ABSTRACT
In the Netherlands hardly any research exists on the cost-benefit and cost-effectiveness of crime prevention and treatment programmes for child delinquents (the terms ‘cost-benefit’ and ‘cost-effectiveness’ are defined below). This is remarkable as the odds are that crime prevention or treatment programmes will show a favourable cost-benefit ratio compared to alternatives such as detention or ‘doing nothing’. The assumption of a favourable cost-effectiveness ratio is based on a straightforward line of reasoning: we know that any long-term residential treatment is very expensive and we know that detention is not an effective way to reduce crime. This reasoning implies that the odds are that any non-residential treatment with even modest effectiveness in reducing recidivism will show a favourable cost-benefit ratio as compared to detention. This lack of evidence is even more remarkable, as research from abroad shows that crime prevention and treatment programmes for children can be cost-effective (for example, Aos et al., 2004; Greenwood et al., 1996).
