A bit odd that they didn't include Japan in their set of countries. My expectation is that it would have probably topped the list.
replies(4):
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/1540-5893.37...
Abstract
This article examines the lost property regime of Japan, which has one of the most impressive reputations in the world for returning lost property to its rightful owner, and compares it with that of the United States. Folk legend attributes Japanese lost‐and‐found success to honesty and other‐regarding preferences. In this article, I focus on another possible explanation: legal institutions that efficiently and predictably allocate and enforce possessory rights. These recognized, centuries‐old rules mesh with norms, institutional structures, and economic incentives to reinforce mutually the message that each sends and yields more lost‐property recovery than altruism alone.
Btw, in both countries there's a rule (at least in Poland it's in the civic law, probably more like a custom in Switzerland), that the person who found your wallet can receive some share (finder's fee) of money, in Poland currently 10%.
Instead of designing things properly (large scale zoning, zoning laws that make sense, building codes to improve the quality of life) we make poor decisions based on cheep and fast; externalize the costs; then make living with those costs a fear/punishment based enforcement.
If "peace officers" were out doing only commonly agreed good things, improving lives rather than being 'tough on crime' then they'd be part of a solution rather than a problem.
To carry out the experiment, the presenter and his daughter visited the Tokyo Skytree’s Sola Machi entertainment complex’s food court and left a smartphone, purse, and shopping bag full of recently purchased items on table for two. Then they positioned themselves at another table and surreptitiously filmed what happened.
A solid hour passed, with no one at all disturbing their unprotected belongings. As a matter of fact, while at the food court they saw a number of other people also stake out tables using bags, purses, and even baby strollers, which, being wheeled, are particularly easy to run off with. Eventually, the presenter decided to retrieve his possessions, not because he was worried that someone would steal them, but because he thought the cleaning staff might think they’d been forgotten and take them to the lost-and-found.
This remarkable trustworthiness wasn’t a fluke, either. Next, the presenter and his daughter made their way to a Starbucks branch where he decided to leave even more tempting bait: his MacBook Pro.
He even placed the laptop, all by itself, on a table behind where he was seated…but 25 minutes later, it was still there, and the presenter decided to call it a wrap.
Amazing.
What's also amazing is that there seems to be a very common belief that when people move to another country, they entirely adopt the culture of that country. So, if Japanese people immigrate to a country where leaving your Macbook unattended in a coffee shop will result in it being stolen, it is expected that their theft statistics will rise to resemble that of the host country. I wonder how true this belief is.
I'm Australian and the idea of that blows me away. Like a third-world country. I've seen all the videos of shootings and disgraceful behaviour but I thought those were probably all rare incidents in bad neighbourhoods.
Here in Australia, I've had nothing but professional interactions with our police. I wouldn't hesitate to call them if there was a need or take a lost object to them.
Our laws are certainly heading more and more in a scary direction however.
It never occurred to me to get it to the Police station. Probably because they never found my wallet when I reported it (and reporting it was a PITA, 2 hours of lot time).
Because the cost of being arrested, shot, etc. is quite high, it’s arguably logical to avoid most if not all interactions with them even if the odds of something going wrong seem relatively low, particularly when you have little to nothing to gain from engaging.
Even if you calculate that you’re not at significant personal risk from engaging, it might make sense to do so for other reasons, e.g. in solidarity with others who are targeted unfairly, and/or (plausibility of this aside) to simply attempt to get along without them.
I did not expect China to top the list or anywhere near there, but such cherry picking of data is indeed concerning. By the way, where are South Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong, or Singapore? Were these countries/regions (culturally similar to China) also excluded because the data did not fit the authors' expectations?