Relative Deprivation, Opportunity and Crime: a Study of Young Men’S Motivations for Committing Burglary
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Relative Deprivation, Opportunity and Crime: A Study of Young Men’s Motivations for Committing Burglary PhD Thesis Frederick Howard Brown London School of Economics and Political Science UMI Number: U615B70 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Dissertation Publishing UMI U615B70 Published by ProQuest LLC 2014. Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author. Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. ProQuest LLC 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 British Library of Political and Economic Science Abstract Relative Deprivation, Opportunity and Crime: A Study of Young Men’s Motivations for Committing Burglary Empirical studies have attempted to measure the relative deprivation - crime relationship with varying degrees of success. These have generally focused on examining ‘actual relative deprivation’ by employing quantitative methods to aggregated, area based data. Operationalising actual relative deprivation in terms of disparities in household income, these studies have attempted to show a relationship between income inequality and crime at the area level. From this they have assumed that those with the lowest incomes are most likely to perceive relative deprivation and are therefore more likely to engage in crime as a result. However, few studies have examined actual and perceived relative deprivation at the individual level. This thesis set out to explore at the individual level whether those experiencing actual relative deprivation are more likely than others to perceive relative deprivation and to determine whether actual or perceived relative deprivation (if either) is a good predictor of criminality. The study employed two methodologies to explore these issues. Secondary analysis of the 1998 Youth Lifestyle Survey was conducted and forms the core of the empirical work presented here. A study of 50 convicted burglary offenders was also undertaken to explore perceived relative deprivation. Both methodologies are limited by the problems associated with operationalising relative deprivation and these are detailed throughout the thesis. The results show that perceived relative deprivation (especially relative deprivation of leisure pursuits) would appear to be associated with involvement in crime more often than actual relative deprivation at the individual level. However, neither would appear to be a good predictor of criminality when compared to other, ‘tried and tested’ measures. For those offenders where perceived relative deprivation may be relevant, the thesis suggests that the offending peer group may provide a powerful comparative reference group while at the same time providing a means to resolve such experience through engaging in crime. Drawing on the findings, the thesis develops alternative theoretical frameworks for how relative deprivation may be associated with crime at the societal and individual level and provides a critique of these frameworks. Contents Chapter Title Page Abstract i List of figures v. List of tables vi. Acknowledgements xiii 1. Introducing relative deprivation and crime 1 2. Exploring the potential of relative deprivation in criminological theory 10 3. Previous empirical research examining the link Between relative deprivation and crime 47 4. Methodology 78 iii Chapter Title Page 5. Relative deprivation and crime: findings from the Youth Lifestyle Survey 126 6. Relative deprivation and crime: findings from interviews with young offenders 198 7. Implications of the current study for understanding the relative deprivation - crime relationship 253 8. Towards a new understanding of the relative deprivation - crime relationship 267 Conclusions 295 References 326 Appendices 349 List of Figures Figure Title Page 1. Conceptual classification for how relative deprivation may be related to crime 61 2 . Distribution of ethnic groups in offender and non-offender samples 91 3. Theoretical framework of how relative deprivation may be associated with crime at the societal level 268 Theoretical framework of how relative deprivation may be associated with crime at the offending peer group level 280 v List of Tables Table Title Page 1. Age distribution of interview subj ects in offender sample 82 2. Age of onset of burglary in offender sample 83 3. Duration of offending, number of burglaries committed and average number of burglaries per year for those estimating more than 1,000 burglaries. 104 4. Prevalence of ever property offending in the YLS by males, females and total sample 117 5. Odds ratios of expected vs. actual rates with which burglary offenders also commit other acquisitive property crimes 121 vi Table Title Page 6. Proportion of all other respondents living in households with more income than each respondent in each income bracket (ARD) 129 7. Proportion of all other males living in households with more income than each male respondent in each income bracket (ARDMALE) 130 8. Proportion of all other females living in households with more income than each female respondent in each income bracket (ARDFEM) 130 9. Frequency with each item of perceived relative deprivation was identified by sex 132 10. Bivariate analysis of relationship between each pair of variables measuring perceived relative deprivation 135 11. Procedure for the inclusion of items in factor 1 136 vii Table Title Page 12. Procedure for the inclusion of items in factor 2 137 13. Procedure for the inclusion of items in factor 3 139 14. Strength of association between nominal level measures of perceived relative deprivation factors (RDF ACT) 140 15. Strength of association between interval level measures of perceived relative deprivation factors (RDSCORE) 141 16. Percentage of those in high / low actual relative deprivation groups who also feel deprived of an item in factor 1, factor 2 or any item. 147 17. Strength of association (based on Spearman’s Rho) actual relative deprivation by perceived relative deprivation using ordinal level variables 148 viii Table Title Page 18. Proportion of individuals in high / low ARD households who perceived relative deprivation by size of household 150 19. Groups of respondents who experience actual relative deprivation and their offending prevalence (statistically significant results only) 153 20. Groups of respondents who feel relatively deprived of an item in factor one (deprived of bare necessities) and their offending prevalence (statistically significant results only) 156 21. Groups of respondents who feel relatively deprived of an item in factor two (deprived of leisure pursuits) and their offending prevalence (statistically significant results only) 157 22 . Groups of respondents who feel relatively deprived of any item and their offending prevalence (statistically significant results only) 158 ix Table Title Page 23. Differences between age groups in the percentage of individuals feeling relatively deprived who have ever committed an offence 160 24. Proportion of respondents committing a property offence ever who feel / don’t feel perceived relative deprivation by household income 165 25. Statistically significant associations between the ARD / PRD classification and the prevalence of involvement in crime ever by sex 170 26 Statistically significant associations between the ARD / PRD classification and the prevalence of involvement in crime ever by age and sex 175 27. Statistically significant associations between the ARD / PRD classification and the prevalence of involvement in crime in the last year by sex 178 x Table Title Page 28. Statistically significant associations between the ARD / PRD classification and the prevalence of involvement in crime in the last year by age and sex 180 29. Frequency of relative deprivation by object 201 30. Objects of perceived relative deprivation mentioned by offenders and non-offenders 203 31. Comparison of the frequency of objects of perceived relative deprivation between offenders and non-offenders (from study of 50 burglary offenders) 204 32. Proportion of individuals who had / had not ever committed a property crime who feel perceived relative deprivation in relation to each of sixteen items listed in the YLS 206 xi Table Title Page 33. Mean average degree per object of relative deprivation 235 34. Frequency of five peer group contact scenarios by whether offending peer group was a comparative reference group for 19 relatively deprived offenders 245 xii Acknowledgements This thesis has only been possible thanks to the support of many individuals and organisations. The early stages of the work were made possible thanks to a small grant from the Cooper Charitable Trust, who also funded a trip to the 1996 American Society of Criminology Annual Meeting, at which the preliminary results of this thesis were presented. I would also like to thank the ESRC for providing part time tuition fees to see me through this venture. I would also like to acknowledge the role played by Professor David Downes at the London School of Economics for acting as tutor through out my PhD registration. Thanks also go to Professor Nick Tilley of Nottingham Trent University and especially Professor Ken Pease of Huddersfield University, both of whom read and