By William J. Cromie

Gazette Staff

Minding other people's business can decrease neighborhood violence and delinquency, according to a major study of urban crime. The researchers conclude that mutual trust and values, and the willingness to look after the children of others and maintain public order lower rates of crime more than other factors.

Conversely, neighborhood instability, distrust, and indifference breed more violence than poverty or racial injustice.

"We found that trust and reciprocity among neighbors is a much stronger predictor of violence levels than race or poverty," says Felton Earls, professor of human behavior and development at the School of Public Health. "The finding applies in low-, middle-, and high-income neighborhoods, as well as in white, black, Latino, and mixed neighborhoods."

Earls directs the Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods, the largest ongoing study ever to look at all factors believed to contribute to behavior and quality of life. He and his colleagues are studying 8,872 residents of 343 neighborhoods in that city.

"We chose Chicago because, more than any other city, it comes closest to measuring all the stripes in the U.S. flag," Earls notes. "Its racial, ethnic, social, and economic diversity closely match that of the country as a whole. In addition, it is the best studied city; we have almost 100 years of data to help us understand what is going on in its neighborhoods."

"Some of the neighborhoods with the highest levels of social cohesion, or what we call collective efficacy, are black, middle-class and stable," adds Robert Sampson of the University of Chicago. "By contrast, many areas low in efficacy and high in violence are not necessarily the public housing projects so disproportionately emphasized in popular discourse."

Places with low community cooperation include middle- and high-income neighborhoods, Earls points out.

"In this sense," Sampson continues, "our findings imply that achieving stable and safe neighborhoods is possible, although not necessarily easy, in all areas whether they be rich or poor, black or white."

Crime Rates Fall

The project has recorded drops in crime rates in as little as two to three years when neighbors work to police their community and discipline children. In some of these areas, church leaders are the force behind originating and maintaining the necessary neighborliness.

"They rally people to cooperate with and inform police about drug selling and other unlawful activities," Earls says. They also stop children from skipping school, defacing the neighborhood with graffiti, and hanging out on the streets.

In Boston, for example, black ministers formed a coalition to help kids in low-income, high-crime areas. They urge them to stay in school, help them get summer jobs, and get to know the children's parents.

"The results have been incredible," Earls remarks. "The ministers have succeeded in generating a strong sense of shared values and community cohesion. In the past two years, there have been no cases of homicide in Boston involving kids under age 17."

Although they conclude that social cohesion accounts for most of the difference in violent crime among Chicago neighborhoods, Earls and his colleagues do not discount other factors, particularly poverty. Levels of violence in poorer neighborhoods with high community cohesiveness still are greater than those in higher-income-level neighborhoods with comparable social efficacy.

Earls concludes that "in any city, there can exist concentrations of poverty so great that it probably is not possible to generate effective cohesion. These neighborhoods lie below a threshold standard of living that provides for such basic needs as housing and nutrition."

Certain external supports also are necessary, such as adequate police protection, public transportation, and other community services to help counter deteriorating buildings and to maintain stability.

While many of the project's findings are obvious, "this is the first time the impact of one's neighborhood has been measured in a precise way," notes Stephen Raudenbush, a Michigan State University educator who worked with Earls and Sampson. "By providing this type of information, our hope is that decision-makers and local citizens will think in new ways about the means to prevent and control violent behavior."