Joseph KK Ho e-resources: A note on social disorganization in housing studies

A note on social disorganization in housing studies (information from perplexity.ai) [an exploratory literature review exercise]

My question 1: "What is the topic of homelessness all about via the lens of social disorganization?"

The reply: "Homelessness, when viewed through the lens of social disorganization theory, is understood as a consequence of various intertwined social and economic factors, such as poverty, lack of access to affordable housing, mental and physical health issues, addiction, and family or community breakdown311. Social disorganization theory posits that crime and social issues like homelessness are more prevalent in communities characterized by poverty, residential instability, and ethnic diversity, which weaken social networks and reduce informal social control4810.

Key aspects of homelessness and social disorganization:

Social Determinants Homelessness is often the result of cumulative adversities rooted in childhood and social exclusion, involving economic, housing, interpersonal, and individual factors3. Homelessness is both a driver of poor health and a consequence of adverse social and economic conditions3.
Poverty and Crime Homeless individuals, often living in poverty, may find the potential benefits of committing a crime outweigh the risk of punishment, making crime an appealing option for survival1. Property crimes, like breaking into buildings for shelter or theft, may become more common1. However, opportunities for property crime may be limited in areas with widespread poverty1.
Social Disorganization Theory This theory, developed by Shaw and McKay, suggests that characteristics like concentrated poverty, high residential mobility, and ethnic diversity weaken social networks and norms, leading to higher crime rates4.
Community Impact Socially disorganized communities often have low levels of social control, reducing the influence of schools and other important institutions10. Unstable neighborhoods lack the cohesiveness and social controls that regulate crime and delinquency7.
Barriers to Community Involvement Homeless individuals face numerous barriers to community involvement due to social, personal, and structural issues6. Discrimination can make it difficult to access necessary services and support, such as opening a bank account or finding employment6.
Criminalization Vagrancy laws can further criminalize homeless individuals, leading to their displacement and marginalization6. Regions with higher criminal activity may also see increased rates of homelessness among ex-convicts, who face difficulty securing housing after serving their sentences1.
Health Disparities Homeless individuals often experience a range of health issues, exacerbated by social determinants like psychological trauma, poverty, unemployment, domestic violence, and social disconnection3. These underlying social issues challenge traditional healthcare boundaries and are major determinants of health for people experiencing homelessness3."

My question 2: "How does social disorganization theory explain the link between homelessness and crime?"

The reply: "Social disorganization theory explains the connection between homelessness and crime by focusing on how community characteristics like poverty, instability, and lack of social cohesion can lead to increased crime rates6. The theory posits that weakened social networks and a breakdown in social control mechanisms within disorganized communities contribute to both homelessness and criminal behavior1.

Key tenets of the theory:

Neighborhood Characteristics Crime rates are higher in areas with conditions such as unemployment, fluctuating populations, and physical decay. These conditions hinder social organization and cohesion, reducing informal social control of delinquency3.
Poverty and Inequality Communities with high poverty and economic disadvantage often experience higher crime rates due to limited access to resources and opportunities1. Poverty can also lead to family disorganization, further contributing to crime5.
Social Disorganization Factors Factors such as poverty, residential mobility, and ethnic heterogeneity can weaken social networks and norms, leading to higher crime rates2. When communities lack strong bonds, mutual trust, and shared norms, crime can proliferate1.
Strain Theory Individuals may turn to crime when they experience a disconnection between socially approved goals and the means to achieve them1. Limited opportunities and resources in socially disorganized communities increase the likelihood of criminal behavior1.
Cultural Transmission Criminal norms and values can be culturally transmitted in socially disorganized areas, passed on to new residents regardless of their background3. Deviant behavior can be passed from older gang members to younger individuals, perpetuating crime3.
Impact on Homeless Individuals Homeless individuals, who often live in poverty, may find the potential benefits of committing a crime outweigh the risk of punishment, making crime an appealing option for survival4. Property crimes, like breaking into buildings for shelter or theft, may become more common4.
Location-Based Link The relationship between homelessness and crime is partially location-based, with homeless individuals often residing in areas prone to crime4. These areas may attract homeless individuals due to low rents and the dissolution of social ties3.
Weakening Mechanisms Social disorganization weakens the mechanisms that maintain social order and control, contributing to higher crime rates4.

The theory suggests that addressing the structural issues that lead to social disorganization such as poverty, lack of community resources, and instability can help reduce both homelessness and crime56."

My question 3: "Are there measurement methods, either qualitative or quantitative, to assess social disorganization in a local community in the academic literature?"

The reply: "Yes, both qualitative and quantitative methods exist for assessing social disorganization in a local community8. Quantitative approaches often rely on census data at the community and neighborhood levels2. Qualitative methods provide rich, contextual information8.

Quantitative Methods:

Census Data: Researchers use census data to measure factors like residential instability, ethnic heterogeneity, family disruption, low economic status, and population density2. These measures are presumed to be indicators of social processes of control over behavior2.
Regression Analyses: Statistical summaries describe the quantitative empirical relationships between structural variables. These include regression analyses, the development of cluster analyses for rural community structures, and analyses of variance of crime between clusters2.
Index of Qualitative Variation: This can measure discrepancies in the operationalizations of key concepts among studies testing the same theory3.
Social Disorganization Variables: These include concentrated disadvantage, residential mobility, ethnic heterogeneity, family disruption, and urbanization4. Concentrated disadvantage can be measured using the Index of Multiple Deprivation, which includes indicators for income, employment, health, education, barriers to housing and services, and the living environment4.

Qualitative Methods:

Neighborhood Surveys: Surveys can directly measure social disorganization, informal control, and collective efficacy1. For example, researchers may survey residents to determine whether they know their neighbors, like their neighborhood, or have compatible interests with neighbors1.
Assessing Informal Control: Researchers can assess the reliability of informal control measures1. Data collection that includes a common set of network and informal control indicators is needed to assess the measurement structure of the items1.
Collective Efficacy Measurement: Collective efficacy can be measured using subscales that reflect social cohesion among neighbors (i.e., trust and cooperation) combined with their willingness to intervene for the common good1. It reflects the process of activating or converting social ties among neighborhood residents to achieve collective goals, such as public order or the control of crime1."

My question 4: "How do qualitative approaches differ from quantitative ones in assessing social disorganization?"

The reply: "Qualitative and quantitative approaches differ significantly in how they assess social disorganization. Quantitative research deals with numbers and statistics5. Qualitative research deals with words and meanings, delving deeply into experiences, social processes, and subcultures52. While quantitative methods ask "what" and "how much," qualitative methods ask "why" and "how"6. Qualitative methods seek to understand meanings, while quantitative research aims to quantify variables7.

Here's a breakdown of the key differences:

Data Type: Quantitative research relies on numerical data, while qualitative research uses data from interviews, observations, and focus groups4.
Focus: Quantitative methods measure and count8. Qualitative methods describe and interpret experiences to provide a "thick description" of phenomena1.
Research Questions: Quantitative research generally begins with a more focused research question, while qualitative researchers generally begin with a less focused research question3.
Sample Size: Qualitative studies generally use smaller samples, aiming for depth of understanding rather than breadth1.
Sampling: Qualitative studies rely principally on “purposeful sampling” designed to maximize the information gained1. Unlike quantitative studies that rely on random samples to minimize bias and confounding1.
Analysis: Qualitative data analysis distinguishes qualitative research more clearly than anything else3. Qualitative methods represent an approach to understanding that does not require, or does not lend itself to, enumeration1.
Objectivity: Some quantitative researchers criticize qualitative methods on the grounds that they lack objectivity and are difficult to evaluate in terms of reliability and validity3.
Design: Qualitative designs emphasize naturalistic inquiry, minimizing investigator manipulation of the study setting and placing no prior constraints on what the outcomes of the research will be1.
Goal: Qualitative methods are used to explore and obtain depth of understanding, while quantitative methods are used to test and confirm hypotheses1.
Types of Designs: Qualitative study generally falls under three types of designs: phenomenology, ethnography, and grounded theory2."

My question 5: "Have there been academic research works on social disorganization in the field of housing studies?"

The reply: "Yes, there have been academic research works on social disorganization in the field of housing studies17. Some studies focus on anti-social behavior (ASB) in housing communities, exploring the impacts of social capital on ASB problems in residential neighborhoods1. These studies often aim to determine whether housing tenure is associated with the extent of ASB problems1. Both quantitative and qualitative approaches are used, including household surveys and in-depth case studies with residents and housing managers1. Some research uses spatial multi-level models to examine socio-spatial variations in the perceived extent of ASB1. The findings often provide insights into how residents perceive the seriousness of ASB problems and can assist policymakers and housing managers in making informed decisions1.

One study explored social disorganization theory in university residence halls, analyzing incident rates to see if the theory explained any variance between different types of residence halls5. This study found mixed results regarding the application of social disorganization theory to university residence halls5."

My question 6: "Have there been housing-related issues related to the theme of social disorganization reported in the public media over the last 20 years?"

The reply: "I do not have access to live, up-to-the-minute reporting from public media sources. However, I can share some ways that housing-related issues and social disorganization intersect, according to research:

Links to Crime: Social disorganization theory is a framework for understanding the relationship between community characteristics and crime in urban areas57. Collective efficacy, or the willingness of residents to intervene in neighborhood problems, can mediate the relationship between structural disorganization and neighborhood violent crime rates1.
Immigration and Crime: Some research explores whether high immigrant populations correlate with higher crime rates, as traditionally posited by social disorganization theory1. Some studies suggest that neighborhoods with more immigrants are actually less likely to experience high levels of violence1.
Neighborhood Participation: Collective efficacy can promote collective problem-solving, like neighborhood watch programs1. Social ties are important for both native-born and foreign-born residents in collective problem-solving1.
Strain and Youth Violence: Some studies use multilevel models to examine the relationship between neighborhood characteristics, strain, and youth violence2.
Social Disorganization Variables: These can include concentrated disadvantage, residential mobility, ethnic heterogeneity, family disruption, and urbanization2. Concentrated disadvantage can be measured using the Index of Multiple Deprivation, which includes indicators for income, employment, health, education, barriers to housing and services, and the living environment2.
Anti-Social Behavior: Studies have explored anti-social behavior (ASB) in housing communities, and the impacts of social capital on ASB problems in residential neighborhoods2.
Forced Evictions: Problems related to housing, such as homelessness, eviction, and inadequate quality of houses, remain a persistent problem all over the world3."