Neighborhood Social Capital, Juvenile Delinquency, and Victimization: Results from the International Self-Report Delinquency Study - 3 in 23 Countries

  • Oriana Binik
  • Adolfo Ceretti
  • Roberto Cornelli
  • Hans Schadee
  • Alfredo Verde
  • Uberto GattiEmail author


Since the beginning of the twentieth century, criminology has attempted to identify ecological factors affecting the rise or the decrease in crime rates. In this framework, concepts of “social disorganization”, “collective efficacy”, and “social capital” have been coined. Particularly in recent years, the perspective of “social capital” has attracted the interest of criminologists, but, despite the numerous studies conducted in this field, some issues remain open. Firstly, studies conducted outside the US context are few. Secondly, even in North American studies, there is a disagreement over the impact of social capital on crime, in particular on violent crimes. The results of this study, conducted on data obtained by the ISRD3 survey in 23 countries around the world, and addressed to 7th, 8th, and 9th grade students (N = 55,201), try to address such issue: they show a negative correlation between social capital and self-reported crime also outside North America, both for violent crimes and general delinquency. The preventive role played by social capital on crime is also confirmed considering the self-reported data on victimization.


Social capital Juvenile delinquency Victimization Violent offenses 



  1. Adler, P. S., & Kwon, S. (2002). Social capital: prospects for a new concept. Academy of Management Review, 27(1), 17–40.Google Scholar
  2. Bandura, A. (1982). Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. American Psychologist, 37(2), 122–147.Google Scholar
  3. Bandura, A. (Ed.). (2003). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: FreemanGoogle Scholar
  4. Bourdieu, P. (1986). The forms of capital. In J. G. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of theory and research for the sociology of education (pp. 241–258). New York: Greenwood.Google Scholar
  5. Bruinsma, G. J., Pauwels, L. J., Weerman, F. M., & Bernasco, W. (2013). Social disorganization, social capital, collective efficacy and the spatial distribution of crime and offenders an empirical test of six neighbourhood models for a Dutch city. British Journal of Criminology, 53(5), 942–963.Google Scholar
  6. Brush, J. (2007). Does income inequality lead to more crime? A comparison of cross-sectional and time-series analyses of United States counties. Economics Letters, 96(2), 264–268.Google Scholar
  7. Burchfield, K. B., & Silver, E. (2013). Collective efficacy and crime in Los Angeles neighborhoods: Implications for the Latino paradox. Sociological Inquiry, 83(1), 154–176.Google Scholar
  8. Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology, 94, S95–S120.Google Scholar
  9. Deller, S. C., & Deller, M. A. (2010). Rural crime and social capital. Growth and Change, 41(2), 221–275.Google Scholar
  10. Enzmann, D., Marshall, I. H., Killias, M., Junger-Tas, J., Steketee, M., & Gruszczynska, B. (2010). Self-reported youth delinquency in Europe and beyond: First results of the second international self-report delinquency study in the context of police and victimization data. European Journal of Criminology, 7(2), 159–183.Google Scholar
  11. Enzmann, D., Kivivuori, J., Marshall, I. H., Steketee, M., Hough, M., & Killias, M. (2018). A global perspective on young people as offenders and victims. First results from the ISRD3 study. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  12. 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.Google Scholar
  13. Gatti, U., Tremblay, R. E., & Schadee, H. M. A. (2007). Community characteristics and death by homicide, suicide and drug overdose in Italy: the role of civic engagement. European Journal of Criminal Policy and Research, 13(3–4), 255–275.Google Scholar
  14. Gatti, U., Fossa, G., Bagnoli, L., Binik, O., Caccavale, F., Cornelli, R., D’Arrigo, P., Di Nunno, N., Greco, O., Gualco, B., Ravagnani, L., Rensi, R., Rocca, G., Romano, C. A., Russo, G., Traverso, S., & Verde, A. (2015). Evolution and characteristics of the multi-centric research project “international self-report delinquency study”: the contribution of Italian criminology. Rassegna Italiana di Criminologia, 5(3), 164–168.Google Scholar
  15. Gottfredson, M. R., & Hirschi, T. (2016). The criminal career perspective as an explanation of crime and a guide to crime control policy: the view from general theories of crime. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 53(3), 406–419.Google Scholar
  16. Granovetter, M. S. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78(6), 1360–1380.Google Scholar
  17. Haidt, J., & Rodin, V. (1999). Control and efficacy as interdisciplinary bridges. Review of General Psychology, 3(4), 317–337.Google Scholar
  18. Harcourt, B. (2001). Illusions of order: The false promise of broken windows policing. Cambridge: Harvard University.Google Scholar
  19. Harcourt, B., & Ludwig, J. (2006). Broken windows: new evidence from New York City and a five-city social experiment. University of Chicago Law Review, 73(1), 271–320.Google Scholar
  20. Hipp, J. R. (2016). Collective efficacy: how is it conceptualized, how is it measured, and does it really matter for understanding perceived neighborhood crime and disorder? Journal of Criminal Justice, 46(C), 32–44.Google Scholar
  21. Hipp, J. R., & Wo, J. C. (2015). Collective efficacy and crime. In: International Encyclopedia of Social and Behavioral Sciences (pp. 169–73). Amsterdam: ElsevierGoogle Scholar
  22. Hsieh, C. C., & Pugh, M. D. (1993). Poverty, income inequality, and violent crime: a meta-analysis of recent aggregate data studies. Criminal Justice Review, 18(2), 182–202.Google Scholar
  23. Jacobs, J. (2016). The death and life of great American cities. New York: Vintage.Google Scholar
  24. Jacoby, A. (2017). Social service organizations, discretionary funding, and neighborhood crime rates. Crime & Delinquency, 63(1), 1–22.Google Scholar
  25. Jean, P. K. S. (2008). Pockets of crime: Broken windows, collective efficacy, and the criminal point of view. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  26. Junger-Tas, J., Steketee, M., & Jonkman, H. (2012). The neighbourhood context. In J. Junger-Tas, I. H. Marshall, D. Enzmann, M. Killias, M. Steketee, & B. Gruszczynska (Eds.), The many faces of youth crime (pp. 257–284). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  27. Kawachi, I., Kennedy, B. P., & Wilkinson, R. G. (1999). Crime: social disorganization and relative deprivation. Social Science & Medicine, 48(6), 719–731.Google Scholar
  28. Knack, S. (2003). Groups, growth and trust: cross-country evidence on the Olson and Putnam hypotheses. Public Choice, 117(3), 341–355.Google Scholar
  29. Kubrin, C. E., & Weitzer, R. (2003). New directions in social disorganization theory. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 40(4), 374–402.Google Scholar
  30. Kubrin, C. E., & Wo, J. C. (2015). Social disorganization Theory’s greatest challenge: Linking structural characteristics to crime in socially disorganized communities. In A. R. Piquero (Ed.), The Handbook of Criminological Theory (Vol. 4, pp. 121–136). Chichester: Wiley.Google Scholar
  31. Kwon, S.-W., & Adler, P. (2014). Social capital: maturation of a field of research. Academy of Management Review, 39(4), 412–414.Google Scholar
  32. Lappi-Seppälä, T., & Lehti, M. (2014). Cross-comparative perspectives on global homicide trends. Crime and Justice, 43(1), 135–230.Google Scholar
  33. Matsueda, R. L., & Drakulich, K. M. (2016). Measuring collective efficacy: a multilevel measurement model for nested data. Sociological Methods & Research, 45(2), 191–230.Google Scholar
  34. Matsukawa A, Tatsuki S (2018). Crime prevention through community empowerment: An empirical study of social capital in Kyoto. International Journal of Law, Crime and Justice, 54, 89–101.Google Scholar
  35. Moore, M. D., & Recker, N. L. (2016). Social capital, type of crime, and social control. Crime & Delinquency, 62(6), 728–747.Google Scholar
  36. Nagin, D., & Paternoster, R. (1994). Personal capital and social control: the deterrence implications of a theory of individual differences in criminal offending. Criminology, 32, 581–606.Google Scholar
  37. Ohmer, M. L. (2016). Strategies for preventing youth violence: facilitating collective efficacy among youth and adults. Journal of the Society for Social Work and Research, 7(4), 681–705.Google Scholar
  38. Olson, M. (1982). The rise and decline of nations: Economic growth, stagnation, and social rigidities. New Heaven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  39. Pare, P. P., & Felson, R. (2014). Income inequality, poverty and crime across nations. The British Journal of Sociology, 65(3), 434–458.Google Scholar
  40. Patterson, E. B. (1991). Poverty, income inequality, and community crime rates. Criminology, 29(4), 755–776.Google Scholar
  41. Pena López, J. A., & Sánchez Santos, J. M. (2007). The Olson-Putnam controversy: some empirical evidence. Economics Bulletin, 26(4), 1–10.Google Scholar
  42. Portes, A. (1998). Social capital: its origins and applications in modern sociology. Annual Review of Sociology, 24(1), 1–24.Google Scholar
  43. Pratt, T. C., & Cullen, F. T. (2005). Assessing macro-level predictors and theories of crime: a meta-analysis. Crime and Justice, 32, 373–450.Google Scholar
  44. Putnam, R. D. (1995). Bowling alone: America’s declining social capital. Journal of Democracy, 6(1), 65–78.Google Scholar
  45. Raymen, T. (2016). Designing-in crime by designing-out the social? Situational crime prevention and the intensification of harmful subjectivities. British Journal of Criminology, 56(3), 497–514.Google Scholar
  46. Robinson, W. S. (2009). Ecological correlations and the behavior of individuals. International Journal of Epidemiology, 38(2), 337–341.Google Scholar
  47. Rodríguez-Pose, A., & von Berlepsch, V. (2014). Social capital and individual happiness in Europe. Journal of Happiness Studies, 15(2), 357–386.Google Scholar
  48. Rukus, J., & Warner, M. E. (2013). Crime rates and collective efficacy: the role of family friendly planning. Cities, 31, 37–46.Google Scholar
  49. Runyan, D. K., Hunter, W. M., Socolar, R. R., Amaya-Jackson, L., English, D., Landsverk, J., & al, e. (1998). Children who prosper in unfavorable environments: the relationship to social capital. Pediatrics, 101(1), 12–16.Google Scholar
  50. Sabol, W. J., Coulton, C. J., & Korbin, J. E. (2004). Building community capacity for violence prevention. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 19(3), 322–340.Google Scholar
  51. Sampson, R. J. (2008). Collective efficacy theory: Lessons learned and directions for future inquiry. In F. T. Cullen, J. Wright, & K. Blevins (Eds.), Taking stock: The status of criminological theory (Vol. 1, pp. 149–168). New York: Transaction.Google Scholar
  52. Sampson, R. J., & Groves, W. B. (1989). Community structure and crime: testing social disorganization theory. American Journal of Sociology, 94(4), 774–802.Google Scholar
  53. Sampson, R., & Raudenbush, S. (1999). Systematic social observation of public spheres: a new look at disorder in urban neighborhoods. American Journal of Sociology, 105(3), 603–651.Google Scholar
  54. Sampson, R. J., Raudenbush, S. W., & Earls, F. (1997). Neighborhoods and violent crime: a multilevel study of collective efficacy. Science, 277, 918–924.Google Scholar
  55. Shaw, C. R., & McKay, H. (1969 [1942]). Juvenile Delinquency and Urban Areas. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  56. Sutherland, A., Brunton-Smith, I., & Jackson, J. (2013). Collective efficacy, deprivation and violence in London. British Journal of Criminology, 53(6), 1050–1074.Google Scholar
  57. Takagi, D., & Kawachi, I. (2014). Neighborhood social heterogeneity and crime victimization in Japan: moderating effects of social networks. Asian Journal of Criminology, 9(4), 271–284.Google Scholar
  58. Taylor, R. (2018). Breaking away from broken windows. Baltimore neighborhoods and the Nationwide fight against crime, grime, fear and decline. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  59. Weisburd, D., Bernasco, W., & Bruinsma, G. J. N. (2009). Putting crime in its place: Units of analysis in geographic criminology. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  60. Weisburd, D., Davis, M., & Gill, C. (2015). Increasing collective efficacy and social capital at crime hot spots: New crime control tools for police. Policing: A Journal of Policy and Practice, 9(3), 265–274.Google Scholar
  61. Wiesner, M., Yoerger, K., & Capaldi, D.M. (2016) Patterns and correlates of offender versatility and specialization across a 23-year span for at-risk young men. Victims & Offenders 13(1), 28–47.Google Scholar
  62. Wilson, J. Q., & Kelling, G. L. (1982). Broken windows. Atlantic Monthly, 249(3), 29–38.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Oriana Binik
    • 1
  • Adolfo Ceretti
    • 1
  • Roberto Cornelli
    • 1
  • Hans Schadee
    • 2
  • Alfredo Verde
    • 3
  • Uberto Gatti
    • 3
    Email author
  1. 1.University of Milano-BicoccaMilanItaly
  2. 2.University Statale di MilanoMilanItaly
  3. 3.University of GenovaGenoaItaly

Personalised recommendations