Following the release of South Africa’s 2018 crime
statistics, which police minister Bheki Cele described as a “war
zone”, there was a side discussion by some opinion writers that “inequality”
is a cause of crime.
Many people – politicians, business, journalists and worst
of all academics who should know better – confuse and conflate inequality with
poverty. They are linked but not the same.
Poverty is the shortage or absence of livelihood resources and assets
particularly income/money, and inequality the disparity of wealth (income) in a
society. Poverty affects the individual at micro level whereas inequality is a
macro, notional indicator of social or income equilibrium – the social
democratic ideal.
Inequality is a catch-all red herring to describe SA's ills.
People use it, often loosely, to sound knowledgeable, as a sound bite, to
simplify what they're talking about or out of intellectual laziness, in this
case, the cause of crime.
Inequality does not drive a person to commit crime but a
variety of reasons do including need, psycho-pathologies, opportunity, and the
main motives for murder, power, money, sex, recidivism, career criminality,
etc. Poor people are not more prone to
commit crimes than those who are not. If
that was the case there wouldn’t be white collar crime, theft, fraud and
corruption where well-heeled businessmen, politicians and the like skim money
off the top and take pensioners savings.
But I suppose if the circumstances were ripe, a person who
hasn’t eaten for days or similarly desperate can commit a crime to serve that
need. However, the poor around us – we see them every day – don’t necessarily
commit crimes – most of them are law abiding – which go to show poverty it’s
not the only driver. It contributes
certainly, but who knows by how much. Perhaps
a troubled society like South Africa has a higher proportion of sociopaths,
psychopaths and recidivists as evidenced by its high crime and murder rates.
A person contemplating committing a crime will do so out of
a real or perceived need, except career criminals, sociopaths and psychopaths
who do so for the thrill of the crime itself and for profit like the conman who
recently defrauded my credit card. He or
she doesn’t say, “You know, society is so unequal ("inequality”) that I’m
going to correct that. The Robin Hood “good thief” legend of stealing from the
rich to give to the poor is just that.
The poor are as law-abiding as the rest of the population
and are no more likely to commit crime than anyone else all things being equal.
It's an insult to them and rubbish and speculation to suggest that.
Poverty (inequality, which is a notional term like GDP per
capita, is often used to make a political rather than practical point, and by
people who have no idea what it means) and need might drive desperate people to
commit crime, but the brutality in South Africa that accompanies it speaks of
something else - evil and utter disregard for life and law. It's not about income equality.
So I disagree with those who say inequality contributes to
crime because the term itself is used incorrectly in place of “poverty” and it inaccurately
attributes the effects of poverty – lack of basic goods. Incidentally, the poor are also victims of
property crimes within their communities which disproves the blanket assumption
wealth disparity increases the incidence of it.
In a The Conversation article
University of Cape Town doctoral candidate Anine Kriegler wrote “inequality makes
property crime more attractive and profitable, and drives frustration,
hostility and hopelessness”. (She also said it “undermines trust, community
engagement and the functioning of social and institutional structures” which I
have no issue with.)
In a follow-up comment she said: “The countries with the
highest murder rates are the middle-income ones that show large disparities in
wealth”.
I tested this assertion. I looked at lists of the 100 middle-income countries and cross-referenced it with 100 countries with the highest income inequality (Gini coefficients) and highest murder rates per 100,000 population. I couldn't determine what a “high” Gini is so assumed it’s 40 (0-100%) and over. Similarly, I can’t find a definition a “high” murder rate so assumed anything above 10 per 100,000. See Table 1.
I tested this assertion. I looked at lists of the 100 middle-income countries and cross-referenced it with 100 countries with the highest income inequality (Gini coefficients) and highest murder rates per 100,000 population. I couldn't determine what a “high” Gini is so assumed it’s 40 (0-100%) and over. Similarly, I can’t find a definition a “high” murder rate so assumed anything above 10 per 100,000. See Table 1.
There’s no Gini data for 17 countries (only four of those
have murder rates above 10), so let’s exclude them. Of the remaining 83,
India’s Gini is 8.6 and the rest range from 25.5 to 63.4, the highest, for
South Africa (murder rate 34). Only 20 countries have murder rates above 10,
from 10.4 (Papua New Guinea; Gini 43.9) to El Salvador’s 82.8 murder rate (Gini
40.8).
While the average Gini for the 83 countries is 39.8, murder
rates start at a low 0.5, 45 with murder rates below 5.
Therefore, there’s no statistical correlation between high
inequality and high murder rates. Of course, this analysis doesn’t examine
countries’ unique social conditions that may account for their crime and murder
rates.
I've not read the studies by "people who have dedicated their lives to the field", i.e., academics like her Kriegler that referred to, and perhaps I shall. But I can’t believe researchers haven’t done this breakdown, a basic first step.
Without having read the international studies she mentioned, I’m sceptical of their conclusions. My superficial assessment supports what I said that inequality is not a driver for crime, and using macro indicators is misleading if not incorrect. Inequality is an outcome like crime itself of the causal chain rather than a claimed trigger:
Without having read the international studies she mentioned, I’m sceptical of their conclusions. My superficial assessment supports what I said that inequality is not a driver for crime, and using macro indicators is misleading if not incorrect. Inequality is an outcome like crime itself of the causal chain rather than a claimed trigger:
Political & business environment > Poor or
inappropriate economic policies & practices > Lack of medium-long-term
economic growth and development > Lack of medium-long-term economic growth &
development > Poverty or unmet basic needs > Inequality & other
negative societal conditions.
The causes of crime cannot be generalised to one convenient factor because social dynamics and pressures vary from one country to another and within a country, from one city or community another.
The causes of crime cannot be generalised to one convenient factor because social dynamics and pressures vary from one country to another and within a country, from one city or community another.
Table 1: Middle-income countries and inequality
Middle-income countries
|
GNI per capita
|
Upper /Lower income
|
Gini
|
Murder Rate
|
5,430
|
U
|
63.4
|
34.0
|
|
4,600
|
U
|
61.3
|
17.1
|
|
Botswana
|
6,820
|
U
|
60.5
|
15.0
|
6,020
|
U
|
57.6
|
8.4
|
|
1,300
|
L
|
57.1
|
5.3
|
|
1,280
|
L
|
54.2
|
41.3
|
|
Belize
|
4,390
|
U
|
53.3
|
37.6
|
2,960
|
L
|
51.5
|
17.3
|
|
Brazil
|
8,580
|
U
|
51.3
|
29.5
|
5,830
|
U
|
51.1
|
25.5
|
|
2,250
|
L
|
50.1
|
56.5
|
|
4,060
|
U
|
48.7
|
27.3
|
|
8,610
|
U
|
48.2
|
19.3
|
|
11,040
|
U
|
48.2
|
11.9
|
|
3,920
|
U
|
48.0
|
9.3
|
|
1,440
|
L
|
47.7
|
4.9
|
|
2,990
|
L
|
47.2
|
11.5
|
|
2,130
|
L
|
46.6
|
7.4
|
|
5,890
|
U
|
46.5
|
5.9
|
|
1,360
|
L
|
46.5
|
4.2
|
|
9,650
|
U
|
46.3
|
2.1
|
|
Bolivia
|
3,130
|
L
|
45.8
|
6.3
|
4,750
|
U
|
45.5
|
47.0
|
|
6,630
|
U
|
44.9
|
15.2
|
|
4,460
|
U
|
44.5
|
18.4
|
|
5,970
|
U
|
44.3
|
7.7
|
|
1,880
|
L
|
44.1
|
6.5
|
|
2,410
|
L
|
43.9
|
10.4
|
|
6,650
|
U
|
43.2
|
4.2
|
|
2,080
|
L
|
43.0
|
9.9
|
|
1,490
|
L
|
42.8
|
1.7
|
|
Angola
|
3,330
|
L
|
42.7
|
4.9
|
8,690
|
U
|
42.2
|
0.6
|
|
1,540
|
L
|
41.7
|
No data
|
|
6,610
|
U
|
41.5
|
8.0
|
|
10,930
|
U
|
41.2
|
4.3
|
|
3,560
|
L
|
40.8
|
82.8
|
|
2,860
|
L
|
40.7
|
1.2
|
|
3,660
|
L
|
40.1
|
11.0
|
|
3,590
|
L
|
40.1
|
4.7
|
|
3,540
|
L
|
39.5
|
0.5
|
|
5,400
|
U
|
38.8
|
2.5
|
|
Bhutan
|
2,720
|
L
|
38.7
|
1.1
|
3,840
|
L
|
38.6
|
2.6
|
|
3,790
|
L
|
38.5
|
1.0
|
|
1,190
|
L
|
38.1
|
2.3
|
|
2,270
|
L
|
37.9
|
7.0
|
|
5,960
|
U
|
37.8
|
3.2
|
|
9,230
|
U
|
37.7
|
10.8
|
|
Bulgaria
|
7,760
|
U
|
37.4
|
1.1
|
9,570
|
U
|
36.8
|
0.8
|
|
1,980
|
L
|
36.7
|
3.0
|
|
4,970
|
U
|
36.4
|
2.3
|
|
3,500
|
L
|
35.8
|
3.1
|
|
10,140
|
U
|
35.8
|
1.8
|
|
4,880
|
U
|
35.6
|
1.6
|
|
3,180
|
L
|
35.5
|
0.7
|
|
2,380
|
L
|
35.4
|
5.2
|
|
3,980
|
U
|
35.4
|
1.6
|
|
2,170
|
L
|
34.8
|
1.5
|
|
Bosnia and Herzegovina
|
4,940
|
U
|
33.1
|
1.3
|
1,100
|
L
|
32.4
|
9.9
|
|
Armenia
|
4,000
|
U
|
32.4
|
3.0
|
3,290
|
L
|
32.0
|
5.7
|
|
Bangladesh
|
1,470
|
L
|
32.0
|
2.5
|
7,350
|
U
|
31.9
|
4.5
|
|
3,010
|
L
|
31.8
|
2.5
|
|
Azerbaijan
|
4,080
|
U
|
31.8
|
2.1
|
1,790
|
L
|
31.6
|
No data
|
|
1,770
|
L
|
30.8
|
3.4
|
|
1,230
|
L
|
30.8
|
1.8
|
|
1,580
|
L
|
30.7
|
4.4
|
|
4,770
|
U
|
29.5
|
9.9
|
|
5,180
|
U
|
29.1
|
1.4
|
|
1,130
|
L
|
29.0
|
4.5
|
|
Albania
|
4,320
|
U
|
29.0
|
2.7
|
Algeria
|
3,960
|
U
|
27.6
|
1.4
|
9,970
|
U
|
27.5
|
1.3
|
|
2,180
|
L
|
27.0
|
3.2
|
|
Belarus
|
5,280
|
U
|
26.7
|
3.6
|
3,890
|
L
|
26.7
|
1.6
|
|
2,390
|
L
|
25.5
|
6.3
|
|
1,820
|
L
|
8.6
|
3.2
|
|
6,990
|
U
|
No data
|
36.5
|
|
8,780
|
U
|
No data
|
19.3
|
|
4,970
|
U
|
No data
|
18.7
|
|
9,650
|
U
|
No data
|
10.3
|
|
1,360
|
L
|
No data
|
9.3
|
|
6,990
|
U
|
No data
|
8.4
|
|
2,780
|
L
|
No data
|
7.5
|
|
7,890
|
U
|
No data
|
4.8
|
|
4,800
|
U
|
No data
|
4.7
|
|
8,310
|
U
|
No data
|
4.0
|
|
1,920
|
L
|
No data
|
3.8
|
|
4,100
|
U
|
No data
|
3.2
|
|
6,540
|
U
|
No data
|
2.5
|
|
7,060
|
U
|
No data
|
2.3
|
|
2,920
|
L
|
No data
|
2.1
|
|
4,010
|
U
|
No data
|
1.0
|
|
10,220
|
U
|
No data
|
No data
|
Comments
Post a Comment