and for socially excluded minorities. Many see the high levels of impunity as one of the key reasons for the high violence levels in Latin America.<sup>89</sup> The world competitiveness report, which rates judicial systems of the world on the basis of efficiency and the opinions of users and public confidence, puts all Latin American judiciaries (except Chile) in the bottom 20%.<sup>90</sup> Perhaps not surprisingly, the lack of confidence in the administration of justice is most pronounced among low-income families and small economic units.<sup>91</sup> In Colombia an empirical study of the determinants of violence measured by the homicide rate, found that in the seven major cities the main explanation for the increase of violence in the 1980s was drug trafficking and to a lesser extent, the collapse of the judicial system.<sup>92</sup> Finally, another significant risk factor for violent behavior is low social capital. Studies demonstrate that societies with low social capital are more susceptible to violence and data suggests that causality runs both ways.<sup>93</sup> Especially when the sense of trust among community members is taken as an indicator for social capital, regressions show a significant crime-reducing effect.<sup>94</sup> A study in Chicago showed that social cohesion among neighbors combined with a willingness to intervene on behalf of the common good is linked with a reduction in violence.<sup>95</sup> In a similar vain, Wilson and Kelling (1982) argue that disorder and urban decay are associated with crime and violence.<sup>96</sup> The presence of other types of violence in a society is also important, because it leads to a legitimization of violence to resolve any conflict. Countries such as Colombia, which experience high levels of political violence, also display a high level of tolerance for economic and social violence. One form of violence often feeds into others.

The 1999 United Nations Global Report on Crime and Justice concludes that the socioeconomic strain – measured by unemployment, inequality, and dissatisfaction with income – is a major factor in explaining the variation in “contact crimes” among countries in the world.<sup>97</sup> There is a consensus in the literature that overall levels of development are less important in explaining violence than the extent of inequality, the levels of growth and the pre-existing level of violence.<sup>98</sup> Tackling inequality is key for violence prevention. The link between inequality and violence has important implications for the type of growth that is conducive to violence prevention. Growth that is not propoor is unlikely to bring about a significant reduction in violence levels.

> 89 Sanjuan (1999) quoted in Buvinic, Morrison, and Orlando (2002). 90 World Economic Forum quoted in Ayres (1998). 91 Ayres (1998).

> 92

> Garfield and Arboleda (2003) quoted in Giugale, Lafourcade and Luff (2003). 93 Buvinic, Morrison and Orlando (2002).

> 94 Lederman, Loayza and Menéndez (2002).

> 95 Sampson, Raudenbush and Earls (1997) quoted in Moser and Van Bronkhorst (1999).

> 96 Wilson and Kelling (1982) quoted in Buvinic, Morrison, and Orlando (2002).

> 97 UN Global Report on Crime and Justice (1999) quoted in Buvinic and Morrison (2000). 98 Fajnzylber, Lederman, and Loayza (1998).

15