Vehicle crime in the Netherlands a research into freight exchange fraud



Download 1.29 Mb.
Page1/22
Date conversion12.05.2016
Size1.29 Mb.
  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   ...   22

Vehicle crime in the Netherlands
A research into freight exchange fraud


E.V.A. Eijkelenboom

Erasmus University Rotterdam

Erasmus School of Economics


Date: August 2012

Supervisor: Mr. Dr. P.A. van Reeven

Student number: 304873

Master program: Urban, Port and Transport Economics



Abstract

Road transport is a vital part of the Dutch economy. Unfortunately road transport crime occurs frequently in various forms, disturbing the market and creating losses. This thesis aims to start academic research into freight exchange fraud, an upcoming form of crime, and to enhance understanding of vehicle crime in the Netherlands. Vehicle crime originally consists of three components, namely cargo theft, vehicle theft and combination theft. Is freight exchange fraud a new component of vehicle crime or is it an innovation and did vehicle crime increase in total? Or did vehicle crime undergo a change resulting in innovation of vehicle crime and do the same actors behave differently?

Our research investigates if freight exchange fraud is an addition to vehicle crime in the Netherlands. We perform a correlation analysis and a vector autoregression to retrieve information about relationships and dependencies between the different components of vehicle crime. Results of our research are mixed. Our research indicates that criminals stealing cargo or vehicles can be seen as experts, who are operating in a homogeneous group of actors. If circumstances remain unchanged, criminals are expected to remain stealing. Cargo theft criminals are found to be different than vehicle theft criminals. We did not find statistical significant evidence for an additional component of vehicle crime. Based on a descriptive analysis freight exchange fraud does seem to be a more advanced way of stealing cargo, vehicles or combinations and can therefore not be seen as an individual component of vehicle crime.

Keywords: Vehicle crime, freight exchange, fraud, vector autoregression

© E.V.A. Eijkelenboom 2012

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form, or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission, in writing, from the author.


Table of Contents


List of figures 7

List of tables 7

Acknowledgements 9

Chapter 1: Introduction 12

1.1 Vehicle crime 12

1.2 Aim of the research 13

1.3 Structure 14



Chapter 2: Freight exchange fraud 15

2.1 Liberalisation of EU freight transport 15

2.2 Freight exchange 19

2.2.1 Definition 19

2.2.2 Membership procedure 20

2.3 Freight exchange fraud 22



2.3.1 False document companies 23

2.3.2 Company take-over 24

2.3.3 The mole 25

2.3.4 Consequences 25

Chapter 3: Data and methods 27

3.1 Data description 27



3.1.1 Data transformation 28

3.2 Correlation 29



3.2.1 Model I 29

3.2.2 Model II 34

3.3.3 Summary and concluding remarks 39

3.3 Model set up 41



3.3.1 Model I 43

3.3.2 Model II 45

Chapter 4: Results and analysis 49

4.1 Model I 49

4.2 Model II 53

4.3 Freight exchange fraud – descriptive 54



Chapter 5: Conclusion and recommendations 57

5.1 Conclusions 57

5.2 Policy recommendations 59

5.3 Recommendations for further research 62



List of references 64

Appendix 66

A. Legal Framework 66

B. Data description 70

B.1 Data characteristics 70

B.2 Chow test 70

C. Vector error correction model 71

D. Model I 72

D.1 Stationary tests for model I 72



D.1.1 Cargo theft 72

D.1.2 Combination theft 74

D.1.3 Vehicle theft 76

D.2 Lag selection for model I 78

D.3 Impulse response function Model I 79

D.4 VAR analysis and impulse response function for Model I including first difference of cargo theft 81



D.4.1 Lag selection 81

D.4.2 VAR analysis 82

D.4.3 Impulse response function 86

E. Model II 86

E.1 Stationary tests for model II 86



E.1.1 Members 86

E.1.2 Posted advertisements 89

E.1.3 Viewed advertisements 91

E.2 Lag selection for model II 94

E.3 Johansen cointegration test 95

E.4 Impulse response function Model II 96



F. Freight exchange fraud 97

F.1 2008 97

F.2 2009 97

F.3 2010 98



F.4 2011 99



List of figures




Figure 1

Orbis 2008

6

Figure 2

EVO, 2003

6

Figure 3

Three components of vehicle crime graphed from January 1996 – December 2012

32

Figure 4

Impulse response function VAR(2) model I vehicle to vehicle

38

Figure 5

Impulse response function VAR(2) model I cargo to cargo

38

Figure 6

Impulse response function VAR(2) model I combination to combination

38

Figure 7

Impulse response function VAR(2) model I combination to vehicle

39

Figure 8

Impulse response function VAR(1) model II d.cargo to d.cargo

42

Figure 9

Freight exchange fraud monthly percentage allocation

44

Figure 10

Freight exchange fraud daily percentage allocation

44

Figure 11

Freight exchange fraud percentage allocation per region

44

Figure 12

European Union within CMR

55

Figure 13

Liability

58

Figure 14

Impulse response function VAR(4) model I vehicle to vehicle

73

Figure 15

Impulse response function VAR(4) model I, combination to combination

73

Figure 16

Impulse response function VAR(4) d.cargo to d.cargo

73

Figure 17

Impulse response function VAR(4) d.cargo to combination

74

Figure 18

Impulse response function VAR(4) combination to vehicle

74


  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   ...   22


The database is protected by copyright ©essaydocs.org 2016
send message

    Main page