What's Yours is Now Mine: Deviant Consumption through Acquisitive Crime

Abstract

Deviant consumption in the form of acquisitive crime, or the theft of material possessions by one person from another person or household, is prevalent in countries across the globe. Anomie theory provides a multilevel framework for understanding this prevalent and damaging form of consumer misbehavior, highlighting the societal factors propagating it. The authors conduct a multilevel study that analyzes reports from more than 58,000 households in 26 countries worldwide. Using hierarchical generalized linear modeling, they contrast household-level crime reports with country data on inequality and cultural values. The findings reveal that wealth inequality, achievement orientation, individualism, future orientation, and uncertainty—both individually and in combination—influence acquisitive crime prevalence. In particular, greater societal wealth inequality increases the positive effects of achievement orientation and uncertainty to promote acquisitive crime. The negative effects of a low future orientation in promoting acquisitive crime are also enhanced under greater inequality. The findings suggest public policy implications at both societal and individual household levels of analysis. Specifically, policies directed at underground markets coupled with consumption adequacy efforts may prove effective in curbing acquisitive crime.

Sharing is not always caring: How sharing labels encourage personal consumption as a response to the threat of others

“…Previous work has demonstrated that individuals who are the most concerned with resource availability (i.e., hold a scarcity mindset) tend to exhibit selfish behavior (Roux et al, 2015) and consumers who experience resource deprivation tend to seek scarce goods (Sharma & Alter, 2012). In this regard, future work could explore the potentially negative downstream effects of sharing labels on other behaviors that arise from a sense of resource‐related threat, for example immoral behavior (Martin et al, 2013), aggression (Kristofferson et al, 2017), or fiscal irresponsibility (Griskevicius et al, 2013). Previous work has also demonstrated that experiences with resource scarcity in childhood can impact consumer perceptions and behavior in adulthood (Mittal et al, 2020), including a tendency toward excessive consumption (Hill et al, 2016) and spending (Griskevicius et al, 2013).…”

Acquisitive Crime Trends: Unpacking the Unemployment-Crime Relationship in a Rural Context

“…Extant research has established a strong relationship between the unemployment rate and crime. Continuing, prior research has predominantly measured the health of the economy through the use of the unemployment rate (Cantor & Land, 1985;Frederick & Jozefowicz, 2018;Greenberg, 2001), consumer sentiment (Rosenfeld & Fornango, 2007;Rosenfeld & Levin, 2016), inflation (Rosenfeld, 2014;Rosenfeld, Vogel, & McCuddy, 2019), the business cycle (Paternoster & Bushway, 2001), and GDP (Martin et al, 2013;Rosenfeld & Messner, 2009). Each of these measurements capture a different aspect of the relationship between the economy and crime and highlights a different mechanism.…”

“…This leads to both an increase in motivation to commit acquisitive crime and the willingness to participate in underground markets buying stolen property (Cantor & Land. 1985;Martin et al, 2013;Rosenfeld, 2009). Long-term unemployment functions as an index for offenders (Cohen et al, 1980).…”

“…Considering the economic incentive of acquisitive crimes, it is a natural outcome measure for studies of the relationship between economic health and crime. While the economic -crime relationship is established, different causal mechanisms including the underground market of stolen goods may help unpack the economic health and crime relationship (Martin et al, 2013;Rosenfeld, 2009). For example, during economic downturns, there is an increased demand for underground goods, a need met through an increase in acquisitive crime rates (Martin et al, 2013;Rosenfeld, 2009;Rosenfeld, 2014).…”

Changing lifestyles in the age of fear: projective analysis of social insecurity and consumption patterns

“…Broader structural issues beyond consumer's control as discrimination, natural disasters (Baker et al, 2007), and violence exerted to others ) adds a link on external influences and consumer vulnerability (Baker et al, 2005). Contexts for consumer vulnerability ranges from the consequences of natural disasters (Baker, 2007) to the threat of terrorist attacks Somer and Ruvio, 2014) to deviant consumption in the form of acquisitive crime (Martin et al, 2013).…”