EXAM 1 Performance (After the curve)

Emile Durkheim The “Chicago School” Social Disorganization Social Structure I

Emile Durkheim (late 1858-1917) French Scientist Suicide Humans nature: selfish and insatiable Effective Societies able to “cap” desires Socialization & Social Ties Special concern with “Industrial Prosperity” Coined the Term “Anomie”: Institutionalized norms lose ability to control human behavior and human needs

“Industrial Prosperity” therefore cap or control Durkhiem’s Legacy Rapidly Changing Society “Industrial Prosperity” Anomie (Norms are Weakened) Human Nature as Insatiable; must therefore cap or control Social Ties Important The Anomie/Strain Tradition (Next Week) The Social Disorganization and “Informal Control” Tradition (Today/Tuesday)

Meanwhile, back in America “Social Pathologists” (1900-1930) Cities as “bad” and “corrupting” Immigrants as amoral and inferior Chicago School (1930s) University of Chicago (Sociologists) Tie to Durkheim: City/Societal Growth Worry over lack of integration (and control)

Park & Burgess (1925) How does a city growth and develop? Concentric Zones in Chicago Industrial zone Zone in transition Residential zones

Shaw and McKay Juvenile Delinquency in Urban Areas 1942. Mapped addresses of delinquents (court records) Zone in transition stable and high delinquency rates over many years Implications of these findings: 1. Stable, despite multiple waves of immigrants!! 2. Only certain areas of the city Something about this area causes delinquency

Social Disorganization What were the characteristics of the zone in transition that may cause high delinquency rates? Population Heterogeneity Population Turnover Physical Decay Poverty/Inequality Why might these ecological characteristics lead to high crime rates?

Explaining high crime in the zone of transition 1. Social Control Little community “cohesion,” therefore, weak community institutions and lack of control Borrowed from Durkheim here: humans need to be controlled or deviance and crime will result. 2. Cultural Transmission of Values Once crime becomes rooted in a neighborhood, delinquent values are passed trough generations of delinquents

Social Disorganization 1960-1980 Fell out of favor in sociology in 1950s Individual theories gained popularity Criticisms of Social Disorganization Use of “Official Data” Are these neighborhoods really “disorganized?” Cannot measure “intervening variables” “Chicago Specific” (not all cities grow in rings)

Modern S.D. Theory Addressing criticism Interest rekindled in the 1980s Continues today with “ecological studies” Reborn as a pure social control theory (left behind “transmission of values”) Addressing criticism “Concentric rings” not necessary, it is simply a neighborhood level theory Ecological characteristics do affect a neighborhoods level of informal control

Sampson and Groves (1989) Using British Crime Survey Data (BCS) ECOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS Population turnover Poverty / inequality Divorce rates Single parents SOCIAL CONTROL Street supervision Friendship networks Participation in organizations

Sampson (1997) Replicated results in Chicago Areas with “concentrated disadvantage,” (poverty, race, age composition, family disruption) lack “collective efficacy” Willingness to exercise control (tell kids to quiet down) Willingness to trust or help each other Lack of collective efficacy increases crime rates

Sampson Friends (1997-Present) Version Data from the Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods Concentrated Disadvantage (Ecological) Population turnover Poverty / inequality Race composition Family disruption Physical decay Collective Efficacy Willingness to supervise/confront in neighborhood Mutual trust and willingness to help neighbors CRIME Homicide Violence as “problem” Victimization

Review of Social Disorganization Macro (Neighborhood) level theory Explains why certain neighborhoods have high crime rates Theory of “Places,” and not “People” Not all people who live there are “crime prone,” in fact most are law-abiding Not simply a result of “bad people” moving into certain neighborhoods

RETURN OF THE “CULTURAL TRANSMISSION” William J. Wilson (Concentrated Poverty) The “Underclass” or “Truly Disadvantaged” Cultural Isolation no contact with “mainstream” individuals/institutions Little respect for “life” Hyper materialism, violence as “normative” Some believe recent “crime drop” reflect move away from these values Elijah Anderson Code of the Streets Disrespect and fear of disrespect at heart of code

Beyond “Informal” controls Robert Bursik Residents of the zone in transition lack “political capital” Inadequate access to public services

S.D. as an explanation for high rates of African American offending William Julius Wilson and Robert Sampson High proportion of the current members of the “Zone in Transition.” Public Policy made matters worse (high rise “projects” of the 1950s-60s) Why do African Americans not “move out” like prior ZIT residents (immigrants)? Housing Segregation Loss of Manufacturing Jobs The irony of “Black Flight”

Sampson and Wilson II Clarify the “cultural component” Issue of “disrespect” rooted in legacy of racism and despair (e.g., based on reality). Idea of “cognitive landscape” When violence is a regular part of reality, it seems more “normal” as a response.

Policy Implications? Build neighborhood “collective efficacy” How do you do this? Address ecological characteristics that ruin collective efficacy Family disruption, concentrated poverty, residential mobility Moving to Opportunity Program in Baltimore Randomly moved 200 families from high poverty to low poverty—then track the children Community Policing Movement

Feature Presentation + Group WOrk What in the video clip can you connect to social disorganization theory? Ecological factors? Social control? Cognitive landscape?