Download GPR 200 CRIMINOLOGY AND PENOLOGY HANDOUT 4

GPR 200 CRIMINOLOGY AND PENOLOGY HANDOUT 4
CRIME AND ECONOMIC CONDITIONS
There are theories that minimize or ignore the significance of biological or
psychological make up. The oldest of these is the one that explains criminal
behaviour in terms of economic differences or influence. Discussions center on
the sad state of the poor, undesirable effects of poverty such as sickness, crime
and despair. Many empirical studies have been undertaken to study relationship
between poverty and crime.
The studies
1. Some research has studied variations in economic conditions to see if they
correspond to variations in crime rates. E.g. crime higher in places or
times where there are more poor people (economic depression economic
property wealthy areas, poor areas
2. Other studies look at the relationship between crime rates and
unemployment crime rates and unemployment, crime rates and economic
inequality (where poverty exists next to wealth)
3. There are many disagreements on whether conclusions that are drawn are
justified.
Some studies contradictions and Disagreements
1. There is a lot of research (hundreds) but most inconsistent and
contradictory to each about the relationship between crimes reconditions.
(a) Refer back to Querry and Quetelet.
(b) Studies or crime and business cycle – most studies conclude that
general crime rate does not increase during economic rescission or
depression – some find crime actually decreases (e.g. Henry and
short 1920 – 1940’s)
(c) Ehrlich in contract found positive relationship between state of
economic conditions, property, crime rates of 1940 – 1960 and
poorhouse holds.
(d) Loftin and Hill (1974) found even stronger results using their index
of “structural poverty” (including such measures as infant
mortality, low education, one patient family income) found strong
relationship between these and state homicide rates.
(e) Research found this relationship to be strongly correlated to
homicide involving families and friends but not stranger.
(f) Other studies found different poverty-crime relationship in
different regions of the country (Messner, and concluded that the
1
results are explained by variation, in the way crimes are reported
and recorded, rather then variations in the incidence of crime.
(g) Crime and unemployment.
Believed unemployment causes poverty and poverty causes crime
unemployment also indicator of general economic conditions
1. Unemployment and juvenile delinquency because parents are unavailable
for children Glaser and rice (1959) found that delinquency is higher when
unemployment is low and vice versa. But Ehrlich (1973) found in separate
study, that unemployment had no effect on criminality of urban males in
age group 14 to 24. Danser and laub (1981) used victimization data.
Instead of police statistics and concluded that there was no relationship
between juvenile delinquency and adult unemployment; contradicting
Glaser and Rice, Danser and Laub found a relationship even within
specific age sex and racial groups. But Calvin A (1981) argues that there is
a close relationship between unemployment and crime for black youths.
There are also contradictions and inconsistencies in the relationship
between unemployment and adult crime. Nagel W (1977) found a strong
co-relation. Berk (1980) found that for ex – offender at least
unemployment and poverty tend to cause crime. Other research have
found no relationship or insignificant relationship. Freeman (1983) found
association but termed as weak and insignificant. But Chirious (1987)
reviewed 63 studies on crime and unemployment and concluded
relationship between crime and unemployment is positive and frequently
significant, especially for property crime, that this relationship manifests
itself better at small unit neighbourhood rather than larger units (e.g.
nations)
But later studies still insisted that the relationship is weak generally.
Problems of interpreting research on crime and economic conditions leading to
inconsistency and contradictions.
1. Poverty is always in part a subjective condition relative to what others
have. Because of lack of clear definite of poverty it has been measured in
more than 20 different ways in different studies. Unemployment is also
not a clear concept does it include those who are able and available but
under employed?
2. There are two contradictory theories in the relationship between crime
and economic conditions. That is it inverse and negative that when
economic conditions are good the amount of crime is low and vice versa.
But other studies have also found the opposite leading to the second
theoretical assumption that it is direct and positive.
2
It looks at criminality as an expansion of normal economic activity (a
criminal fringe) and it increases and decreases in the same manner as
other economics activity therefore crime should be highest when
economic conditions are good and vice versa.
Morris Ploscome (1931) concluded where there are incentives and
increased occasions for illegitimate activity there is boundto be an increase
in crime.
Gurr (1976) found a relationship that supports both assumptions.
3. Problem of specifying the amount of time before economic changes are
said to have an effect on criminality (same time as change or time lag)
some studies have found different relationships when different time lags
are considered. Opportunity, motivation and time lag were also found to
have effect in certain types of crimes such as robbery, theft. But
unemployment did not seem to have association with rape and assault.
4. Problems of determining the size of the unit- is it neighbourhood or
nation? Economic conditions of these two may have different impact.
5. High crime communities usually have a whole host of factors that may
cause crime (poverty, unemployment divorce, single parent, high
population, poor housing and social services, racial problems etc.) Any or
all of these factors might cause crime, but are all found at the same time?
The problem is to determine which factors actually cause crime, and
which one is there but has no actual effect. This problem is called multi co
linearity (i.e. a number of possible casual factors are all highly inter
correlated with each other).
Lanch (1990) tried a baseline regression model, which clustered these
variables. When these factors were conceptually separate, the statistical
techniques could not separate them from each other in the effects they had
on homicide.
6. Problem with interpreting research on crime and economic conditions
adequately distinguishing between concepts of poverty and economic
inequality.
Hsiech and Pugh (1980 – 1991) focused on the relationship between poverty,
economic inequality and violent crime and results suggested that both poverty
and economic inequality are associated with higher levels of violent crime.
Messner and Golden (1992) Examined the effects of inequality between whites
and blacks in 54 states using different cluster of resource deprivation affluence,
racial inequality, income, education, unemployment and residential segregation.
They concluded that racial inequality evidently affects the social order in some
generalized way that increases criminogenic pressure on the entire population.
Other studies have been very mixed or different.
3
SOCIOLOGICAL POSITIVISM AND ANOMIE THEORIES
Sociologists have long sought to dissociate themselves from the pitfalls of the
individualistic approach to crime in which the causes of crime were sought in the
individual and little attention was paid to the social context. It did not make a
clean break with positivism but provided a challenge to individualist theories of
crime. Sociological positivists explained crime as a pathological deviation from
the consensus of the social order. It is concerned with the various indicators of
social disorganization. It sees a real and progressive threat to the continuance of
the consensus of the social order. They believed in measuring these indicators
(such as high crime rates, suicide rates, drunkenness etc) as away of identifying
the whereabouts of existing and potential trouble spots in society. Which must be
treated, prevented or controlled if serious social disorder is to be avoided.
DURKHEIM ANOMIE , SOCIAL DISORGANISATION THEORY AND
MODERNIZATION
DEF: Anomie means a condition or malaise in individuals characterized by an
absence of or reduction of standards or values. It implies a social unrest or chaos.
The word comes from Greek ‘a’ without and “namos” law contemporary English
understanding of the word is ‘norm’ and therefore “normlessness” to reflect a
situation of anarchy. Theorists use anomie to mean a reaction against or a retreat
from the regulatory social control of society. (1858 – 1917).
Emile Durkheim was the founding father of academic sociology in France. He
was primarily concerned with the study of archaic societies and especially with
primitive religion and social organization. Durkheim agreed with Freud that
human beings were not really human until they had been socialized. He saw
socialization and the development as necessary for individual well- being. The
lack of socialization and conscience leads to conflict between the individual and
society.
He viewed inequality as natural and inevitable human conditions that are not
associated with social maladies such as crimes unless there is also a breakdown
at social norms. He called breakdown anomie, which occurs as a result of rapid
social changes accompanying the modernization process Durkheim focused, or
society and its organization and development. Its theories are complex but his
influence on criminology has been great.
He has been called one of the best known and least understood major thinkers.
He lived during the 2 revolutions French and industrial, which had great impact
on human thoughts and values. Sociology had also just been developed by
Auguste Comte, as part of a more general effort to construct a rational society
out of the wings of the traditional one. Sociologist, wanted to mastermind ‘social
4
regeneration’ through re – establishment of social solidarity Durkheim studied
social sciences and sociology. He presented his first major analysis of the process
of social charge in his book, The division of labour in society.
He saw society as divided into mechanical and organic society. In its mechanical
forms each group is relatively isolated from all other social groups and itself
sufficient. In organic society different segments of society depend on each other
in highly organized division of Labour. Social solidarity is no longer based on the
uniformity of the individuals but in the diversity of the functions of the parts of
the society. No society was totally one or the other all being in state of law plays
an essential role in the progress between organic and mechanical.
Role in maintaining the social solidarity of each of these two types of societies
but in different ways. In mechanical society law functions to enforces the
uniformity of the members of the social group, and thus is oriented towards
repressing any deviation from the norm of the time. In the organic society law
functions to regulate the interaction of the various parts of society, and provide
restriction in cases of wrongful transactions.
He argues that to the extent that a society remains mechanical crime is normal in
the sense that a society without crime would be pathologically over controlled.
As society develops towards organic form it possible for a pathological state,
(anomie) to occur, and such a state would produce a variety of social meladies
such as crime.
Crime as normal in Mechanical societies.
Mechanical societies have totality of social likeness; Durkheim called this
collective conscience uniformity found in all culture. But each also has a degree
of diversity in the form of individual differences among its members. Societies
will pressure for uniformity against this diversity in varying degree and forms.
Strongest form is criminal sanction, weak forms such as morally reprehensible or
distasteful or deviant behaviour.
Society cannot be formed without sacrifices (price of membership). But these
demands are constructed so that it is inevitable that certain number of people
will not fulfill them. The number is large but not too much so that the rest of the
society feels a sense of moral superiority and see the rest as criminals and
inferior. This superiority is the primary source of social solidarity. Punishment of
criminals also plays a role in the maintenance of the social solidarity.
Crime is itself normal in society because there is no clearly marked dividing line
between behaviour. Considered criminal and those considered morally
5
reprehensible. He believed that even in a society of saints, faults can appear. This
society without crime is impossible new behaviour will always be placed in the
crime category. Crime is then inevitable because of there is an inevitable
diversity of behaviour in society.
The abnormal or pathological state of society would be one in which there was
the crime. If there is no crime there will be no progressive changes, as it is
introduced by opposing the constraints of the collective conscience and those
who do this are all frequency declared to be criminals. Crime is the price society
pays for the possibility of progress (e.g. Jesus and Gandhi were considered
criminals) He explains that individuals growth cannot occur in a child unless it is
possible for that child to misbehave.
The child is punished for misbehavior and no one want the child to misbehave.
But a child who never did anything wrong would be pathologically over
controlled. Eliminating the misbehavior would also eliminate the possibility of
independent growth. In this sense the child’s misbehavior is the price that must
be paid for the possibility of personal development.
He concludes that from this viewpoint, “the fundamental facts of criminality
present themselves to us in an entirely new light. Contrary to current ideas, the
criminal no longer seems a totally unsociable being, a sort of parasitic element a
strange thing, introduced into the midst of society. On the contrary, he plays a
definite role in social life. Crime for its part must no longer be conceived as an
evil that cannot be too much suppressed. There is no occasion for self
congratulation when the crime rate drops noticeably below the average level, for
we may be certain that this apparent progress is associated with some social
disorder ”
Anomie as a pathological state in organic societies
To the extent that a society is mechanical, it derives its solidarity from pressure
for conformity against the diversity of its members. The criminal behaviour is a
normal and necessary part of this pressure. But to the extent that a society is
organic, the function of law is to regulate the interactions of the various parts of
the whole. If this regulation is inadequate there can result a variety of social
maladies including crime. Durkheim called this state of inadequate regulation
anomie.
Durkheim made three arguments about crime during the process of transition
from mechanical of organic societies.
1. A greater variety of behaviours would be tolerated.
2. Punishment could become less violent as their purpose changed from
repression to restitution.
6
3. There would be a fast expansion of functional law to regulate the
interaction s of the emerging organic society.
Regarding point one, Wolfgang (1977) stated that the American culture and
western society, generally, was experiencing an expansion of acceptability of
deviance and a corresponding contraction of what they define as crime. Western
societies are losing their morals. Anomie theory (this attempt to explain the
occurrence not merely of crime but also deviance and disorder. (Deviance
different in moral or social standards from what is considered normal) Studies by
Neumann and Berger (1988) found no support for the argument that increases in
property crimes were caused by the change from traditional to modern values,
and therefore question the continued dominance of Durkheim theory in
explaining the link between modernization and crime. They suggest that much
more attention be paid to the role of economic inequality in this process as
opposed to Durkheims emphasis on the breakdown of traditional values
Durkheims influence has been extremely broad in criminology and sociology.
The concept of anomie was developed in Durkheim’s classic study Suicide. He
analysed suicide rates and tried to explain why these increased during times of
economic growth as well as during depressions. He made a point that we cannot
understand why suicide is a recurrent feature of modern life by means of a study
of individual cases. Only a sociological analysis of rates can illuminate the social
elements in suicide. Durkheim’s emphasis was on considering social integration
and the person’s ties to society.
Its primary impact was that he focused attention on the role that social forces
play in determining human conduct at a time when the dominant thin king held
either that people freely choose their courses of action or that behavior was
determined by inner forces of biology and psychology.
This was a radical view at the time. There is now considerable evidence that the
basic patterns of crime found in the modern world can only be explained by a
theory that focuses on modernization as a fundamental factor.
THE ECOLOGY OF CRIME
The Chicago school of Human Ecology (Department of sociology) at the
university of Chicago 1920) attempted to pinpoint the environmental factors
associated with crime, and to determine the relationship among those factors.
They focused on rapid changes in the neighbourhood unlike Durkheim who
focuses on rapid changes in entire societies) their procedure evolved correlating
the characteristics of each neighbourhood with the crime rates of that
neighbourhood.
7
The Theory of Human Ecology.
Ecology in original meaning is a branch of biology in which plants and animals
are studied in their relationships to each other and to the natural habitat. Plant
life and animal life are seen to as an intricately complicated whole, a way of life
in which each part depends on almost every other part for some aspect of its
existence. Organisms in their natural habitat exist in an ongoing balance of
nature, a dynamic equilibrium in which each individual must struggle to
survive. Ecologists study this way of interrelationship and interdependence in an
attempt to discover the forces that define the activities of each part.
Human communities particularly organized around a free marked economy
could be seen to resemble this biotic state in nature. Each individual struggles for
his or her survival in an interrelated, mutually dependant community. The law
of survival for the fittest applies here as well.
Robert Park (1968)
Proposed a parallel between the distributions of plant life in nature with
societies. He viewed a city not merely as a geographic phenomenon, but as a
kind of super organism that had organic unity derived from the symbiotic
interrelationships of the people who lived within it. Within this super organism
there were many natural areas where different people lived e.g. “china town”
“little Italy” or “the black belt”.
Other natural areas included individuals in certain income or occupation of
groups or industrial or business areas. Others areas were cut off from the rest of
the city by rivers, highways or unused space. A symbolic relationship existed
among people within a natural area but also among the areas. Each area players
a part in the life of the city as a whole.
Through certain processes the balance of nature in a given areas might change
through invasion dominance and succession such as the American invasion of
territory of native America, or cultural or ethnic groups taking over entire
neighbourhoods by shifting into it, one after the other.
These cities expand radically from their center in patterns of concentric circles
each moving gradually outwards. Burgess (1928) describes these concentric
circles as zones. Zone I is the central business district, Zone II is the area
immediately around, it oldest section of the city and is continuously invalid by
business and industry expanding Zone I. Zone II is deteriorating and continue to
do so. It is usually the most undesirable part of the city and therefore habituated
by the poorest and recent immigrants. Zone III is relatively modest homes and
apartments and families escaping deteriorating Zone II. Zone IV is residential
8
district or single-family houses and expensive apartment. Beyond these limits
are, the suburban areas, zone V which constitute the commuter zone. Each of
these zones is growing and thus gradually moving outwards into the territory
occupied by the next zone in process of invasion dominance and succession.
Parks and his colleague used this model to study the city of Chicago and its
problem. They attempted to discover the processes to by which the biotic balance
and the social equilibrium are maintained once they are achieved, and the
process by which the biotic balance and social equilibrium are disturbed.
RESEARCH IN THE DELINQUENCY AREA IN CHICAGO
Shaw C. (1929) devised a strategy based on the theory of human ecology to
study the process by which Juvenile delinquents detached from convectional
groups. He saw them as normal human beings and believed that their illegal
activities were somehow bound up with their environment. He therefore
analyzed the characteristics of the neighbourhood that according to the notice
records had not delinquents.
He compiled known histories from individual delinquents to see how they
related with their environment. He found that the most neighbourhoods with
most delinquents are immediate near heavy industrial areas (zone II), poor
housing, and industrial invasion, poor physical status also highest number of
delinquent found in areas of lowest economic status and high rates of infant
death, diseases and insanity.
The population composition in high delinquency areas had higher concentration
of foreign born and Africa American heads of families. These are the populations
that mostly remained in the inner areas of zone II. Also that the high delinquency
rates in this areas was associated with the geographical location rather then race
or ethnicity or nationality.
Further he found that delinquent are largely not different from other persons in
intelligence, physical condition and personality traits. But that in the high
delinquency areas convectional traditional, neighborhood institution and public
opinion and control systems were largely disintegrated. Therefore children grew
up in a social world where delinquency was an accepted and appropriate form of
conduct. The neighborhood also provided many opportunities for delinquent
activities, which began at an early age as part of play activities of the street.
These play activities were transmitted from older boys to younger boys in
continuity of tradition (e.g. shoplifting carjacking). The normal methods of
official control could not stop this process Shaw concluded that the problem of
delinquency and other social problems are closely related to the process of
invasion dominance and succession that determine the growth patterns of the
9
city. There is rapid shift of population and formal social organization that existed
tends to disintegrate as the original population retreats. Because the
neighbourhood is in transition the residents no longer care as much about its
appearance or reputation.
The high mobility means there is high turnover of children in the local schools,
and therefore disruptes of learning and discipline. The areas also tend to become
battle ground between the invading and the retreating cultures, which tend to be
manifested in individuals and gang conflicts between youth and the incoming
cultures.
Policy implications.
Shaw believed that since juvenile delinquency was generated by social
disorganization treatment of individual youth could not have much effect in
reducing overall rates. He believed the answer was in the development of
programmes, which seek to effect changes in the conditions of life in specific
local communities and in whole sections of the city. This would be through
organizations of neighborhood residents so that natural forces of social control
would take effect. He launched the Chicago free project in 1932, which operated
for 25 years until his death in 1957, but its effect on delinquency in these areas
was never closely evaluated.
In Boston, a similar project was evaluated by Miller (1962) over a three-year
period and was found to achieve many desirable goals. The gangs established
involvement in recreational activities provided opportunities for occupation and
education and increased interagency cooperation to address community
problem. However it had very little impact on delinquency rates.
More recent theory and Research on Neighborhood as causes of crime.
Despite the failure of the Chicago area project to prevent delinquency,
criminologist continue to argue that neighborhoods themselves are important as
causes of crime and delinquency and that they are appropriate for crime
prevention programs (e.g. hence community policing programs)
This continued focus is the result of Shaw and McKays discovery of residential
succession (1942) where neighborhoods themselves associated with high crimes
rats remained the same, independent of the people who lived there. Stark (1987)
identified structural characteristics of aspects of these neighborhoods to explain
residential succession: density, poverty, mixed uses (residence and industrial)
dilapidation and transience (frequent in and out movement). Stark argues that
these increase moral cynicism among the community residents, provide more
opportunity or the motivation to commit crime and reduced surveillance.
10
Therefore crime prone people are attracted to these neighborhoods as lawabiding people move out.
This results in high crime rates, which persist even when there is complete
turnover in the people who live there. Sampson (1995) propose a variety of
policy recommendation that are focused on changing places not people e.g.
improve housing, services increased community power to promote community
organizations, and that the small cumulative changes will result in a more stable
community in the long.
The Chicago school can be described as a goldmine that has continued to enrich
criminology. The basic point is that crime cannot be understood without also
understanding the contexts in which it occurs. Crime is part of the symbiotic
unity and so it can only be understood in the context of its relationship to the
activities of the rest of the organism.
There is a symbiotic relationship between conventional and illegal activities in a
way that victims and offenders are linked in ecology of crime. Thus
criminologists must look at the social context to understand the parallel process
by which victims come to experience the risk of crime and offenders come to be
motivated to commit crime.
11