CrimProf Blog

Editor: Kevin Cole
Univ. of San Diego School of Law

Wednesday, May 24, 2023

Rahman et al. on Cybercrime Impact

Dr. Akim M. Rahman Ph.D (USA) and Islam S. (Canadian University of Bangladesh and American International University) have posted Cybercrime-Impact in Australian-Economy: Policy-Design for Marginalizing the Problem (British Journal of Cyber Criminology, Volume 2 Issue 1, May 2023) on SSRN. Here is the abstract:
Today’s technology-driven human society(s) country-wise are counted more than ever before, and Australia's society is no exception. Tech-users here compete for comparative time-saving options for marginalizing operating costs. It has resulted in huge data usage and a high number of users and devices, which has attracted criminals to take advantage, which is called cybercrime. In addressing cybercrime, Australia, like other countries, is not out of control of laws. However, laws like cybercrime in our society are not always for absolutely cutting the crime. Thus, besides having a cybercrime law in place, Australia needs a piecemeal approach in practice where a department may vary from the approaches of other departments. With awareness about risky online behaviors and options, tech users as defenders are needed to invest their own efforts. Voluntary Insurance (VI) is proposed as a new product in the network-service market. This study has laid out the foundation of the VI proposal underpinning Akim’s model using the Theory of Consumer Choice and Behaviors and Welfare Analysis. The presence of VI as a new product in the network-service market can ensure the tech-user’s own efforts to be on the safe side, where approaches to having VI vary from department to department. Having access to the VI and the network service market’s efforts on promoting awareness, the tech user’s actual utility received is the sum of utility received from awareness and own effort and utility received from cybercrime law. Any changes to services received from the joint efforts may make tech users vulnerable. Welfare analysis shows tech-users' actions—awareness and own effort—besides cybercrime law can create net social gain, which largely depends on tech-users' own actions. The tech user’s economic surplus is greater than government expenses for the implementation of cybercrime law in Australia. Net loss to Australia is the sum of deadweight loss and net loss to technology producers for underutilized resources.

| Permalink


Post a comment