An Exploratory Examination of Social Ties and Crime in Mobile Home Communities

William P Mccarty

doi:10.1177/2158244013512132

Abstract

Guided by the systemic model of social disorganization, the purpose of this study was to explore the nature of social ties in mobile home communities and examine how that relates to rates of violent and property crime. Interviews with a small sample of mobile home residents, owners, and managers in Omaha, Nebraska, indicate a wide spectrum of communities, from those characterized by an atomized population to those with strong social ties. Fear of crime, ethnically heterogeneous populations, and lax management were cited by respondents as factors that undermined relationships. Proactive management and a desire to help neighbors were cited by respondents as factors that helped strengthen relationships. Violent and property crime rates for the mobile home communities were largely consistent with the interview data, providing support for the importance of social networks and a systemic model of social disorganization. The implications of these findings for research and policy are also explored.

Highlights

Mobile homes began to dot the American landscape in the 1920s and 1930s as trailers morphed from travel accessories to permanent residences for some people (Wallis, 1991)
Rooted in a systemic model of social disorganization, the goal of the current study was to use interviews with a small sample of mobile home residents, managers, and owners, supplemented with official police reports in Omaha, Nebraska, to explore the nature of social ties in mobile home communities and examine how that relates to rates of violent and property crime
Supplemented with official crime data, the interviews were used to explore the nature of social ties in mobile home communities and examine how that relates to rates of violent and property crime

Summary

Introduction

Mobile homes began to dot the American landscape in the 1920s and 1930s as trailers morphed from travel accessories to permanent residences for some people (Wallis, 1991). Shaw and McKay (1942) argued that poor, constantly changing, and ethnically heterogeneous neighborhoods lacked the regulatory capacity to allow residents to achieve their common goals People in these areas struggled to establish social networks, instill norms for acceptable and unacceptable behavior, and fortify informal social control mechanisms. Current research has responded to this criticism by focusing on how informal social control in a neighborhood is largely based on the affiliations, interactions, and communication among local residents (Bursik, 2001). This is generally referred to as the systemic model of social disorganization (Bursik & Grasmick, 1993; Taylor, 1997)

Objectives

Results

Conclusion