Income Inequality and Property Crime

Abstract

Cultural issues that act as intervening variables in the inequality‐crime relationship have been neglected in the literature on inequality and crime. The present article explores the interaction between inequality and variables thought to be associated with a perception that inequality is illegitimate. The central argument is that the strength of inequality‐crime relationship is dependent on a contextual factor, a radical egalitarian culture promoting the view that inequality is illegitimate. Data on property crime from 62 nations are analyzed. The results generally indicate that neither inequality nor the interaction between inequality and egalitarian culture exerts independent effects on property crime.

A Theory of General Causes of Terrorism - High Population Growth, Income Inequality and Relative Deprivation

“…Another possible effect of high growth rates of population is higher economic inequality, which supports violent crime in society (cf., Coccia, 2017). The relationship between high growth rate of population, income inequality and terrorism can be explained with the sociological theory of "relative deprivation": inequality breeds social tensions and the less well-off individuals feel dispossessed when compared with wealthier people (Stack, 1984). Hsieh and Pugh (1993) argue that poverty and income inequality can generate resource deprivation and subsistence stress, which are associated with violent crime.…”

Terrorism Driven by High Population Growth

“…3 here). The relationship between high growth rate of population, income inequality and terrorism can be explained with the sociological theory of "relative deprivation": inequality breeds social tensions and the less well-off individuals feel dispossessed when compared with wealthier people (Stack, 1984). Hsieh and Pugh (1993) argue that poverty and income inequality are an indicator of resource deprivation, which is associated with violent crime.…”

Social context of crime control: a time-series analysis of the Korean case, 1973–2002

“…Stack [67] argues that the meaning of inequality and relative deprivation may vary across societies and that economic inequality may not produce threats in societies that view economic inequality as an acceptable outcome based on cultural and religious values. For example, demand for punishment seems to be highest in societies that have a strong commitment to individualistic means of social achievement and a correspondingly weak capacity for collective responses to inequality.…”