Social Exclusion and Crime

Abstract

How does the marginalization of people in society relate to criminal activity? Are some groups more marginalized than others? What happens when people feel disconnected from others in society, and how does that affect their propensity toward crime? What can be done to ameliorate the correlation between social exclusion and crime? Questions like these fit into the broader study of crime and deviance and engender theories regarding causes of crime and delinquency (Siegel, 2019). Issues of social stratification and inequality underpin many of these questions—and the answers they generate. First, social and economic inequalities can be viewed as antecedents to social and political unrest, which at times takes the form of criminal activity and violence. Second, the burden of crime is disproportionately distributed across social groups such that the poorest economic groups are among the most likely to be victimized by crime (Thatcher, 2004). In the first instance, social exclusion may lead to crime; in the second, the experience or perpetration of crime may lead to (further) social exclusion.

Overview

Social Exclusion & Crime. How does the marginalization of people in society relate to criminal activity? Are some groups more marginalized than others? What happens when people feel disconnected from others in society, and what is the relationship between that disconnection and crime? Questions like these fit into the broader study of crime and deviance and engender theories regarding causes of crime and delinquency (Panades, 2023). Issues of social stratification and inequality underpin many of these questions—and the answers they generate. First, social and economic inequalities can be viewed as antecedents to social and political unrest, which at times takes the form of criminal activity and violence. Second, the burden of crime is disproportionately distributed across social groups such that the poorest economic groups are among the most likely to be victimized by crime (Thatcher, 2004). In the first instance, social exclusion may lead to crime; in the second, the experience or perpetration of crime may lead to (further) social exclusion.

Crime declined in the US between the 1980s and 2010s, but that decline was not shared equally across social groups (Thatcher, 2004). For instance, although theft crimes are more likely to occur within higher economic levels, violent crime and burglary is more likely to be experienced by poorer people. This burden may have the effect of reinforcing other forms of inequality (such as income and health inequalities), which in turn contribute to social exclusion. Demographic change within the poorest groups is of particular note: these groups are more likely to be young, urban, and unmarried and exposed to interactions and spaces where criminal acts are more likely to occur. By 2020, the rate of violent crime in the US reached levels equal to that of 2010, eliminating any progress made that decade.

What is Social Exclusion? Social exclusion is a somewhat ambiguous concept that is measured in different ways but conceptualizes the alienation or disenfranchisement of certain groups of people within a society. Some people are marginalized based on factors related to their social class, race, gender, or age. Social exclusion also applies to people who are perceived to be more likely to deviate from the norms and values of society (e.g., young people are often labeled 'troublemakers,' Greer and Jewks, 2005). Policymakers in the UK measure social exclusion according to levels of income, health, type of housing (e.g., public or private, owned or rented), employment status, and political involvement (Panades, 2023). Concomitantly, the UK government defines social exclusion as "what happens when people or places suffer from a series of problems such as unemployment, discrimination, poor skills, low incomes, poor housing, high crime, ill health and family breakdown" (www.crimeinfo.org.uk).

Researchers agree that social exclusion is about more than income poverty and financial difficulties. As Young (2001) suggests, social exclusion is multidimensional and involves not only exclusion from economic and political involvement (such as exclusion from the job market or from expressing political views) but also exclusion from a variety of areas of social life, such as exclusion from living in certain neighborhoods and lack of access to medical provision, policing, or housing.

When individuals are excluded from society, they are deprived of social recognition and their value to society (Meyers, 1993). Thus, many individuals feel less obligated to follow the rules of society and positively contribute to their community. Social exclusion can also lead to reduced brain function, poor decision making, drug and alcohol use, and crime.

How has Social Exclusion Occurred? Social exclusion is a product of vast changes in the way people in modern industrialized societies live, many of which contribute directly to a sense of risk and uncertainty (e.g., instability in family life, economic precariousness, excessive individualism; see Beck, 2013). Not only is there less secure employment in the early twenty-first century than in the mid-twentieth century, but also a larger proportion of the population work in jobs that are insecure (often accompanied by low wages), or they persistently find it difficult to find employment at all (Young, 1991). Some commentators suggest that such changes contribute to social disconnection and community fragmentation such that social ties are loosened (Putnam, 2020). In communities where there are loose social ties, there is some evidence of higher levels of crime, because there is less informal social control (e.g., neighbors looking out for each other).

Scholarship in the areas of social exclusion and crime has demonstrated the link between social exclusion and criminal activity (Kramer, 1998). These findings warrant additional discussion and research in so far as they shed light on theories of crime and deviance that go beyond rational choice and suggest socio-structural factors contribute to, and can potentially decrease, the propensity of individuals to engage in criminal activity.

Further Insights

Crime Theories. There are many ways scholars have tried to explain crime that focus variously on individual choices, personal traits, social process, and structural conflict (Seigel, 2006).

First, for functionalists, crime is a normal part of healthy societies: the rule-breaking associated with crime serves to highlight shared norms and values and reaffirm the basis of society. Thus, in this perspective, crime is even considered necessary to secure and maintain the moral foundation of society. However, such a view takes little account of how crime is distributed across social groups, and as research suggests (e.g., Thatcher, 2004), crime is disproportionately perpetrated and shared by the poorest groups in society. Moreover, functionalist approaches to crime assume that there is consensus about what constitutes right and wrong actions or behaviors—not so, argue some scholars (Marsh et al., 1996). For instance, some people are labeled as wrongdoers or criminals because their rule-breaking violates a social norm; thus, the act itself is not necessarily a crime (nor is the person inherently a criminal). They are labeled so (Becker, 2018).

Second, rational choice theory relating to crime emphasizes individual choice and asserts that a person makes a conscious decision to become involved in criminal activity, though his or her decision to commit crimes or violate the law may be influenced by a multitude of factors including lifestyle and opportunity to engage in criminal activity. Rational choice theories explain criminal behavior as a function of one's ability to rationally assess the costs and benefits of choosing a behavior given a set of values and beliefs. It is assumed by rational choice theorists that individuals are aware of the range of alternatives available to them; while at the same time, they ignore the constraints of their environment and social institutions. More simply put, rational choice theories posit that prior to engaging in a criminal event, individuals collect, organize, and analyze information regarding the nature of their actions within the confines of their values and beliefs. However, critiques of rational choice theory as it relates to crime suggest that there is too much emphasis placed on an individual's knowledge—and discounting—of the consequences of their actions and provides little understanding of the role social context might play in influencing criminal activity.

Third, structural theories of crime look beyond individual choice as the predominant cause of criminal activity and attribute criminal activity to social strain and inequalities. In the former case—social strain—there is disconnection between means and goals (Merton, 1938) that produces anomie. Those who experience anomie are unable to regulate their choices or behaviors according to prevailing social norms; moreover, they seek to achieve their goals (which are widely held and socially sanctioned goals associated with material and status acquisition) through means that are not, necessarily, socially sanctioned, such as through criminal behavior.

Additionally, there may be greater pressure on some social groups than others to achieve their material goals through criminal means. Social inequalities, according to structural theorists, put pressure on the individual and thus increase the likelihood of criminal activity. In part, such inequalities are linked to social disorganization, alienation, and disenfranchisement (Kramer, 2000). The notion here is that when social disorganization increases, levels of despair and social conflict among community members also increases, which results in an increase in criminal activity. The lack of informal mechanisms of social control increases the likelihood of individuals becoming involved in criminal activity due to lack of social obligations and oversight, which exacerbates individual gang membership and social disorder. Simply, one's exclusion from the wider community facilitates criminality by creating a sense of despair, isolation, and strain.

Social Exclusion & Crime. Social exclusion can be both a cause and a consequence of crime, but causality is difficult to determine given that many offenders are multiply excluded (e.g., they live in poverty and have little family support, access to education, adequate housing, or jobs) (Panades, 2023). According to crimeinfo.org.uk, both "offenders and victims of crimes often suffer from one or more aspects of social exclusion [stemming from] factors such as family change, drug misuse, or mental health problems." In both the US and in the UK, statistics show that "the 5% most disadvantaged are 100 times more likely to have multiple problems (e.g., conduct disorders, police contact, cannabis use, mood disorders and alcohol abuse)," according to Newcastle JSNA, and more likely to be perpetrators and victims of crime.

Social exclusion affects some communities or neighborhoods more intensely than others, where there may be clusters of problems such as financial deprivation, few employment opportunities, inefficient public transportation, and poor-quality schools and housing. This 'concentration' of disadvantage may contribute to a negative reputation, leaving the people who live there feeling stigmatized (crimeinfo.org.uk). Social exclusion clusters are characterized by urban location; opportunities for illegal income opportunities that may be highly visible to young people; and high rates of drug use. Individuals with weak ties to the community as a result of social exclusion lack informal mechanisms of social control. In these communities, economic disadvantage can become concentrated and result in widespread social exclusion. As a result, the crimes and violence in the community do not receive the attention they need by political officials, police officers, and community service providers (Reitzes, 1986).

For those who live a life of disadvantage, living in communities with scarce resources, while at the same time being aware of opportunities outside of the community can call attention to economic disparities (Kelly, 2000; Kramer, 2000). This can affect crime in several ways. On the one hand, it can affect the lives of those who are living in poverty as they are forced to initiate alternative ways of accessing resources. On the other hand, it also affects the response from others regarding the behavior of those who are poor and exacerbates already negative stereotypes about 'us' and 'them.'

Crime Victims. Criminal victimization—that is, the likelihood of being a victim of crime—is disproportionately distributed across social groups. The poorest economic groups, who already bear the burden of other inequalities such as health inequalities, are more likely to become victims of crime. Indeed, in the US, all categories of crime are concentrated in the 20 percent poorest households (Thatcher, 2004), and according to research from the US Department of Justice’s 2012 criminal victimization report, the distribution of violent crime across social groups has remained relatively unchanged between the early 1990s and the early 2010s. Moreover, both offenders and victims of crimes often experience one or more forms of social exclusion.

The issue of social exclusion and crime goes beyond looking at only those who are likely to offend, but also includes those who are likely to be victims of crime:

Fear of crime itself is considered a cause of social exclusion. For instance, according to 2011 British Crime Survey data women aged 60 and over from lower income households are 1.5 times as likely to feel very unsafe out at night as those from higher income households. [CCL1] Similarly, the experience of domestic violence can lead to ill health, poverty, and continuing fear of physical harm, which in turn prevents stable employment or social activities (crimeinfo.org.uk).

Many offenders are also victims. For example, an offender may come from an impoverished neighborhood, or a victim may be a gang member. In addition, being labeled or perceived as a criminal can lead members of society to exclude those who are perceived as criminal—or who act in a manner that is contrary to the norms and values of the community.

Viewpoints

Youth Violence. Accompanying the policy, media, and popular concern about the individual causes of perceived social decline and accompanying crime, is, as Greer and Jewkes (2005) comment, an assumption that "people commit crimes because 'they' are not like 'others.'" Young people are a particular 'other' who experience deep, collective disadvantage associated with social exclusion (Kramer, 2000) and who are most likely to be involved in violent crime, as either victims or perpetrators.

In addressing the causes of crime among poor youth, Kramer (2000) identifies three types of crime that are most prevalent among socially excluded and impoverished children:

• Young offenders are likely to be arrested for offenses that have the potential to increase monetary gain, such as robbery or car theft.
• Youth tend to be involved in crimes related to drug use and sales.
• Youth tend to be involved in social relationships that include violence.

For instance, disadvantaged neighborhoods are less likely to offer forms of social support and mechanisms of informal social control that help to limit opportunities for crime; many poor communities also have a substantial transient population, which makes it hard for neighbors to connect and create relationships that could facilitate social support networks and contribute to informal mechanisms of social control.

Policy Concerns. Those who are socially excluded are hard to reach through formal policies or programs, although such programs exist to provide social outreach, initiate community alliances, or reintegrate offenders. Moreover, although social exclusion typically refers to disadvantages that are related to crime, many policies and programs address only one of these aspects at a time (crimeinfo.org.uk). While social exclusion is a useful concept to capture the complexity of the causes of crime, as crimeinfo.org.uk notes, "generalizing characteristics in an unequal society can encourage a sort of 'us and them' approach to policy, leading to further social exclusion."

Terms & Concepts

Anomie: A sense of individual meaninglessness and social dislocation that is the outcome of a disjunction between the promotion of unrestricted desires and a lack of regulating norms.

Social Exclusion: The alienation or disenfranchisement of certain groups or people within a society by other members of the society.

Individual Theories of Crime: Theories that promote the notion that individual attributes alone are the cause of crime and criminality.

Rational Choice Theory: The notion that individuals weigh the costs and benefits of their actions before deciding to consciously participate in criminal activity.

Socialization: The process of learning the norms and values of one's culture and how to live within it including the development of skills and habits necessary for participation.

Social Control: The mechanisms, formal or informal, that attempt to regulate individual and group behavior.

Social Strain: The disjuncture between one's goals and the available means to achieve them.

Structural Theories of Crime: Theories that promote the notion that crime and criminality are in part due to structural inequality that puts pressure on the individual and provides the context for engaging in criminal activity.

Bibliography

Beck, U. (2013). Risk society: Towards a new modernity. Sage.

Becker, H. (2018). Outsiders: Studies in the sociology of deviance. Free Press.

Bowles, R. (2012). Social exclusion and offending. In G. Parodi and D. Sciulli (Eds.), Social exclusion: Short and long term causes and consequences (pp. 105–126). 8Springer.

Crimeinfo.org.uk (n.d.). Crime, Deprivation and Social Exclusion. Retrieved January 21, 2009, from http://www.crimeinfo.org.uk/servlet/factsheetservlet?command=viewfactsheeet&factsheetid=54&category=factsheets

Díez-Ripollés, J. (2013). Social inclusion and comparative criminal justice policy. Journal of Scandinavian Studies in Criminology & Crime Prevention, 14, 62–78. Retrieved October 28, 2013, from EBSCO online database SocINDEX with Full Text. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=87106965

Foster, H., & Hagan, J. (2016). Maternal and paternal imprisonment and children's social exclusion in young adulthood. Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, 105(2), 387–429. Retrieved December 8, 2016, from EBSCO Online Database Sociology Source Ultimate. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sxi&AN=117912861&site=ehost-live&scope=site

Greer, C., & Jewkes, Y. (2005). Extremes of otherness: Media images of social exclusion. Social Justice, 32, 20–31. Retrieved January 21, 2009, from EBSCO online database SocINDEX with Full Text. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=17059923&site=ehost-live

Kelly, M. (2000). Inequality and crime. Review of Economics and Statistics, 82, 530–539. Retrieved August 17, 2008, from EBSCO online database Business Source Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=buh&AN=3820953&site=ehost-live.

Kramer, R. (2000). Poverty, inequality and youth violence. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Sciences, 567(1), 123–139. https://doi.org/10.1177/00027162005670010

Lander, I. (2015). Gender, aging and drug use: A post-structural approach to the life course. British Journal of Criminology, 55(2), 270–285. Retrieved January 25, 2016, from EBSCO Online Database SocINDEX with Full Text. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=101371070&site=ehost-live&scope=site

Lightowlers, C. L. (2015). Let’s get real about the ‘riots’: Exploring the relationship between deprivation and the English summer disturbances of 2011. Critical Social Policy, 35, 89–109. Retrieved January 12, 2015, from EBSCO online database SocINDEX with Full Text. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=100263384&site=ehost-live&scope=site

Merton, R. K. (1938). Social Structure and Anomie. American Sociological Review, 3, 672–682. https://doi.org/10.2307/2084686

Lymperopoulou, K., Bannister, J., & Krzemieniewska-Nandwani, K. (2021). Inequality in exposure to crime, social disorganization and collective efficacy: Evidence from Greater Manchester, United Kingdom. The British Journal of Criminology, 62(4), 1019–1035. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjc/azab106

Meyers, D. (1993). Social exclusion, moral reflections, and rights. Law and Philosophy, 12. 217–232.

Neary, J., Egan, M., Keenan, P. J., Lawson, L., & Bond, L. (2013). Damned if they do, damned if they don’t: Negotiating the tricky context of anti-social behavior and keeping safe in disadvantaged urban neighborhoods. Journal of Youth Studies, 16, 118–134. Retrieved January 12, 2015, from EBSCO online database SocINDEX with Full Text. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=84379786&site=ehost-live&scope=site

Nilsson, A., & Estrada, F. (2011). Established or excluded? A longitudinal study of criminality, work and family formation. European Journal of Criminology, 8, 229–245. Retrieved October 28, 2013, from EBSCO online database SocINDEX with Full Text. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=60833337

Panades, R. (2023, June 6). Social exclusion: Definition and 10 examples. Helpful Professor. Retrieved June 10, 2023, from https://helpfulprofessor.com/social-exclusion-definition-examples

Putnam, R. (2020). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community (20th Anniversary ed.). Simon & Schuster.

Reitzes, D. (1996). Urban identification and downtown activities: A social psychological approach. Social Psychology Quarterly, 49, 167–179. Retrieved August 17, 2008, from EBSCO online database Academic Search Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=13545237&site=ehost-live.

Siegel, L. (2019). Criminology (7th ed.). Cengage.

Thacher, D. (2004). The rich get richer and the poor get robbed: Inequality in U.S. criminal victimization, 1974-2000. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 20, 89–116. Retrieved January 21, 2009, from EBSCO online database SocINDEX with Full Text. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=13218286&site=ehost-live

Young, J. (2001). Identity, community and social exclusion. In R. Matthews and J. Pitts (Eds.), Crime, disorder and community safety. Routledge. Retrieved January 21, 2009, from http://www.malcolmread.co.uk/JockYoung/crime&socialexclusion.htm

Suggested Reading

Dean, H., & Platt, L. (2016). Social advantage and disadvantage. Oxford University Press.

Jones-Finer, C., & Nellis, M. (Eds). (1997). Crime and social exclusion: Broadening perspectives in social policy. Blackwell Publishing.

Jones S. (2021). Criminology (7th ed.). Oxford University Press.

Lyons, C. J., Vélez, M. B., & Santoro, W. A. (2013). Neighborhood immigration, violence, and city-level immigrant political opportunities. American Sociological Review, 78, 604–632. Retrieved January 12, 2015, from EBSCO online database SocINDEX with Full Text. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=89499147&site=ehost-live&scope=site

Pierson, J. (2016). Tackling poverty and social exclusion (3rd ed.). Routledge.

Romano, E., Bell, T., & Billette, J. (2011). Prevalence and correlates of multiple victimization in a nation-wide adolescent sample. Child Abuse & Neglect, 35, 468–479. Retrieved October 28, 2013, from EBSCO online database SocINDEX with Full Text. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=64485225&site=ehost-live

Young, J. (1999). The exclusive society: Social exclusion, crime and difference in late modernity. Sage Publications.