WEB PROJECT—
OVERCOMING COMPARISON PROBLEMS
Get the Adobe version of the study by Farrington, Langan, and Tonry at
and read the three columnson “Method” (pp. iii–iv). Write a few paragraphs that explain how theseauthors tried to overcome some of the methodological problems associated with cross-national comparison of crime data. Do you think they werereasonably successful in identifying the key problems and in the mannerthey tried to overcome them?
IMPACT
GUNS IN AMERICA
A goal of comparative studies is to provide a point of contrast so we can better
understand our own country. As more countries participate in projects such as the
U.N. Survey on Crime Trends and Operations of Criminal Justice Systems (U.N. Sur-
vey) and the International Crime Victim Survey (ICVS), it is possible to place crime
in the United States in a broader context.
Using data from both the U.N. Survey and the ICVS, van Dijk and Kangaspunta
(2000) note that crime in the United States is rather similar to that in Canada. Both
the United States and Canada have relatively high burglary rates and car-related
crimes. When compared with England, however, the United States may have less
of a burglary problem. Langan and Farrington (1998) used victim surveys and police statistics to conclude that England’s burglary rate was almost double America’s,
as was its motor vehicle theft rate. However, while the United States may look relatively good in regard to property crimes, the picture is not so rosy for violent
crime. Despite the fact that serious violent crimes are relatively more prevalent in
the countries of the former Soviet Union (e.g., Estonia, Kazakhstan, and the Russian Federation), the United States stands out with high rates, especially in contrast
to other industrialized nations such as Canada and the Western European countries
(vanDijkKangaspunta).
The violent crimes of homicide and robbery are especially high in the United
States, where those crimes often involve the use of guns. In fact, a frequent explanation for the greater violence in America is the country’s high rate of gun ownership. Presumably, the more lethal the weapon being used in a violent confrontation, the more likely that death will be the result. In countries wherelethal weapons are more readily available, therefore, we might expect homicidesto be higher. Indeed, an international study of firearm regulation found that, ingeneral, countries with higher firearm ownership rates among their citizens alsohave higher firearm-related death rates, including homicide rates (Walker, 1999)
.
VICTIMIZATION RATES
Information from victimization studies can be quite useful for increasing
our understanding of crime within countries. The following are examples
of information learned from the 2000 International Crime Victims Survey
(vanKesteren et al., 2000).
•
The risk of having a car stolen was highest in Australia, England and
Wales, and France, but victims of auto theft in Belgium, Japan, the
Netherlands, and Poland were least likely to get their cars back—
suggesting proportionally more professional theft.
•
Having something stolen from a car (e.g., luggage, radios, car mir-
rors) was more common in Australia, England and Wales, Poland,
and the United States.
•
Bicycle theft is highest in countries where more bicycles are owned
and, where bicycle theft is common, stealing cars occurs less often.
•
Robbery was comparatively uncommon in all countries, but risks
were highest in Australia, England and Wales, and Poland. Robbery
risks were lowest in Japan and Northern Ireland.
•
Women in Australia, England and Wales, Finland, and Sweden were
most at risk of sexual assault (i.e., incidents described as rape,
attempted rape, or indecent assaults) while women in Japan,
Northern Ireland, Poland, and Portugal were least at risk.
•
The most common reason for not reporting in all countries was that
the incident was “not serious enough” or there was “no loss.” The
idea that police could not do anything about what happened was
also frequently mentioned, but few victims mentioned fear or dislike
of the police as their reason for not reporting.
•
When asked how safe they feel walking alone in their area after dark,
persons in Australia, Catalonia, and Poland were most anxious, and
those in Sweden and the United States were least anxious
Comparative Criminology Looks at Crime as Social Behavior
When looking at crime as social behavior, criminologists develop and test
theories about crime’s etiology—that is, its causes, origins, and distribution.
Traditionally, those theories have been used to understand domestic crime in a
particular country. When theories about crime are developed and tested in or
across two or more countries, criminology is more accurately called comparative criminology.
Modernization Theories
Grand theories typically assume that a single theoretical construct has significant impact on a nation’s crime level. Crime and Modernizationis an early example of this methodology. As the title indicates, Shelleyuses empirical evidence to show that modernization provides the best theoretical explanation for crime’s evolution in recent history. Specifically, shesuggests that social processes accompanying industrial development haveresulted in conditions conducive to increased criminality such as loosenedfamily ties, instability of family, and lack of supervision of youthful membersof a family.
Civilization Theory
Another type of grand theory uses a comparative historical approach to show a
link between crime and civility. For example, these civilization theorists note
that murder was more common in the Middle Ages than it is now and that it
dropped dramatically in the 17th, 18th, and 19th centuries. This seems to directly contradict modernization theory because it suggests that violent crime,at least, decreased rather than increased as modernization dismantled traditional family and community bonds. These attribute to the decline to thegradual introduction of courtly manners (e.g., eating with a knife and fork,refraining from urinating in public) that transformed a violent medieval society into a more peaceful modern one.
World System Theory
Other grand theories take politics as the key construct. World system theory,
for example, draws from the Marxist perspective to explain that as capitalism
expands, it disrupts indigenous cultures and traditional means of subsistence.
The resulting exploitation from the outside and new inequalities within disrupt
political and legal formations and create class conflict.
This perspective treats industrialization and urbanization as the outcomes of
capitalist expansion. Unlike the modernization perspective, which sets modernization as a key predictor of crime rates, the world system perspective usesmodernization only as an intervening variable. In this way, it argues that the effect of industrialization and modernization depends on how modes of production interact with one another.
Opportunity Theories
Opportunity theories suggest that the occurrence of crime is best understood
as the result of modern economies and social organization that provide in-
creased opportunities to engage in criminal behavior. More goods are purchased as expanding economies create more expendable income, and those goods become available for theft. Technological gains produce smaller andmore portable electronic devices that are easily stolen. Changes in social organization (e.g., both spouses working and increased leisure time mean morehours of the day when the home is unoccupied) result in less guardianship overhousehold items and more opportunities for theft.
Howard and colleagues (2000) note that tests of grand theories have produced conflicting results. For example, Bouley and Vaughn (1995) studied violent crime in Colombia and found support for grand theories with respect tothe crimes of theft and robbery but not for the more violent crimes of assaultand homicide. Similarly, Schichor’s (1990) study of homicide and larceny ratesindicated that development is likely to be accompanied by increased propertyand decreased violent crime. Gillis (1994) claims that civilization theory issupported in his study of violent crime and suicide in France from 1852 to
1914. Gillis found that the climbing literacy rate during that period was associated with a decrease in the rate of crimes of passion and an increase in the suicide rate. Opportunity theory seems supported in studies such as that byLaFree and Birkbeck (1991), which uses victimization data in Venezuela andthe United States to show that robbery typically involves public domains, lonevictims, strangers, and incidents taking place outside buildings. Should comparative criminologists continue to find that crimes occur in similar situations,
Transnational Crime Types
More extensive coverage is given to the ninth type, terrorism.Notable by its absence in this grouping of transnational crimes is transnational organized crime. A common feature of any transnational crime is the organized effort involved in the inception and perpetration of the crime. A singleperson might be able to conceive and begin a crime in one country, move throughseveral other countries in the process of accomplishing the crime, and then complete it in yet another country, but the likelihood seems very remote. Much morelikely, and certainly more efficient, is the reliance on several individuals and
groups in many countries working together to complete the crime. Rather thanhaving a separate category called transnational organized crime, this list assumesthat each of the specific crime types has an organized crime component.
Computer Crime
Computers are linked to criminal activity in two general ways. The first way isthe use of the computer as a tool in committing a crime—as in the “money-laundering” crime category that follows. When a crime is committed throughthe use of a computer, it is often referred to as cybercrime. . The second way isthe use of the computer itself as a target of the criminal act. This is typicallywhat is being referred to by the term
computer crime . These acts against computers or their services include obtaining illegal access to a system, preventinglegitimate access by others, theft of services provided by the computer, or causing damage to a computer or its data makes the interesting observation that historical attacks on a nation’s essential services have required a physical attack that crossedthe nation’s borders slowly enough that it was subject to recognition and interception by that nation’s military. At least some physical evidence would be left
that would allow for tracking, tracing, and identifying the perpetrator and the
tools or weapons used. Today, and more so in the future, the speed and global
connectivity of the Internet allows cyber attackers to ignore national boundaries
and to leave little electronic evidence that can be used to track or trace them.