No causal evidence that free markets and globalization reduce homicide: A quasi-experimental test of emerging consensus

There has been a recent boom in cross-national criminological research on the topic of free markets, globalization, and homicidal violence. Much of this new literature reports negative associations and suggests that open markets and globalization ameliorate homicide. However, the research relies on correlational panel regressions and occasionally dubious instrumental variables, leaving endogeneity unresolved. This paper re-examines the issue using a quasi-experimental design on a global panel of countries from 1980 to 2021. Treating large and sustained jumps in economic freedom and globalization as reform shocks, I estimate their effects on homicide with synthetic difference-in-differences. The results overturn the optimistic reading from the correlational literature. Across baseline models, alternative treatment thresholds, extended event windows, and regional subsamples, I find no robust evidence that free-market reforms or globalization reduce homicide on average. While some specifications produce negative estimates, these are typically statistically insignificant under in-space placebo inference. A notable but limited exception is the negative effect of economic-freedom shocks in high-income countries. Overall, the paper shows that recent claims about the violence-reducing effects of markets and globalization, if interpreted causally, are fragile. • Existing literature reports a negative relationship between free markets (or globalization) and homicide. • This paper shows the negative correlation doesn't survive under a quasi-experimental approach. • The correlation is likely endogenous and cannot be interpreted causally. • Synthetic difference-in-differences estimation finds no causal effect on homicide.