What Is The Concentric Zone Model?

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,

Environmental crime prevention is based on the phase of ‘broken windows’, Wilson and Kelling use this point to stand for all the various signs of disorder and lack of concern for others that are found in some neighbourhoods. They argue that leaving broken windows unrepaired sends out a signal that no one cares. In these neighbourhoods, there is an absence of both formal social control and informal control. The police are only concerned with serious crime and turn a blind eye to petty nuisance behaviour, while respectable members of the community feel intimidated and powerless. Without curative action, the problem deteriorates. As item A shows this causes families and respectable people to move out and the area becomes a magnet for deviants.

Detroit, the largest city in the state of Michigan, unfortunately has been plagued with a high crime rate resulting in synonymous acts of violence, poverty, and urban decay. A multitude of factors are considered when determining accurate explanations of crime within Detroit. These factors include changes in land use, property values, transportation, and retail, as an individual moves further away from the city center. According to Robert Park and Ernest Burgess, Chicago School, a city was similar to a body and consisted of various organs. The theory attempted to analyze criminality from an ecological and social disorganization standpoint. This theory asserted that a city included distinctive concentric circles that radiated from the central business district (CBD). Supposedly, the further one moves away from the concentric zones, the fewer social problems that exist (Williams & McShane, 2009, p. 86).

The assumption with this theory is that those neighborhoods that are disorganized and messy will have higher crime rates than neighborhoods that are clean and orderly. In neighborhoods that are messy and disorganized, it starts to become the norm, and there starts to become less control that leads to disorder and crime.

Sutherland’s theory piggyback on Social Disorganization theory by answering some of the critic’s questions about why only some people in crime-prone neighbors commit crime while many others do not. While Aker’s theory pick up where Sutherland

Another theory that many like to refer to would be social disorganization. This philosophy concentrates more on the circumstances in the inner city that affect crimes. They include, but are not limited to, the destruction of homes and neighborhoods, lack of social control, and the presence of gangs or groups who violate the law (Siegel 2010). Other than this theory, there is such thing as the strain theory. This suggests that crime is brought upon communities and individuals by the overwhelming strain that people are feeling when they aspire to reach their personal ambitions but have no way to grasp them. According to Featherstone and Deflem (2003), strain theorists believe that money and power are spread throughout economic classes unequally. They feel as if this frustration and strain built by individuals who are not able to achieve their goals is what influences a person’s choice to commit a crime. Believing this, strain theorists feel that the youth are certain that the only way to obtain what they desire is to join gangs, because they see other gang members in the community prosper with money. However, it is due to a life of crime and unfortunately, the youth feel as if joining the gang will benefit them in the same way.

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

This theory is often referred to as a Concentric Zone Theory.# Burgess believed that as cities expand in size, the development is patterned socially and argued that the city of Chicago could be described in terms of five concentric zones. It was by a competitive process that decided how people were distributed spatially amongst the zones.# The most expensive residential areas were in the outer zones, away from the chaotic atmosphere in the city centre, the pollution caused by factories and the homes of the poor. However, Burgess placed great importance on the ‘zone of transition '. The zone of transition was an area of great social upheaval, which contained deteriorating tenements, often built in the shadow of ageing factories. This zone was described as the least desirable living area and was the focus for the influx of waves of immigrants, as this was the only place the immigrants could afford to reside. This lead to weak family and communal ties which resulted in ‘social disorganisation and it was this disorganisation that was presented as the primary explanation of criminal behaviour.#

Sampson and John H. Laub Social Disorganization Theory directly links crime rates to neighborhood ecological characteristics. An essential source to the theory is that place matters in shaping the likelihood that a person will become involved in illegal activities. An individual’s living surroundings is more substantial to how one will end up rather than the persons individual characteristics. Those with disadvantaged neighborhoods partake in a subgroup which approves delinquency. As Shaka said in his Ted talk that he was not from a good neighborhood.

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.

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.

There are three main models to living, those models are known as concentric zone models, sector models, and multiple nuclei models. The concentric zone model is an early theoretical model that explains urban social structures. The sector model is known as the Hoyt model. The sector model allows for an outward development of growth. The sector model grows in a wedge-shaped zone.

The deviant place theory deals strictly with a specific area known as the “bad” areas. Living in a neighborhood with low income or conditions showing bad reputations exhibits big roles of said crimes and deviance. These types of neighborhoods have all kinds of individuals that move in and move out consistently. Because replacements of people occur in this location, then it “fits” the location itself as being deviant and portraying bad behaviors. These type of neighborhoods involve the poor, overcrowded, less supervised, higher conflicts, etc. – which forces individuals to manage relations with one another and to their physical surroundings of the location. (1990) This “bad” area exposes its own dangerous location and makes an individual more susceptible to becoming a victim of a crime. This victimization is not coming from the victim itself, but rather the result of being in such “bad” areas. Gangs are a great example of a deviant neighborhood that would therefore come with a greater crime rate. The only way not to become a victim of this deviant location would be to move from said

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 ecological theory of crime, also known as social disorganisation of crime is a theory used to describe the difference in crime in association with physical environmental factors such as cultural and structural factors. In the 1970’s and 1980’s the term ‘environmental criminology’ was used until it became associated with environmental issues. This theory can also be defined as a positivist theory because it seeks to find out about human behaviour. For the ecological theory the causes of crime for example are found in the way of the physical environment, where people live and socially interact. This is what creates the conditions for criminal and non-criminal behaviour.