Lecture 4- The Chicago School of Criminolgy PDF

Title Lecture 4- The Chicago School of Criminolgy
Course Classical Theories of Crime
Institution University of Ontario Institute of Technology
Pages 5
File Size 159.9 KB
File Type PDF
Total Downloads 11
Total Views 135

Summary

Outline: sociology, social structure theories, emile durkheim, Chicago school of criminology, cultural context, theory of ecology, ernest w. burgess, concentric circles theory, theory of social disorganization, etc....


Description

Lecture 4- The Chicago School of Criminology Sociology • Theoretical emphasis: • Social aspects of human behavior • Organization • Structure • Culture of group life • Interaction Social Structural theories • Crime – how society is organized • Disregard for biological or psychological variation Emile Durkheim (1858-1916) • Influential: • Modern structural perspectives on crime • Affected by: • American revolution • French revolution • Industrial revolution • Strong theoretical ties: • Social Disorganization Theory • Merton’s Theory of Anomie • Social Disorganization Theory – “first distinct sociological theory of crime” (Barlow & Kauzlarich, 54) Chicago School of Criminology • Ecological School • Early example: theory with scientific analysis Cultural Context: Chicago 1800s and early 1900’s • Chicago in the 19th century – fastest growing city in U.S. history • Population: • 5,000 in early 1800’s • 2,000,000 by 1900 • Growth due to central geographic position • Early to mid 1800’s – many large cities – no formal social agencies • Urbanization • Communities responsible for solving own problems: • Crime • Late 1800’s – language and cultural barriers • Solving problems difficult • Result – chaos, normlessness • Durkheim - rapid urbanization/industrialization • Quintessential example of “anomic” state

• • • • • • •

Breakdown in control Delinquency, gangs Theoretical guidance – solutions Early 1900’s: Department of Sociology – University of Chicago Solve social problems Various theoretical models – crime/social ills

Ecology and City Growth • 1920’s and 1930’s – new ideas pertaining to city growth • University of Chicago sociologists • Model – Robert E. Park Theory of Ecology • Human behavior and city growth – “principles of ecology” • Wildlife • Ecology: “…the study of the dynamics and processes through which plants and animals interact with the environment.” (Tibbetts and Hemmens, 383) • Application of Darwin theory • Park: growth of cities – natural pattern, evolution • Cities – type of organism: • Unity • Interrelations • Symbiosis – citizen dependence on each other • Better off – work together, whole • Cities – identifiable clusters • Natural Areas: “life of its own” • Contribute to whole • Certain areas (species): • Invade/dominate neighbouring areas • Dominated areas (species): • Recede • Migrate • Die off • Urban Sprawl • Detriment to stable residential areas: • Businesses moving in • Invasion- potential for “chaos” • Increased traffic • Transient population • Crime • Observation (Chicago): • Businesses/factories – invading residential areas • Chaos • Instability • Breakdown of informal control (i.e. neighbourhood networks)

• • • • • • • • • • •

Due to: Highly transient population (consumers) Weak ties Result – psychological indifference No one cares Afford to leave- go Save money - go Introduced theory in 1920’s Factories – moving in – chimneys Smoke, smog Disruption of stable area

Complementary perspective- Ernest W. Burgess Burgess • Theory: • City growth – from the inside out • Not just edges • Source of growth – centre • Inner city growth – pressure on adjacent zones • Grow into additional adjacent zone • “Radial growth” – inside, ripple outward • Drop of water – bucket • Waves – circles • Growth - highly visible on edges • Reason – pressure from city centre • Primary zones – Five natural areas • Constant state of flux (result of growth) • All cities • Concentric Circles Concentric Circles Theory • Zone 1: • Innermost circle • Central Business District • Large buildings • Skyscrapers • Business/political centres • Zone 2: • Zone of Transition • Transition – residential to industrial • Business and factories – invading • *Crime * • Zone 3: • Working Class Zone • Modest houses/apartments • Zone 4:

• • • •

Residential Zone High priced family homes/apartments Zone 5: Commuter Zone Suburban

Concentric Circles

• •

Three outer zones – less important within the context of crime Inner zone growth, pressure on outer zone (growth)

Shaw and McKay’s Theory of Social Disorganization Theory of Social Disorganization • Assumption: Certain neighbourhoods – more crime than others • Most: “zone of transition” – zone 2 • Residential to industrial • Areas with highest crime – Three common characteristics (at least): • Physical Dilapidation • Poverty • Heterogeneity -

High transient population Other social ills

Shaw and McKay- Significance • Social ills- overlap with higher delinquency rates • Higher rates- zone of transition • Rejection of social Darwinism • Environment – not culture • Does not matter who resides in zone of transition Social Disorganization Theory- Critique • Did their research actually measure social disorganization? • Emphasis on macro level of analysis • Why don’t most youth in worst areas engage in crime? • Why do some youth in zone 5 engage in crime? • Largest criticism: How to slow invasion of factories/businesses in zone 2.

• Source of criminality Social Disorganization Theory- Policy Implications • Shaw • Chicago Area Project (CAP) • Neighborhood centres • Still in existence today • www.chicagoareaproject.org...


Similar Free PDFs