Chapter 9

shaw and mckay's theory of social disorganization

- Clifford Shaw and Henry McKay drew heavily on their colleagues at the University of Chicago in devising their theory of social disorganization, which became known as the Chicago School theory of criminology.7 Shaw had been producing excellent case studies on the individual (i.e., micro) level for years before he took on theorizing on the macro (i.e., structural) level of crime rates.8 However, once he began working with McKay, he devised perhaps the most enduring and valid model for why certain neighborhoods have more social problems, such as delinquency, than others. - In this model, Shaw and McKay proposed a framework that began with the assumption that certain neighborhoods in all cities have more crime than other parts of the city—most of them located in Burgess's Zone II, the zone in the transition from residential to industrial due to invading factories. According to Shaw and McKay, the neighborhoods that have the most crime typically have at least three common problems (see Figure 9.2): physical dilapidation, poverty, and heterogeneity (which is a fancy way of saying a high cultural mix). Shaw and McKay noted other common characteristics, such as a highly transient population, meaning that people constantly move in and out of the area, as well as unemployment among the residents of the neighborhood - As noted in Figure 9.2, other social ills are included as antecedent factors in the theoretical model. The antecedent social ills tend to lead to a breakdown in social organization, which is why this model is referred to as the theory of social disorganization. Specifically, it is predicted that the antecedent factors of poverty, heterogeneity, and physical dilapidation will lead to a state of social disorganization, which in turn will lead to crime and delinquency. This means that the residents of a neighborhood that fits the profile of having a high rate of poor, culturally mixed residents in a dilapidated area cannot come together to effectively solve problems, such as delinquency among the neighborhood's youth, especially in terms of transient populations. (You may remember that such was the case in Chicago in the late 19th and early 20th centuries.) - One of the most significant contributions of Shaw and McKay's model was that they demonstrated that the prevalence and frequency of various social ills—be they poverty, disease, low birth weight, or other problems—tend to overlap with higher delinquency rates. Regardless of what social problem is measured, higher rates of social problems are almost always clustered in the zone in transition. It was in this area that Shaw and McKay believed there was a breakdown in informal social controls and that children began to learn offending norms from their interactions with peers on the street through what they called "play activities."9 Thus, the breakdown in the conditions of the neighborhood leads to social disorganization, which in turn leads to delinquents learning criminal activities from older youths in the neighborhood. Ultimately, the failure of the neighborhood's residents to organize themselves allows the older youths to govern the behavior of the younger children. Basically, the older youths in the area provide a system of organization where the neighborhood cannot, so younger children follow their guidance, which leads them astray of the norms of conventional society. - Shaw and McKay supplied data to support these theoretical propositions. Specifically, they demonstrated through data from the U.S. Census and city records that neighborhoods with high rates of poverty, physical dilapidation, and a high cultural mix also had the most delinquency and crime. Furthermore, the high rates of delinquency and other social problems were consistent with Burgess's framework of concentric circles, in that the highest rates were observed for the areas in Zone II, the zone in transition. However, there was an exception to the model; the Gold Coast area along the northern coast of Lake Michigan was notably absent from the high rates of social problems, particularly delinquency, that existed throughout the otherwise consistent model of concentric circles and neighborhood zones. - So Shaw and McKay's findings were as predicted, in the sense that high delinquency was apparent in areas where factories were invading the residential district. Furthermore, Shaw and McKay's longitudinal data showed that it did not matter which ethnic groups lived in Zone II (zone in transition), because all groups (with the exception of Asians) who lived in that zone had high delinquency rates while they lived there. On the other hand, once most of each ethnic group moved out of Zone II, their delinquency rates decreased significantly. - This finding rejects the notion of social Darwinism (i.e., individuals are influenced by the same Darwinism in laws of natural selection as plants and animals), because it shows that it is not culture but, rather, the criminogenic nature of the environment that influences crime and delinquency. After all, if ethnicity or race made a difference, we would expect the delinquency rates in Zone II to fluctuate based on the ethnic or racial makeup of that area, but they do not. Rather, the zone determines the rates of delinquency, regardless of what ethnic or racial groups live there.

cultural context: chicago in the 1800s and early 1900s

- No American city has ever experienced faster growth than Chicago did in the 19th century.1 The population of Chicago exploded from about 5,000 people in the early 1800s to more than 2 million people by 1900; put another way, it more than doubled every decade.2 This massive rate of growth, which was much faster than that seen in other large U.S. cities such as Boston, Baltimore, New York, Philadelphia, and San Francisco, was due to Chicago's centrally located geographic position; in other words, it was in many ways "landlocked," because although it sits on Lake Michigan, there was no water route to the city from the Atlantic Ocean until the Erie Canal opened in 1825, which opened the Great Lakes region to shipping (including migration of people). Three years later, the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad—the first American passenger train with a route from a mid-Atlantic city to central areas—began operation. These two transportation advancements created a continuous stream of (im)migration to the Chicago area, which only increased with the completion of the transcontinental railroad in 1869, linking both coasts with the Midwestern portions of the country - In the early to mid-1800s, many large U.S. cities had virtually no formal social agencies such as we have today to handle problems of urbanization. For example, there were no social workers, building inspectors, garbage collectors, or even police officers. Once police agencies did start in some of these cities, their duties often included tasks we associate with other agencies, such as finding lost children and collecting garbage, primarily because there weren't other agencies to perform these tasks. Therefore, communities were largely responsible for solving their own problems, including crime and delinquency. However, by the late 19th century, Chicago was largely made up of citizens who did not speak a common language and did not share one another's cultural values. This phenomenon is consistent with Census Bureau data that show 70% of Chicago's residents were foreign-born and another 20% were first-generation American. It was almost impossible for these citizens to organize themselves to solve community problems, because their backgrounds varied so greatly. In most cases, they could not even understand one another. This resulted in the type of chaos and normlessness that Durkheim predicted would occur when urbanization and industrialization occurred too rapidly (see previous chapter); in fact, Chicago represented the archetypal example of a society in an anomic state, with almost a complete breakdown in control. There were many manifestations of this breakdown in social control, but one of the most notable was children roaming the streets in gangs with little intervention from the adults in the neighborhoods. Delinquency was soaring, and it appeared that the gangs controlled the streets as much as any other group. - The city of Chicago was desperate for ways of dealing with its exponentially growing problem of delinquency and crime. The leaders and people of Chicago needed theoretical guidance to develop solutions to their problems, particularly regarding the high rates of delinquency. In this regard, the Department of Sociology at the University of Chicago became extremely important in the early 1900s. Essentially, modern sociology developed in Chicago because the city needed it to solve its social problems. Thus, Chicago became a type of laboratory for the sociological researchers, and they developed a number of theoretical models of crime and other social ills that are still empirically valid today.

social disorganization theory

- by first introducing the concentric zone model, the zone of transition and the research by park and burgess, it provides the historical background and link to the origins of social disorganization theory. - the names most associated with early social disorganization theory are shaw and mckay. These two focused on the belief that the city of chicago is a social organism, and wanted to understand the interaction between people and their environment. Specifically, shaw and mckay examine the economic and social condition in urban areas that may affect crime rates. they wanted to see how neighborhood conditions in urban areas created a crime prone environment. in other words, shaw and mckay wanted to examine the differences between organized and disorganized communities. - EX: disorganized neighborhoods are usually identifiable by geographic distributions of poverty, racial and ethnic heterogeneity, and transience and mobility of its residents. - racial and ethnic heterogeneity is the amount of different racial and ethnic groups residing in a community. A racial homogenous community would mean that only one racial group resides in that area, while a heterogeneous community means that various groups live together in the same neighborhood. - mobility and transience corresponds to the degree to which how many residents move in and out of the neighborhood, or how many renters live in a community compared to people who own their homes. - now, shaw and mckay believe that the geographic distribution of poverty, heterogeneity, and mobility were marked by people in the inner city. Therefore, the indicators of poor people, different racial and ethnic groups living in the same area, and the constant flow of people moving in and out of community usually means that the neighborhood is disorganized. - shaw and mckay studied the slums of chicago for over 40 years by continuing the previous research by park and burgess. They adapted and extended park and burgess idea of social ecology and the concentric zone model to explain the patterns of delinquency in chicago. - shaw and mckay basically revised park and burgess perspective to more fully understand delinquent and criminal behavior. Specifically, they theorized that delinquency would be higher in the inner city than in the areas further out from the zone of transition or in the outer circles of the concentric zone model. in other words, if you were to look at the communities that were further out from the inner city, the crime rates would be lower. - in order to examine the concepts that they theorized, shaw and mckay used offical crime data in the form of arrest statistics to see how deliquency rates were spread out throughout the different concentric zones. They physically mapped and plotted each deliquents address for every single zone by going through the arrest statistics. This was before computerized crime mapping was invented, so this took a long time to do. - overall shaw and mckay found that there was a heavy pattern of delinquency in the zone of transition. - what shaw and mckay found from mapping all of the address of juvenile deliquents was that over time, the crime rates by each concentric zone area did not significantly change. this finding was regardless of what ethnic or racial group was living within each zone. Therefore, no matter who or what groups were moving in and out of each zone, the crime rates stayed relatively stable and did not change. So if you were looking at a series of maps over the years and you keep seeing high delinquency rates in the same area, what do you think is going on? what does it mean? this consistent finding by shaw and mckay resulted in the conclusion that the area's delinquency rates are based on the characteristics of the community itself. In other words, it is the characteristics of the area and not the individuals who live in these areas that affects delinquency rates. stated in a different way, shaw and mckay believe that people are a byproduct of the community and neighborhood that they live in. They argued that crime was not a function of personal traits or characteristics, like biological or psychological theories, but crime was more of a social and environment phenomenon based on ecological characteristics. - from these results, shaw and mckay theorized that various social institutions in disadvantaged communities had broken down. In other words, in these communities, there was a breakdown in the family, school, and church. In one way, social disorganization theory emerged based on shaw and mckay noticing that there was a breakdown in inner city neighborhoods due to family, school, and employment problems. EX: there was a high rate of high school dropouts in single parent homes. These are community level characteristics that are indicative of problematic social institutions. - shaw and mckay also believed that from this breakdown, adults in disadvantaged neighborhoods were not able to control youth. From this, they weren't able to stop criminal organizations, such as gangs, from forming and arising in their neighborhoods. In stronger neighborhoods, adults are able to prevent crime and gangs from emerging based on the connections with youth in their community, but not in broken down communities. Since there is the breakdown of family, school, and church institutions, gangs are free to roam in the neighborhood and recruit other potential young members. The formation of gangs eventually leads to the adoption of subcultural values. In this subculture, it is now okay to steal, sell drugs, and be violent, since the definition of a subculture includes values and beliefs that are opposite to mainstream society.

zone in transition

in the chicago school, this refers to a zone (zone II) that was once residential but is becoming more industrial; it tends to have the highest crime rates

which unit of analysis does shaw and mckay's theory focus on?

macro level

which theorist proposed the theory of lower-class focal concerns?

miller

natural areas

refers to the chicago school's idea that all cities contain identifiable clusters, such as a chinatown or little italy, and neighborhoods that have low or high crime rates

concentric circles

model proposed by chicago school theorists that assumes that all cities grow in a natural way with the same five zones

in shaw and mckay's theoretical model, which zone was predicted to have the most crime and delinquency, largely due to other social problems there?

zone in transition

cultural/subcultural theory

a perspective on criminal offending that assumes that many offenders believe in a normative system distinctly different from and often at odds with conventional norms

focal concerns

a primary concept of miller's thory, which asserts that all members of the lower class focus on six concepts they deem important: fate, autonomy, trouble, toughness, excitement, and smartness.

collective efficacy

- since the work of shaw and mckay began in the 1940s, a more recent concept is now connected with social disorganization theory, which is the term called collective efficacy. - collective efficacy is defined as a mutual trust with the neighborhoods and communities, a willingness to intervene in the supervision of children within a neighborhood and the maintenance of public order within a neighborhood. Some of the characteristics of neighborhoods that have collective efficacy are ones that have high levels of social control, social integration, social cohesion, and social trust. Residents who live in these types of neighborhoods are said to enjoy a better life because being in a cohesive neighborhood can lead to a better education for their children, quality healthcare, and abundant housing opportunities. - THREE TYPES OF collective effficacy (within socially organized neighborhoods): informal social control, institutuional social control, and public social control (former social control). - 1st type Informal social control: consist of groups of people within a neighborhood that are within the primary or private level of an individual. Family and friends have a certain amount of control on all of us. informal social control by our family and friends is used by awarding us for good behavior or withholding approval, respect, or admiration, depending if we engage in problematic behavior. Family and friends are actually able to control our behaviors by using direct criticism, ridicule, or even physical punishment if we are problematic. EX: if you know that your parents will be mad at you if you skip school on a constant basis and drink alcohol underage, and therefore, you do not engage in these behaviors because you do not want your parents to be disappointed in you, then this is a way that your parents actually have some form of control over you. This is because you do not skip school or drink underage because you are worried of what your parents may think of you if you do engage in these deviant behaviors. ISC can also be demonstrated in neighborhoods that does not directly involve control by your parents or peers. ISC occurs in communities by neighbors looking and watching out for each other or kids being supervised by other adults in the neighborhood when they're playing outside, and neighbors having a willingness to intervene when they see something negative happening in their neighborhood. In a community that has collective efficacy, if a neighbor sees something suspicious going on in the neighborhood they may go and tell other neighbors about what is going on or call the police because the neighbors watch out for each other. Concerning the supervision of youth, if an adult sees Matthew painting graffiti on a brick wall, that adult will go and tell Matthew's parents what deviant behavior he has been up to. Also, if matthew knows that what he's doing is wrong in the neighborhood and the other adults will be keeping an eye on him, he may be less likely to cause trouble. EX: say that mrs smith looks out her window and sees someone trying to break into the house across the street. she may intervene by calling the police herself because she cares about her neighbors and does not want crime occurring in her community. - 2nd type institutional social control: occurs when school, churches, and businesses exert control over people in a community. Communities that have collective efficacy attempt to use their local institutions, such as school and churches, to control crime. EX: schools may offer after school programs for children until their parents get out of work, or churches and recreational centers open for teenagers to have a safe place to hang out with their friends. - 3rd type public social control (former social control): Public sources of social control are external to neighborhoods and communities, or they're considered outside forces that can exert control over neighborhood residents. Some examples of this include police and outside government or political agencies. Police are a primary source of public social control. A positive police presence is normally the largest when communities have a significant amount of political power to give funding for additional law enforcement to patrol their neighborhoods. - neighborhoods that are socially disorganized have LOW collective efficacy. - first, socially disorganized neighborhoods have parents who are unable to use neighborhood resources to help control their children. - second, in these types of neighborhoods, unsupervised peer groups or gangs emerge because no one is looking out for youth or intervening in problematic behavior. Paralleling this issue, neighbors are also unwilling to watch out for each other and intervene. If mrs smith sees someone breaking into the house across the street, she may just move away from the window and not call the police because she does not want to get involved. - third, mrs smith or other residents may be unwilling to help because they fear for their own safety in these neighborhoods. They do not want to go outside because of a constant threat of violence or do not want to intervene because they are fearful of being retaliated against later. residents may also be fearful for their personal safety, but do not have enough economic or political power in resources to demand a larger police presence. - since socially disorganized neighborhoods are characterized by low collective efficacy, unsupervised peer groups or gangs emerge. This is because parents may be working once kids get out of school and neighbors are not looking out for problematic youth. Also, kids are unable to participate in after school programs at churches or schools if these locations do not have enough resources to fund these programs. Therefore the only place for youth and adolescents to hang out after school in in around the neighborhood while adults are still at work. Lastly, socially disorganized communities have low collective efficacy because they do not have enough political power to demand more police protection, patrols, and help from social agencies. However, one issue with the last point is that neighborhoods that have low collective efficacy may not necessarily trust the police and want their help. This becomes more of a debate and a touchy subject. This is because some people in disadvantaged communities do want more police patrols and in increase in the presence of police in their community, while other residents do not trust the police and want them to stay out of their neighborhood.

shaw and mckay - theory

- so based on the geographic distribution and various social conditions that are found in disadvantaged communities, Shaw and mckay theorized that deteriorated neighborhoods produce social disorganization. - another way to understand the concept of social disorganization is that a community or neighborhood is not organized. These geographic, social, and co-occurring negative characteristics that were discussed through shaw and mckay's main idea of the lecture are theorized by shaw and mckay to lead to weak social ties within a neighborhood. In other words, these characteristics lead to weak social ties with other people in the neighborhood and institutions such as church and school. One way to say this is that in socially disorganized neighborhoods, there is basically no sense of community. These communities are unable to provide the basic services needed by its residents, such as adequate education, healthcare, and proper housing. As a result, residents of the community are not tied to each other and have no stake in their neighborhood. However, it is important to know that it is not the geographic and social conditions themselves that are disorganized. Social disorganization is produced because of problematic social conditions. This is led to by weak ties and no sense of community. Another way to say this is that there's not necessarily something wrong with the residents in the neighborhood, but there is something wrong with the community. - therefore, the basic definition of social disorganization theory states that social disorganization is the inability of a community to meet the wants and needs of its residents. In these communities, there are few opportunities for stable employment or job advancement. From this problem, residents in socially disorganized communities may begin adopting other types of lifestyles and subcultural values in order to adapt and survive in their neighborhood. This is where the concept of subculture emerges within social disorganization theory. Stated differently, social disorganization in communities may lead to alternative values, beliefs, and views which deem acceptable for its residents to engage in illegal or illegitimate behavior to achieve their goals. - in addition, the subcultural values that emerge in socially disorganized communities may compete and conflict with mainstream societal norms. In other ways, living in a socially disorganized community may lead to believing in alternative values. EX: most of us have learned throughout the years that it is morally wrong to steal. However if you are living in a socially disorganized community, your values might change because there are not enough job opportunities. From this, you decide that it is okay to rob a liquor store because your family needs money for rent and to put food on the table. This concept relates to the example on the slide that your family may not oppose to you stealing because it means that you will have more money and more economic gain. - A subculture or subcultural value emerges in socially disorganized communities. in these types of neighborhoods, a subcultural value system emerges that consists of alternative deviants and values that are different than mainstream society. EX: stealing, selling drugs, and using violence is a normal behavior that is deemed acceptable in these subcultures. in other words, these types of deviant behaviors become the norm in these communities and are very difficult to eliminate once they are established. If disorganized communities are not changing for the better to help decrease crime, then how can deviant and subcultural values ever change? - another difficult situation to change, in these communities is that the subcultural values and beliefs are passed down from generation to generation and through constant peer interaction. This also means that subcultural values are even harder to eliminate once they are established in a community.

shaw and mckay - main ideas

- while shaw and mckay argued that disadvantaged communities have a breakdown in certain social institutions, they also centralized on some main ideas in regards to social disorganization theory. - first they were interested in examining theoretically how geographic distribution of communities relates to crime rates. as a reminder, shaw and mckay contended that crime rates are higher in some neighborhoods compared to others. while this finding is revolving back to the concentric zone model, it is also extended by the fact that some people within certain communities are physically cut off from other areas. This actually makes physical boundaries between neighborhoods. EX: railroad tracks, highways, and rivers are physical characteristics that distinguish between neighborhoods. Its like the phrase "be careful that person is from the wrong side of the tracks" this phrase shares a commonality with a bad part of a community or somewhere that you do not want to be. Even today, in every city and every town, there is a right side and a wrong side of the railroad tracks. usually one side is more crime prone and has higher crime rates than the other side. - while the first main idea of shaw and mckay's theory focused on the geographic distribution of communities, their second main idea surrounded certain social conditions and a link between economic segregation and high crime rates. They argued that economic segregation is the type of social condition that can identify between communities with low and high crime rates. Some of these economic segregation characteristics include old and dilapidated buildings, a low number of homeowners, which translates to a high number of renters, and a large number of residents living in a small area. These communities are also characterized by crumbling neighborhoods and high levels of poverty. paralleling economic segregation, another type of social condition that shaw and mckay said exists in disadvantaged communities is racial and ethnic segregation. They believe that disadvantaged communities are characterized by a large proportion of racial and ethnic minorities and a large percentage of foreign born individuals. Also, since minorities and immigrants are concentrated in the inner city, shaw and mckay also believed that for the most part, they also live in poverty. - so as a brief review of shaw and mckay is that neighborhoods that are broken down can be characterized by their geographical distribution and various social conditions. These conditions include economic segregation, racial and ethnic segregation, and now, residential instability. Residential instability means that individuals do not live in their homes for a long period of time. Once residents have enough money in resources to move out of the zone of transition, they relocate to a more prosperous neighborhood. Once they become acclimated to the urban environment, they leave when they have enough resources and money. Therefore, the residents who are left in the inner city are either homeless or move around the inner city because they cannot afford to move out. - therefore, while shaw and mckay stated that there were various types of social conditions, which were economic segregation, racial and ethnic segregation, and residential instability, there are Additional social condtions that are also more likely to occur in these communities compared to more affluent neighborhoods. Some of these issues include high infant mortality rates, a high prevalence of mental disorders and alcoholism, and high instances of domestic violence. These problematic issues co-occur within disadvantaged communities and add to the numerous negative other aspects in these neighborhoods.

criticism

Studies on cultural theories of crime, at least in the United States, show that no large groups blatantly flout the middle-class norms of society. Specifically, Miller's model of lower-class focal concerns simply does not exist across the entire lower class. Studies consistently show that most adults in the lower class attempt to socialize their children to believe in conventional values—respect for authority, hard work, delayed gratification, and so forth—and not the focal concerns that Miller specified in his model. Even Ferracuti and Wolfgang admitted that their research findings led them to conclude that their model was more of a subcultural perspective and not one of a distinctly different culture. So there are likely small groups or gangs that have subcultural normative values, but that does not constitute a completely separate culture in society. Perhaps the best subculture theories are those presented by Cohen, as well as Cloward and Ohlin (see the previous chapter), in their variations of strain theory that emphasize the formations of gangs among lower-class male youths. Therefore, it can be concluded that if there are subcultural groups in our society, they seem to make up a small percentage of the population, which somewhat negates the cultural/subcultural perspective of criminality

chicago school of criminology

a theoretical framework of criminal behavior that emphasizes the environment impact of living in a high crime neighborhood, applies ecological principles to explain how cities grow, and highlights levels of neighborhood organization to explain crime rates

which theorist wrote a significant book on inner-city, african american subculture titled The Code of the Streets?

anderson

social structure- key terms

- 1st term structure: the concept is concerned with certain patterned relationships, differentiated opportunities, and basically how things are done in society. Structure is concerned with class, gender, race, and age. - EX: economically disadvantaged neigh`borhoods are more likely to be characterized as the lower class and poor, as well as having more minority residents than other neighborhoods. These neighborhoods also have fewer opportunities for steady jobs and employment. - 2nd term culture: The concept of culture for the purpose of this course is considered the mainstream values and norms that are held within a community or society. - 3rd term subculture: they run counter or opposite to mainstream cultures and values. Therefore the norms and values of a subculture are basically the opposite of the values and norms within mainstream society.

cultural and subcultural theories of crime

- Cultural/subcultural theories of crime assume that there are unique groups in society that socialize their children to believe that certain activities that violate conventional law are good and positive ways to behave. Although it is rather difficult to find large groups of people or classes that fit this definition, it is somewhat likely that there are subcultures or isolated groups of individuals who buy into a different set of norms than the conventional, middle-class set of values.

ecological principles in city growth and concentric circles

- In the 1920s and 1930s, sociologists at the University of Chicago offered several new perspectives of human behavior and city growth. The first relevant model was proposed by Robert E. Park, who claimed that much of human behavior, especially the way cities grow, follows the basic principles of ecology.4 Ecology is essentially the study of the dynamics and processes through which plants and animals (i.e., wildlife) interact with their environment. In an application of Darwinian theory, Park proposed that the growth of cities follows a natural pattern of evolution - Specifically, Park claimed that cities represent a type of complex organism that has a sense of unity formed from the interrelations among citizens and groups in the city. Park applied the ecological principle of symbiosis to explain the dependency of the various citizens and units on one another: Everyone is better off working together as a whole. Furthermore, Park claimed that all cities contain identifiable clusters, which he called natural areas, where the group has taken on a life or organic unity of its own. To clarify, many cities have neighborhoods with a majority ethnic group or with certain distinctive features. For example, Hell's Kitchen, Times Square, and Harlem represent areas of New York City that have each taken on a unique identity; however, each of them contributes to the whole—namely, the makeup and identity of the city. The same can be seen in other cities, such as Baltimore, with its Inner Harbor, Little Italy, and Fells Point. From Miami to San Francisco to New Orleans, cities across America—and throughout the world, for that matter—contain these identifiable natural areas - Applying several other ecological principles, Park also noted that some areas (or species) may invade and dominate adjacent areas (species), causing the recession of previously dominant areas (species). The dominated area or species may either recede and migrate to another location or die off. In wildlife, this can be seen in the incredible proliferation of a weed called kudzu. Kudzu grows at an amazing pace and has large leaves. It grows on top of other plants, trees, fields, and even houses, covering everything in its path and stealing all the sunlight. A vine of Asian origin, it was introduced to North America in the 1800s at a world exposition. Americans found it useful in controlling erosion, but the plant soon became a menace, especially in the southeastern region of the United States. Now this weed costs the government more than $350 million each year in destruction of crops and other fauna. This is a good example of a species that invades, dominates, and causes the recession of other species in the area. As is often the case, kudzu was not a completely natural phenomenon; it was synthetically introduced to this country at a world expo. - A similar example is the introduction of buffalo to Santa Catalina Island, off the coast of Southern California. In the 1930s, about three dozen buffalo were brought to the island for a movie shoot. Once the production was over, the film producers decided not to spend the money to remove the beasts. Had this occurred in many other parts of the United States, it would not have caused a problem; however, the largest mammal native to the island was a 4-pound fox. So the buffalo herd, with no competition and no natural predators, multiplied into the many hundreds. They destroyed much of the environment, driving to extinction some plants and animals unique to Catalina Island. Similar to kudzu, the buffalo came to dominate the environment, and other species died off. - Park claimed that a similar process occurs in cities, where some areas invade other zones or areas and the previously dominant area must succeed or die off. This is easy to see in modern times with what is known as urban sprawl. Geographers and urban planners have long acknowledged the detriment caused to traditionally stable residential areas when businesses move in. Some of the most recent examples involve the battles of longtime homeowners against the introduction of malls, businesses, and other industrial centers to a previously residential district. The media have documented such fights, especially with the proliferation of such establishments as Walmart and Super Kmarts in areas where residents perceive (and perhaps rightfully so) their presence as an invasion. Such an invasion can create chaos in a previously stable residential community due to increased traffic, a transient population, and, perhaps most important, crime. Furthermore, some cities are granting power to such development through eminent domain, in which the local government can take land from the homeowners to rezone and import businesses. - At the time when Park developed his theory of ecology, he observed the trend of businesses and factories invading traditionally residential areas of Chicago, causing chaos and instability in those areas. Readers, especially those who were raised in suburban or rural areas, can likely relate to this, in that when they go back to where they grew up or even currently live, they can often see fast growth. Such development can devastate the informal controls (neighborhood networks, family ties, etc.) in these areas due to the "invasion" of a highly transient group of consumers and residents who do not have strong ties to the area. - This leads to a psychological indifference toward the neighborhood—no one cares about protecting the community anymore. Those who can afford to leave the area do, and those who can't afford to leave remain only until they can save enough money. After all, especially in the time when Park presented his theory of ecology in the 1920s, when factories moved into the area, it often meant a lot of smoke billowing out of chimneys. No one wanted to live in such a state, particularly at a time when there was no real regulation of pollution and virtually no filters on such smokestacks. In fact, certain parts of Chicago, as well as all other cities in America, were perpetually covered by smog from these factories. In highly industrial areas, it appeared to be always snowing or overcast due to the constant and vast coverage of smoke and pollutants across the sky. So it is easy to see how such "invasions" by factories and businesses can completely disrupt the previously dominant and stable residential areas of a community. - Park's ideas became even more valid and influential with the complementary perspective offered by Ernest W. Burgess.5 Burgess proposed a theory of city growth in which cities were seen as growing not simply on the edges but from the inside outward. To clarify, while it is easy to see cities growing on the edges, as in the example of urban sprawl described above, Burgess claimed that the source of the growth is in the center of the city. Specifically, the growth of the inner city puts pressure on the adjacent zones of the city, which in turn begin to grow into the next adjacent zones (following the ecological principle of "succession" identified by Park). This type of development is referred to as "radial growth," meaning it begins in the middle and ripples outward.6 - An example of radial growth can be seen by watching a drop of water fall into the center of a bucket filled with water. The waves from the impact will form circles that ripple outward. This is exactly how Burgess claimed that cities grow. Although the growth of cities is most visible on the edges, largely due to development of businesses and homes where only trees or barren land existed before, the growth on the edges originates from pressure forming in the very heart of the inner-city area. Another good analogy is the "domino effect," because pressure from the center leads to pressure to grow in the next zone, which leads to growth in the adjacent zones, and so forth. - To his credit, Burgess also specified the primary zones all cities appear to have, including five pseudo-distinctive natural areas (in a constant state of flux due to growth). Burgess exhibited these zones as a set of concentric circles (see Figure 9.1). The first, center circle is called Zone I, the central business district; this zone is also referred to as "The Loop" because that is what downtown Chicago is called, even today. This area of a city contains the large business buildings (modern skyscrapers), including banking establishments, chambers of commerce, the courthouse, and other essential business and political centers, such as police headquarters and the post office. The adjacent area, just outside the business district, is the "factory zone" (unnumbered), which is perhaps the most significant in terms of causing crime, because it invaded the previously stable residential zones in Zone II—identified as the transition zone or zone in transition. Zone II is appropriately named, because it is truly in a state of transition from residential to industrial, primarily because of businesses and factories encroaching on residential areas. Zone II is the area most significantly subjected to the ecological principles suggested by Park—invasion, domination, recession, and succession. This is the zone subsequent theorists focused on in criminological theorizing, and it is based on the encroachment of factories and/or businesses in the areas that were previously stable residential communities. - According to Burgess's theory of concentric circles, Zone III is the "workingmen's homes," largely made up of relatively modest homes and apartments; Zone IV consists of higher-priced family dwellings and more expensive apartments; and Zone V is considered the suburban or commuter zone. These outer three zones identified by Burgess are of less importance in terms of distinction, primarily because as a general rule, the farther a family can move out of the city, the better in terms of social organization and the lower the rate of social ills (e.g., poverty, delinquency). The important point of this theory of concentric circles is that the growth of each inner zone puts pressure on the next zone to grow and push on the next zone. - It is easy to see examples of this model of concentric circles. Whether you live on the East Coast, on the West Coast, or in the middle of the United States, all you have to do is drive on a highway into a major city to see real-life evidence of the validity of this perspective. For example, whether you drive on Interstate 95 through Baltimore or Interstate 10 through Los Angeles, you will see the same pattern of structures as you travel through the city. As you approach each of the cities, if you look closely you will see suburban wealth in the homes and buildings (often hidden by trees). As you get closer to the cities, you will see the homes and buildings deteriorate in terms of value. From the raised highway system near Baltimore and Los Angeles, it is readily apparent when you enter Zone II, due to the prevalence of factories and the highly deteriorated nature of these areas. Many of the factories have been abandoned or are limited in use, so many of these factory zones feature rusted-out or demolished buildings. This is also often the location of subsidized or public housing. In other words, this is where the people who can't afford to live anywhere else live. Finally, as you enter the inner-city area of skyscrapers, the conditions improve drastically, because this is where the major businesses have invested their money; it appears to be a relative utopia compared with Zone II. - This theory does not apply just to U.S. cities, and we challenge readers to find any major city in the world that did not develop this way. In modern times, some communities have tried to plan their development, and other communities have experienced the convergence of several patterns of concentric circles due to central business districts (i.e., Zone I) starting in what were previously suburban areas (i.e., Zone V). However, for the most part, the theoretical framework of concentric circles still has a great deal of support. In fact, even cities in Eastern nations have evolved this way. Therefore, Park's application appears to be correct: Cities grow in a natural way across time and place and abide by the natural principles of ecology

conclusion

- In this chapter, we examined theoretical perspectives proposing that the social organizations in neighborhoods that are broken down and dilapidated are unable to control delinquency and crime. Furthermore, we discussed how this model of crime was linked to processes derived from ecological principles. This type of approach has been tested numerous times, and virtually all studies show that the distribution of delinquents and crime activity is consistent with this model. We then discussed the ability of cultural and subcultural theories to explain criminal activity. Empirical evidence shows that cultural values do make a contribution to criminal behavior but that the existence of an actual alternative culture in our society has not been found. However, pockets of certain subcultures, particularly regarding inner-city youth gangs, provide some validity for the subculture perspective of crime. Furthermore, the Chicago perspective plays a role, because these subcultural groups typically form in inner-city areas (i.e., zones of transition). We also examined some policy implications suggested by these theoretical models. Regarding social disorganization, we noted the paradox that exists: The very neighborhoods most desperately in need of organization are the same inner-city ghetto areas that are, by far, the most difficult places to cultivate such organization (e.g., neighborhood watch groups). On the other hand, the neighborhoods that do have high levels of organization tend to be those that already have low levels of crime, because the residents naturally "police" their neighbors' well-being and property. Still, there have been some advances in organizing residents to fight crime. Regarding the cultural and subcultural perspectives, we examined some of the intervention and outreach programs suggested by such models of offending. Finally, let us now revisit the case study at the beginning of this chapter, which involved members of a fraternity giving themselves alcohol enemas, resulting in legal sanctions after one of them was hospitalized. It is clear that most individuals would not engage in such acts if it was not for peer associations and subcultural influences. So although much of the Ecological/Chicago School framework was proposed more than 50 years ago, the principles and concepts of this approach can be applied to contemporary subcultures in society.

social structure theories

- Macro level perspectives are also known as structural or social structure theories. - criminological theories that focus on group behavior, communities and neighborhoods make up macro-level or social structure theories. - social structure theories are an example of macro level theories, which explain crime and delinquency rates through the economic and social arrangements of society. - the macro level perspective that this course focuses on is social disorganization theory, which has been considered not only a criminological theory, but also a sociological perspective.

policy implications

- Many of the policy implications suggested by the theoretical models proposed in this chapter are rather ironic. Regarding social disorganization, a paradox exists in the sense that the very neighborhoods most desperately in need of organizing are the same inner-city poor areas that are, by far, the most difficult places in which to cultivate such organization (e.g., neighborhood watch or "Block Watch" groups). The neighborhoods that do have high levels of organization tend to be those that already have low levels of crime, because the residents naturally "police" their neighbors' well-being and property since they have a stake in keeping the area crime-free. Although there are some anecdotal examples of success by neighborhood watch programs, the majority of the empirical evidence is "almost uniformly unsupportive" of this approach's ability to reduce crime. Furthermore, many studies of neighborhood watch programs find that in a notable number of communities, they actually increase residents' fear of crime, perhaps because they create a heightened awareness of it. - Also, as explained above, perhaps the most prominent program that resulted from the Chicago School/social-disorganization model—the Chicago Area Project—and similar programs have been deemed failures in reducing crime. Still, there have been some advances in organizing residents of high-crime areas. To clarify, the more specific the crime-reduction goals, such as more careful monitoring of high-level offenders (e.g., more intensive supervised probation) and the better the lighting in neighborhoods at night, the more effective the implementation will be. - Regarding cultural/subcultural programs, some promising intervention and outreach programs have been suggested by such models of offending. There are now many programs that attempt to build prosocial attitudes (along with other health and opportunity aspects) among high-risk youths, often young children. A program called PeaceBuilders, which focuses on children in early grades, was shown to foster (a) gains in conflict resolution, (b) the development of prosocial values, and (c) reductions in aggression, and a follow-up showed that these attributes were maintained over time.26 Another program, for foster-home boys, showed much success in increasing levels of empathy, self-efficacy, and attribution style among boys who had exhibited early-onset aggression.27 Ultimately, there are effective programs out there that promote prosocial norms and culture. More effort should be devoted to promoting such programs that will help negate antisocial cultural norms, especially among high-risk youths.

early theoretical developments and research in cultural/subcultural theory

- One of the key developments of cultural theory has been largely attributed to the 1967 work of Franco Ferracuti and Marvin E. Wolfgang, who examined the violent themes of a group of inner-city youths from Philadelphia.16 Ferracuti and Wolfgang's primary conclusion was that violence is a culturally learned adaptation to deal with negative life circumstances and that learning such norms occurs in an environment that emphasizes violence over other options.17 These researchers based their conclusion on an analysis of data that showed great differences in rates of homicide across racial groups. However, Ferracuti and Wolfgang were clear that their theory was based on subcultural norms. Specifically, they proposed that no subculture can be totally different from or totally in conflict with the society of which it is a part.18 This cultural/subcultural theory brings the distinction of culture and subculture to the forefront - The distinction between a culture and a subculture is that a culture represents a distinct, separate set of norms and values among an identifiable group of people that are summarily different from those of the dominant culture. For example, communism is distinctly different from capitalism because it emphasizes equality over competition, and it values utopia (i.e., everyone gets to share all profits) over the idea that the best performer gets the most reward. So it can be said that communists have a different culture than capitalists. However, there is a substantial difference between a culture and a subculture, which is typically only a pocket of individuals who may have a set of norms that deviate from conventional values. Therefore, what Ferracuti and Wolfgang concluded is not so much a cultural theory as a subcultural theory. - This is also seen in the most prominent (sub)culture theory, which was presented by Walter Miller.19 Miller presented a theoretical model that proposed that the entire lower class has its own cultural value system. In this model, virtually everyone in the lower class believes in and socializes the values of six focal concerns: fate, autonomy, trouble, toughness, excitement, and smartness. Fate is the concern of luck, or whatever life deals you; it disregards responsibility and accountability for one's actions. Autonomy is the value of independence from authority. Trouble is the concern of staying out of legal problems, as well as getting into and out of personal difficulties (e.g., pregnancy). Toughness involves maintaining your reputation on the street. Excitement is engagement in activities (some of them illegal) that help liven up a mundane lower-class existence. Smartness emphasizes "street smarts" or the ability to con others. - Miller claimed that these six focal concerns are emphasized and taught by members of the lower class as a culture or environment (or "milieu," as stated in the title of his work). - A more recent subculture model, proposed by Elijah Anderson, has received a lot of attention.20 This theory focuses on African Americans and claims that due to deprived conditions, inner-city residents feel a sense of hopelessness, isolation, and despair. Anderson clearly notes that while many African Americans believe in middle-class values, these values have no worth on the street, particularly among young men. According to Anderson, "the code of the streets"—also the title of his book—is to maintain one's reputation and demand respect. For example, to be disrespected ("dissed") is considered grounds for a physical attack. Masculinity and control of one's immediate environment are treasured characteristics; this is perceived as the only thing these young men can control, given the harsh conditions they live in (with unemployment, poverty, etc.).

reactions and research

- Over the past few decades, the Chicago School theoretical framework has received an enormous amount of attention from researchers.10 Virtually all the research has supported Shaw and McKay's version of social disorganization and the resulting crime in neighborhoods that exhibit such deprived conditions. Modern research has supported the theoretical model proposed by Shaw and McKay, specifically in terms of high crime rates in disorganized neighborhoods. Also, virtually every city that one can drive through on an elevated highway (e.g., Richmond, Virginia; Baltimore, Maryland; Los Angeles, California) supports Shaw and McKay's model of concentric circles. Specifically, one can see while driving into almost any city that dilapidated structures surround the inner-city area, which is the zone of transition. Preceding (and following) this layer of dilapidated structures, one encounters a layer of houses and residential areas that seem to increase in quality as the driver gets closer to (or farther away from) the inner-city area (refer to Figure 9.1). - However, critics have raised some valid concerns regarding the original model. Specifically, it has been argued that Shaw and McKay's original research did not actually measure their primary construct: social disorganization. Although this criticism is accurate, recent research has shown that the model is valid even when measures of social disorganization are included in the model.11 Such measures of social disorganization include simply asking members of the neighborhood how many neighbors they know by name or how often they observe unsupervised peer groups in the area. - Additional criticisms of Shaw and McKay's formulation of social disorganization also focus on the emphasis the theory places on the macro, or aggregate, level of analysis. After all, while their theory does a good job of predicting which neighborhoods will have more crime than others, it does not even attempt to explain why most youths in the worst areas do not become offenders. Furthermore, it does not attempt to explain why some, albeit a very small number of, youths in the best neighborhoods (in Zone V) choose to commit crime. However, Shaw had previously attempted to address the individual (micro) level of offending in published case studies. - Also, there was one notable exception to Shaw and McKay's proposition that all ethnic/racial groups would have high rates of delinquency and crime while they lived in Zone II. Evidence showed that when Japanese residents made up a large portion of residents in this zone in transition, they had very low rates of delinquency. Thus, as in most theoretical models in social science, there was an exception to the rule. - Perhaps the biggest criticism of Shaw and McKay's theory, and one that has yet to be adequately addressed, deals with their blatant neglect in targeting the most problematic source of criminality in the Zone II neighborhoods. Their findings seem to point undoubtedly to the invasion of residential areas by factories and businesses as a problem, yet the researchers did not focus on slowing such invasions as a recommendation. This may have been due to political and financial concerns, seeing as how the owners of Chicago factories and businesses were financing their research and later funded their primary policy implementation. Furthermore, this neglect is represented in their failure to explain the exception of the Gold Coast in their results and conclusions. - Despite the criticisms and weaknesses of the Chicago School perspective on criminology, it provided the basis for a massive effort to reduce delinquency. Clifford Shaw was allowed to lead the Chicago Area Project, which established youth activity centers in the most crime-ridden neighborhoods of Chicago. These neighborhood centers sought to foster ties between parents and officials in the neighborhood. Although this program was never scientifically evaluated, it still exists, and many cities have implemented programs based on this model. An evaluation of a similar program in Boston showed that while it was effective in establishing relationships and interactions between local gangs and community groups, as well as providing more educational and vocational opportunities, it appeared to fail in reducing delinquent or criminal behavior.12 Thus, the overall conclusion was that the Boston project and similar programs, such as the Chicago Area Project, typically fail to prevent criminal behavior.

disparities of race in regard to subcultural theories of crime

- Recent reviews of race and crime rates have shown that the most consistent predictor of crime is the percentage of black people who live in the area, whether that area be a particular neighborhood, county, state, or industrialized nation.21 The relationship between race and crime has been consistent over time, with virtually all studies finding that, in the United States, blacks have the highest crime rates (especially for violent crimes, such as homicide), followed by whites, and then Asians. As Wright has noted, "the undeniable fact is that blacks commit more crime than any other group; and they commit more violent crime than any other group . . . [T]he data on this fact could not be any clearer."22 - For example, according to the FBI, blacks commit 85% of all interracial crimes, and although 45% of violent crimes involve blacks offending whites, only 3% involve whites offending blacks. Furthermore, black youths account for 45% of all juvenile detention cases, despite accounting for only approximately 15% of the juvenile population.23 This supports the existence of a strong subculture of black youths in the United States, which reinforces Anderson's concept of subcultures that lead to a higher propensity for crime. - Consistent with previous research, a 2015 study in the United Kingdom found that extreme disadvantage was more predictive of crime in black communities than it was of crime in white or South Asian communities/boroughs. This supports the idea of subcultural influence, even among similarly deprived groups.24 This is also seen on the other side of the fence regarding victims of crime, in which there is a consistently greater prevalence of intraracial crime (e.g., blacks violating blacks) than interracial crime (e.g., whites violating blacks). Specifically, a study using the National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS) for 2009 and 2010 for aggravated assault rates found that as racial residential segregation increased, the relative frequency of black intraracial assault to black interracial assault increased. On the other hand, there was no effect on the ratio of white intra- versus interracial assault.25 This also supports a subcultural perspective, given that certain racial groups seem to respond differently to similar living conditions.

The ecological school and the chicago school of criminology

- The Chicago School of criminology represents one of the most valid and generalizable theories we will discuss in this book, in the sense that many of its propositions can be readily applied to the growth and evolution of virtually all cities around the world. The Chicago School, which is often referred to as the Ecological School or the theory of social disorganization, also represents one of the earliest examples of balancing theorizing with scientific analysis. It has guided many important programs and policies to this day. Perhaps most important, the development of the Chicago School of criminology was the epitome of using theoretical development and scientific testing to address chaos and crime of the sort that existed in Chicago in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. The Chicago School is also credited with the first attempts at understanding cultural or subcultural differences in groups that do not fit with the mainstream of society; a significant portion of the Chicago perspective involves the transmission of certain cultural and antisocial values, both from delinquents to their peers and from veteran offenders to young children. In this chapter, we will examine this cultural aspect of the Chicago model, as well as other subculture frameworks of offending behaviors

shaw and mckay - criticisms

- critiques of shaw and mckays theory of social disorganization - first some critics have said that shaw and mckay were too unrealistic about certain areas outside of the transitional zone. In other words, critics argued that social disorganization theory is actually more complex than just these circular zones. - second, in one of the biggest critiques was that shaw and mckay never empirically tested their theory. - third, shaw and mckay only relied on official crime reports and arrest statistics. Their theory argued that weak social ties and an absence of community produces socialization, the social disorganization. If this is there theoretical model, then how can you explain weak social ties or examine residents' feelings and perceptions about their neighborhood through official data? - fourth, shaw and mckay completely ignored white collar crime and middle class crime by soley focusing on crime rates that occur in the lower class. - fifth, the perspective is unable to explain delinquency rates in more affluent areas or in the outer circles outside of the inner city.

shaw and mckay - strengths

- iit has emerged in recent years again since the original formation of the theory in the 1940s. - the first strength is that social disorganization theory is one of the most well known macro-level criminological perspectives. From this, it is a theory that focuses on the connection between communities and crime rates, not the behavior of individuals. - second, the emergence of social disorganization theory resulted in the basis of many of the chicago projects. The chicago projects believed that crime could decrease in disorganized neighborhoods by improving the social and economic conditions in these communities. - the chicago projects provide a motivation to organized citizens, organized programs, and organized resources for socially disorganized communities. EX: there are now more pickup times in days for garbage. This way the trash does not stay on the street for days on end. The chicago projects also resulted in collaborations with school, police, and courts. The projects also helped detached social workers understand in more detail what negative situations were occurring on in a daily basis in these communities. EX: the PAL or Police Athletic League emerged to play sports with inner city kids and help them gain more trust and satisfaction with police officers. there are also citizen community boards and panels to talk about issues between residents, police, and political officers in regards to community safety.

park and burgess - concentric zone model

- in the early 20th century, Park and burgess examined the relationship between social structure and human behavior. - they specifically studied the connection between ecology, the urban environment, and neighborhood behavior. - Park and burgess research began at the university of chicago, and it is still referred to as the chicago school today. Its predominantly associated with social disorganization theory, even to this day. - park and burgess developed the concentric zone model, and specifically coined the term the zone of transition or transitional zone that was used to explain urban growth in chicago. - you can see that at the center of the concentric zone model, it is what is known as the loop, which is a central business district of chicago. - the loop is home to chicagos commercial center and city hall. Now by looking at the concentric zone model, park and burgess argued that the expansion of urban areas started from the inner core of the central business district and moved outward. The zone of transition is considered one of the most problematic areas throughout the concentric zone model, and the image on the slide is an example of a drawing by park and burgess that visualizes their argument concerning the zone of transition. - concerning the concentric zone model, if you think about the structure of a city, or in particular, the structure of chicago, you can picture a central business district of industrial areas. All cities have a central business district or area that is made up primarily of companies and industries. - according to park and burgess, immediately outside of the central business district is the zone of transition. Now when new residents move into a city, they end up settling into the zone of transition for various reasons: first (remember: this perspective emerged in the 1920s, families would be closer to their job in factories, which was in the central business district). Second: housing was much cheaper compared to the outer parts of the city or in the suburbs. - within the concentric zone model, families and groups who reside in the zone of transition tend to settle within their own racial and ethnic group. However, within the zone of transition itself, it is comprised of numerous racial and ethnic groups. - during the time that this research was being conducted in chicago, there were many different types of european groups that were living in the zone of transition. - the concentric zone model shows that beyond the central business district area and factories, each zone moving outward is more prosperous than the last. As there is a low class residential areas, the medium or middle class residential areas, followed by the high class residential areas that comprise the outermost zone. The basic premise of the circles is that once new residents have adjusted to the city, have saved enough money, or may need more room for their family, they move out to a zone that is further away from the inner city and the zone of transition. in turn, once the adjusted residents have moved beyond to the outer zones, the new residents who have just moved to the city start their new life in the zone of transition, and then the process keeps repeating itself. - center area is called the loop, or in other cities is known as the central business district. The next zone is the factory zone and the third zone is that zone of transition. The rest of the zones as you move more out of the city are the suburbs and considered more affluent than the inner zones.

summary - SD theory

- its important to know that social disorganization theory is a macro-level perspective that focuses on the inability of a neighborhood or community to meet the needs and wants of its people. Crime can ultimately be traced back to structural factors, such as the percentage of residents who live in poverty, minority representation, and unemployment. crime in these neighborhoods can also be traced back to interactions with cultural adaptations and deviant subcultures. Once again, structural features such as poverty, racial and ethnic heterogeneity, single parent households, and people moving in and out of the inner city and residents who are stuck in the inner city learn to adapt to their surroundings. These cultural adaptations are what leads to crime and high crime rates in these communities. More modern tests and discussions of social disorganization theory includes this concept of collective efficacy. Neighborhoods that are socially disorganized and have low collective efficacy are more likely to be crime prone communities.

community structure & crime

- one of the weaknesses of shaw and mckays research with social disorganization theory was that they did not empirically test their perspective. In the 1940s, there was not enough adequate data to test the theory, and census data that was available did not include measures and variables that could describe the relationship between community structure and crime. So in 1989, sampson and groves used both official arrest data and results from self-report surveys of community residents and found support for social disorganization theory. In particular, they found that neighborhoods with low social ties, low social control, and a large number of unsupervised kids had much higher rates of crime. These results were also relevant because the findings showed that social disorganization theory was able to explain crime rates in other geographic locations and cultures other than the US. This was because sampson and groves study was completed in britain. Therefore, their findings demonstrate the effect of generalizability. This means that the results from this study can be generalized or can relate to other types of geographic locations.

social ecology

- within social structure perspectives is the concept of social ecology, or what is also known as the ecological school of criminology. - social ecology is considered an ecological approach to the study of communities. It is a branch off of biology, but instead of studying plants and animals, it is the study of groups of people based on where they live in communities. - the ecological approach is used to examine the link between location, geography, structure, and people related to each other in a community, instead of studying each of these factors independently. - the social ecology approach examines how people adapt to their environment and community. therefore, this type of research is once again a study of communities or macro-level research.