 (6.55) | −1.4 | 0.00 | −0.22 | 0.00 |
| No. of rapes | 0.11 (0.42) | 0.12 (0.43) | 0.01 | 0.11 | 0.00 | 0.99 |
| No. of rapes per 100 000 residents | 0.50 (2.74) | 0.66 (3.78) | 0.16 | 0.01 | 0.00 | 0.99 |
| No. of robberies | 1.77 (8.11) | 1.73 (7.10) | −0.05 | 0.46 | 0.00 | 0.86 |
| No. of robberies per 100 000 residents | 5.36 (9.67) | 5.47 (9.46) | 0.12 | 0.55 | 0.00 | 1.00 |
| No. of thefts | 3.25 (12.42) | 3.13 (11.71) | −0.12 | 0.06 | 0.00 | 0.87 |
| No. of thefts per 100 000 residents | 12.32 (17.15) | 11.98 (16.77) | −0.34 | 0.29 | −0.01 | 0.95 |
| No. of vehicle robberies or thefts | 1.16 (8.06) | 1.13 (7.36) | −0.03 | 0.58 | 0.00 | 0.97 |
| No. of vehicle robberies or thefts per 100 000 residents | 1.71 (12.59) | 1.59 (5.35) | −0.12 | 0.79 | 0.00 | 0.95 |
SD: standard deviation.
a Post-truce mean minus pre-truce mean.
b From a t-test corrected for correlated observations within municipalities
c Corrected for correlated observations within municipalities, autocorrelation across time and trend and heteroskedastic effects across municipalities.
d 1 January 2010 – 29 February 2012.
e 1 March 2012 – 31 December 2013.
Homicide rate ratios derived from statistical models, El Salvador, 2010–2013
| Model | Homicide rate ratio (95% CI) | |
|---|---|---|
| Without controls | With controls | |
| 0.61 (0.54–0.69) | 0.55 (0.49–0.63) | |
| No. of imprisoned Eighteenth-Street gang members per 100 000 residents | ||
| 10 | 1.14 (0.91–1.43) | 1.13 (0.90–1.43) |
| 50 | 1.23 (0.95–1.60) | 1.22 (0.94–1.59) |
| 100 | 1.27 (0.96–1.68) | 1.26 (0.96–1.67) |
| 200 | 1.31 (0.97–1.78) | 1.31 (0.97–1.76) |
| 400 | 1.36 (0.98–1.88) | 1.35 (0.98–1.87) |
| No. of imprisoned MS13 gang members per 100 000 residents | ||
| 10 | 0.62 (0.53–0.72) | 0.61 (0.52–0.72) |
| 50 | 0.45 (0.37–0.54) | 0.44 (0.37–0.53) |
| 100 | 0.39 (0.32–0.48) | 0.38 (0.31–0.47) |
| 200 | 0.34 (0.27–0.42) | 0.33 (0.27–0.42) |
| 400 | 0.29 (0.23–0.38) | 0.29 (0.22–0.37) |
CI: confidence interval.
a All models were mixed-effect negative binomial regressions with a population offset, a random intercept and random slope for the effect of the truce on homicide rates, a two-month lag and a spatial lag on the homicide rate, a linear time trend and indicators for the calendar month.
b The ratio of the number of homicides per 100 000 residents in the period before the truce – i.e. 1 January 2010 to 29 February 2012 – to the corresponding number in the period after the truce – i.e. 1 March 2012 to 31 December 2013.
c Controls included the percentages of residents educated to at least secondary school level, unemployed, male and aged 10–29 years, living in a female-headed household and/or born in another municipality, per-capita income, the percentage of households that were in urban areas and/or rented, measures of racial/ethnic heterogeneity and municipality participation in the Violence-free Municipality Programme and, for each gang, loge(number of imprisoned gang members per 100 000 residents), loge(number of gang members on the street per 100 000 residents) and spatial lags.
d All moderated models included, for each gang, loge(number of imprisoned gang members per 100 000 residents), loge(number of gang members on the street per 100 000 residents) and spatial lags.