IMMIGRATION AND CRIME IN AN ERA OF TRANSFORMATION: A LONGITUDINAL ANALYSIS OF HOMICIDES IN SAN DIEGO NEIGHBORHOODS, 1980–2000*

Emerging research associated with the “immigration revitalization” perspective suggests that immigration has been labeled inaccurately as a cause of crime in contemporary society. In fact, crime seems to be unexpectedly low in many communities that exhibit high levels of the following classic indicators of social disorganization: residential instability, ethnic heterogeneity, and immigration. But virtually all research conducted to date has been cross-sectional in nature and therefore unable to demonstrate how the relationship between immigration and crime might covary over time. This limitation is significant, especially because current versions of social disorganization theory posit a dynamic relationship between structural factors and crime that unfolds over time. The current study addresses this issue by exploring the effects of immigration on neighborhood-level homicide trends in the city of San Diego, California, using a combination of racially/ethnically disaggregated homicide victim data and community structural indicators collected for three decennial census periods. Consistent with the revitalization thesis, results show that the increased size of the foreign-born population reduces lethal violence over time. Specifically, we find that neighborhoods with a larger share of immigrants have fewer total, non-Latino White, and Latino homicide victims. More broadly, our findings suggest that social disorganization in heavily immigrant cities might be largely a function of economic deprivation rather than forms of “neighborhood” or “system” stability.     

GHETTOS,THRESHOLDS, AND CRIME: DOES CONCENTRATED POVERTY REALLY HAVE AN ACCELERATING INCREASING EFFECT ON CRIME?*

Theories make varying predictions regarding the functional form of the relationship between neighborhood poverty and crime rates, ranging from a diminishing positive effect, to a linear positive effect, to an exponentially increasing or even threshold effect. Nonetheless, surprisingly little empirical evidence exists testing this functional form. This study estimates the functional form of the relationship between poverty and various types of serious crime in a sample of census tracts for 25 cities, and it finds that a diminishing positive effect most appropriately characterizes this relationship whether estimating the models nonparametrically or parametrically. Only for the crime of murder does some evidence exist of an accelerating effect, although this occurs in the range of 20 to 40 percent in poverty, with a leveling effect on crime beyond this point of very high poverty. Thus, no evidence is found here in support of the postulate of scholars extending William Julius Wilson's (1987) insight that neighborhoods with very high levels of poverty will experience an exponentially higher rate of crime compared with other neighborhoods.     

Rethinking Community Organization and Robbery: Considering Illicit Market Dynamics

In this investigation we examine the relationship between the certainty of execution and murder in the District of Columbia, 1890–1970. By examining a small political/geographic unit like the District, we avoid the aggregation problems of previous time-series analyses at the national level, and time-series and cross-sectional investigations of states as the unit of analysis. At odds with the deterrence argument, we find no evidence of a substantial and/or statistically significant inverse relationship between the certainty of execution and murder rates when multiple execution and murder rate variables are considered, when various time lags are examined, and when five time periods are examined between 1890 and 1970. In contrast, there is some suggestion that the immediate effect of executions may be to increase, not decrease, murders. This possible effect is extremely slight and short-term, however, with murder and executions being largely independent factors in the District.     

INCOME INEQUALITY,RACE, AND PLACE: DOES THE DISTRIBUTION OF RACE AND CLASS WITHIN NEIGHBORHOODS AFFECT CRIME RATES?*

This study tests the effects of neighborhood inequality and heterogeneity on crime rates. The results of this study, which were obtained by using a large sample of census tracts in 19 cities in 2000, provide strong evidence of the importance of racial/ethnic heterogeneity for the amount of all types of crime generally committed by strangers, even controlling for the effects of income inequality. Consistent with predictions of several theories, greater overall inequality in the tract was associated with higher crime rates, particularly for violent types of crime. Strong evidence revealed that within racial/ethnic group inequality increases crime rates: Only the relative deprivation model predicted this association. An illuminating finding is that the effect of tract poverty on robbery and murder becomes nonsignificant when the level of income inequality is taken into account; this finding suggests that past studies that failed to take income inequality into account may have inappropriately attributed causal importance to poverty. This large sample also provides evidence that it is the presence of homeowners, rather than residential stability (as measured by the average length of residence), that significantly reduces the level of crime in neighborhoods.     

Do Fringe Banks Create Fringe Neighborhoods? Examining the Spatial Relationship between Fringe Banking and Neighborhood Crime Rates

In the aftermath of one of the worst recessions in US history, high unemployment has placed millions of Americans in precarious financial positions. More than ever, Americans are opting out of traditional financial services, relying instead on “fringe lenders” such as check cashers, payday lenders, and pawnshops to manage their finances. Given their tremendous growth and the concern that consumers who are least able to pay for high-cost, high-risk financial products are most likely to use them, fringe lenders have been the subject of controversy and the focus of much research. Largely unknown, however, are the effects of fringe lenders on the communities where they are located. Given their spatial concentration in low-income neighborhoods with greater concentrations of racial and ethnic minorities—areas with typically more crime—of concern is whether fringe lenders themselves are criminogenic. We consider this by examining the impact of several types of fringe lenders on neighborhood crime rates in Los Angeles. Our findings reveal that the presence of fringe banks on a block is related to higher crime levels, even after controlling for a range of factors known to be associated with crime rates. The presence of a fringe bank also impacts crime, particularly robbery, on adjacent blocks. Whereas we find that pawnshops have little impact on crime levels, payday lenders and check cashers have a much stronger impact. Finally, we discover there are moderating effects, as the fringe lender–crime relationship is considerably reduced if the lender is located in a higher population density area.     

Measuring community social organization: Sense of community as a mediator in social disorganization theory

The current study utilized an updated systemic model of social disorganization to investigate neighborhood effects on both positive and negative youth outcomes. Although empirical support for updated social disorganization models has increased in recent years, the field continues to rely too heavily on behavioral indicators of community social organization. Unfortunately, these measures do not assess the truly important social processes and dynamics that result in cohesive and supportive neighborhoods. It was proposed that sense of community (SOC) was a more valid, comprehensive, and applicable measure for the mediating variables in social disorganization theory. Results supported the hypothesis that SOC mediates the effect of neighborhood disadvantage on youth outcomes and implications for the field are discussed.     

A LONGITUDINAL TEST OF SOCIAL DISORGANIZATION THEORY: FEEDBACK EFFECTS AMONG COHESION,SOCIAL CONTROL,AND DISORDER*

Social disorganization theory holds that neighborhoods with greater residential stability, higher socioeconomic status, and more ethnic homogeneity experience less disorder because these neighborhoods have higher social cohesion and exercise more social control. Recent extensions of the theory argue that disorder in turn affects these structural characteristics and mechanisms. Using a data set on 74 neighborhoods in the city of Utrecht in the Netherlands spanning 10 years, we tested the extended theory, which to date only a few studies have been able to do because of the unavailability of neighborhood‐level longitudinal data. We also improve on previous studies by distinguishing between the potential for social control (feelings of responsibility) and the actual social control behavior. Cross‐sectional analyses replicate earlier findings, but the results of longitudinal cross‐lagged models suggest that disorder has large consequences for subsequent levels of social control and residential instability, thus leading to more disorder. This is in contrast to most previous studies, which assume disorder to be more a consequence than a cause. This study underlines the importance of longitudinal data, allowing for simultaneously testing the causes and consequences of disorder, as well as the importance of breaking down social control into the two dimensions of the potential for social control and the actual social control behavior.     

UNSTRUCTURED SOCIALIZING AND RATES OF DELINQUENCY

This article applies an individual-level routine activities perspective to explaining rates of delinquency. The theoretical analysis also links the opportunity processes of that perspective to key themes of social disorganization theory. Multilevel analyses of 4, 358 eighth-grade students from thirty-six schools in ten cities support the central hypothesis: Time spent in unstructured socializing with peers has both individual and contextual effects that explain a large share of the variation in rates of delinquency across groups of adolescents who attend different schools. In addition, parental monitoring has a very strong contextual effect on unstructured socializing, which supports the proposed integration of routine activity and social disorganization perspectives.     

DIRECTLY INTERVENE OR CALL THE AUTHORITIES? A STUDY OF FORMS OF NEIGHBORHOOD SOCIAL CONTROL WITHIN A SOCIAL DISORGANIZATION FRAMEWORK*

Informal social control is a central concept in the contemporary social disorganization literature, and much attention has been directed at examining community characteristics related to variation in the quantity of informal social control across communities. However, considerably less attention has been paid to variation in forms of informal social control. This study examines the extent to which neighborhood characteristics are related to residents’likelihood of using two different forms of informal social control: direct informal social control (i.e., through direct intervention) and indirect informal social control (i.e., through mobilizing formal authorities). Data for this study are based on surveys of residents in 66 neighborhoods. The analysis uses hierarchical modeling to examine whether neighborhood characteristics central to contemporary social disorganization theory have similar effects on these two forms of neighborhood social control. Findings indicate that social ties increase the likelihood of direct informal social control but not indirect informal social control, whereas social cohesion and trust decreases indirect informal social control but does not have a significant effect on direct informal social control. Faith in the police is not found to affect either form of informal social control. These findings are discussed in terms of current issues in contemporary social disorganization theory.     

Expressive Crimes in Post‐Socialist States of Estonia,Latvia and Lithuania1

The objective of this study is to examine the social determinants of violent victimization, with the principal focus being directed at the significance of neighbourhood conditions. By combining data from victim surveys with information on the neighbourhoods in which the survey respondents live, we have been able to study both the individual and household characteristics, and also the factors specific to different neighbourhoods that are associated with violent victimization. What we are able to show is that the violence that occurs in the residential neighbourhood constitutes only a small fraction of the violent incidents to which people are exposed. Further, the violence that occurs within the neighbourhood takes place to a large extent within the victim's home. This suggests that exposure to violence is associated with neighbourhood conditions only to a limited extent. More detailed analyses of the violence that does occur within the neighbourhood show no effects of neighbourhood conditions when controls are included for individual and household characteristics. The conclusion, therefore, is that we are unable to find any clear neighbourhood effects in relation to violent victimization. The differences that we initially note between different types of neighbourhood in the proportions reporting exposure to violence are too a large degree the result of selection processes. These do not, however, in themselves increase the risk for violent victimization.