Neighborhood Inequality, Collective Efficacy, and the Spatial Dynamics of Urban Violence

• NCJ Number: 189941
• Journal: Criminology Volume: 39 Issue: 3 Dated: August 2001 Pages: 517-560
• Author(s): Jeffrey D. Morenoff; Robert J. Sampson; Stephen W. Raudenbush
• Date Published: August 2001
• Length: 44 pages
• Publication Format: Article
• Publication Type: Report (Study/Research)
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America
• Note: This is a revised version of a paper presented at the national conference, "Neighborhood Effects on Low-Income Families," September 9-10, 1999, and at the Annual Meeting of American Society of Criminology, Toronto, November 1999.

Annotation

Highlighting resource inequality, social processes, and spatial interdependence, this study combines structural characteristics from the 1990 census with a survey of 8,872 Chicago residents in 1995 to predict homicide variations in 1996-98 across 343 neighborhoods.

Abstract

The integrated framework used in this study built on the insights derived from social disorganization, social capital, and collective efficacy theory, coupled with a "routine activities" emphasis on the explanation of crime events. Applying this framework, the study highlighted two neglected dimensions of neighborhood context: spatial dynamics arising from neighborhood interdependence and social-institutional processes. To assess collective efficacy, the study replicated Sampson et al. (1997) and combined two related scales. The first is a five-item Likert-type scale of shared expectations for social control. Residents were asked about the likelihood that their neighbors could be counted on to take action if children were skipping school and hanging out on street corners, children were spray-painting graffiti on a local building, children were showing disrespect to an adult, a fight broke out in front of their house, and the fire station closest to home was threatened with budget cuts. Social cohesion/trust was measured by asking respondents how strongly they agreed that "People around here are willing to help their neighbors;" "This is a close-knit neighborhood;" "People in this neighborhood can be trusted;" "People in this neighborhood generally don't get along with each other;" and "People in this neighborhood do not share the same values." The study found that spatial proximity to homicide was strongly related to increased homicide rates adjusting for internal neighborhood characteristics and prior homicide. Concentrated disadvantage and low collective efficacy -- defined as the linkage of social control and cohesion -- also independently predicted increased homicide. Local organizations, voluntary associations, and friend/kinship networks were apparently important only insofar as they promoted the collective efficacy of residents in achieving social control and cohesion. Spatial dynamics coupled with neighborhood inequalities in social and economic capacity are therefore consequential for explaining urban violence. 4 tables, 3 figures, and 65 references