The Theory Of Social Disorganization Theory Essay

In this research study, we will be examining The Social Disorganization Theory derived from The Chicago School of criminology. The purpose of this study is to better understand the social and ecological characteristics of those whom reside within this community and the environmental influences that may have contributed to the increased crime rate; which has significantly lead to mass incarceration within the urban community. This research will examine how many environmental characteristics impact the community and the particular disadvantages which lead to the increase in crimes? We will also assess the different legislative factors that theoretically contribute to the growing rate in poverty, which ultimately leads to an increase in the incarceration rates? Lastly, we will further explain the correlation between poverty and crime, and how it contributes to greater disparities within the community. These questions will be answered by focusing on impoverished communities consisting of primarily African Americans and Latinos.

Using criminological terms and concepts, focus on a jurisdiction, neighborhood, or geographic locale with which you are familiar. Regarding a human behavior which you select to focus on in that geographical space, write two concise yet comprehensive paragraphs on how social disorganization theory can inform your understanding of behavior and place, and one weakness which would find your understanding somehow lacking, and why. Then write two equally compelling paragraphs on how routine activities theory would foster your understanding, and one weakness which might leave your understanding lacking, and why.

In this article, as the title suggests, it explains the use of social class differences to explain racial differences in crime. Among earlier arguments are the subculture of violence and subculture of poverty theories, which argue that African Americans tend to have pro-crime norms and values. The article's author, Robert D. Crutchfield, goes in depth with recent and more advanced theories to explain the link between poverty, crime, and race, while criticizing the subcultural theories. These new theories tell a different view from that of the subcultural theories with evidence showing that economic disadvantage and the way how society is structured accounts for the link between poverty, crime, and race. From these evidence, ethnographers conclude

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.

During the 19th century, poverty was widely seen as one of the main drivers of crime(Burney, 161). Many families that were starving were driven to theft. For some lower class families, crime was an easy way out, but for others it was a necessity. Furthermore, education affected crime in various numbers of ways. One direct effect of education is that it reduced the amount of time for criminal activities to those enrolled in school(Wong, 239). The older offenders committing crimes were too late to benefit from the spread of educational opportunities and they were more likely to commit crimes. Overtime, education resulted in a significant decline in juvenile offenders(Wong, 239). The unemployment rate had a significant effect on the crime rate as well. Many people found themselves without jobs and homes. Unemployment implied that the increasing risk of finding a good job encouraged crime.

Poverty fosters large crime rates. Where you find poverty, you often find crime. Urban areas are commonly known to be densely populated. High population along with the close proximity of businesses provide criminals with larger amounts of potential targets. For many impoverished people, the potential benefits of crime outweigh the risks of being caught. The pressing need for material goods, such as food, can steer people to commit crimes. Often threats and violence produce larger quantities of goods, which provokes people to commit even more violent acts. These acts are carried out primarily by people from poorer segments of the population and who are more likely to live in urban areas.

So far, both theories are able to explain the crime inequality observed insides neighbourhoods; however, when it comes to explaining the difference in crime rates between neighbourhoods with similarly low levels of poverty, social disorganization theory is not able to fully explain why such difference may occur, as it places a greater focus on the internal dynamics of the neighbourhoods than on the external contingencies (Peterson & Krivo, 2010, p. 92). Based on Table 4.5 of Divergent Social Worlds: Neighborhood Crime and the Racial-Spatial DivideI, minority low-poverty areas have roughly two and a half times more violence than their white counterparts (Peterson & Krivo, 2010, p. 88). Social disorganization theory insists that residential instability (percent of those who owns and percent of those who rent) , population heterogeneity (internal differences, including ethno-racial differences), poverty (percent of those who live in poverty), income, deteriorating neighbourhood, and population loss (percent of those who leave due to deterioration) are mechanisms that leads to the absence of informal social control and increases social disorganization, causing the loss of control over youths who then hang out at spontaneous playgrounds and form gangs with delinquent traditions that get passed down through cultural transmission. If such was the case, then one would expect neighbourhoods with similar and comparable local conditions to have similar average rates of crimes. However,

contributor to crime in the United States is a young, black male living in an

The relationship between Crime and less fortunate people cannot underestimated; it may just be the way the media has conditioned us to characterize what a criminal looks like and how they live their lives. There are many low income cities and crime rates widespread across America. One may say that people with low income have nothing to lose when they commit crime or depressed or desperate to the point that they will commit crimes for the profit of money. Even though crime is committed at all walks of life, one can still pose a question to know if crime is more likely to be committed by people with low income that those with high income.

In 1942, Clifford Shaw and Henry D. McKay produced Juvenile Delinquency and Urban Areas, which aimed to explain crime in urban communities using social disorganization theory. Elliot and Merrill (1934) define social disorganization as “a breakdown in the equilibrium of forces, a decay in the social structure, so that old habits and forms of social control no longer function effectively” (p.20). Using this definition and the ecological approach, Shaw and McKay argue that low economic status, ethnic heterogeneity, and residential mobility led to the disruption of community social organization (Shaw and McKay 1942). This disruption is what essentially leads to delinquency and further crime. Numerous empirical studies and tests were conducted in order to determine the validity of the theory. Studies done in the United States and in other countries have also shown support for the theory. In addition, the theory has been extended and revised by multiple scholars and applied to nonmetropolitan areas. The numerous studies and tests of social disorganization theory will prove whether the theory is applicable to other metropolitan and nonmetropolitan areas and whether the theory is still applicable to the modern era.

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.

Hannon, Analyzes the level of poverty present in neighbourhoods in Austin, Texas and Seattle, Washington and the rates of property crime in those areas. Hannon looks for any correlation between the data he is analyzing to determine if poverty does in fact have a strong positive effect on crime rates.

A violent crime occurs every 23.5 seconds in the United States of America. Even though crime has been at a low during the past decade, violence is still prevalent in today’s society. Most of these crimes happen in places that are socio-economically disadvantaged. There then is the debate of whether violent crime is associated with environments struck with poverty. There is a correlation between violent crimes and poverty because of the unemployment rates in major cities, the culture of poor areas, and drugs.

In the US, urban crime is often seen as an issue among areas with high poverty levels. This may be the case; however, many other aspects, such as unemployment, population density, minority population, age distribution, and locality in the US, relate to crime rates and affect poverty as well. The impact of poverty on crime rates can be elucidated through a range factors. There is a higher rate of mental illness in the poor than in the rich. And even when the rich get such

Poverty and the relationship it has to crime is a long standing sociological, humanists and historical phenomenon. From the plight of the third world to the violence soaked inner city streets of the 1980’s, the relationship of crime and poverty has been the source of a great deal of social commentary. In societies throughout the world and throughout history there has always been a traditional measure of deviance through relative income gaps. Both poverty and crime as well as their connections are heavily weighed topics of political and social discourse. Opinions in these areas contain a great deal of variance. The prejudices of the old guard from the professional police era still utilize association with poverty as a measuring stick for social deviance. Meanwhile, intelligent social science continues to give insight to factors such as social disorganization, socialization into violence, as well as, the far reaching impact political, economic and justice based policies have on those in poverty.