Criminal Justice

school needed

Chapter5Powerpoint.pdf

Home >Law homework help >Criminal homework help >Criminal Justice

Criminological Theory: A Brief Introduction Fourth edition

Chapter 5 The Social Ecology of Crime

Social Disorganization Theory (1 of 2) • Contains several assumptions that distinguish it from other

perspectives discussed in the text

• Social disorganization attempts to explain why some communities have higher crime rates than others (not individually based)

Social Disorganization Theory (2 of 2) • This theory assumes that social organization, schools,

churches, businesses, etc., when functioning normally enable a community to deal with crime

• Crime is not due to defective people, but rather social organizations that have failed

Intellectual Origins • During the early 1900s in Chicago, Park and Burgess

began their work on social ecology

• Social ecology holds that people struggle for survival in a community of mutual dependence

Important Principles • Two principles are of particular importance to Social

Disorganization Theory 1. People compete for resources 2. People exist in a world of mutual dependence

Location of Crime (1 of 2) • Shaw and McKay (1942), developed the connection

between social disorganization and crime

• Looked at how crime was spread across Chicago in the 1930s and 1940s

• They found that crime was concentrated in slum areas, which tended to be located in the center of the city

Location of Crime (2 of 2) • The pattern appeared to be consistent over time

regardless of ethnic composition

• Based on this information, the question then became, why does place matter?

• The city of Chicago was divided into 5 zones that radiated out from the city’s center or core

Zones • The Zones were as follows:

1. Inner City (Central Business District) 2. Transitional Zone (Area of high crime) 3. Working Class Zone 4. Residential Zone 5. Commuter Zone (Suburbs)

Zone II • The most important zone to the theory is the transitional

zone

• Homes in the area are older and of poorer condition

• People living in this zone have little tangible incentive to make their communities better

Social Disorganization and Causes • Shaw and McKay concluded that Social Disorganization is

endemic to Zone II

• The community in this area cannot function as its residents would desire

• They expend personal effort to improve the living conditions of this type of neighborhood that is against the common sense of individuals in this area

Conditions for Social Disorganization (1 of 2) • According to Shaw and McKay, 3 factors create natural

conditions for social disorganization 1. Residential Instability 2. Racial/Ethnic Heterogeneity 3. Poverty

Conditions for Social Disorganization (2 of 2) • Each of the aforementioned signs of disorganization

undermines the ability of residents to work in concert and prevent crime from occurring

Residential Instability • Communities with a lot of residential turnover have high

levels of crime

• Effective formal and informal community organizations require a relatively stable population

• People do not tend to form close ties with people they will only know for a short while

Racial/Ethnic Heterogeneity • Shaw and McKay found that communities where many

different ethnic groups live in close proximity have higher crime rates

• Communication was found to decrease under these conditions, which made the community less effective at being able to organize/control the neighborhood

Poverty • Communities with high poverty tend to lack the resources

needed for effective community organization

• Concentrated poverty weakens the tax base, which supports community institutions (schools)

• Residents are focused on personal survival and not other activities

Development of Social Disorganization Theory (1 of 4) • After Shaw and McKay the theory languished for many

years

• Other theories become more popular

• Crime was seen as a byproduct of culture and not explicitly the domain of poor communities

Development of Social Disorganization Theory (2 of 4) • Disorganization also fell out of favor due to limitations with

data

• Weakness of community networks (an important factor of disorganization) was hard to measure using typical community level data

Development of Social Disorganization Theory (3 of 4) • The primary data that disorganization theorists were able

to show were maps with dots denoting where crime was taking place

Development of Social Disorganization Theory (4 of 4) • In 1974, Kasorda and Janowitz talked of communities with

informal ties, which helped the theory come back into fashion

• Kornheiser (1978), attacked critiques and focused on informal social bonds

Revived Social Disorganization Theory (1 of 2) • Work by Sampson et al. (1997), created the concept of

Collective Efficacy

• Collective efficacy is the idea that residents band together to protect the best interests of their communities

Revived Social Disorganization Theory (2 of 2) • Social Capital is related to collective efficacy and is based

on the idea that informal networks within the community help prevent crime

Policy Implications (1 of 3) • On one level, disorganization theory suggests

straightforward policy

• Community organizations with informal control mechanisms need to be promoted

• HOAs and neighborhood watches are examples of these types of community organizations

Policy Implications (2 of 3) • Shaw and McKay’s Chicago Area Project is an example of

an early social program based on Social Disorganization Theory

• Project staff and social workers were used to help create and maintain community organizations

Policy Implications (3 of 3) • An interesting finding from this study was that once

financial support was cut back, these communities began to have more issues

Policy Implementation • Why have these types of policies been so difficult to

implement?

• Issues such as residential mobility, incarceration (which hurts communities) and improvements that ‘price out’ poor residents are some of the key issues here

Routine Activities Theory • Based on the work of Hawley (1950) suggesting that there

was a natural rhythm of human life

• Cohen and Felson (1979), three components were necessary for a crime to occur 1. Motivated Offender 2. Suitable Target 3. Lack of Proper Guardianship

Role of Social Changes • Social Changes are often relevant for facilitating/impeding

situations in which offenders are poorly defended/worthwhile targets

• Changes such as more women working (leaving homes unguarded during the day) have affected crime rates

Empirical Research/Criticisms • A criticism of Routine Activities Theory is that it is difficult to

test

• Many look at routine activities as a victim blaming theory and are thus highly critical of it

• Readers should be aware of the inherent ideology embedded within any type of theory