The high unemployment rates and economic deprivation resulting from the collapse of the banking sector had crime-producing effects in Wortropolis. These effects provoked problems of poverty, social disorganization, social inequality, increased divorce, increased high-school dropout rates and a rise in unwed, teenage pregnancy. Both social disorganization theory and strain theory can be used to explain how social and economic problems resulted in an increase of violent and property crime between 1980 and 2000. The relation between unemployment, poverty, community deterioration, and social and economic inequalities, and their distinct relation to crime can be examined and explained through both theories and evaluated on both an individual and communal level.
The collapse of Wortropolis’ economic sector resulted in increased violent and property crimes that detrimentally affected individuals in terms of unemployment, poverty, and social and economical inequality. In terms of unemployment, a survey found that unemployed individuals were more likely to commit crime, evidenced by the correlation between the underemployment and unemployment of offenders prior to their incarceration (Siegel, 203). Through the lens of social disorganization theory, unemployment is a recognizably contributing factor to crime because it “sever[s] attachments to co-workers and reduc[es] parents’ ability to be breadwinners, [and] reduces the attachment people have to conventional institutions and their ability to exert authority to children” (203). Underemployed or unemployed individuals are disengaged from the workforce and more likely to endure social-economical depravitivity whereby they become more prone to seek crime for psychological, physical, and economical support (209). Concerning the psychological effects of unemployment, socially and economically deprived individuals may have higher levels of antisocial behaviour such as expressions of “rage, frustration, and anger,” which can manifest as violent crime (289). According to Robert Agnew’s general strain theory, “individuals who feel stress and strain are more likely to commit crimes,” especially when individuals cannot realize their goals because they lack sufficient employment (220). Particularly, those who lack coping mechanisms can be sensitive to strain; traits linked to anti-social behaviour and hence, the propensity to turn to crime. Furthermore, “limited employment opportunities [which] reduce the stabilizing influence of parents and other adults”—particularly those who developed anti-social behaviours as a result of unemployment—lack authority over their children, and are “more likely to have children who put a premium on violence…as a means of dealing with limited opportunity” (209). Thus, individuals in Wortropolis who live in poverty due to underemployment or unemployment more often possess anti-social behaviour, stress, and vulnerability to strain, as their relationship with the social-economic sector is severed and they become susceptible to violent crime as a coping strategy.
Not only do unemployed individuals in Wortropolis suffer from poverty, but also inequality in terms of insufficient income and social injustice. Social and economic inequality are both products of and contributing factors to poverty, which delineates the degree of variance in compensation between the haves and have-nots—between the underemployed or unemployed and the employed, and also amongst the deprived—creating disparity between social and economic goals and means to obtain them (215). Here, strain theory can be applied to examine how social injustice is dependent upon individuals’ class as well as how the stratification of class impacts these individuals’ capabilities to obtain their goals (215). The lack of economic opportunities in Wortropolis caused strain because legitimate avenues for economically and socially deprived individuals were limited or absent, thus greatly diminishing opportunity for advancement. As a result, those lacking the financial resources to obtain desirable or necessary goods and services through legitimate channels are often prompted to rash measures in order to assuage their economic and social struggles, such as through theft, extortion, and other property crimes (217). The aftermath of Wortropolis’ economic recession, which limited the means to achieve success, explains the presence of increased property crime and predominance of delinquent and criminal behaviour among the deprived. Furthermore, income inequality is a significant predictive factor in terms of neighbourhood crime rates and it increases perceptions of strain and actual crime rates because the divergence between rich and poor creates an atmosphere of resentment and apprehension (219). For instance, general strain theorists believe that wage inequality encourages individuals to trade in illegal substances, an activity which also increases the possibility that they will commit violent crimes—research corroborates income inequality with homicide rates in both Canada and the United States (219). Therefore, limited opportunities resulting from social and economic inequality and class-stratification propel individuals to use deviant methods to achieve their goals.
The pernicious effects of unemployment, poverty, and social inequality are simultaneously a product of and contribution to community deterioration: a large number of individuals competing for a limited amount of resources in a concentrated area is a result of community deterioration and the ongoing cycle of unemployment, poverty, and social inequality which further contributes to societal degradation. Concentric zone theory, within social disorganization theory, explains how neighbourhood degradation results in criminal behaviour. Similarly, social ecology school, another branch of social disorganization theory, has evidenced that residential and institutional sites in poor condition in areas of poverty are known to possess the highest rates of violence (especially gun crime)—overall, a deteriorated community significantly impedes the potential for neighbourhood control and effective transmission of moral standards within the community (208). That being said, fewer police on patrol in Wortropolis limited the amount of external resources of social control, such as crime prevention and law enforcement, which thus generated less community motivation: the absence of a police presence weakened collective efficacy (social control and community cohesiveness) which created social disorder, and facilitated the community’s inability to deter criminal behaviour. Hence, the inability to deter criminal behaviour creates an ongoing cycle of criminal conduct, such as violent and property crime. Furthermore, where collective efficacy is insufficient, as in Wortropolis, adolescents become more involved in deviant behaviour, leading to increases in high school drop-out and teenage pregnancy rates, further limiting their overall mobility (201). That being said, lack of social control in terms of police presence causes social disorganization and community deterioration, which further aggregates levels of violent and property crime.
Overall, concepts of unemployment, poverty, social and economic inequality, and community deterioration as a contribution and causation of increased violent and property crime in Wortropolis are interdependent. How these detrimental social and economical conditions affect individual and communal levels can be examined through the lenses of social disorganization and strain theory. Underemployment and unemployment, which lead to poverty, cause anti-social behaviour because individuals’ relationships with socioeconomic sectors are severed, and in turn, individuals become vulnerable to committing violent crime as a means to cope with stressors. Furthermore, the inability to obtain goods and services due to poverty and the competition for limited resources due to social and economical inequality both drive individuals to criminal behaviour. As a result, individuals faced with impoverished conditions, social and economic deprivation and inequality, as well as lack of social control through police enforcement, become both contributing factors to and aftermath of the degradation of communities as a whole.