IntroductionClifford Shaw and Henry McKay initially proposed the theory in their book published in the year 1942.Highlights variations in crime rates among neighborhoods.Assumes that basis of crime behavior is entirely dependent on neighborhood’s structural and cultural states.
Development of the TheoryClifford and Henry examined distribution of delinquency among various groups in Chicago.Found that cases of delinquency reduced as one moved from the city center outwards.Neighborhoods with high levels of delinquency had high numbers of social problems.Concluded that crime is a likely product of neighborhoods dynamics.
Family as a process leading to crimeSocial disorganization causes juvenile violence by affecting family structures and stability.Family instabilities eliminates essential set of regulations that control youth’s behavior.Weak families and lack of effective guardianship lead to increased crimes.
The influence of SutherlandSutherland sets the stage for understanding several theories on crime based on Differential Association Theory.An individual can acquire criminal tendencies by associating with persons who are considered deviant.This relationship allows persons to learn specific traitsFrequency, and time determine the likelihood of crime
Influence of SutherlandSutherland’s assertion explains the influence of peers in crime processes.Sutherland presents nine propositions that can be summarized as learning crime.Additionally, he addresses explores criminal motivation, communication, logic, and group think.
Neighborhood processes and crime occurrenceSocial disorganization such as low economic status, residential mobility and ethnic heterogeneity affect informal regulations plans.
Neighborhood processes and crime occurrenceNeighborhoods with compromised social state are likely to have sparse local friendship network, unsupervised youths and poor social organization.Lack of effective control measures increases the rates of crimes.Social disorganization models promote the assessment of important social dynamics that result in cohesive and helpful neighborhoods
Economic factors and crime ratesEconomic deprivation leads to social disorganization.Social disorganization and poverty increases violence among youths.Poor communities lacks enough resources for defending their interest collectively.Economic inequalities creates latent hostilities.
The Implication of the theoryPublic spending and private investments should be channeled towards impoverished areas.Family preservation programs should be funded.Large public bureaucracies should be neighborhood-based.
References Akers, R. L. (2009). Social learning and social structure: A general theory of crime and deviance. New Brunswick, N.J: Transaction Publishers. Steenbeek, W., & Hipp, J. R. (2011). A longitudinal test of social disorganization theory: feedback effects among cohesion, social control, and disorder. Criminology, 49(3), Sun, I., Ruth T., & Randy G. (2004). “ Social Disorganization, Legitimacy of local institutions and neighborhood crime: An exploratory study of perceptions of police and local governments,” journal of crime and justice Witherspoon, D., & Ennett, S. (2011). “An Examination of Social Disorganization and Pluralistic Neighborhood Theories with Rural Mothers and Their Adolescents.” Journal Of Youth & Adolescence,