Introduction
This paper will explore various sources regarding social disorganization theory and how it contributes to crime in Chicago. Social disorganization theory will be defined and analyzing the various components that contribute to these crimes. In addition, support for my theory will be proven through various sources. The possible policy implications will be supported by the various academic sources as well. Social disorganization theory is alive and present in the city of Chicago, Illinois and through the proof of academic sources and showing the empirical status, the application, and the policy implications of this theory will be supported and shown.
Social Disorganization Theory
Social disorganization is a “macro-level perspective concerned with explaining the spatial distribution of crime across areas” (Kubrin, 2016). It is “a theoretical perspective that explains ecological differences in levels of crime based on structural and cultural factors shaping the nature of the social order across communities. This approach narrowed the focus of earlier sociological studies on the covariates of urban growth to examine the spatial concentration and stability of rates of criminal behavior. According to the social disorganization framework, such phenomena are triggered by the weakened social integration of neighborhoods because of the absence of self-regulatory mechanisms, which in turn are due to the impact of structural factors on social interactions or the presence of delinquent subcultures. The former process defines disorganization as the reflection of low levels of social control generated by socioeconomic disadvantage, residential turnover, and population heterogeneity; the latter highlights the convergence of conflicting cultural standards in poor neighborhoods and the emergence of group behavior linked to criminality.is the breakdown of the power of informal community rules to regulate conduct” (Rengifo, 2018). So this theory explains inner city crime, why exactly it is an endless cycle and the societal factors that contribute to that endless cycle of social disorganization.
“The social disorganization theory comes from the Chicago school of sociology in the early 1920s and can be defined as the decline of influence of existing social rules of behavior upon individuals within a group. In essence, social disorganization is the consequence of a community’s inability to realize common values and to solve the problems of its residents, resulting in the breakdown of effective social control within that community. This theory claimed that delinquency was not caused at the individual level, but was considered to be the normal response of normal individuals to abnormal social conditions. Consequently, there was an indirect loss in the ability to act communally and individuals exhibited unrestricted freedom to express their dispositions and desires, often resulting in delinquent behavior” (Wong, 2016).
Creation of the Social Disorganization Theory
The social disorganization theory traces its origins back to the early 1900s. “In 1929, two researchers from the University of Chicago, Clifford Shaw and Henry McKay, began a series of studies using official records which showed that in the city of Chicago, rates of delinquency, criminality, and commitment to correctional institutions varied markedly by area. In particular, rates were highest in slums near the city center and diminished as distance from the center of the city increased, except in areas of industry and commerce just outside of the central district, which had some of the highest rates. Shaw and McKay also found that rates of crime and delinquency exhibited a remarkable consistent patterning over many decades; in particular, the spatial pattern of rates revealed significant long‐term stability even though the nationality structure of the population in the inner‐city areas changed greatly over time. Shaw and McKay thus determined that crime and delinquency were not the result of personal characteristics of the residents who lived in the neighborhoods but were tied to the neighborhoods themselves” (Kubrin, 2016, “The Handbook of Criminological Theory”). Shaw and McKay saw a problem and created a theory to try to explain it. Following the creation of social disorganization theory people have begun to explore the explanation and the possible actions that could be taken to help this to be less of a prevalent problem.
Main Components of Social Disorganization Theory
Social disorganization theory is rooted in disorder of inner city communities. Some of these cities like Chicago have rough parts. According to Shaw and McKay, they think that social disorganization focus’ on the transition zone, zone 2, where most of the crime occurs (Miller, 2015). Charis adds that “cluster in certain locales but not others. It is for this reason that residents can often identify where the “good” and “bad” areas of a city are. Social disorganization theory takes this fact—the non-random distribution of crime—as a point of departure for explaining crime” (Kubrin, 2009). So these bad areas in zone 2. In this poor area people are constantly coming and going, thus there are people who don’t really care of have any ties to the community – thus higher crime is more likely (Miller, 2015). This zone is the poorest in the city due to run down homes, abandoned businesses, and poor school systems. These type of communities are made of minorities because this zone offers some of the cheapest living options in the city and a significant amount of them are in positions where they are unable to afford a nicer area of town. The mix of these very different groups very close together can be problematic according to Shaw and McKay (Miller, 2015).
Empirical Status of Social Disorganization Theory
Based on research gathered and read, the research does support my theory. For example, in the abstract for “Organized for What? Recasting Theories of Social (Dis)organization,” written by Robert J. Sampson shares their support of how social disorganization is alive and present (Sampson, 2018). Another example is research on “ The impact of neighborhood disorganization on neighborhood exposure to violence, trauma symptoms, and social relationships among at-risk youth.” Here is the abstract describing the overview of their research.:
“Previous research has demonstrated that exposure to violence (ETV) is a serious concern across the north-south socioeconomic divide. While studies have found that social support is a protective factor for youth exposed to violence and trauma, little is known about the impact of trauma symptoms on forming and maintaining social relationships which are key to accessing a vital social resource that fosters resilience in youth experiencing trauma symptomatology. Building on previous models that examine the impact of neighborhoods on exposure to violence and trauma, the current study examines the impact of neighborhood disorganization on ETV among youth and ETV’s effects on trauma symptoms and social relationships. Data were collected on 2242 juvenile justice-involved youth with behavioral health issues in 11 urban and rural counties in the Midwestern United States. Using structural equation modeling (SEM), our data demonstrated that living in highly disorganized neighborhoods was associated with higher levels of ETV and that ETV was positively associated with trauma symptoms. Mediational analysis showed that trauma symptoms strongly mediated the effect of ETV on social relationships. Freely estimating structural paths by gender revealed that hypothesized associations between these variables were stronger for females than males. Findings here highlight the need to provide trauma-informed care to help youth to build and maintain social relationships. Identification and treatment of trauma symptoms that is culturally informed is a critical first step in ensuring that identified protective factors in local contexts, such as social relations and social support, have opportunities to minimize the impact of ETV among youth across northern and southern nations.
(Butcher, 2015).
So these researchers dug deep into a very vulnerable group in the inner city areas to see how trauma affected the youth. They went through a very complicated process, but it shows that social disorganization is present due to the fact trauma is a current and ongoing problem in these inner cities based on the fact children live through and sometimes are the victims of violence or crime.
Application of Social Disorganization Theory
An example of social disorganization theory being applied today in a study is from Rachel E. Morgan and Jana L. Jasinski. These women use the theory to analyze domestic violence in Chicago. Here is the abstract from their research:
“Social disorganization theory proposes that specific neighborhood characteristics contribute to an increase in crime rates. In a disorganized community, informal social controls are not present; therefore, crime and delinquency flourish. Researchers have focused on these measures of social disorganization and the ability to explain public crimes. Recently, researchers have focused their attention to characteristics of socially disorganized areas and their ability to predict private crimes, such as domestic violence. This study contributes to the research on domestic violence and its applicability to social disorganization theory by examining domestic violence in Chicago neighborhoods and Illinois counties. Results indicate that different measures of social disorganization are significantly associated with domestic violence at different units of analysis.” (Morgan & Jasinski, 2016)
This theory was used on a more specific topic within the city of Chicago and focused on a particular area of violence that interested the authors.
Policy Implications of Social Disorganization Theory
Various actions taken by local and federal government can greatly impact this theory and how it could either get worse or better. In order to solve the problems that are explained by social disorganization theory, there are a few things that need to happen. First, these communities need to come together and really try to get along. If we take the gang element in these cities especially Chicago we may have way fewer crimes. Second, there needs to be community organizers and mediators within these small barrios in these big cities in America where crime is concentrated in these similar neighborhoods like Chicago. For example, in a documentary watched in Criminology class called “The Interrupters,” taking place in modern-day inner city Chicago. This local community organization called “CeaseFire” is comprised of people who are trying to resolve community issues and keep violence at a minimum. These people in this organization who have either been previous offenders or just have lived in the same living situations as the one’s they are serving in Chicago. They also teach youth how to resolve conflict without violence. This is important because youth in these because they are the most at-risk group in these rough inner city neighborhoods. The behavior of these children often come to hopelessness and engage in high risk behavior (Bolland, 2003). Although, it is trying to prevent crime on a small scale it has been somewhat successful. The biggest thing that would help these communities would be better job opportunities and revitalization. If the communities are cleaned up, businesses will more inclined to move there and invest in those areas and more businesses may follow if they see success from businesses that are already there. In order to have the ability to clean up, these communities need support from their local government and any various organizations that promote inner city revitalization.
Conclusion
Social disorganization theory is present and seen in Chicago today. The high poverty, mix of minorities, and lack of community support that has fueled the high crime in inner cities across America especially Chicago. The empirical and the application of the theory are supported through research and society applying the theory. Policy being applied today can be seen displayed by the Interrupters from CeaseFire in Chicago.