Inequality and Crime

Relative Deprivation Theory

The most prominent inequality-crime argument is the relative deprivation thesis. This argument suggests that criminal behavior is motivated by a feeling of injustice that individuals experience when they become aware that others are more economically advantaged. Relative deprivation is thus a social-psychological construct that arises from a subjective perception of inequity. Because individuals who exhibit little objective economic need can perceive that they have less than others, the relative deprivation explanation can be applied to criminality at lower as well as upper ends of the economic distribution. Despite its conceptualization in social-psychological terms, relative deprivation has appeared most prominently in macro-level, or community, research on crime. Thus, scholars have argued that relative deprivation is a mechanism by which economic inequality affects crime rates in aggregate units such as states, counties, cities, or neighborhoods. Overall, research evidence is mixed when it comes to the hypothesis that greater overall income inequality is predictive of higher crime rates.

The basic relative deprivation theory was extended in 1982 by Judith and Peter Blau who argued that not all manifestations of economic inequality are likely to produce “relative deprivation.” While certain types of inequality will be perceived as legitimate, others will be considered bluntly unjust. For example, inequities that result from differences in natural talent, personal ambition, and individual hard work are typically viewed as normative and expected in our merit-based society. However, when inequities have their basis in ascribed statuses that are beyond an individual's control, such as race, they are likely to be perceived as illegitimate. Based on this logic, Blau and Blau proposed that between-race economic inequality will produce diffuse alienation, frustration, and hostility, which will result in higher violent crime rates. To date, research findings regarding this ascribed inequality thesis are rather equivocal.

The Blaus’ ascribed inequality argument implies that members of an economically subordinate racial or ethnic group (e.g., blacks) will judge their economic situation relative to that of an economically advantaged racial or ethnic group (e.g., whites). But some scholars have questioned whether that logic is valid. Drawing from reference-group theory, Miles Harer and Darrell Steffensmeier argue that individuals are most likely to evaluate their own economic situation relative to others with whom they share salient personal or social characteristics, such as race. Consequently, they posited that within-race economic inequality should be a major driver of relative deprivation and increased crime rates. Harer and Steffensmeier's empirical findings indicate support for the within-race argument among whites, but not blacks. Subsequent research yields some support for the within-race inequality argument, but findings are not uniformly consistent.

...