Moral panic:
Increasing concerns about the
development of crime in Germany
Master Thesis Sociology
Casper Giltay Veth, 10833501
Sociology: Social Problems and Social Policy
First supervisor: Thomas Leopold
Second supervisor: Ruben van Gaalen
University of Amsterdam, 4 July 2018
caspergv@hotmail.com
2 Abstract
In Germany, and other Western societies, crime rates have been declining for the last couple of decades. Nevertheless, a large part of its citizens is convinced that crime has been
increasing and their country is thus becoming more and more dangerous. Although this might not be true, their concern about the development of crime reflects a dissatisfaction with the current status quo. It signifies a lack of social cohesion, creating general feelings of unease, anxiety and insecurity. This research set out to examine this apparent increase of public concern about the development of crime in Germany by analyzing both individual and social changes in concern. To analyze this age-cohort framework, panel data from the German SOEP study was used. Contrary to earlier theories, the ones who are perceived as the most physical vulnerable in society are not the ones who are most concerned about the
development of crime in Germany. Men are actually more concerned than women. And age has a negative effect on concern: as people get older, they get less concerned. Meanwhile this research also found results supporting the claim that the increase of public concern about the development of crime had been the result of a so-called cohort replacement. Cohort has a positive effect on concern, indicating that older ‘less concerned’ cohorts or generations have been gradually replaced by younger ‘more concerned’ cohorts or generations. Instead of merely associating vulnerability with a lack of physical strength, these findings suggest that the concept of vulnerability needs to be expanded to a broader form of social insecurity. Concerns about the development of crime seem to be the highest for those whose futures are very uncertain or unstable.
3 Index Introduction 4 Research questions 7 Theoretical framework 8 Age effects 8 Gender effects 10 Cohort effects 11 Hypotheses 16 Methodology 17
Data and sample 17
Operationalization 18 Analysis 19 Results 22 Hypothesis 1 23 Hypothesis 2 24 Hypothesis 3 25 Hypothesis 4 27
Conclusion and discussion 29
Bibliography 34
4 Introduction
In modern-day Western society, crime seems to be everywhere. Every time you read a
newspaper, watch television or go online, you are confronted with stories about danger. From criminal lawsuits to terrorist attacks, and from violent wars to nuclear threats, news sources provide you with a constant wave of human despair (Bolton, 2015; Feffer, 2014; Warrick Jr. & Miller, 2016). Because of the rapidly increasing scope and pace of distribution, it can easily feel like the world is on fire and there is no way to escape it. Crime is often a very invisible phenomenon, which means that the ideas of the public are mostly shaped by these media sources (Dowler, 2003). Even in areas with low crime, people believe it to be one of the most important social problems and that it has been steadily increasing (Valera & Guardia, 2014). Furthermore, the public often claims that their governments are not doing enough to protect them from harm (Hummelsheim et al., 2011). Therefore, they argue that better prevention of crime or tougher sentencing should be the number one priority for their elected officials (Pfeiffer et al., 2015; Signorielli, 1990).
Recently, this fear of increasing criminality in the Western world has been linked to the arrival of migrants from Middle-Eastern and African countries. The conservative, traditional Islamic values of these ‘foreigners’ are perceived as a huge threat to modern Western values such as gender equality, tolerance and freedom of speech (Leubecher, 2018; Scarborough, 2017). These ideas are further strengthened by media reports about asylum seekers or migrants murdering little girls (Die Welt, 2018), sexually assaulting women (Richards, 2016; Smale, 2016) or committing bombings or knife attacks which were later linked to terrorist organizations such as Al-Qaeda and the Islamic State (BBC News, 2015; Biermann et al., 2016; De Morgen, 2016; Phipps & Rawlinson, 2015). Although these incidents have happened in almost all of Western-Europe, Germany is often used as an example to discuss this relationship between increasing fear of criminality and the influx of refugees. During the refugee crisis of 2015, their Chancellor Angela Merkel held a passionate statement about the German ability to accept all these refugees into their country (Delcker, 2016). Since then, Germany has been used as a poster child for refugee problems (Schuetze & Wolgelenter, 2018) or rising ‘migrant’ criminality (BBC News, 2018; New York Post, 2018) by many different sources. Unsurprisingly then, 44% of the German population claims to feel less secure than they did a few years ago (Cockburn, 2018). The public consensus seems to be that crime, violence and terrorism have been rapidly increasing in Germany and the rest of Western-Europe, and that most of this increase should be attributed to a so-called ‘Islamic
5 threat’. Instead of something you merely read or hear about in the news, crime has become an ever-increasing danger for whole of society. However, a closer look at the actual crime rates shows a slightly different picture.
In 2017, the total number of reported crimes in Germany was 5.76 million. Not only was this a decrease of almost 10% in comparison to 2016, it was also their lowest crime rate since 1992. In addition, the proportion of crimes that were actually solved has increased. While drug offences and economic crimes had increased by 9.2% and 28.7%, street crime and theft offences decreased by 8.6% and 11.8% (Bundeskriminalamt, 2017; Rising, 2018). Although there was a slight decrease in violent crimes, this could largely be attributed to a sharp increase of violent crimes that had occurred in 2016. This increase of 6.7% was depicted as a dangerous side-effect of the massive influx of migrants after the refugee crisis. Combined with a 52.7% increase of immigrant suspects, domestic and foreign media sources reported about the dangers of refugee crimes to Germany (BBC News, 2018;
Bundeskriminalamt, 2016; New York Post, 2018). While the Federal Criminal Police Office results of violent crimes in 2016 and 2017 couldn’t be further apart, a larger time frame clearly shows a decline in German crime rates since the early 2000s. Similar results can be found in other Western-European countries, such as the United Kingdom (Office for National Statistics, 2015; Office for National Statistics, 2018) and the Netherlands (CBS, 2018; De Zeeuw, 2018). Despite some recent erratic results, crime rates indicate that Western-Europe on average is a whole lot safer than it was 10, 20 or 30 years ago (Tonry, 2014). However, these declining crime rates do not seem to have had a positive effect on the public perception of criminality within their society. Instead of feeling safer, they seem to be more afraid than ever before.
The idea that crime is increasing is not only worrisome for individual feelings of comfort and safety, but also for the society as a whole. It reflects how citizens feel about their neighbors, communities and culture. The apparent rise in concerns about the development of crime should therefore foremost be treated as a social problem. It signifies a lack of social cohesion, safety and trust (Gerber et al., 2010; Gray et al., 2011). Especially when the fear of rising crime and terrorism gets linked to specific ethnic populations this could lead to further polarization or discrimination. As mentioned earlier, people perceive the protection of crime as the main priority of their government. The idea that crime has been increasing thus means that their elected officials are not doing enough to protect them from harm. This is further reflected in the criticism many people have against crime statistics. They argue that it only seems like crime rates have been decreasing because people have become less willing to
6 report criminal activities. They have become disillusioned in the crime-solving abilities of both the police and the government, and therefore believe reporting crimes will have no effect (Nix et al., 2015). Especially with new crimes such as cybercrime, identity fraud or corporate espionage, the police are not (yet) accustomed to properly deal with them (Office National Statistics, 2018). Therefore, these types of crime cannot be properly measured by the Federal Criminal Police Office. Finally, crime statistics do not pay enough attention to the human impact of very violent crimes such as terrorist attacks or (sexual) murders (Bonnet, 2013; Kreling, 2018). In sum, instead of a scientific proof that living circumstances are relatively safe ‘positive’ crime statistics are perceived as distorted picture of reality. It is merely used as a distraction to what is really happening, namely that crime within Germany and other
Western-European countries is on the rise.
The main research questions then become if concerns about the development of crime have indeed increased in Germany, and consequently why people have become more
concerned. To answer these questions, the theoretical framework within this research has to focus on two important types of effects: age and cohort effects. Age effects are primarily concerned with answering questions about what kind of life course events could lead individuals to suddenly become more concerned about rising criminality. As their age increases, do people become more or less concerned about the development of crime? Here, the focus thus lies on individual changes of concern. However, it could also be that the recent increase of public concerns is not the result of individuals changing their mind but of a so-called cohort replacement. Elder Jr. and George (2016) use this term to explain a societal change in which older generations or cohorts with certain similar values are gradually being replaced by younger generations with different kinds of values. This type of cohort effect focuses on answering questions if younger generations are more concerned about the development of crime and if so, what kind of societal changes could have made them so concerned? By analyzing concerns about rising criminality through an age-cohort framework, this research aims to not only get a better understanding of what public concerns about rising crime rates exactly entail but also of why this concern seems to have increased in recent years in Germany and the rest of Western-Europe.
7 Research questions
- Have concerns about the development of crime in Germany indeed increased in recent years? And why have people become more concerned?
- As their age increases, do people become more or less concerned about the development of crime?
- Are younger generations more concerned about the development of crime? And if so, what kind of societal changes could have made them so concerned?
8 Theoretical framework
In the Oxford dictionary ‘crime’ refers to a whole array of illegal activities, ranging from pickpocketing, vandalism and public intoxication to murder, rape and terrorism. Not only the severity of these offences differs greatly, but also the likelihood one will encounter this type of crime and the possible reasons why one would worry about these crimes. Therefore, ‘crime’ will be used as an umbrella term for all criminal offences and the threats they pose to the safety of both the individual and the society as a whole. Now that ‘crime’ has been
defined more accurately, it is time use the age-cohort framework to answer why people would have become more concerned about the development of crime in Germany in the last couple of decades. First, possible age effects will be analyzed with the aid of life course theories. Why are people concerned about crime? What kind of events in the life course make people concerned, or what could make them feel safer? Second, the earlier mentioned cohort
replacement theory from Elder Jr. and George (2016) will be analyzed to discuss why younger generations would be more concerned about crime than earlier generations. What kind of societal changes have occurred in Germany that could have made its citizens more concerned about crime, and why would these changes specifically affect younger generations? After a short summary of the different hypotheses at the end of this chapter, the focus will shift from the theoretical age-cohort framework to the empirical section of this research.
Age effects
Before discussing the relationship between concern about the development of crime and age, it is first important to analyze what this concern means on both an individual and a societal level. Why are people concerned about the development of crime in their country? The most logical reason is of course that people are afraid to become a victim of a heinous crime themselves. If more crimes are committed, the chances of becoming a victim to a crime increases (Gerber et al., 2010). Besides the fear of becoming a victim yourself, people also fear for the safety of their loved ones. Whether or not crime has really been increasing, the consequences of this belief are perceived to be real. Therefore, this individual fear of
becoming a victim can also be seen as a broader fear of social disorder. Crime then becomes an indicator for the public perceptions on safety and security within their country, community or neighborhood. People are thus not only concerned about the development of crime within their country because they are worrying about the safety of the people around them, but also because they perceive it as a sign of despair or decay within their social environment. Their belief that crime has been increasing then indicates feelings of general unease, danger or
9 insecurity (Carro et al., 2010; Vieno et al., 2013). Thus, it could be argued that concern about the development of crime entails a more generalized anxiety about the future of one’s
neighborhood, country or society.
However, this still doesn’t explain why some people are more concerned about the development of crime in Western-Europe than others. The rational explanation would be that people who are most at risk of becoming victimized, are also the ones who are most
concerned about the personal and societal risks of increasing criminality. While crime statistics clearly show that most victims of crime are adolescent men (Bundeskriminalamt, 2017; Reiner, 2002), most research into fear of crime found opposite results. Women are more concerned about crime than men, and it increases with age (Kury et al., 2001; Valera &
Guardia, 2014). Here, young men are actually the least concerned about the development of crime. To explain this ‘fear of crime-victimization’ paradox, Boers (1991) argued that instead of the actual risk of victimization it is ones perceived risk that determines their concern. The more vulnerable one perceives themselves to be, the more concerned they will be about the development of crime within their country. However, a few important remarks about this paradox must be mentioned. While the majority of scientific research shows that fear of crime is indeed higher among the elderly (Baumer, 1985; Carro et al., 2010), there have also been some studies that did not find any differences between age categories at all (Pfeiffer et al., 2005) or found that fear of crime was higher among both the youth and the elderly (Croake et al., 1998). Despite these conflicting results, the ‘fear of crime-victimization’ paradox offers some very interesting insights into the importance of vulnerability within the research into concern about the development of crime.
The idea is that women and elderly are more concerned about the development of crime because they are perceived to be more vulnerable. They lack the physical strength to prevent an attack and are therefore more susceptible to becoming a victim of criminal activities such as thefts or burglaries. Their frail health does not only weaken their defensive mechanism to limit the damage, but also reduces their coping skills to deal with possible injuries in the case of an actual victimization. Furthermore, their frail health also makes them more dependent on other people (De Donder et al., 2009; Killias, 1990). In sum, their overall deficiency of both physical and social control makes the general public associate getting older with physical decline, dependency and vulnerability. Because of this perceived vulnerability, elderly people will become more aware or their own inability to defend themselves against a possible attack and will therefore become more concerned about both their own personal safety and the state of their country as a whole.
10 This leads to the following hypothesis:
H1: Concerns about the development of crime in Germany increase with age. The older someone gets, the higher their probability to be concerned.
Gender effects
Similarly to the elderly, women as a group are perceived as more vulnerable because in comparison to men they lack physical strength. They do not have the power to protect themselves against a possible attack or the defensive mechanisms to limit the damage (Dowler, 2003; Kury et al., 2001). However, besides the physical aspect women are also believed to be more vulnerable because of their sexuality. Women are the primary victims of sexual crimes, which therefore combines the fears of other types of crime with an extra threat of rape or sexual assault. For men a burglar or thief only poses a financial or material threat, while for women this situation also poses a threat of sexual assault. Schafer et al. (2006) argue that besides the fear of sexual crime women also fear that they might be perceived as
(partially) responsible because of their behavior or lifestyle. According to them, most studies severely underestimate these female crime risks when assessing victimization rates. Because not every crime is reported and it is sometimes unclear who should be seen as the victim(s), it is very difficult to accurately assess victimization numbers. Especially in regard to sexual crimes, there are many reasons why some people can’t or won’t file a police report (Gerber et al., 2010). Therefore, the threat of a sexual assault should also be considered when analyzing concerns about crime. Women are perceived as more vulnerable than men, because they lack the physical strength to protect themselves and because they face an extra threat of becoming a victim of a sexual crime. In combination with the ‘fear of crime-victimization’ paradox (Boers, 1991), the following hypothesis has been set up:
H2: The probability to be concerned about the development of crime in Germany is higher for women than it is for men.
However, Kury et al. (2001) suggest that women and men are perceived to be vulnerable at very different moments during their life course. For men, both emotional fear of crime and cognitive estimate of risk increases from the age of 60, thus at the moment they are starting to perceive themselves as ‘elderly’. This seems to indicate that they indeed become more
concerned about the development of crime in their country as they get older. For women, the emotional fear of crime is highest in their 20s. After a slight decrease, it then starts to increase again from the age of 60. Although this seems to indicate that women also become slightly
11 more concerned about the development of crime in their country as they get older, it suggests that their concern is actually highest when they are relatively young. This is further supported by similar results from Lindström et al. (2003) and Hummelsheim et al. (2011). Because the threat of sexual crimes is mainly focused on young women, they are perceived as the most vulnerable age group for women. Keeping in line with the idea that the people with the highest perceived vulnerability are the most concerned about the development of crime, this suggests that the age effect on concern should be negative for women. The older women get, the less concerned they become about the development of crime in their country. This gendered perspective on the relationship between concern about the development of crime and age leads to the reformulation of the following hypothesis:
H3: The relationship between age and concern about the development of crime in Germany should take gender into account. For women the probability to be concerned about the development of crime will decrease with age, while for men the probability to be concerned about the development of crime will increase with age.
Cohort effects
After discussing who is concerned about the development of crime and why they are, it is time to start answering the question why the German public seems to have become more concerned about the development of crime in recent years. This increase in concern could be the result of a so-called period effect. This entails that a social event affects the concerns about the development of crime of so many people at the same time that it actually increases the average public concern. Such an event would thus have to make a majority of the German public become vulnerable, and therefore more concerned about the development of crime in Germany. Although it could be argued that some recent events, for example the terror attack on the Twin Towers on 9/11 2001 in New York or the financial crisis of 2008, might have this kind of impact it seems more likely that the increase of public concern about the development of crime in Germany is an effect of a so-called ‘cohort replacement’ (Elder Jr. & George, 2016). This entails that the increase in public concern about the development of crime is caused by the replacement of older ‘less concerned’ cohorts by younger ‘more concerned’ cohorts. Because these younger generations have a different point of view, the values
concerning criminality and security are gradually changing. However, this raises the question why these younger generations are more concerned about the development of crime than their predecessors. Which ‘modern’ aspects of the 21st century could explain these worries, and
12 Germany and other Western societies have changed rapidly due to all kinds of modernization processes, two important aspects can be distinguished with regard to the development of crime: the expansion of the traditional media landscape and the changing composition of the population.
Expansion of the traditional media landscape
In just a couple of decades, the term ‘news’ has acquired a completely different meaning. Whereas it used to mean reading the daily newspaper and watching the 8 o’clock news, the introduction of (private) television, the internet and social media have made news a 24/7 business. The broadened scope and accelerated space gives people the possibility to remain up-to-date at all times, but also makes it absolutely necessary to make choices. It is simply impossible to follow everything. Furthermore, a recent discussion is starting to question the reliability of certain media sources. Especially in regard to social media, the public is
constantly warned about the dangers of ‘fake news’ (Fürstenau, 2017). With so many different media sources, it has become very difficult to distinguish what is real and what is not.
Combined with the earlier mentioned focus of the news on crime, violence and terrorism (BBC News, 2018; Leubecher, 2018), it is easy for the general public to believe crime is everywhere. It is not only the description of the heinous crime that influences the way people perceive crime, but also the media focus on the victims of these crimes. By meticulously unfolding every little detail in their life, the public is constantly reminded about the possibility that this could happen to you or your loved ones. After all, these victims were just ordinary people trying to live their life. Garland (2001) already reported a growing identification with victims of crime, while Reiner (2002) warned people about the tendency of news sources to focus on white, higher educated victims. Especially in regard to racially charged crimes, an ‘us versus them’ mentality seems to be adopted within the media. For example, terrorist attacks are almost always depicted as a vicious attack on ‘our’ Western way of life (Bolton, 2015; Devlin, 2018).
Similarly, the perceived increase of crime rates in Germany and the rest of Western Europe is often linked to the arrival of migrants from Middle Eastern or African countries. These ‘refugees’ or ‘foreigners’ are allegedly refusing to assimilate into the German society, instead forcing their own conservative and traditional values upon ‘real’ Germans. Especially the beliefs of the Islamic faith are perceived as in stark conflict with ‘Western’ values such as gender equality, tolerance and freedom of speech (Leubecher, 2018; Scarborough, 2017). This so-called ‘Islamic threat’ has become one of the most heated debate topics in the Western
13 world, with a possible solution growing more distant by the day (Feffer, 2014; Oberwittler & Höfer, 2005; Warrick & Miller, 2016). Germany is seemingly divided between ‘us’ native or white Germans and an Islamic ‘them’. This type of polarization seems to have become a daily feature in every news bulletin, making it almost impossible to talk about criminality without also addressing immigration and integration issues.
Because crime is often a very invisible phenomenon, the view of people is mostly influenced by its representation in the media (Dowler, 2003). Therefore, the concern is that by exaggerating and overrepresenting violent crimes such as murder, rape and terrorism the media depicts the world as more dangerous than it really is. The idea is that the media creates fearful people (Reiner, 2002), which makes them more susceptible to manipulation and control (Pfeiffer et al., 2005). Although it is very difficult to assess if the focus of crime within the media has been increasing and whether this has had any effect on public
perceptions on crime, it is obvious that the role of (social) media within our lives has grown tremendously in a relatively short time. Especially since the introduction of the smartphone, we literally have the whole world in our hands (Brody, 2017). Reading, watching or hearing crime news gives people the conviction that violent types of crime are happening ‘everyday’ and that therefore their country is becoming more and more dangerous. Because younger generations in Germany have grown up in this expanding media landscape, they will therefore be more concerned about the development of crime than earlier generations. Besides the negative effects of worrying on the individual level, the focus on certain ethnic populations could also lead to even further polarization.
Changing composition of the population
It is not only the media landscape that has altered drastically in the last couple of decades. In the wake of major processes of globalization, modernization and individualization, a new ‘modern’ lifestyle has been claimed in Western societies such as Germany. Urbanization has brought many people to live in cities, while immigration and integration processes have made the ethnic population much more diverse. Marriage rates have also been declining, with more and more people diverging from the ‘nuclear family’ (OECD, 2018). Although the birth rate rose a little bit in recent years, the Germans are still known for their reluctance to have kids (The Local, 2018). Thus, German population has been aging steadily. Not only the
composition of the population has been changing, but also how they are spending their lives. The economic market has become more individual, technical and flexible. Instead of having a long full-time contract with the same company, a whole new array of job opportunities has
14 been developed. Technological developments are expanding the possibilities to become self-employed or work as a freelancer, while companies are experimenting with temporary workers, (un)paid internships and volunteers (Hoekstra et al., 2016). Meanwhile, the
emancipation of women in the workplace has led to discussions about equality, parental leave and child care (Bünning, 2015). While most of these modernization processes have been very beneficial for the average German citizen, it has also made their future a lot more uncertain (Baumann, 1999; De Donder et al., 2009).
There may be a certain degree to freedom to make your own lifestyle choices, but the opportunities are not the same for everybody. Germany might be one of the richest countries in the world, but not everybody reaps the benefits of all this wealth. The gap between the haves and the have-nots only seems to be increasing. Furthermore, the financial crisis of 2008 painfully illustrated the vulnerabilities of our current capitalistic system. Rising living
expenses and the so-called decline of the Western welfare state have made living
circumstances for the middle and lower classes much more dire (Kersbergen et al., 2014; Seeleib-Kaiser, 2016). Especially for those who are not self-reliant or just starting at the job market, the governmental demand for active citizenship and participation is very constricting. Without a stable job and income guarantee, it becomes very difficult to pay your rent or support your family. And it becomes almost impossible to save the money to improve your living circumstances later in life. In Germany youth unemployment even reached an all-time high of 15.9% in 2016 (Trading Economics, 2018). While it has since slowly started to stabilize, the youth unemployment rate in the rest of the Eurozone has been stuck between 19% and 25%, causing some people to talk about ‘Europe’s lost generation’ (Petroff, 2017). In their research, Hummelsheim et al. (2011) found a clear link between fear of crime and feelings of social insecurities, of not feeling protected and of helplessness. Based on the welfare model of Esping-Andersen (1990) fear of crime was lowest in countries with a strong welfare state such as the Nordic social-democratic countries. Meanwhile, fear of crime was highest in the Anglo-Saxon and Eastern European countries. Germany was ranked 13th from 23, thus somewhere in the middle. Furthermore, social protection measures offering services in educational and health services, as well as policies to reduce unemployment rates, had the strongest fear-reducing effect. In line with this theory, the further decline of the German welfare state will only increase public concerns about crime.
As Vieno et al. (2013) explains, fear of crime is highest among people who are considered to be socially marginal and whose future is very uncertain. Most studies therefore find that lower educated or unemployed people are more concerned about the development of
15 crime than higher educated people (Baumer, 1978; Hummelsheim et al., 2011). When people feel insecure or uncertain about their life, they often believe they have no influence on what is happening around them. They feel scared about the pace at which the world seems to be changing, and about their own role in it (Schinkel & Van Houdt, 2010). For many people, the compositional changes of the German population increases their uncertainty. You might not find a partner, a stable job or a steady source of income. Combining this insecurity with the earlier explained meaning of what it means to be concerned about the development of crime, these people have a higher risk of feeling neglected by their neighbors, community or culture. Their perceived vulnerability and uncertainty makes them more susceptible for the idea that the world is dangerous and criminal. Growing up in changing times such as the 21st century would then make people also more concerned about the development of crime in their own country or society. Therefore, older less concerned cohorts or generations have been gradually replaced by younger more concerned cohorts. The younger the birth cohort, the higher their probability to be concerned. The hypothesis about cohort effects can thus be formulated as:
H4: Concerns about the development of crime in Germany increase for every cohort. Thus, the younger the cohort, the higher the probability to be concerned.
16 Hypotheses
H1: Concerns about the development of crime in Germany increase with age. The older someone gets, the higher their probability to be concerned.
H2: The probability to be concerned about the development of crime in Germany is higher for women than it is for men.
H3: The relationship between age and concern about the development of crime in Germany should take gender into account. For women the probability to be concerned about the development of crime will decrease with age, while for men the probability to be concerned about the development of crime will increase with age.
H4: Concerns about the development of crime in Germany increase for every cohort. Thus, the younger the cohort, the higher the probability to be concerned.
17 Methodology
Data and sample
In order to test these hypotheses panel data from the Sozio-oekonomische Panel (SOEP) will be used. SOEP is a representative longitudinal study of German private households. Since 1984 about 30,000 persons within 11,000 households have been interviewed about a wide range of topics such as household composition, occupational biography, work, health, personal attitudes and opinions. These interviews are conducted by Kantar Public Germany, an independent private-sector institute for social and political research. Because the same private households have been surveyed every year the data offers a unique perspective on changes within economic and social circumstances, behavior and subjective individual well-being in the last couple of decades. Therefore, it is not only possible to compare individuals with each other but also to analyze changes within someone’s individual life course (SOEP, 2018). In sum, SOEP has been conducting internationally recognized high-level scientific research for more than 30 years and is therefore extremely suitable to help answer if people have indeed become more concerned about the development of crime in Germany in recent years and if so, why people have become more concerned. Furthermore, the longitudinal aspect of the study makes it possible to test the hypotheses about age and cohort effects.
Before explaining how the different variables have been operationalized and which analytical methods will be used, it is first important to discuss the selection process of the data. In 1984 SOEP only selected households in West-Germany, but after the reunification in 1990 they expanded their research to include the Eastern states as well. Periodically new households have been added to keep the research up-to-date. Additionally, SOEP has also added several samples to account for composition changes within the German population. For example, a sample of high-income households was added in 2002, while four different
samples of migrant households were added between 1984 and 2015. In total, there have been more than 600,00 observations. To avoid confounding possible age or cohort effects with any cultural effects, this research will only use the original samples of West- and East-Germany and its refreshment samples. All other observations were removed from the sample. Although SOEP has been conducting questionnaires since 1984, they only added a question about concerns about the development of crime in 1994. Therefore, all observations before 1994 were removed. Because of the importance of this specific question, all respondents who did not answer this question were removed from the sample as well. Finally, an age range was set up to ensure that there were enough observations for every age category. The minimum age
18 for participating in the survey was 17 years, while 95 years was chosen as the maximum. Thus, all respondents younger than 17 or older than 95 were removed. After the selection process, the final sample contained 356,662 observations of 42,718 unique individuals. All these individuals were observed at least one time between 1994 and 2016, with an average participation of eight times.
Operationalization
From 1984 onwards the SOEP study has been asking its respondents how concerned they were about areas such as ‘the economy in general’, ‘your own economic situation’, ‘your health’, ‘environmental protection’ and ‘maintaining peace’. For every area there were three possible answers: ‘not concerned at all’, ‘somewhat concerned’ or ‘very concerned’. In 1994 they added the area ‘the development of crime in Germany’, which they have then used every year since. The last available data stems from 2016. Therefore, the analysis of concerns about the development of crime will focus on the time period between 1994 and 2016. To measure the dependent variable ‘concern about the development of crime in Germany’, the
aforementioned question was used to construct a dichotomous variable. If a respondent answered that they were ‘not concerned at all’ about the development of crime, they were classified with a 0. If they answered that they were ‘somewhat’ or ‘very’ concerned, they were classified with a 1. A classification of 1 thus indicates a concern about the development of crime in Germany. A small majority of 55% indicated their concern.
To measure possible age effects, a variable age was constructed by subtracting the birth year of a respondent from the survey year in which the respondent was questioned. As mentioned earlier, all respondents younger than 17 years or older than 95 years were removed from the sample. The variable ‘age’ thus ranges from 17 to 95, with an average age of 49 years.
To analyze whether a possible increase of concern about the development of crime in Germany is the result of a cohort replacement, this research uses the term cohort to describe birth cohorts. This entails that the shared experience of cohort members is that they were all born at approximately the same time. A cohort replacement then means that trends in individual attitudes are not caused by a large amount of individuals who suddenly changed their mind but develop because an older birth cohort has been gradually replaced by a birth cohort whose members share different attitudes, concerns and behavioral preferences. In this research, birth cohorts are defined by a 10-year interval. To analyze cohort effects on the concern about the development of crime in Germany, the variable birth year will be used
19 primarily. The oldest respondent was born in 1899 while the youngest was born almost a century later, in 1998.
Finally, to analyze gender differences a dichotomous variable was constructed whereby men were classified with a 0 and women with a 1. 53% of the respondents was female, while 47% was male. The most important descriptive data are further summarized in Table 1.
Table 1
Descriptive statistics of the dependent and independent variables (N=356,662)
Variables Minimum Maximum M SD
Concern about the development of crime a
0 1 0.54 0.50
Age 17 95 48.93 17.90
Birth year 1899 1998 1957 18.00
Gender b 0 1 0.53 0.50
a) Concern about crime: 0 = not concerned, 1 = concerned; b) Gender: 0 = male, 1 = female
Analysis
The analytical strategy is to examine both individual and social changes in concerns about the development of crime in Germany by developing a growth-curve model. First, a basic model will be developed in which the relationship between concern about the development of crime in Germany with age and cohort respectively are considered to be linear. Therefore, a
multivariate linear regression will be executed with ‘concern about the development of crime’ as the dependent variable, and ‘age’ and ‘birth year’ as the independent variables.
Second, an estimated model has been developed to fit both age and cohort effects. As presented in figure 1, the relationship between age and concern about the development of crime in Germany does not seem to be linear. The best-fitting model estimated this relationship to be quartic. The average amount of people who are concerned about the development of crime seems to steadily decrease as their age increases until around 80 years old, after which it starts to increase.
20 Figure 1
Concerns about the development of crime in the life course
The best-fitting model further estimated that the relationship between cohort and concern about the development of crime is approximately linear. Figure 2 presents the trends in concern about the development of crime for the separate cohorts. The brown line represents the birth cohort between 1990 and 2000, while the red line represents the cohort born between 1910 and 1920. The cohorts are thus represented youngest to oldest from left to right. For almost all cohorts their concern increased as they got older, but then seemed to decrease at their last measured age. Meanwhile, it is clearly visible that every birth cohort begins with a higher concern about the development of crime than the previous cohort. This indicates a linear relationship where younger cohorts seem to be more concerned than older cohorts. For the second estimated model a multivariate regression will be executed with ‘concern about the development of crime’ as the dependent variable, and ‘age’ and ‘birth year’ as the two
independent variables. .4 .5 .6 .7 A v e ra g e c o n c e rn 20 40 60 80 100 Age
21 Figure 2
Concern about the development of crime in the life course by cohort
Finally, to analyze the different hypotheses about gender a bivariate linear regression will be performed with ‘concern about the development of crime’ as the dependent variable and ‘gender’ as the independent variable. Males will be used as the reference category. After testing whether there are any statistically significant differences between men and women in their concern about the development of crime in Germany, the sample will be sorted by gender to examine if the age effect might be gendered. Then, the multivariate regressions from both the basic and the best-fitting model will be executed for women and men separately. In the next chapter the results of the different multivariate regressions will be discussed per hypotheses.
0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .8 .9 1 A v e ra g e c o n c e rn 15 25 35 45 55 65 75 85 95 Age 1910-1920 1920-1930 1930-1940 1940-1950 1950-1960 1960-1970 1970-1980 1980-1990 1990-2000
22 Results
Before testing the hypotheses concerning age, gender and cohort effects, it is first important to test the assumptions that were made in the theoretical framework. Have respondents indeed become more concerned about the development of crime in Germany in the last couple of decades? Between 1994 and 2016, SOEP asked its respondents how concerned they were about the development of crime in Germany. Figure 3 shows the average public concern for every survey year. It illustrates a steady increase until 2013, after which public concerns decline rapidly. Although the most recent results are a bit confounding, on average the
respondents in the SOEP study have become much more concerned about the development of crime in the last couple of decades. Whereas 40,3% of the respondents indicated their concern in 1994, this rose to an all-time high of 68,3% in 2013.
As mentioned in the introduction, the crime rate statistics from the Federal Criminal Police office show a clear decrease within the same time frame. Thus, the results from the SOEP study corresponds with the assumptions that were made in the theoretical framework. Concerns about the development of crime in Germany have been increasing in recent years, while actual crime rates decreased.
Figure 3
Concern about the development of crime in Germany between 1994 and 2016
.3 .4 .5 .6 .7 A v e ra g e c o n c e rn 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 Survey year
23 With the confirmation that the panel data from the SOEP study has measured an increase of public concern about the development of crime in Germany in the last couple of decades, it is now time to disentangle the different age, gender and cohort effects. As mentioned in the methodology, a growth-curve model was developed to test the relationship of concerns about the development of crime in Germany with age and cohort respectively. A basic model was developed in which the functional forms of both birth year and age were considered to be linear. Then, a second model estimated the functional form of age to actually be quartic. The functional form of birth year, or cohort, remained linear. For both these models a multivariate regression was executed with ‘concern about the development of crime’ as the dependent variable, and ‘age’ and ‘birth year’ as the independent variables. After testing whether or not there are any statistically significant differences between men and women in their concern about the development of crime in Germany, the earlier mentioned multivariate regression will also be performed separately for men and women. In this way it becomes possible to analyze whether the age effect might be gendered. The results from these multivariate regressions will now be discussed more thoroughly per hypothesis.
H1: Concerns about the development of crime in Germany increase with age. The older someone gets, the higher their probability to be concerned.
Table 2 presents the results from the multivariate regression with ‘concern about the
development of crime in Germany’ as the dependent variable and ‘age’ and ‘birth year’ as the independent variables. The R-squared of the basic model 1 is 0.051, which indicates that only 5.1% of the variance in ‘concern about the development of crime’ can be explained by the birth year the respondent was born in and his or her respective age. For the best-fitting model 2, the explained variance increased to 5.3%. To confirm hypothesis 1, the results from table 2 would have to show a positive and statistically significant effect of age on concern about the development of crime in Germany. For every year someone gets older, their probability to be concerned would then increase. The B-coefficient for model 1 is 0.009, which indicates that the probability to be concerned about the development of crime in Germany increases with 0.9 percentage points for every year someone gets older. The p-value shows that this relationship between age and concern about the development of crime is statistically significant. However, as shown earlier this relationship is not linear but quartic. When estimating for this functional form in model 2, the B-coefficient actually becomes negative. The B-coefficient of -0.023 indicates that the probability to be concerned about the
24 someone gets older. The p-value remains the same, thus indicating a statistically significant effect. This indicates that the older someone gets, the lower their probability to be concerned will be. Instead of a positive effect, age has a negative effect on concern. Thus, hypothesis 1 cannot be confirmed. It can not be statistically proven that concerns about the development of crime in Germany increase with age. Instead, the opposite is true: concerns about the
development of crime in Germany actually decreases with age. The older someone gets, the lower their probability to be concerned.
Table 2
Multivariate regressions with ‘concern about the development of crime’ as the dependent variable (N=356,662) Model 1 Model 2 Variables B SE p B SE p Age 0.009 0.000 0.000 -0.023 0.003 0.000 Constant -26.108 0.298 0.000 -25.737 0.301 0.000 R2 0.051 0.053
H2: The probability to be concerned about the development of crime in Germany is higher for women than it is for men.
Before testing whether any age effects might be gendered, it is first important to analyze if there are any statistically significant differences between men and women in their concern about the development of crime in Germany. Table 3 presents the results from a bivariate linear regression with ‘concern about the development of crime’ as the dependent variable and ‘gender’ as the independent variable. The R-squared is 0.004, which indicates that only 0.4% of the variance in ‘concern about the development of crime’ can be explained by the
respondent’s gender. The p-value shows that there are statistically significant differences between men and women when it comes to their concern about the development of crime. The B-coefficient of -0.060 indicates that the probability to be concerned is 0.060 smaller for women than it is for men. To confirm this hypothesis, the probability to be concerned about the development of crime in Germany should be statistically higher for women than they are for men. However, the empirical results from table 3 show that the probability is actually lower for women. Therefore hypothesis 2 cannot be confirmed. Actually, the opposite is true. The probability to be concerned about the development of crime in Germany is lower for
25 women than it is for men, indicating that men are more concerned about the development of crime in Germany than women.
Table 3
Bivariate linear regression with ‘concern about the development of crime’ as the dependent variable (N=356,662)
Variables B SE p
Gender -0.060 0.003 0.000
Constant 0.589 0.002 0.000
R2 0.004
H3: The relationship between age and concern about the development of crime in Germany should take gender into account. For women the probability to be concerned about the development of crime will decrease with age, while for men the probability to be concerned about the development of crime will increase with age.
To test whether any age effects on concerns about the development of crime in Germany are gendered, the sample has been sorted by gender. Thereafter, the same type of multivariate regression from table 2 has been executed again. Table 4 presents the results from the multivariate regression with ‘concern about the development of crime’ as the dependent variable and ‘age’ and ‘birth year’ as the independent variables, for women only. Meanwhile, table 5 presents the same but then for men only.
In table 4 the R-squared of the basic model 1 is 0.049, which indicates that only 4.9% of the variance in ‘concern about the development of crime’ for women can be explained by the birth year the respondent was born in and his or her respective age. For the best-fitting model 2, the explained variance increased to 5.1%. In table 5 the R-squared is 0.053 for model 1 and 0.054 for model 2. In both models, the explained variance is thus slightly higher for men than it is for women. The B-coefficient for model 1 is 0.009 in both tables. This indicates that for both men and women, their probability to be concerned about the
development of crime in Germany increases with 0.9 percentage points for every year they get older. For both genders, the p-values show that the relationship between age and concern about the development of crime is statistically significant. However, similar to the results in table 2 the B-coefficient for model 2 becomes negative. Again, this is the same for both genders. The B-coefficient for women is -0.020, indicating an increase in probability of 2.0
26 percentage points. The B-coefficient for men is -0.025, indicating an increase in probability of 2.5 percentage points. The effect here is thus slightly stronger for men than it is for women. For both, the p-values remain the same and thus indicate a statistically significant relationship.
To confirm hypothesis 3, the probability for women to be concerned about the development of crime would have to decrease while the probability for men would have to increase. For women, the results show a negative and statistically significant age effect on concerns about the development of crime in Germany. As women get older, their probability to be concerned decreases. The first part of hypothesis 3 can thus be confirmed. For men however, the results also show a negative and statistically significant age effect on concerns about the development of crime in Germany. The probability to be concerned does not increase as they get older. As for the women, it decreases. The latter part of hypothesis 3 thus cannot be confirmed. Furthermore, the results do not indicate that the effect of age on
concerns about the development of crime in Germany is gendered. For both men and women, their probability to be concerned decreases as they get older. In sum, hypothesis 3 cannot be confirmed.
Table 4
Multivariate regression with ‘concern about the development of crime’ as the dependent variable (separate for women) (N=356,662)
Model 1 Model 2 Variables B SE p B SE p Age 0.009 0.000 0.000 -0.020 0.005 0.000 Constant -25.693 0.409 0.000 -25.380 0.413 0.000 R2 0.049 0.051 Table 5
Multivariate regression with ‘concern about the development of crime’ as the dependent variable (separate for men) (N=356,662)
Model 1 Model 2
Variables B SE p B SE p
Age 0.009 0.000 0.000 -0.025 0.005 0.000
Constant -26.556 0.432 0.000 -26.106 0.438 0.000
27 H4: Concerns about the development of crime in Germany increase for every cohort. Thus, the younger the cohort, the higher the probability to be concerned.
Table 6 once again presents the results from the multivariate regression with ‘concern about the development of crime in Germany’ as the dependent variable and ‘age’ and ‘birth year’ as the independent variables. As explained earlier, the same multivariate regression was used to test both age and cohort effects. Therefore, the R-squared of both the basic and the best-fitting model of table 6 are exactly the same as for table 2. For model 1, only 5.1% of the variance in ‘concern about the development of crime’ can be explained by the birth year the respondent was born in and his or her respective age. The explained variance increased to 5.3% for model 2. As shown earlier in figure 2 in the methodology chapter, every birth cohort began with a higher concern about the development of crime than the previous cohort. At similar moments in their life time, younger cohorts were more concerned about the development of crime in Germany than older cohorts.
To confirm hypothesis 4, cohort or birth year should thus have a positive and statistically significant effect on concern about the development of crime in Germany. For every successive birth year, the probability to be concerned would then increase. The B-coefficient for model 1 is 0.013, which indicates that the probability that someone will be concerned about the development of crime in Germany increases with 1.3 percentage points for every birth year. The p-value shows that this relationship between birth year and concern about the development of crime is statistically significant. Because the best-fitting model estimated the functional form of birth year or cohort to be linear, both the B-coefficient and the p-value remain the same values in model 2. Thus, the later someone’s birth year the higher his or her probability to be concerned about the development of crime in Germany. As
predicted, cohort has a positive and statistically significant effect on public concerns. These empirical results confirm hypothesis 4. Younger (birth) cohorts or generations are
significantly more concerned about the development of crime in Germany than previous cohorts or generations.
28 Table 6
Multivariate regressions with ‘concern about the development of crime’ as the dependent variable (N=356,662) Model 1 Model 2 Variables B SE p B SE p Birth year 0.013 0.000 0.000 0.013 0.000 0.000 Constant -26.108 0.298 0.000 -25.737 0.301 0.000 R2 0.051 0.053
29 Conclusion and discussion
The main aim of this research was to gain more insight into a seeming contradiction between crime, safety and public concern. In Germany, and other Western societies, crime statistics have clearly been showing that living circumstances have significantly improved in the last couple of decades. In 2017 crime rates reached its lowest level since 1992, while the
proportion of crimes that were solved also rose (Bundeskriminalamt, 2017). Similar to other Western European countries, patterns in both police and victimization data show a decline in all types of crime since the early 2000s (Tonry, 2014). However, 44% of the German citizens felt less safe in 2017 than they did a few years ago (Cockburn, 2018). Despite the empirical evidence otherwise, many people are convinced that crime has been increasing and their country is thus becoming more and more dangerous. They attribute the favorable statistics to a loss of faith in the police (Nix et al., 2015) or an outdated way of measuring crime (Office for National Statistics, 2018). In sum, a large part of the German population does not feel safe despite the fact that they are living in one of the most affluent and democratic countries in the world.
Although their belief that crime rates have been increasing does not seem to be true, it feels real to them. If they believe that the government and police are not doing enough to protect themselves or their loved ones, this diminishes their trust in public institutions (Hummelsheim et al., 2011). Being concerned about the development of crime should therefore not only be seen as an individual fear of victimization, but more importantly as a dissatisfaction with the current status quo. The way people perceive crime is a reflection of how they feel about their neighbors, their community or their country as a whole (Gerber et al., 2010; Gray et al., 2011). It signifies a lack of social cohesion, creating general feelings of unease, anxiety and insecurity. The idea is that crime rates only increase in troubled societies and is therefore directly related with some form of social despair or decay (Carro et al., 2010; Vieno et al., 2013).
This worrisome development has not gone unnoticed in the media. Their tendency to focus on crimes such as murder, sexual assault or terrorism poses the risk of exaggerating or overrepresenting the dangers of this world. Because crime is a largely invisible phenomenon, most of the ideas of the public about crime are shaped by its reports in the media (Dowler, 2003). Especially since the introduction of internet, social media and smartphones it is virtually impossible to escape the news. Everywhere you go, you remain up-to-date about what is happening all around the world. Therefore, the role of the media will only get bigger.
30 In both the domestic and international press Germany is often used as an example of a
relationship between rising criminality and a whole array of immigration and integration issues. A recent peak in violent crimes has been attributed to the massive influx of migrants since the refugee crisis of 2015 (BBC News, 2018; New York Post, 2018; Schuetze & Wolgelenter, 2018). Instead of respecting ‘our’ modern values such as gender equality, tolerance and freedom of speech, they are trying to force their conservative and traditional values upon countries such as Germany (Feffer, 2014; Oberwittler & Höfer, 2005; Warrick & Miller, 2016). The public debate about this ‘Islamic threat’ to Western Europe further clarifies both the influential role of the media and the possible dangers of public concern or
dissatisfaction. Especially when it gets so explicitly linked to certain ethnic or religious groups, it poses a huge risk of further polarizing already tense situations.
Therefore, this research set out to examine this apparent increase of public concern about the development of crime by analyzing possible age and cohort effects. This type of framework has been chosen to study both individual and social changes in concern. First, it was necessary to examine what this type of concern about the development of crime exactly entails. And subsequently, what kind of life course events could influence this concern. Second, the question arose why recent generations might be more concerned about the development of crime than previous generations were. To analyze this possible cohort effect, the so-called cohort replacement theory (Elder Jr. & George, 2016) was implemented. This entailed that the increase of public concern was not the result of a sudden life-changing event that affected the whole population in the same manner, but instead a gradual replacement of people with similar kind of values by younger people with different kind of values. In this case, older ‘less concerned’ people were replaced by younger ‘more concerned’ people.
To analyze this age-cohort framework, panel data from the Sozio-oekonomische Panel was used. Their longitudinal approach offered the opportunity to not only compare people with each other, but also to analyze their own development throughout the years. Respondents were questioned on a wide range of topics, such as their occupational biography, health and personal opinions. In regard to public concerns about crime, SOEP has been asking if respondents were concerned about the development of crime in Germany since 1994. To examine both age and cohort effects, a growth-curve model was developed. Subsequently, a multivariate regression was executed in the statistical software program Stata to analyze the effects of the age and birth year of the respondent on their concern about the development of crime in Germany. Furthermore, to analyze if possible age effects might be gendered these multivariate regressions were also performed separately for men and women. In line with
31 expectations the SOEP study showed that the average concern about the development of crime in Germany has been steadily increasing since 1994, reaching an all-time high in 2013. However, it should be added that the most recent results show a steep decline. Therefore, it would be very interesting to monitor this surprising development in the coming years. Thus, while the total amount of criminal offences in Germany has been declining, the German population has only become more worried about a supposed increase of criminality.
For the effect of age on individual concern about the development of crime in Germany, the theoretical framework was mainly built around the concept of vulnerability. Conform the ‘fear of crime-victimization’ paradox of Boers (1991) in which women and elderly were found to be the most concerned about crime, the idea was that the more someone perceived themselves as vulnerable the more afraid or concerned they would be about crime. A lack of physical strength would not only weaken the coping mechanisms to prevent an attack or limit the damage but would also make people more aware of the dangers around them (Kury et al., 2001; Valera & Guardia, 2014). Because people become more vulnerable when they get older, a positive age effect was expected. However, the empirical results showed a different picture. Instead of increasing, concern about the development of crime in Germany actually decreased as age increased. Thus, on average people become less
concerned when they get older. Similarly, it were not women who were most concerned about the development of crime. On average they were actually less concerned than men were. Furthermore, there were also no significant differences between men and women in regard to the relationship between age and concern about the development of crime. Based upon the argument that men and women are vulnerable at different moments in their life course (Kury et al., 2001), it was expected that women would be vulnerable and thus concerned when they were young. Although the results confirm that for women concern indeed decreased when age increased, the same could be applied to men. The relationship between age and concern about the development of crime does thus not seem to be gendered.
Contrary to the expectations based upon the theoretical framework, the ones who are perceived as the most vulnerable in our society are not the ones who are most concerned about the development of crime in Germany. Although this seems to question the influence vulnerability has on individual concern, it could also be that this research used an incomplete definition of what it means to be vulnerable. Besides a fear for their personal safety, concerns about the development of crime are also a reflection of anxiety about the future. It could be that instead of merely associating vulnerability with a lack of physical strength, it needs to be expanded to a broader form of social insecurity. While their deteriorating health makes older
32 people physically vulnerable to a possible attack, their relatively strong position within
society could protect them from harm. Most people in their 50s and 60s have a long-time partner, a steady job and a permanent place of residence, which provides them with a kind of stability and security many younger people do not yet have. For the majority of people, their 20s and 30s are a period of searching and hoping. They are looking for a partner, trying to find a job or saving to buy a house. Thus, while their bodies might be strong, their social position is very unstable. Furthermore, they are also the ones whose lifestyle poses the most risks. They go out more, thereby increasing the risks of encountering dangerous situations (Baumer, 1978; Kury et al., 2001). The vulnerable position of the youth and its relation to concerns about the development of crime could therefore be a very interesting topic for further research.
To examine whether the apparent increase in concern about the development of crime in Germany has been the result of a so-called cohort replacement, the theoretical framework focused on two important social changes: the expansion of the traditional media landscape and the changing composition of the German population. While modernization, globalization and individualization processes have made life easier in many different aspects, it has also made life circumstances much more uncertain. The flexibilization of the workforce has changed the definition of a job. It is no longer the expectation to work full-time in the same company for the rest of your life. Instead the norm seems to shift towards temporary contracts and freelancing (Hoekstra et al., 2016). For the European youth, unemployment rates fluctuate around 20%-25% (Petroff, 2017). Urbanization processes have skyrocketed the housing prices, making it almost impossible for starters to buy or rent in the large cities anymore. In addition, more people remain single (OECD, 2018). Combined with the destruction of the German welfare state (Kersbergen et al., 2014; Seeleib-Kaiser, 2016), living circumstances for the middle and lower classes is characterized by insecurity, anxiety and uncertainty. Modernization creates opportunities, but not for everybody. As Vieno et al. (2013) explains, concerns about the development of crime are highest among people whose future are very uncertain. In line with this theory it was expected that because younger generations are confronted with a lot more uncertainty in their lifetimes, they would be a lot more concerned than previous generations. Thus, the younger the cohort, the higher their probability to be concerned about the development of crime in Germany. The empirical results indeed confirmed this theory. There is a positive effect of cohort on concern, indicating that the increase in concern likely has been the result of a so-called cohort replacement.
33 in Germany, this research aims to help develop further insights into what makes the current generation so obsessed with the idea of rising criminality. As the low explained variance of the regressions shows, there are still many unknown factors to explore. Besides the vulnerable position of the youth, it could therefore also be interesting to analyze other social groups who are perceived as vulnerable. For example, unemployed or single people. In addition, the supposed polarization between ‘real’ Germans and immigrants could be further explored. Refugees or immigrants might just be the most vulnerable social group within society. Whereas a certain part of the population might perceive them as the culprits behind the perceived increase of crime, it could very well be that this group is very worried or scared about the development of crime themselves. After all, most of them do not have a very strong social safety net and therefore have a pretty high risk of becoming victimized. Finally, by questioning who is most concerned about the development of crime in Germany and why, the focus can slowly start to shift to convincing people that crime rates have been decreasing and life has become safer. And most importantly, to actually make them feel safe.
34 Bibliography
Baumann, Z. (1999). In search of politics. Cambridge: polity Press.
Baumer, T.L. (1978). Research on fear of crime in the United States. Victimology: An International Journal, 3, 254-264.
Baumer, T.L. (1985). Testing a general model of fear of crime: Data from a national sample. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 22, 239-255.
BBC News (9 December 2015). Paris attacks: What happened on the night. BBC News. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-34818994
BBC News (3 January 2018). Germany: Migrants ‘may have fueled violent crime rise’. BBC News. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-42557828
Biermann, K., Faigle, P., Geisler, A., Müller, D., Musharbash, Y., Polke-Majewski, K., & Venohr, S. (19 December 2016). Was wir über den Anschlag in Berlin wissen. Zeit Online.
https://www.zeit.de/gesellschaft/zeitgeschehen/2016-12/berlin-breitscheidplatz-gedaechtniskirche-weihnachtsmarkt
Boers, K. (1991). Kriminalitätsfurcht. Über den Entstehungszusammenhang und die Folgen eines sozialen Problems. Pfaffenweiler: Centaurus.
Bolton, D. (18 November 2015). Paris attack victims: All 129 people killed in terrorist attacks identified by French government. The Independent.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/paris-attack-victims-list-french-government-identifies-all-129-people-killed-in-paris-terrorist-a6739116.html
Bonnet, M. (1 August 2013). Even though crime levels are falling, why don’t we feel safer? The Guardian.
https://www.theguardian.com/local-government-network/2013/aug/01/crime-falling-people-dont-feel-safer
Brody, J.E. (9 January 2017). Hooked on Our Smartphones. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/09/well/live/hooked-on-our-smartphones.html Bundeskriminalamt (2016). Accessed on 4 July 2018 at:
https://www.bka.de/EN/CurrentInformation/PoliceCrimeStatistics/2016/pcs2016.html ?nn=39580
Bundeskriminalamt (2017). Accessed on 4 July 2018 at:
https://www.bka.de/EN/CurrentInformation/PoliceCrimeStatistics/2017/pcs2017.html ?nn=39580
