Crime in neighbourhoods that have experienced mass immigration from eastern Europe over the past 10 years has fallen significantly, according to research that challenges a widely held view over the impact of foreigners in the UK.

Rates of burglary, vandalism and car theft all dropped following the arrival of migrants from Poland, the Czech Republic, Hungary and seven other countries after they joined the European Union in 2004. But the opposite was found to be the case in areas that experienced an influx of asylum seekers from the late 1990s onwards, where rates of property crime were "significantly higher". In addition, immigration has no impact on levels of violent crime on British streets, according to the analysis.

Experts from the London School of Economics set out to examine if the common assertion that immigrants cause crime was corroborated by statistics, after noting a "paucity of credible empirical evidence" to support the claim.

Places that had attracted large numbers of eastern European immigrants enjoyed a "significant fall in property crime", a category of offence that also includes theft and shoplifting. The report, to be published later this year in Harvard University's Review of Economics and Statistics, also found that the relationship between the arrival of thousands of foreigners and levels of violence was "close to zero and insignificant".

Brian Bell, a research fellow at the London School of Economics, said: "The view that foreigners commit more crime is not true. The truth is that immigrants are just like natives: if they have a good job and a good income they don't commit crime."

The findings come days after a report revealed that the UK is becoming more peaceful with rates of violent crime and murder falling more rapidly in the past decade than in any other western European country. The UK Peace Index, produced by the Institute for Economics and Peace, found that violent crime rate fell by a quarter between 2003 and 2012, a period of relatively high immigration.

The Conservatives have pledged to reduce net migration – the difference between the number leaving the country permanently every year and those arriving – from 200,000 during the last government to less than 100,000. Tory elements have sounded warnings over the impending arrival of more Bulgarian and Romanian immigrants, who at the end of 2013 will gain the same rights to work in the UK as other EU citizens, with Romania's prime minister admitting last week that citizens of his country had come to Britain and committed crimes. However, the LSE report found that neighbourhoods that have a high level of immigrants have a lower number of offences in some crime categories than comparative areas with fewer foreigners.

Marian Fitzgerald, a visiting professor of criminology at the University of Kent, said that the night-time economy, and the numbers of people who could afford to drink alcohol and socialise, was a key driver of violence.

"Most violent crime is associated with affluence. Most immigrants are not affluent so it's not surprising that immigration has no impact on that large proportion of total violence which is a function of affluence."

David Wilson, professor of criminology and criminal justice at Birmingham City University agreed that recession tended to reduce crime because less people could afford to go out and drink. However, he also said broader factors such as increased access to information had made people acutely sensitised to violence.

"Globalisation through the internet, through media images has meant that there is a greater intolerance to violence. There is more of a global acceptance that inter-personal violent crime is something that we should not be engaged in."

Wilson added a third factor also came into play, saying that the type of immigrant attracted to Britain tended to contradict the scrounger stereoptype.

"Historically, people who move from one nation state to another are the kinds of people who are more entrepreneurial. Far from coming to live off benefits, the people who tend to want to move are the ones who want to get a job and get ahead," he added.

Previous research by the LSE team revealed that enclaves with high numbers of immigrants experienced less crime than neighbourhoods with fewer arrivals from abroad. The research focused on neighbourhoods that had an immigrant population larger than 30%. Bell and his team found "strong and consistent evidence that enclaves have lower crime experiences than otherwise observably similar neighbourhoods that have a lower immigrant share of the population".

Further research was required to understand the beneficial enclave effect of crime and in turn help enhance political debate on immigration, the report concluded.

One area where large numbers of immigrants exerted a negative effect was highlighted. In places where the government located large numbers of asylum seekers from the late 90s, property crime rates were "significantly higher".

A proportion of the crime might be explained as a result of crimes committed against immigrants, the report's authors added. Improving work opportunities for asylum seekers might have a beneficial effect on reducing crime, Bell said, but admitted such a move would be politically unpalatable and could send a message to potential migrants that asylum applications were a way of seeking work.

Historically, people who move from one nation state to another are the kinds of people who are more entrepreneurial. Far from coming to live off benefits, the people who tend to want to move are the ones who want to get a job and get ahead.