Social Disorganization, the Criteria for Organized Crime and its Varying Relationships
Among the criteria that sets how organized crime operates that can be related with social disorganization are as follows: 1) lack of political systems or aims; 2) hierarchal power or authority; 3) “exclusive membership;” 4) continuous operations; 5) use of violence, when necessary; 6) monopolistic control; and 7) compliance with certain rules or governing policies (Lampe, n.d). It is important to note the similarities of socially-disorganized communities with how organized crime operates. The similarities in criteria can easily enable advocates of organized crime to establish relationships and collaborate with authorities and high officials of a certain community.
This week reading discuss social disorganization and collective efficacy. Higgins (2010) stated that the social disorganization theory where a person live is important in deciding if their is weakness to commit crime. In both text, it stated that social disorganization theory came from the Chicago School's social ecology movement. The theory stated that many factors such as "geography, population movement, and physical environment" and the combination of these factors can cause criminal behavior (Higgins, 2010, p. 30). In explain social disorganization theory, it is broken into zones. The concentric zones explain crime because these are the zones where individuals worked and lived. By having this view it can tell that crime is probably
Frank Schmalleger explains the theory of social disorganization as one that depicts both social change as well as conflict, and lack of any agreement as the origin of its cause for both criminal behavior as well as nonconformity to society and closed associated with the ecological school of criminology (Schmalleger, 2012, p. 152). The philosophy behind the organization and structure of a society and how that contributes to criminal behavior within society is by stressing poverty, economic conditions, lack of education, lack of skills, are not sought-after in the work place, and divergent cultural values. Criminal behavior is the result of the person’s assignment of location within the structure of society.
For years, gang crime has been loathed by society, as society has perceived it to threaten the well-being of its members. In addition to the fear of gang violence, concerns have been raised of gangs polluting youth; hence, policing strategies have emerged more increasingly in an attempt to put an end to the delinquency. Nevertheless, for society the causation of gang crime has been discussed to a lesser extent; thus, the objective of this essay will be to depict a viable explanation of gang crime through the use of two criminological theories. To accomplish the task at hand; I shall, define gang crime, provide a description of social disorganization theory, illustrate how the application of social disorganization theory provides an explanation of gang crime, describe differential opportunity theory, demonstrate how differential opportunity theory can explain gang crime, and exemplify as to which theory provides a superior explanation of gang crime. In the end, it will be clear that social disorganization theory is a superior explanation of gang crime in comparison to differential opportunity theory, due to its ability to deliver a more enhanced explanation than the one that is provided by differential opportunity theory.
This breakdown of organization and culture within a community leads to a lack of informal social control which in turn leads to higher crime rates especially in the juvenile population (Simons, Simons, Burt, Brody, & Cutrona, 2005). Social disorganization theory asserts that strong levels of connection within a community along with a sense of civic pride motivate individuals to take a more active role in the community therefore acting as a deterrent to crime.
Social disorganization theory was established by Shaw and Mckay (1942) in their famous work “Juvenile Delinquency and Urban Areas”. The main argument of the social disorganization theory is that, the place where people live will influence the individual’s behavior, and this may lead them to crimes. More precisely, certain characteristics of the neighborhood/community will strengthen or weaken the informal social control within the community, and this has mediating effect on crimes.
Social disorganization is a macro-level theory which focuses on the ecological differences of crime and how structural and cultural factors shape the involvement of crime. A person’s residential location is a factor that has the ability to shape the likelihood of involvement in illegal activities. The social disorganization theory looks at how socioeconomic status and the environment affects individuals and motivates them to become a part of a gang. Shaw and McKay link area delinquency to three attributes of the social disorganization theory; economic deprivation, residential instability and race and
Social disorganization theory explains the ecological difference in levels of crime, simply based on cultural and structural factors that influence the social order in a given community. Social disorganization is triggered by poverty, social stability, ethnic heterogeneity, and a few key elements. Although Clifford Shaw and Henry D. McKay (1942), were known for social disorganization theory, in 1947 Edwin Sutherland introduced the notion of a ecological differences in crime that is the result of differential social organization. Despite similar arguments on social organization, Shaw and Mckay argued that the cultural integration explained the ecological variation in crime rates as a result of the negative impact on the community. Also elaborating on structural socioeconomic factors shaping informal control like poverty, heterogeneity, and residential mobility. Later Robert Sampson and Byron Groves (1989), refined the work of Shaw and Mckay by highlighting on the importance of social ties and new measures of social disorganization.
Unlike most theories of crime that focus on the individual, the social disorganization theory focuses on inability of community members to achieve shared values or to solve jointly experienced problems (Bursik, 1988). Using Mexico City for the study has many benefits, including what alternative explanations for the causes and dynamics of criminality. Institutional anomie basically says that crime in the United States is driven by pressures to succeed and profit monetarily. Mexico City is a prime example of using this theory because looking from a socioeconomic stand point it is not very stable. There are many factors that need to be considered while performing this study and the results will inform criminal justice practice and policy by revising
The social disorganization theory is directed towards social conditions. This theory argues that crime is due to social conflicts, change, and lack of consensus in the group.
In 1942, the theory of social disorganization was developed by two criminology researchers by the name of Clifford Shaw and Henry D. McKay. Social disorganization theory focuses on a person physical and social environments are what causes their behavioral choices. This means that if a person is placed in a neighborhood where there is a high crime rate, or the neighborhood is not dynamic, this can cause them to participate in such crimes, or make the wrong behavioral choices within the youth. In the rural poor communities with high crime rate, children who are not supervised or are not giving rules, are likely to participate in juvenile crimes.
The main assumption of Social Disorganization Theory is the ability to explain why crime committed by lower class communities is more prominent than neighborhoods from communities in better economic areas. This theory is the relationship of the destabilization of urban communities and neighborhoods through Shaw and McKay’s study (Quoted in Siegal, 2010) that used the analysis of Ernest Burgess’s Concentric Zones Model. This model generates ideas that the closer to “zone 2”, individuals in a community have more stress factors
All of these points illustrate how organized crime violates social norms and the impact on families directly involved, but in the study of organized crime the impact is not only felt on that level but on a much broader societal level as well.
Social Disorganization theory connects crime rates to neighborhood ecological characteristics. Based on the research and according to Osgood and Chambers, social disorganization theory specifies three important variables; residential instability, ethnic Heterogeneity, female-headed households. These three variables are considered to be the most criminogenic.
The Social Disorganization theory is an intriguing theory that can be seen in our society today. This theory states that “disorganized communities cause crime because informal social controls break down and criminal cultures emerge” (Cullen 6). The city of Chicago was the predominate focus upon the construction of this theory. The reasoning for this was because Chicago was the fastest growing population in the 19th century, a population starting at 5,000 in 1800 and growing to 2 million in 1900, nearly doubling every decade. At this point in time, the city was composed of citizens who did not speak a common language nor shared the same cultural values. Due to this social divide, these community members were unable to organize themselves in
The two theorist that developed the social disorganization theory were Clifford Shaw and Henry D. Mckay according to their book "Juvenile Delinquency in Urban Areas" they created this theory throughout research they were doing. The two theorists of the social disorganization theory were criminology researchers from the "Chicago School". Social disorganization theory is at the macro level. It looks among different communities and neighborhoods. And it studies many people in the neighborhoods not just one single individual. This theory is the most valid at the macro level because crime rates are explained better in this theory than any other. How Shaw and Mckay created