Numerous theories on the nature of crime
Numerous theories have been put forward in an effort to foster a more intuitive understanding and appreciation of the facts because the nature of crime in our society has attracted the attention of academics from a broad range of disciplines. Theories based on sociological research have been developed to explain how different organizational and institutional processes relate to the projection of crime in society. It is obvious that criminal activity can occur on different scales among individuals from all walks of life. (Aaltonen, Kivivuori, & Martikainen, 2011). However, crime is a reflection of the destructive social relationships in which the perpetrators find themselves in from time to time (McCarthy, Hagan, & Martin, 2002). Without proper socialization skills, a person may be unable to find the right responses to challenges in life which result in a cycle of crime and deviance. It is for this reason important to appreciate the fact that it is possible for people to learn improper behavior in much the same that they learn conventional behavior (Savolainen, Messner, & Kivivuori, 2000). This paper notes that social reaction and labeling is responsible for the creation of negative labels and perceptions that heavily contribute to the creation and perpetuation of criminal careers.
Scholarly research on community responses to crimes
The paper will look to discuss a scholarly research that has been conducted to provide important information with regards to the development of community responses to various crimes in the country. It will look at the interactions that various social groups have on their members’ abilities to respond to difficult situations in their environment. At the same time, the paper seeks to look at the impact of the value system in the perpetuation of criminal incidences in the society. All of this information will be based on research and analysis that has been conducted to analyze the concept of deviance in the society (Gatti, Tremblay & Larocque, 2003).
Analysis of the article “The association between social capital and juvenile crime: The role of individual and structural factors”
The paper will look at Salmi and Kivivuori’s article titled, ‘The association between social capital and juvenile crime: The role of individual and structural factors.’ The article was published in the European Journal of Criminology (Salmi & Kivivuori, 2006). It is an article that looks at the concept of social capital and its relationship with various forms of social capital and criminal behavior. However, the control factors in the study are both at the individual level as well as the structural level. The authors also sought out to study other factors such as economic conditions, family structures, cognitive ability, self-control, and participation in delinquent behavior. The data was analyzed through statistical methods which involved multivariate analysis. The indicators of social capital that were assessed included low levels of control among teachers and parents as well as low interpersonal trust. Cognitive ability was also found to contain a strong correlation with delinquency. At the end of the day, the article encourages the reader to focus on the individual-level factors that are a major determinant of delinquent behavior (Salmi & Kivivuori, 2006).
Relevance of the research to the paper
The research is relevant to the direction of the paper as it looks at the structural and personal factors that are responsible for the creation of attitudes and perception that encourage labeling at various levels of the society. It is also insightful as it provides an in-depth understanding of the crucial factors behind delinquency among adolescents. For one to appreciate the effect of social reaction on people’s lives, it is important for one to look at its expression on various levels of the society and find intuitive ways of solving a problem that has persisted in the society without a clear solution to it (Salmi & Kivivuori, 2006).
The nature of social capital and its connection to crime
In the paper, the authors begin by describing the nature of social capital in various social settings. From the onset, social capital exists out of the expression of social organizations such as norms, networks, and trust and these tend to work in such a manner as to elicit and facilitate cooperative relations borne out of an innate understanding of mutualism. In essence, people tend to behave in a certain way in a specific context out of the realization that good behavior will result in positive rewards. There is an element of justice when it comes to social capital, and it is important that people are afforded the various elements that will make them have access to social capital and thus enable them to navigate through the various challenges of life. For that reason, the article notes that social capital is something that exists primarily in the context of resources as well as relationships (Salmi & Kivivuori, 2006). The resources, in this case, represent issues above such as information, norms, and trust. However, it is not necessarily clear as to the direct impact of different types of relationships and their contribution to social capital. For a long time, the connection that existed between the various metrics with regards to social capital and the theoretical definitions with regards to social capital has been problematic. As such, there has been the need to establish the needed distinctions that will make it possible to create the appropriate ways of understanding delinquency (Salmi & Kivivuori, 2006).
The positive and negative consequences of social capital
For a long time, social capital has been perceived about the positive dimensions that come out as a result of strong social connections. However, the research is quick to note that it is possible for social capital to directly lead to the creation of negative consequences especially about the people who do not have the ability or the opportunity to benefit from the said social capital (Wright, Cullen, & Miller, 2001). In essence, strong social capital in one area is often a recipe for the creation of exclusivity and restrictions on individual freedoms with regards to those who do not have access or an opportunity to partake of the social capital. It has already been noted that social groups that have rich access to social capital are usually predisposed to have access to better services and other opportunities which are then utilized as tools of oppression with regards to the rest of the subgroups that do not have the privilege of having access to the social capital (Wright, Cullen, & Miller, 2001).
Challenges in defining social capital
The authors are also keen to note the different views of other researchers who have consistently criticized the application of the term “social capital.” However, such differences have usually resulted in a great deal of methodological confusion in addition to the fact that there has been the little consensus with regards to the theoretical definitions of the concept as well (Salmi & Kivivuori, 2006). In essence, the social capital has been embraced in such a wide aspect of life that it has become important for researchers to break down the concept of social capital into major thematic areas such as social control, social ties, and collective efficacy. It is through such a systematic breakdown that criminologists can see the benefits of analyzing these concepts in a way that will shed light on the nature of juvenile delinquency among different areas of life (Salmi & Kivivuori, 2006).
Social capital as a framework for understanding crime
The authors argue that social capital provides a better framework for understanding the nature and expression of crime among young people. In addition to this, it also provides a better platform for the integration of other criminological theories which can, for that reason, be used to provide sound steps and solutions to solving one of the most pertinent issues in human history. More specifically, the paper points to the fact that research conducted have also been used to provide intuitive understanding into the social disorganization theory and its connection with the principles of social capital (Salmi & Kivivuori, 2006). Additionally, social capital theories have enabled researchers to focus on traditional concepts and theories that have boggled them for decades. It is the systematic way in which social capital calls for change and analysis that provides needed insights even as social scientists and criminologists look for ways to focus on the development of better policies that can address the increasing waves of crime across different social settings. In essence, social ties, as well as controls, have come to be seen as important elements of social capital and these can be linked to the social bonding theory in addition to the age-graded theory of informal social control. These concepts point to the fact that delinquent acts arise as a result of the breaking of the crucial linkages between an individual’s bond and that of the society. Even a slight weakening of such a bond is enough to push people towards criminal behavior in a way that disturbs the already established social protocols (Wright, Cullen, & Miller, 2001).
The impact of labeling and stereotypes
In looking at the concept of labeling, many people have come to the realization that it does not help to give names and overly criticize people especially when they are not in a position to control their present conditions (Dufur, Parcel, & McKune, 2008). It is a scenario that has been reflected in many instances whereby one particular group of people have access to strong social capital as compared to another. In such a scenario, the stronger community will tend to embrace stereotypical mindsets and attitudes which can come across as harmful to those who are on the receiving end (Skarøhamar, 2009). While stereotypes do exist across the board, an understanding of social capital can be used to shed light on those who are most negatively affected by these stereotypical attitudes to the extent that they respond and react through delinquent acts. Stereotypic behavior from a dominant culture and group of people has, for that reason, be associated with oppression and such labeling acts are reflected in various other subcultures across all societies at different levels. It is, for that reason important to understand the nature of social capital and the way in which it manifests itself in various systematic issues in society as it can provide meaningful ways of solving the crime and adjusting the mindsets of those who have resorted to seeing themselves as being victims of circumstances (Wright, Cullen, & Miller, 2001).
The importance of individual-level social capital
The premise of the article is, for that reason, based on this fundamental understanding; that the lack of social capital among different groups is directly linked to the elevated risks of delinquent behavior. The authors are also keen to approach the concept of social capital through the lens of individuals and their primary social units and relationships (Salmi & Kivivuori, 2006). It is in the interests of the authors to create a clear picture of the situations that take place at the micro level as these realities tend to have significant multiplier effects on wider movements with regards to maintenance of crucial social bonds that contribute to the development of social capital. The metrics that are used to measure social capital at such a level include things such as social control and social support (Salmi & Kivivuori, 2006).
Analyzing the associations between social capital and delinquency
The data has been analyzed using robust statistical methods that embraced random sampling stratified along geography and community residential density parameters (Salmi & Kivivuori, 2006). The measures of social capital, self-control, and delinquency were primarily centered on family and the school set up. As it has been mentioned before, the concept of social capital is a broad concept that requires researchers to break it down into constituent elements that can then be analyzed to produce better systems of thought and organization. These controls that were specifically analyzed were parental control, parental support, teacher control, teacher support, neighborhood control, trust, intergenerational closure, labor market access, self-control, and delinquency (Salmi & Kivivuori, 2006). All these controls provided the researchers with an intuitive understanding of the nature of the crime and its expression among young people who are still involved in the education system. It should be noted that some of these control measures had greater significance with regards to the availability of social capital as compared to other control measures. A healthy social capital about these control measures resulted in the expression of better standards of living among the young people. When any one of these measures was missing, it was more likely than not that a young person would be involved in some delinquent behaviors. Parental controls seemed to be the most important control measure for assessing the impact of social capital and its influence on the behaviors of young people (Salmi & Kivivuori, 2006).
The importance of individual characteristics
Additionally, the researchers took a proactive and balanced approach to analyzing the expression of delinquency through understanding the individual characteristics of a person. Through such practices, one gets to appreciate the concept of social capital as a dynamic entity as opposed to the static definitions that have limited other researchers in the past. The paper can show that social capital is not necessarily an extrinsic factor independent of a particular person (Salmi & Kivivuori, 2006). The real essence of social capital is the connection that it creates between a person and the wider society. For this reason, individual characteristics such as temperament as well as cognitive ability automatically become vital in the bid to establish strong social connections. It is this approach that has enabled the authors to break ground on various issues that had prevented previous research work from objectively and systematically deciphering the connection between social capital and delinquency. Subsequently, by adopting such control measures into the research, the authors were able to significantly shed light on the nature of social capital in the micro and individual settings that have the most influence on the development of a child (Salmi & Kivivuori, 2006).
The structure and implications of the paper
In looking at the overall structure of the paper, the authors were keen to provide a context for the development of their theories and hypothesis which were important elements that ensure that the project developed towards concrete conclusions. The paper provided one with a clear and developed understanding of the issues that have historically preoccupied social scientists for many years (Salmi & Kivivuori, 2006). The mentioning of some of the crucial theories provided one with a clear trajectory of the research and the way forward in understanding the social science concepts and their relationship with criminology. In essence, it was important to provide a clear theoretical background before delving deeper into the structure of criminological studies. It is a result of this careful arrangement of the literature that one can understand the crucial importance of social capital and the required steps that can be used to develop better structures to fight juvenile crime. Social capital is, for this reason, an element that does not have to be dealt with from theoretical perspective alone. The breakdown of social capital at the micro level provides intuitive levels by which different institutions can re-orient their strategies with the aim of ensuring that balance is attained in the lives of those who seem to be deprived of crucial social structures and relationships that are critical definers of social capital. It is interesting that the research has long-term implications for those concerned even though this has not been directly alluded to by the researchers (Salmi & Kivivuori, 2006). Indeed, the researchers were concerned with the factors at the individual level, but there is no doubt that such factors can result in the development of better systems that can be used to handle the behavior modification programs that have so far been ineffective when it comes to dealing with young delinquents (Salmi & Kivivuori, 2006).
Implications for schools and families
The work presented by the authors is particularly helpful to a variety of institutions such as schools and families. It is increasingly clear that the role of teachers and parents in the development of young minds has to evolve if the society is to benefit from intergenerational transfer potential. At the core of this research seems to be an inclination towards understanding and appreciating the person in the way they are structured as human beings. Self-control and cognitive ability seemed to be particularly important expressions that could be used to develop positive behavior as well as control negative ones (Salmi & Kivivuori, 2006). Policies should, for this reason, rely on the findings of this research to develop better structures that will not only equip teachers with the necessary knowledge and skills to deal with children but also to partner with their guardians. The researchers note that it is difficult to measure the degree of separation between parental control and parental support. It is probably due to such a strong correlation between the two factors that they could not necessarily figure out the origins of self-control among children. It is in this understanding that it has become particularly important for researchers and policy makers to develop better strategies that will ensure that there is a close collaboration between teachers and parents. As such, it will ensure that children have the ability to develop the necessary social skills that will enable them to be productive members of the society and not engage in delinquent behavior (Ring & Svensson, 2007).
Promoting positive social connections among young people
As it has been noted, there is great potential that lies when parents come together to view the events of their children through each other’s perspectives. It is an important distinction that has created better frameworks for the development of stronger communities which is an important element of social capital. At the end of the day, there has to be a shift away from social labeling and stereotyping and a real movement towards inclusion policies (Özbay, 2008). At this juncture, the role of peer-to-peer counseling should be embraced even though it is something that has not been dealt with in the research. At the end of the day, young people tend to understand and appreciate the problems they face together with greater sincerity as compared to when they are engaged with their parents. It is to their advantage that counseling sessions are restructured in such a way that these connections are strengthened in meaningful ways. A concept such as cyberbullying is one in which solutions can be best provided when the young people can have not only strong leadership and direction from parents and teachers but also from positive reinforcement from fellow students (Wright & Fitzpatrick, 2006).
Conclusion
In conclusion, social capital at the individual level is something that is developed from within a person, and it is their relationship with their outside environment that determines the way in which they respond to challenges. The researchers in the article point out that work among the different players does not start and stop with the teachers and the parents. The role of the individual students is also crucial. However, it is not essentially clear as to whether self-control is attributed to parents alone. On the other hand, it cannot be denied that social capital is an important factor that can be used to develop the kind of meaningful relationships that students can develop their society to ensure that they lead successful lives in the wider society. When social capital is denied, juvenile delinquency is likely to increase and become a pertinent problem both at present and future scenarios.
References
Aaltonen, M., Kivivuori, J., & Martikainen, P. (2011). Social determinants of crime in a welfare state: Do they still matter?. Acta Sociologica, 54(2), 161-181.
Dufur, M. J., Parcel, T. L., & McKune, B. A. (2008). Capital and Context: Using Social Capital at Home and at School to Predict Child Social Adjustment∗. Journal of health and social behavior, 49(2), 146-161.
Gatti, U., Tremblay, R. E., & Larocque, D. (2003). Civic community and juvenile delinquency. A study of the regions of Italy. British Journal of Criminology, 43(1), 22-40.
Katz, R. S. (2002). Re-examining the integrative social capital theory of crime. W. Criminology Rev., 4, 30.
McCarthy, B., Hagan, J., & Martin, M. J. (2002). In and out of harm's way: Violent victimization and the social capital of fictive street families. Criminology, 40(4), 831-866.
Özbay, Ö. (2008). Does social capital deter youth from cheating, alcohol use, and violence in Turkey?: Bringing torpil in. Journal of Criminal Justice, 36(5), 403-415.
Ring, J., & Svensson, R. (2007). Social class and criminality among young people: A study considering the effects of school achievement as a mediating factor on the basis of Swedish register and self‐report data. Journal of Scandinavian Studies in Criminology and Crime Prevention, 8(2), 210-233.
Salmi, V., & Kivivuori, J. (2006). The association between social capital and juvenile crime: The role of individual and structural factors. European Journal of Criminology, 3(2), 123-148.
Savolainen, J., Messner, S. F., & Kivivuori, J. (2000). Crime is Part of the Problem: Contexts of Lethal Violence in Finland and the USA. Journal of Scandinavian Studies in Criminology and Crime Prevention, 1(1), 41-55.
Skarðhamar, T. (2009). Family dissolution and children's criminal careers. European Journal of Criminology, 6(3), 203-223.
Wright, D. R., & Fitzpatrick, K. (2006). Social capital and adolescent violent behavior: Correlates of fighting and weapon use among secondary school students. Social Forces, 84(3), 1435-1453.
Wright, J. P., Cullen, F. T., & Miller, J. T. (2001). Family social capital and delinquent involvement. Journal of criminal Justice, 29(1), 1-9.
