Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

LSE 400: Thinking Like a Social Scientist American Exceptionalism in Crime, Punishment and Inequality Nicola Lacey (Law, Gender and Social Policy); David.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "LSE 400: Thinking Like a Social Scientist American Exceptionalism in Crime, Punishment and Inequality Nicola Lacey (Law, Gender and Social Policy); David."— Presentation transcript:

1

2 LSE 400: Thinking Like a Social Scientist American Exceptionalism in Crime, Punishment and Inequality Nicola Lacey (Law, Gender and Social Policy); David Soskice (Government)

3 International variation in crime and punishment Huge variations in levels of crime and punishment across states – and even between states at comparable levels of economic and political development Opportunities afforded by these variations to build explanatory hypotheses about the linkages between not only criminal justice policy and crime, but also crime, punishment and broader social, political and economic institutions and cultural dynamics LSE 400 American Exceptionalism in Crime, Punishment and Inequality, 6 February

4 Questions for comparative analysis 1) How can we explain the different trajectories of crime and punishment in different countries? 2) What light can a comparative analysis shed on our understanding of how patterns of crime and punishment are produced, and in particular of the relative importance of penal policy and of other factors – social and economic policy, culture, the structure of political institutions – in producing those patterns? 3) What light can comparative studies throw on the wisdom – or possibility - of ‘transplanting’ policies from one country to another? LSE 400 American Exceptionalism in Crime, Punishment and Inequality, 6 February

5 5

6 The Ratio of Serious Violent Crime and of Homicides, United States, England and Wales, Canada and New Zealand, based on offences per 100,000 of the population. LSE 400 American Exceptionalism in Crime, Punishment and Inequality, 6 February

7 Prison Population Rates Source: OECD, 2007; International Centre for Prison Studies, 2007 LSE 400 American Exceptionalism in Crime, Punishment and Inequality, 6 February

8 Source: International Centre for Prison Studies (2010); European Sourcebook of Crime and Criminal Justice (2010); John Pratt, British Journal of Criminology (2008) LSE 400 American Exceptionalism in Crime, Punishment and Inequality, 6 February

9 Source: International Centre for Prison Studies, 2010; John Pratt, British Journal of Criminology LSE 400 American Exceptionalism in Crime, Punishment and Inequality, 6 February 2015

10 An institutional explanation? The economic dimension: labour market arrangements; production regime; education and training (Hall and Soskice 2000) The political dimension: electoral and party systems; the bureaucracy (Lijphardt 1984, 1999) The welfare state (Esping-Andersen 1990) The constitution (Lacey 2008) Inclusionary and exclusionary dynamics in both prevailing institutional structures and in culture LSE 400 American Exceptionalism in Crime, Punishment and Inequality, 6 February

11 Inequality and Redistribution (ca ) Source: Torben Iversen and David Soskice, ‘Distribution and Redistribution: The Shadow of the Nineteenth Century’, (2009) 61:3 World Politics : Luxembourg Income Study and OECD. LSE 400 American Exceptionalism in Crime, Punishment and Inequality, 6 February

12 Vocational Training and Redistribution Source: Torben Iversen and David Soskice, ‘Distribution and Redistribution: The Shadow of the Nineteenth Century’, (2009) 61: 3 World Politics UNESCO LSE 400 American Exceptionalism in Crime, Punishment and Inequality, 6 February

13 Literacy and Education, (1994-8) Source: Torben Iversen and David Soskice, ‘Distribution and Redistribution: The Shadow of the Nineteenth Century’, (2009) 61: 3 World Politics NOTE: The top bars (using top scale) show the percentage of adults who have not completed an upper secondary education but have high scores on document literacy. The bottom bars (using bottom scale) show the percentage of adults taking the test who get the lowest score, averaged across three test categories. LSE 400 American Exceptionalism in Crime, Punishment and Inequality, 6 February

14 United States United Kingdom AustraliaNew Zealand CanadaSwe Residential Segregation: (Ethnic) 10.8 [11.4] Black 1.7 [9.9] S Asian 0.1 [2.7] Asian 0.0 [19.6] Maori 1.4 [11.2] Asian Prison per cap Homicide rate Literacy score 5 th percentile Child poverty LSE 400 American Exceptionalism in Crime, Punishment and Inequality, 6 February Notes: (1)Residential segregation: % population in large cities living in tracts where (a) > 70% ethnic (non-white), (b) one ethnic group dominant, (c) > 30% of group in city live in these tracts. The number in [] is % of main ethnic group in cities analysed Johnston, Poulsen, Forrest, ms 2005 (2)Prison data ; 2004 Canada (3)International Adult Literacy Survey 2000 OECD (4) Unicef, 2012

15 Methodological question: similarity vs difference in comparative analysis Difference tends to become salient in comparative research, but… Similarity also needs to be explained. Our analysis in this lecture focuses on explaining the very stark differences just described, but… Here is one striking similarity, the explanation for which must be part of any full analysis: LSE 400 American Exceptionalism in Crime, Punishment and Inequality, 6 February

16 Gender and Crime: US LSE 400 American Exceptionalism in Crime, Punishment and Inequality, 6 February

17 Gender and Crime, UK LSE 400 American Exceptionalism in Crime, Punishment and Inequality, 6 February

18 Gender and Crime: UK LSE 400 American Exceptionalism in Crime, Punishment and Inequality, 6 February

19 Women as % of prison population on latest World Prison Brief data USA9.0% Australia7.7% Sweden5.8% Germany 5.7% Scotland 5.4% Canada5.1% England and Wales4.5% Ukraine 4.4% France 3.3% LSE 400 American Exceptionalism in Crime, Punishment and Inequality, 6 February

20 LSE 400 American Exceptionalism in Crime, Punishment and Inequality, 6 February PoliceProsecutorsLocal judgesZoningSchools US City/municipal app by mayor (sometimes elected) DA elected county or multi- county district Most states elected on county or multi-county district Zoning Boards appointed by locally elected Council/Mayor Property tax by elected School Board at School District Canada Office of Provincial AG; operating procedures, appointments, training Provincial AG Provincial government Provincial, Federal defined policies Provincial policies England and Wales Home Office appoints Chief Constables Attorney General (government agency) Lord Chancellor (Ministry of Justice) Min Housing rules, right of appeal to Minister National govt policies NZGovernment appoints (under Min of Police, prosecution independence) Attorney General appoints (remain private lawyers) national guidelines Attorney GeneralNational guidelinesNational system (Ministry of Education)

21 LSE 400 American Exceptionalism in Crime, Punishment and Inequality, 6 February

22 LSE 400 American Exceptionalism in Crime, Punishment and Inequality, 6 February

23 Most serious violent crime committed by men from late teens to late 20s; largely in big cities Start with UK and US: UK bad and US worse if we go back to 1950s – (compared to Germany and Sweden) But from 1970s to mid 1990s UK violent crime doubled but US quadrupled Since mid 1990s violent crime halved in UK and US – though differences across cities Very largely from underprivileged families and with weak education – high school dropouts in US, early leavers UK

24 So 3 periods of violent crime in UK and US: 1950s and 1960s relatively low 1970s through mid 1990s doubles in UK quadruples in US mid 1990s to present falls significantly (roughly halves) UK and US

25 Key methodological hypothesis: Choosing crime is like many (perhaps most) other choices of economic and educational activities made by young people from mid teens to mid twenties Constrained choice: My background is given (imagine socially underprivileged and bad schools): What jobs are available given my education, skills and social connections? Does it pay me to invest more in education and skills (what sort?) and social connections (what sort?) to increase choice of jobs/activities (inc crime)?

26 These choices depend on job opportunities provided by labour markets – and these change hugely across the 3 periods 1950s 1960s: Huge ‘Fordist’ assembly line auto plants etc needed semi-skilled (male) workers – learn simple range of tasks requiring physical dexterities and stamina, plus discipline social skills not important, education level not important (but don’t drop out of high/secondary school – bad signal for accepting discipline) strong unions bargained good wages and conditions Good period: 1950s and 1960s

27 1950s 1960s: choice not difficult even if from bad schools/background with limited social connections – accept discipline and get decent job and avoid crime because that risks losing decent jobs and difficulty getting back in with criminal record Good period: 1950s and 1960s

28 Mid 1970s to mid 1990s Growing consequences of Information technology revolution: many good effects but ….. implies gradual collapse of Fordism/ end of decent mass semi-skilled employment for low-educated young males bad period for big cities where most big Fordist plants located – especially in US: eg Chicago, New York nearly go bankrupt Difficult choices for disadvantaged young males: (1) Upgrade educationally. Standard middle class choice as proportion staying on for higher education and hence better careers generated by IT revolution. But requires good schools and social connections. Bad period: mid 1970s to mid 1990s

29 Choice (2): work legally in low-skill employment, (non-unionized); but real hourly earnings for low-skilled males collapse in this period (here shown for US): low-skill male real hrly earnings in US Bad period: mid 1970s to mid 1990s

30 Choice (3): invest in crime, build ‘bad’ social connections in high school and/or drop out in US, this typically involved membership of street gang ability to earn money from protection and drug-sales (more later) Bad period: mid 1970s to mid 1990s Conclusion for Bad Period For young males from really disadvantaged backgrounds, bad schools, low ‘cultural/social’ capital, no/limited social connections to employment, legal jobs pretty shit jobs, then crime not a stupid choice – despite all long-term consequences

31 Methodology: This approach often called ‘rational choice’: (i) Individuals have ‘preferences’: most people want: to live comfortably (earn money) to be approved of (even admired) by their friends and colleagues (ii) Individual has ‘assets’: human capital (education background); social/cultural capital: social background, social connections (eg to potential employers, often indirectly), ability to communicate with those from different backgrounds Methodological Interlude

32 LSE 400 American Exceptionalism in Crime, Punishment and Inequality, 6 February

33 (iii) Given his or her assets, the individual has ‘choices’, and these can and do change over time Methodological Interlude (iv) Given his or her assets, preferences and choices, the individual chooses what he sees as best available option. - when industry (1950s/1960s) demanded physically fit young men prepared to accept industrial discipline, and it didn’t require significant education or social/communicative skills, that gave one set of choices - and when those choices were eliminated (mid 1970s on), the choice set narrowed for those with low/poor education and social capital

34 (1) Why such a huge increase in violent crime in large US cities (mainly the ex- industrial cities where semi-skilled employment had collapsed)? (2) Why was increase in violent crime in US much larger than in UK (even though same basic cause – collapse of semi-skilled employment for less educated young men)?

35 (1) So why such a huge increase in violent crime in large US cities (mainly the ex- industrial cities where semi-skilled employment had collapsed)? We’ll see that young men with poor education and who couldn’t get decent jobs; a large proportion of whom were black (some Hispanic); lived in densely populated very poor areas in city centres (de facto ethnic ghettos) - residential segregation or sorting And then we’ll look at why living in these ghettos generated such a high level of serious violent crime

36 US cities ‘herd’ the poor (especially poor blacks, also poor hispanics) into densely populated tracts/neighborhoods; these are the Truly Disadvantaged - William Julius Wilson US often called the ‘sorting society’ – sorting class/ethnicity residentially Huge increase in US violent crime mid 1970s to mid 1990s: (1) Residential Segregation Here’s an ethnic map of Chicago: red dot: 25 White residents gold: 25 Hispanic residents blue: 25 Black residents; the more intense the colour, the denser the population check median income here tract by tract: /how-rich-is-your-neighborhood

37 Huge increase in US violent crime mid 1970s to mid 1990s: (1) Residential Segregation Which very large US cities? https://www.flickr.com/photos/walkingsf/ /in/set /

38 Huge increase in US violent crime mid 1970s to mid 1990s: (1) Residential Segregation Addendum: a great website for flicking between median income tract by tract and race tract by tract is: US often called the ‘sorting society’ – sorting class/ethnicity residentially

39 And which are these very large US cities? Huge increase in US violent crime mid 1970s to mid 1990s: (1) Residential Segregation

40 United States United Kingdom AustraliaNew Zealand CanadaSweden Residential Segregation: (Ethnic) 10.8 [11.4] Black 1.7 [9.9] S Asian 0.1 [2.7] Asian 0.0 [19.6] Maori 1.4 [11.2] Asian Prison per cap Homicide rate Literacy score 5 th percentile Child poverty Notes: (1)Residential segregation: % population in large cities living in tracts where (a) > 70% ethnic, (b) one ethnic group dominant, (c) > 30% of group in city live in these tracts. The number in [] is % of main ethnic group in cities analysed Johnston, Poulsen, Forrest, ms 2005 (2)Prison data ; 2004 Canada (3)International Adult Literacy Survey 2000 OECD (4) Unicef, 2012 Huge increase in US violent crime mid 1970s to mid 1990s: (1) Residential Segregation

41 Some more detailed comparative data on (ethnic) residential segregation in matched cities in US compared to UK, Canada, NZ Huge increase in US violent crime mid 1970s to mid 1990s: (1) Residential Segregation

42 Why so much higher residential segregation in US cities compared to elsewhere? Free market property forces? In most rich capitalist countries the better-off live in nicer places – but that doesn’t distinguish US from UK where residential segregation much lower But unlike elsewhere, American cities have Zoning Laws which say how many houses per acre and how many families per building; these laid down for each neighborhood; so a 2 house per acre/ one family per building zoning rule keeps poor families very effectively out And ethnicity (blacks, Hispanics) highly correlated with income/class

43 Huge increase in US violent crime mid 1970s to mid 1990s: (2) Educational Segregation (de facto) So disadvantaged largely black/hispanic young men with weak job prospects in these highly residentially segregated poor areas Strongly reinforced by de facto educational segregation: So despite famous Supreme Court decision in Brown vs Board of Education (1954) making school segregation illegal …. Residential segregation means education remains highly segregated for low income groups And US cities choose to spend much less on schools with high poor/Black/Hispanic children: these ghetto schools often very bad

44 Mental note: 2 policies which have adverse reinforcing impact on the already disadvantaged in US (1). Using Zoning Laws creating residential segregation (2). Significantly lower funding for (de facto racially segregated schools in these poor areas, reinforcing low educational performance

45 How do we actually know that there is ‘lower funding for (de facto racially segregated) schools in these poor areas in US cities’ as I’ve just claimed? 0%0% 60% 50% 0%0% % Ethnic in City Share of City Spending on Education slope of line is

46 Huge increase in US violent crime mid 1970s to mid 1990s: (2) Educational Segregation (de facto) Disadvantaged Youth Residentially Segregated Educational Segregation Low Resources for Schools Bad schools Collapse of decent jobs for males with low education and social skills; but accept discipline From 1980s on, decent careers require good education and social (and cultural) skills Legal employment is sink v low pay employment ? Thus crime attractive but why violent crime?

47 Before seeing why violent crime developed in such a huge way in US compared to UK we can check that these areas (poor ethnic inner city areas) were in fact the areas of violent crime we’ll actually see this had a great deal to do with street gangs; these were always feature of big city life in US – back to Irish and Italians in C19th; but they really develop from mid 1970s through to early 1990s and key question for us is why?

48 index.php?pr=GANG_MAP_SOUTH

49 LSE 400 American Exceptionalism in Crime, Punishment and Inequality, 6 February

50 Huge increase in US violent crime mid 1970s to mid 1990s

51

52 Huge increase in US violent crime mid 1970s to mid 1990s: why did gangs develop in this period? (1) As we’ve argued: A lot of disadvantaged young men, largely ethnic, with minimal labor market attachments, in these deeply poor neighborhoods, in effect for whom crime is sensible choice; (prison for 6 months or a year – normal length (??Check) – almost rite of passage) 3 factors led to big surge in gangs

53 Huge increase in US violent crime mid 1970s to mid 1990s: why did gangs develop in this period? (2) As these neighborhoods became worse thru 1970s and 1980s – unemployment rising, businesses incl retail moving out – middle classes also moved out 3 factors led to big surge in gangs A key element for any community to work – some form of social organization – became much weaker. These became increasingly what sociologists call areas of ‘social disorganization’

54 Huge increase in US violent crime mid 1970s to mid 1990s: why did gangs develop in this period? (3) These poor areas were always areas with very limited police presence on foot – and now police presence was largely in well-armed and defended police cars 3 factors led to big surge in gangs So gangs caused by total lack of protection for individuals in bad areas, and social disorganization. Young men carried weapons of self-defence. Violence easily broke out. Joining gangs meant relative safety; enabled drug-dealing, as well as money from protection.

55 Much of the gang violence came from establishing gang turf between neighborhoods. Also, enforcing payments eg from drug dealers.

56 Three US policies which really ‘caused’ huge rise in violence in US compared to UK (1). Zoning: Using Zoning Laws creating residential segregation (2). Education: Significantly lower funding for (de facto racially segregated schools in these poor areas, reinforcing low educational performance (3). Policing: Significant under-policing of poor areas, with beat policing almost absent

57 Big difference between US and UK policy-making in these areas: In UK (and Canada, NZ and Australia) policies in these 3 areas made at national (or state/provincial) level But in US policies in these 3 areas made at local or city level: by democratically elected mayors and city councils, or school boards

58 Similar difference between US and UK policy-making in two other areas: state prosecution (District Attorneys or DAs) and district judges In UK (and Canada, NZ and Australia) appointments of public prosecutors and judges is made at national (or state/provincial) level But in US DAs and district judges (who judge all criminal cases in first instance) are directly elected at county or city level in special elections

59 POLICESTATE PROSECUTORSDISTRICT JUDGESZONINGSCHOOLS US City/municipal app by mayor (sometimes elected) DA elected county or multi- county district Most states elected on county or multi-county district Zoning Boards appointed by locally elected Council/Mayor Property tax by elected School Board at School District Canada Office of Provincial AG; operating procedures, appointments, training Provincial AGProvincial government Provincial, Federal defined policies Provincial policies England and Wales Home Office appoints Chief Constables Attorney General (government agency) Lord Chancellor (Ministry of Justice) Min Housing rules, right of appeal to Minister National govt policies NZGovernment appoints (under Min of Police, prosecution independence) Attorney General appoints (remain private lawyers) national guidelines Attorney GeneralNational guidelinesNational system (Ministry of Education)

60 So why does this matter whether rules/policies/appointments made at national level or city/local level? Fundamental difference between US political system and that of every other advanced country: Huge range of decisions left to local voters without any national (federal/state) framework (why its different from Switzerland) This goes right back in history

61 This matters most to home owners: - their home usually their main capital asset; - and its value depends on local environment: (iii) on local safety (especially from violence): so effective policing for us, but not for poor areas where effective policing expensive and poor beat up poor (iv) on good schools (for our children): so don’t spend our property taxes on schools in poor areas (ii) on ‘nice’ neighbors (read ‘neighbors like us’) so zoning rules to keep ethnic poor away from us (this is costless) (i) on low property taxes: so do things as cheaply as possible for us

62 Home owners are the dominant voters: (1) frequently close to a majority of home owners (largely white) (2) home owners well-organized in ‘neighborhood’ or ‘homeowner’ associations; and they ensure turnout to vote and participation in zoning board meetings etc (3) the poor areas are socially disorganized and turn out low

63 Why are results different in national elections? (1) Generally much bigger turnout at national elections, say 70% versus 30%. So decisive voters in national elections lower income & don’t want rigid zoning rules (2) ‘Negative externalities’: Governments at national level want disadvantaged groups to have reasonable education, because illiteracy spills over to economic and social problems throughout country – as do bad pockets of crime in city centers.

64 LSE 400 American Exceptionalism in Crime, Punishment and Inequality, 6 February

65


Download ppt "LSE 400: Thinking Like a Social Scientist American Exceptionalism in Crime, Punishment and Inequality Nicola Lacey (Law, Gender and Social Policy); David."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google