1. University of Helsinki
Can we use social disorganisation theory to describe the contemporary Nordic reality? Theoretical and empirical aspects
Teemu Kemppainen
University of Helsinki
teemu.t.kemppainen(at)helsinki.fi

2. Park & Burgess (1925) Concentric zone theory
City grows through differentiation
Industrialisation, urbanisation, immigration  neighbourhood life?
Biological concepts
ecology, natural areas
Neigbourhood: place, emotions, traditions, history

3. Park & Burgess (1925) / 2 Transitional zone
Least wanted, least expensive
residential instability
ethnic / racial heterogeneity
high crime rates

4. Shaw & McKay (1942) Social disorganisation theory
study of crime along the lines of Park & Burgess
the clustering of ”social pathology” in the zone of transition
Neighbourhood communities and youth crime
crime statistics: ; ;
Observation: crime has a clear and temporally stable spatial distribution
poverty, residential instability, race/ethnic heterogeneity
theory: social control & transmission of sub-cultural values

5. Synthesis: ”organised community”
Normative consensus on how to behave and live together (solidarity, cohesion)
Strong ties: neighbourhood spirit, neighbours know each other (cohesion, strong bonds)
Social interaction (integration, social ties)
Mutual trust (trust, cohesion)
...thus, the community can realise common goals, e.g. security
...and sustain efficient informal social control
Structural basis  organisation  crime rates

6. Selected critiques Empirical tests were long missing
Sampson & Groves 1989 (UK data!)
Epistemic question: implicit middle-class bias?
is behaviour x organised or not?
only a terminological problem (”dis”)?
Natural areas: where’s power and politics?
e.f. where to place social housing?
But still: the core question remains important and perfectly reasonable:
Structural basis  organisation  crime rates ?
crime-disorder-continuum (e.g. Sampson & Raudenbush 1999)
Varhaiset versiot: disorganisaatiota ei aina eroteltu seurauksistaan
esim. rikostasoa käytettiin disorganisaation indikaattorina
Rekisteridata: onko poliisin toiminnassa alueellista vinoumaa....kyselyaineiston edut

7. From the industrialising Chicago inner cities to the late modern Nordic suburbia
Kontula (1970) (Helsinki),

8. Background: housing estates (=?)
Spatially accumulating social disadvantage
Increasing ethnic diversity
Aging
Relatively safe cities
Policy of social mixing
Diversity of estates

10. Estates do not really differ from other urban neighbourhoods...

11. On the other hand, incivilities conincide with disadvantage (cf
On the other hand, incivilities conincide with disadvantage (cf. Shaw & McKay)
plus: neighbourhood SES explains the small SHE-HRN difference
Kemppainen & Saarsalmi (2013)

12. Diversity of estates: a sample of 71 Finnish estates

13. Local social life: regression results
Random intercept models:
Rental tenure structure  higher disadvantage  more perceptions of social disorder
The level of social interaction does not seem to play any role with regard to local social disorder
High social cohesion (i.e. normative consensus) and high informal social control  lower values of disorder perceptions.
Also, partial mechanism between disadvantage and disorder

14. Conclusion Natural areas ... account for power instead
No absolute order or disorder in social life
The core of social disorganisation theory remains valuable and serves as a good guide in studying urban life
disadvantage, social control and disorder are associated