Table 10: The impact of homicide rates on test scores

|**Dependent Var**|**iable: Mean **<br>|**Math Enlace **<br>|**Test Scores, **<br>|**2009-2011**<br>|||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
||(1)|(2)|(3)|(4)|(5)|(6)|(7)|(8)|
||Primary<br>School<br>(years 1-9)|Secondary<br>School<br>(years 1-6)|Primary<br>School<br>(years 1-9)|Secondary<br>School<br>(years 10-12)|Primary<br>School<br>(years 1-9)|Secondary<br>School<br>(years 1-6)|Primary<br>School<br>(years 1-9)|Secondary<br>School<br>(years 10-12)|
|Homicide Rate|0.102|0.0156|||0.0296|-0.145|||
||(0.0920)|(0.146)|||(0.0904)|(0.114)|||
|Drug Related|||||||||
|Homicide Rate|||0.0175|0.0434|||0.0247|-0.00594|
||||(0.0240)|(0.0472)|||(0.0326)|(0.0395)|
|Constant|534.7***|513.9***|534.9***|513.7***|521.6***|517.9***|521.5***|517.5***|
||(0.528)|(0.700)|(0.490)|(0.631)|(0.510)|(0.689)|(0.477)|(0.647)|
|Observations|5,641|5,598|5,645|5,602|261,455|88,802|261,571|88,843|
|R-squared|0.858|0.757|0.858|0.757|0.791|0.751|0.791|0.751|
|Fixed|||||||||
|Municipality<br>and Year<br>Effects|Yes|Yes|Yes|Yes|No|No|No|No|
|Fixed School<br>and Year<br>Effects<br>**Notes.** Dependent <br>columns (5) - (8). <br>drug related homicid<br>the Federal Govern<br>Standard errors clu|No<br> variable is the m<br>Homicide rates a<br>e rate of 2.6). D<br>ment and include <br>stered at county|No<br>ean math test s<br>re normalized ac<br>rug-related homic<br> all deaths by "pr<br>level in parenthes|No<br>core on ENLACE<br>cording to the n<br>ides are collect<br>esumed delinqu<br>es. *** p<0.01,|No<br>. It is aggregated <br>ational homicide rat<br>ed by the National C<br>ent rivalry". The sta<br>** p<0.05, * p<0.1|Yes<br>at the county leve<br>e per 100,000 inh<br>ouncil of Public Se<br>te of Oaxaca is e|Yes<br>l for columns (1)<br>abitants in 2007 <br>curity (Consejo<br>xcluded due to t|Yes<br> - (4), and at th<br>(general homicid<br>Nacional de Seg<br>he unreliability o|Yes<br>e school level for<br>e rate of 8.3 and<br>uridad Pública) of<br>f the test scores.|

The results do not point to large changes in learning as a result of increases of violence. However, given that these results are less tightly estimated, and the selection issues mentioned above, we interpret the result of no effect on learning with more care than the effect on enrollment, and we recognize the possibility that there is a significant impact on learning that we are unable to uncover.

# **7. Conclusions**

Based on a growing literature that documents the negative impacts of violence (for example, Robles et al, 2013; Arias and Esquivel, 2013; Dell, 2014 and Velasquez, 2014), one could expect a negative impact on education attainment. However, we find no such detrimental effect of homicide rates on education enrollments. The wealth of available data, and the large within-municipality variability in homicide rates, allows us to estimate very precisely a null or small impact on the number of students enrolled. Furthermore, we find that the school enrollment in affected municipalities goes down because of an effect of violence on migration out of those municipalities (and immigration into safer ones), and not because of a direct effect on individuals’ schooling decisions.

Preparatory is the only school-level where we found an effect, albeit very small and not robust, on the number of students enrolled. However, even this result seems to arise from migration of 32