Work, Income Support, and Crime in the Dutch Welfare State: A Longitudinal Study Following Vulnerable Youth Into Adulthood

Abstract

Life-course criminological research has consistently suggested that employment can reduce criminal behavior. However, it is unclear whether the financial aspects of employment or the social control that inheres in employment best explains the relationship between employment and reduced offending. By using longitudinal information on a sample of men and women (N = 540) who were institutionalized in a Dutch juvenile justice institution in the 1990s, this study examines the effects of employment as well as the different types of income support on crime. Random-and fixed-effects models show that for men, both work and income support are associated with a reduction in the rate of offending. For women, however, although employment is correlated with a lower offending rate, receiving income support, and in particular disability benefits, is correlated with a higher offending rate. The findings support both theories that stress the financial motivation for crime as well as theories that emphasize the importance of informal social control for reducing offending.Life-course criminology argues that making successful transitions to adult social roles facilitates desistance from offending during the young adult years. A successful transition into the labor market seems especially important in this respect as unemployment has repeatedly been found to be related to adult crime (Lageson and Uggen, 2013). Being employed provides potential offenders with a source of income, thereby diminishing their financial motivations for committing offenses. In addition, continued involvement in work may provide potential offenders with a structured daily routine, a social network of conventional colleagues, and a sense of meaning and self-worth, which they are increasingly unlikely to be willing to jeopardize by engaging in criminal behavior. Research up to this *

Adult outcomes of youths who have spent time in a judicial treatment institution in the Netherlands

“…This group may be cut off from a conventional life style and ties with their relatives through their addiction. Those who had offended at a high rate but subsequently desisted were relatively often employed, which is in line with research on the relationship between employment and crime (Sampson & Laub, 1993;Verbruggen, Apel, Van der Geest & Blokland, 2015). The largest group of low-rate desisters appeared to have the most positive outcomes in adulthood.…”

How and Why Does Work Matter? Employment Conditions, Routine Activities, and Crime Among Adult Male Offenders*

“…This finding has also been replicated in a variety of non‐U.S. settings (Blokland and Nieuwbeerta, ; Farrington et al., ; Hagan, ; Savolainen, ; Van der Geest, Bijleveld, and Blokland, ; Verbruggen et al., )…”

“…and Monitoring the Future (Staff, Osgood, et al, 2010;; with population birth cohorts (Thornberry and Christenson, 1984;Williams and Sickles, 2002;Witte and Tauchen, 1994); in follow-up studies of incarcerated individuals (Laub and Sampson, 2003;Sampson and Laub, 1993;Witte, 1980); among homeless samples (Hagan and McCarthy, 1997); and in randomized evaluations comprising hard-to-employ individuals with arrest histories or prison experience (Cook et al, 2015;Uggen, 2000;Uggen and Thompson, 2003). This finding has also been replicated in a variety of non-U.S. settings (Blokland and Nieuwbeerta, 2005;Farrington et al, 1986;Hagan, 1993;Savolainen, 2009;Van der Geest, Bijleveld, and Blokland, 2011;Verbruggen et al, 2015). 1 Despite a good deal of evidence showing that work can play an important role in curtailing criminal behavior, surprisingly little is known about the mechanisms through which work lowers individual involvement in crime, especially among serious offenders.…”

Adult Life Adjustment of Vulnerable Youths. The Relationship Between Criminal History, Employment History and Adult Life Outcomes

“…Convictions pertain to a wide range of offenses, such as violent offenses, property offenses, serious public order offenses, drugs offenses and weapon offenses (following a classification used by Loeber et al [35], and as used in previous work on the 17up dataset, e.g. [55,57,58]). Given that minor offenses, such as vandalism and road traffic offenses, are relatively common even in the general population, convictions for minor offenses are excluded from the analyses.…”