London Housing Issues

London Housing The research was undertaken to study the link between inequality and depravity, poverty and crime in the housing structures of London. The study found that there is wide spread economic disparity in London. This divide is evident in the living styles and the types of housing structures that people live in. The council or housing estates of the city are primarily the residences of the lower income families. This depravity among social classes creates strain within the residents many of whom resort to antisocial activities.

Being influenced by socio-economic factors, some individuals also resort to crime. Thus, the estranged council and housing estates that are home to the lower economic demographics have turned into high-crime areas.

Table of Contents Abstract Introduction Inequality distribution in London Deprivation and inequality in London Crime and Housing/neighborhood Strain theory Literature Review Relations between poverty, crime and neighborhoods 10 Neighborhood and housing estate defined 16 The Strain Theory 18 Other Forms of Strain 22 Cases of neighborhood Violence 25 The link between poverty and housing circumstances 28 The impact of poverty on housing 28 The impact of housing on poverty 29 London-Housing and Crime-evidence from Publications 30 'Gang wars made estate a no-go zone for police -- until they found a supergrass' 31 'Council estate decline spawns new underclass' 31 'Southwark Council spent £140k on 'Berlin Wall-style' fence around housing estate' 32 Income & Wealth inequality in London 32 Methods and challenges to the study 33 Findings 35 Conclusions 36 References 38 Appendices 44 Introduction While class and economical situations are often linked to criminology and creation of criminal intentions, the influence of neighborhoods, schools and peers are also considered to be factors driving youth and others towards crime.

Over the years much research has been conducted in the sociological aspect of crime and more often than not, such research efforts have been illuminating. A social relation is basically defined to be class. Economic, social, and political power is the most important elements that are associated with class. Derived from these factors is, in general the housing, school, college and the other related facilities that people use (Devine and Heath, 2009).

This is because more often than not, class is the distinction that decides how laws are framed, the way various institutions are organized, and the distribution of resources available in the society. The relationship with other classes in a society and the resources allocated in the society can influence the way individuals react to each one another (Buechler, 2011). The resources mentioned can be both material and cultural in nature.

The class situation that comprises of the economic, social, and power factors is dependent on the community and is subjective and can change over time.

Since in most cases class is related and associated with money and power, most people judge class by the type and the geographical location of the housing of such people and the ability of the individual or their families to buy and provide material support and comfort, the school children of such people or families or group attend and the nature of qualifications (Mauro and Carmeci, 2007).

Class is also defined by in general by the professions that people enter into and the age that they enter such profession and the type of leisure activities that people engage in. Hence it can be said that the class of an individual or a group of people is indicated primarily by the area and nature of housing and residence and the life style that such people lead.

Mostly it is argued that people of the so called upper class in society have access to more of the social resources, power, and facilities. In most cases the class distinction is generic and the housing and the geographic location of the housing is the first stage of distinction of people in a society (Devine and Heath, 2009). Inequality distribution in London London is considered to be one of the largest urban zones in the European Union as well as the capital of the United Kingdom.

The population of the metropolis, according to the Census of 2011 is 8,173,900 (2011 Census: Key Statistics for England and Wales, March 2011, 2012). But this population nearly doubles when the population Greater London urban area is taken into account. According to the 2011 census, the population of London grew by more than 430,000 people between the years 2001 and 2009 (Neighbourhood.statistics.gov.uk, 2015). London is a truly cosmopolitan city with more than 300 languages spoken in the primary schools (von Ahn et al. 2010) and has people from 41 different countries whose population is more than 10000 in the city.

Another interesting fact that shows the diversity of the city is the 45% of the state funded primary schools English is the second language of instruction while other languages are the primary languages for the educational environment. In the terms of the ethnic mix of the population of London, there has been an increase in the population of Asian and Chinese residents in comparison to the white inhabitants between 2001 and 2011, according to the Office for National Statistics (2011 Census: Key Statistics for England and Wales, March 2011, 2012).

The interesting fact is that this ethnic division in the population is the development of clusters across the city. Such clusters or groups of ethnic people tend to cluster together and settle down in specific localities and even in housings. There are certain areas in the city that have a predominance of blacks and other areas where there is a predominance of Asians and Indians and concentrations of white populations in other places.

Most often this clustering is also based on the social class, the financial ability, and the power of an individual. This means that apart from ethnicity, social class also defines clusters of homes and residential areas in London. Since London is a city with a varied social classes and ethnic structures, the distribution of such clusters is also varied significantly since the start of the 21st century. The huge area included in London's borders includes 32 boroughs and 624 wards. Deprivation and inequality in London According to Noble et al.

(2004), the Index of Multiple Deprivation as developed by them, indicates some of the sections of London are ranked among the worst in the whole of England in terms of certain aspects like income and housing, education, training and skills. The degree of deprivation varies from one area of the city to another (Darity, 2008). The index indicates that the most deprived populations in the above mentioned aspects lie in the in eastern, north and north-western parts of the city which consists of boroughs of Brent, Hackney, Islington, Newham and Tower Hamlets.

According to the GLA Intelligence Unit (2011), poverty has touched almost one child in three in the city of London (Children in Poverty: Intelligence Update 14 -- 2011, 2011). This is indicative of the high degree of variation in the social structure within London. There is a 40 percentage point difference in the proportion of children in poverty between one of the poorest of the area of the city-Hackney when compared with one of the richest neighborhoods of the city- Richmond.

In terms of the living environment with respect to housing, London also has a very high degree of deprivation (Leeser 2011). In terms of income equality, the city of London also has one of the biggest disparities in the European Union. The inner London area has the most unequal income distribution in the entire country with more than 28% of population included in both the top and the bottom rank of income generation and distribution.

This is evident in the boroughs of the city where many boroughs have a mixture of very wealthy and very poor wards and neighborhoods. Crime and Housing/neighborhood According to criminological research over the years, is has been shown that crime and the perceptions about crime are not randomly distributed over geographical areas (Wo, 2014).

Researchers like Wikstrom and Sampson (2003) state that early findings in the study of criminology indicates that the rates of crime, criminal behavior, intentions and perceptions are directly linked to the areas and neighborhoods that have a disadvantageous position in terms of economy and social resources (Armstrong, Katz and Schnebly, 2010).

Other researchers have also confirmed that the individual perceptions about crime and the influence of the local and surrounding environment have a profound effect on the level of crime (Armstrong, Katz and Schnebly, 2010) More studies that are based on advanced statistical data and approaches and analysis like multilevel modeling and the use of more contextual data are being conducted that clearly indicate the effect of a neighborhood and the importance of the role of influences of a housing or neighborhood on the development of criminal intentions and the individual perceptions about crime (Crawford, 2010).

(Refer Appendix 1 & 2) Strain theory As already discussed, there are huge disparities in income and social class and status based on accessibility to social resources in many portions of London. While some wards of the city are wealthy, a neighboring area would be among the very poor. This has also created clusters of homogenous communities in terms of place and area of residence (Merton, 1938). Research has also linked the lack of access to available social resources and the influence of neighborhood on crime and its perception.

Research have shown that the lack of accessibility to available social resources often push individual to the brink of crime related activities (Merton, 1968). According to the theories of strain, certain stresses and strains in social and personal life often drive and increase the chances of an individual resorting to crime to attempt to resolve the strain and find relief.

Strain or stress in an individual happens when the individual is unable to achieve the goals that one sets for oneself or are induced upon the individual by the society and the family and peers (Merton, 1968). Such goals can be to financial matter and status. Stress and strain can also happen due to loss of positive stimuli like the death of very close person or the missing of something very dear to an individual.

Personal strain also occurs due to verbal and physical abuse and other forms of negative stimuli the theory sates that such people undergoing strain and stress may resort to crime in order to relieve themselves of the stress and strain (Merton, 1968). For example in a case of abusive parents, children may turn violent or steal money to get away from the parents. For people suffering from strain, crime can also happen to be a mode of taking revenge against an individual or a group or the society at large (Merton, 1968).

This theory can be helpful to explain the way children would attack their peers who bully them to take revenge (King and Wincup, 2000). Stress could drive people to seek solace and relief by engaging themselves in illegal drug abuse. Therefore researchers and practitioners have placed significant importance to the strain theory to explain and correct crime and criminal intention and perception (King and Wincup, 2000).

Literature Review Relations between poverty, crime and neighborhoods The prevalent divisions and social inequalities which are indicative of a wider social and economic structure are often responsible for the creation and act of crime in urban social settings. Research has shown that criminal perceptions and acts are often result of a number of social factors and behaviors and influenced by a number of issues that tend to divide the society on the basis of financial ability, ability to access social resources, and power (King and Wincup, 2000).

This is defined as class and this 'class' divide among the society, according to researchers like G. Davis (2006), is the basic cause of antisocial behavior among a section of the people or groups in the society (Davies, 2006). According to Peterson, Krivo, and Hagan (2006), it is often emphasized in the attempts of the state to address the issue of criminality based on identification of marginalized groups.

Such identification of groups is often formed on the basis of 'class' and can include factors like financial ability, education and cultural background, ethnicity and most importantly according to the area or place of residence. In the developed economies, one of the ways to identify and distinguish between the rich and the poor is the geographical area of residence. It is assumed that people with similar ethnicity and financial capabilities tend to stay in clusters and hence form neighborhoods (Goldson, 2008).

Therefore researchers are of the view that often the state machinery gets biased towards certain sections of society based on such differentiation. Use of certain commonly used terms like 'no hopers', an 'underclass', 'dangerous' and/or 'criminal' are often used to describe certain sections of people in the society.

These terms are often used in general to describe a group or a cluster of people who have a background of antisocial behavior and often all the people in a cluster are identified under one class or names as mentioned above (King and Wincup, 2000). The use of such words are linked to groups or clusters of people often on the basis of employment, social class, and place of residence to describe the nature and habit if the group or a majority of the group.

Such identification often turns into a stigma for the group that then induces more marginalization of the already marginalized groups or clusters (Johnson and Crocker, n.d.). Such groups or clusters as mentioned above, based on the ability to access a number of socially produced resources and services like housing education, employment and power, are further marginalized and alienated and seen as social outsiders due to the use of such identification terms. This, according to researchers like W.

Darity (2008), is often a result of the neo-liberal economic ideology that encourages unemployment and underemployment, privatization of state services, reduction and withdrawal of state support of income and other social resources like housing and health during the overall globalization of economies (Darity, 2008). Analysis and the understanding of the social ecology linked to poverty and unemployment is critical to assimilate the nature and perception to crime based in a particular locale or neighborhood.

While external factors like school exclusion and unemployment seems to be the primary cause of people's perception and actions of crime, the actual social condition and depravity seems to be the underlying factor. Such social depravation is manifested in the lack of economic ability and access to social resources like education, health care and housing (Lind, 2000). Hence researchers claim that an assessment of the degree of inequality in specific community resources, which include employment, education, housing, health and income, provides the valuable insight in the link between crime and locale.

In particular, research points to the influence of local community conditions and the influence of a neighborhood to the perception and behavior towards crime. Researchers like Mauro and Carmeci, (2007) believe that when a particular geographic location has a large number of financial deprived and unemployed people with limited access to societal resources, the sense of depravity is commonly spread among the people of the area.

This often leads to attempts to satisfaction of aspirations and a sense of getting justice that drives entire groups or localities to create a favorable perception towards crime (Hunter, 1998) Housing and poverty have a hand in glove relation. Those with less access to financial means often are forced to stay in areas with deteriorating housing facilities (King and Wincup, 2000). It is also seen that people with similar financial backgrounds choose to stay in a particular locality that is characterized by the expense of housing facilities.

Such people living in clusters or constituting a neighborhood often are the worst sufferers of any reduction in public amenities. Given their financial conditions such people are more likely to face problems related to other social resources like health, educational and welfare services of the state (McEwan and Sharpe, 2011). Thus research has established that poverty and the locality or the housing where such people live is intricately related to each other.

While poverty and crime have been established to be related to each other in a proportionate manner in most cases of crime, and with poverty and housing or the place of stay also related to each other, it is assumed that housing or place of stay also have a profound relation to each other (Clarke and Newman, 2005). The influence of a neighborhood on the mind of an adolescent or a youth also plays a part on the perceptions towards crime.

Often it has been seen that neighborhoods with criminal backgrounds become stigmatized as 'crime prone' (McEwan and Sharpe, 2011). Such stigmatization also induces a state to pay special attention to the control of crime in such areas and neighborhoods which are often viewed as repressive in nature. In this way the financially not so well to do are thus forced to locate themselves along with their families in localities and neighborhoods that are identified as not so friendly (Devine and Heath, 2009).

Research in the British context has shown that in certain geographically defined residential locations there is prevalence in unemployment, disability and sole parenthood. Such localities are often referred to as housing estates exists in heterogeneous neighborhoods (Burney, 2000). Research in the British context further suggests that the history of such housing estates were formed to accommodate and consolidate the vulnerable sections of the society that include financially weak sections of the society. Such residential clusters are often those that are the least attractive for the general people.

Researchers like Goodchild and Cole (2001) state that such housing formations and attempts to consolidation of the weaker sections of the society often have implications for the residents with respect to the employment and educational opportunities and the creation of perception towards crime (Goodchild and Cole, 2001). Therefore the people, particularly the young, of such a particular neighborhood are affected by the overall atmosphere of the place and the surroundings and have a more profound impact on their perceptions towards crime than other socio economic factors (Ferrell, Mathur and Mendoza, 2008).

Researchers claim that individuals and young people coming from a low income group who lives in a crime prone neighborhood is more likely to develop into offending behavior than a similar young person living in a neighborhood that is less crime prone. In this way, researchers have established a link between the influence of the housing and neighborhoods and the perception and attitude to crime and antisocial behavior (Clarke and Newman, 2005).

This also is helpful in explain the reason for some of the youth and other able people to develop positive perceptions and greater propensity towards crime who stay in neighborhoods that are crime prone and essentially poor. It has also been observed that such youth or individuals are often unemployed or are not well employed and thus are considered to be poor (Weatherburn et al., 2000). According to C.

Crawford, (2010) the influence of a neighborhood or a housing estate in a criminally active area is exerted from the associations that people have with the individuals or groups of the area. The network of friends, families, and peers from the area or neighborhood often serve the purpose of the social circle of an individual belonging to that area. In the wake of the gradual retreat of the welfare state concept in the developed world, individuals or groups are representative of the subterranean sources of income and emotional support (Crawford, 2010).

Thus such closed groups often exert influence on an individual by the sharing and distribution of goods and services in the absence of lack of accessibility to resources and in the absence of a welfare state. Shared social markers like ethnicity, geography and local history are often the reason for the formation and rise of such support networks (Devine and Heath, 2009).

Hence the network is strong enough to exert influence on the individual and in case that such influence is negative or tilted towards criminology, the resultant behavior of the support seeking individual also takes a similar turn. According to T.

YOSHIDA, (2008), the low economic status of a housing estate or a neighborhood attaches a stigma on the people coming from that area and thus the people tend to be defensive in their approach to the external society in an attempt to counter the stigma that has been attached on them related to their place of residence (YOSHIDA, 2008).

Very often this tendency to counter a stigma can take the form of a conflict where the individuals acting singularly or as a group can manifest tendencies to go against the law and exhibit anti-social behavior. Take for example in case of extreme aggressive policing by the state on a certain neighborhood stigmatized by the geographic position can often result in violent language in the streets as well as in the police -- citizen confrontations that can take the shape of urban riots and violent uprisings.

This has happened both in the UK and the U.S. which would be studied at a later stage (YOSHIDA, 2008). Neighborhood and housing estate defined Criminological research has been able to establish the spatial patterning of crime across local areas in a consistent manner and the economically and socially disadvantaged neighborhoods and housing estates have been noted to comprise more to crime. In the U.S.

For example, the data of the Home Office shows that on an average in the last decade, at least 19% of the households in the more deprived urban areas faced criminal activities compared to 14% of the households in more affluent areas (Fletcher, Andreyeva and Busch, 2009). Many researchers have attempted to unravel the mechanisms that are at work in neighborhoods and housing estates that exert influence on crime and the perceptions within specific localities.

This is because of the systematic difference in perceptions across localities and the neighborhood contexts (Stewart, 2003), The sociological concepts developed by the Chicago school have tried to explain the link between depravation and poverty and the neighborhood. Works of researchers like Park and Burgess (1924) and Thrasher (1927) attempted to dwell into the aspect during the 1920s and the 1930s.

While considering the spate of urbanization and the mobility in society related to the urbanization process, the early researchers had tried to stress on the role of the physical and social environment in the formation and directive abilities of human behavior and social outcomes (Jargowsky, 1997).

This discussion and deliberations further led researchers like Graif, Gladfelter and Matthews (2014) to investigate the role and the impact of locality and the local context behind such human motivations thereby giving rise to possible examination of the neighborhood or housing estate mechanisms at work in shaping human behavior (Graif, Gladfelter and Matthews, 2014). Studies into community and sociology have indicated the flexibility and permeable nature of the local or neighborhood boundaries.

This indicated that the individuals of a certain locality or a housing estate or neighborhood not only are influenced by the immediate surroundings but also by the neighborhoods outside their immediate neighborhood. Thus the definition of a neighborhood is different for different individuals and boundary of geographical areas may vary according to the interpretation of a neighborhood by different individuals (Devine and Heath, 2009). Thus the word neighborhood is often subjective and is dependent on the perception of the individual.

However researchers agree that in most cases individuals refer to the immediate surroundings that comprise of people and households of similar class as their neighborhood. Hence though theoretically open and flexible, in most cases people living in a cluster in a housing estate would refer to that particular housing estate as their immediate neighborhood. Individuals might add some additional geographic area as being their neighborhood if they have interactions with the residents of that area in a similar fashion as in their immediate surroundings (Hastings, 2009).

According to Buechler, (2011), the flexible neighborhood boundaries are breached with a spillover effect when more than one neighborhood remain in close proximity and have similar spatial autocorrelation, with residents from neighborhoods and the similar sharing of social and life experiences. These similar feelings and similar social strata and class are often the basic criteria for the breach of neighborhood boundaries (Buechler, 2011).

Hence when housing estates house people from similar social and economic backgrounds and who have the similar life experiences emanating out of financial and social differences, the immediate neighborhood of an individual tends to get extended or breached by other similar neighborhoods or housing estates situate din close proximity (Devine and Heath, 2009).

In London people tend to form clusters with respect to social and economic class and ethnicity, it is apparent that the immediate neighborhood of an individual get extended from the housing estate that individual lives in to other similar housing estates and neighborhoods situated in close proximity. G. Davies (2006) claims that such measures of spatial autocorrelation are used often to identify the social process that work at different levels to exert influence on a specific geographic area (Davies, 2006).

Such information on neighborhood boundaries can provide additional information to indicate the several mutually competing spheres of influence on individuals that would together shape the way the individual behaves and the propensity and perception to crime. Thus apart from the influence of the immediate surroundings, there are shared influences on an individual that originate from the extension of the neighborhood or housing estate boundaries.

In this way social researchers have been able to clarify the role and the influence of the immediate neighborhood in conjunction with the adjustable neighborhood and the extension of the neighborhood boundaries (DeGloma, 2010). The Strain Theory One of the most well-known theories used to explain the connections and relation between crime and social and emotional factors influencing an individual was formulated by Robert Merton. The theory explains that stress and strain that goes in the mind of an individual that leads that individual to acquire criminal behavior.

Since the emphasis of this theory is on the strain experienced by an individual, the theory has come to be known as the strain theory. Merton developed the theory in 1938 while the world and specially the U.S. And Europe was in the midst of the Great Depression and hence the theory concentrated on the effects of not being able to achieve material success and its relation to crime (Merton, 1938).

Societies since ancient times all around the world have their own set of values and goals that are dominant and there are set means to achieve those goals and ends. Apart from these individuals and their families also expect to perform to a certain level and achieve preset goals. However as is the case in every society, not every individual is able to achieve the goals and values. Merton describes the gap between the approved and expected goals to be achieved and the means to achieve them as strain (Merton, 1938).

As is the case in most modern societies that are ruled by capitalist views and economics, in the UK too, the goals and success set by the society indicates the achievement of success through personal achievements. In almost every society the term success is associated with the achievement of material success, social status and recognition of personal expression. Material success is measured by material indicators like jobs and income, house and place of residence, clothing, car and other consumer goods.

It is also emphasized that the means to achieve the goals and values is through hard work and individualistic efforts, education and self-control and persistence (Buechler, 2011). Hence according to the standards and ethics of modern world, success is achieved by working hard enough and trying to succeed for long enough. While success if viewed as a personal victory, failure to achieve the goals are also attributed and marked as an individual's failure.

Such failures can be in terms of not being able to get employment, poverty, not being able to gain financially and achieve social prestige and social status (Buechler, 2011). Merton's theory of train says this gap between wants and achievement creates a strain or a stress in the minds of so called failed individuals. This is due to societal pressure on the individual as well as the personal expectations of the individual. This strain often manifests itself in a number of ways like rebellion, retreatism, and innovation.

(Refer to Appendix 2) Rejecting the established and accepted ways to achieve the goals with the attempt to forge the creation of a new society using values and goals that are different from the established goals and values is often termed as rebellion. Similar to rebellion retreatist individuals also do not accept the goals and the accepted means of achieving them set up by the society and find recluse in illegal activities to escape the strain like drug abuse, alcoholism, vagrancy, or countercultural lifestyle (Devine and Heath, 2009).

This theory thus is able to explain the causes and the reason for high prevalence of drug use and alcoholism in some societies. However there has been no established theory about the relation between drug and alcohol abuse and crime. But researchers like Spano, Rivera and Bolland, (2006) say that many start taking drugs and then get into a habit of crime to keep the finances going for their habit while others enter crime and they get used to consuming drugs.

What researchers agree upon though is that the chances of crime increase manifolds when an individual is under the influence of drugs or alcohol as both inhibits the natural thinking and logic in a person (Spano, Rivera and Bolland, 2006). Innovation entails the acceptance of an individual of the societal goals and values but not the means to achieve those goals. In all societies, the established means of achieving goals is through safe and legal means.

Rejection of the set mode of achievement entails that an individual would resort to unlawful activities to achieve the goal. Thus, according to Merton's Strain theory, crime is committed by individuals who are by nature innovative as they tend to achieve material success and things by illegal means. Thus the primary concern of Strain theory by Merton is the inability of an individual to achieve monetary success.

In his book the strain theory, Merton explains the how everyone in the United States is encouraged to achieve financial success and have monetary gains irrespective of the social class or stature (Merton, 1938). He also explains how the so called lower class of the society is restricted access to social resources due to the lacking means of achieving monetary success. Merton explains how children belonging to families which were poor were denied the chance to attend proper schools to develop the skills and the expertise necessary to attain material success.

He also explain how young individuals from similar backgrounds do not have access to funds for starting a business to achieve the set material goals. Therefore such people are often unable to achieve the monetary goals as is deemed proper by society through legal channels. This creates a gap in the desire to achieve the goals and the actual achievement through proper means (Merton, 1938).

This creates stress, strain and frustration among the individuals which can manifest in such individuals resorting to illegal means and ways of achieving monetary goals thus leading to criminalization such as theft, drug selling, and prostitution. This manifestation is also a means by such individuals to cope with the stress and strain within themselves inflicted by the societal goals.

He however emphasized that this is not a general feature and most people endure the strain while others scale down their material goals and desires to achieve them to cope with the strain. While a few resort to pursuing other goals in life that are not necessarily material in nature. The relation between strain and crime, according to Merton is not a general phenomenon but can explain why most of the crimes happen (Merton, 1938). Strains lead to emotions that are basically negative in nature like anger, frustration, depression and fear.

Individuals suffering from these emotions tend to find ways to escape and reduce the emotions. Since the legal ways were not enough to attain the goal, and the need to reduce negative emotions, individuals resort to illegal means to take corrective action. Strains are said to increase the likelihood of crime for several reasons. Most notably, they lead to negative emotions such as anger, frustration, depression, and fear. These emotions create pressure for corrective action; that is, strained individuals feel bad and want to do something about it.

Other Forms of Strain Study into criminal behavior and criminology during the 1960s and the 1970s began to suggest the existence and dominance of strains other than not being able to achieve monetary gains or the middle class status. Researchers like Greenberg (1977) and Elliott, Huizinga, and Ageton (1979) identified a number of goals that people as juveniles pursue. Such goals as described by researchers were popularity among the peers, autonomy and independence from adults of the home and the society and the harmonious relation with parents.

In a situation of not being able to achieve any of these goals also resulted in strain among individuals (Terman, 2014). Further, more types of psychological strains were identified and established. According to Agnew (1992) defined strain as events and conditions that individuals find themselves in and which individuals dislike. Such strains were identified based on studies in psychology and sociology. Such events can be not being able to achieve one's goals.

However researchers now started defining strain as the loss of positive stimuli and the accumulation of negative stimuli in the life of a person (Agnew, 2006). Put in simplistic terms, stress and strain is caused when individuals lose something valuable to tem or get or are forced to get something bad or are unable to get what they want. All the above factors may act singularly or in conjointly to create strain on an individual.

These ideas were put together by Agnew and are now considered to be the most dominant strain theory in criminology. It is known by the name Agnew's General Strain Theory (Agnew, 2006). According to Agnew, (2015) the General Strain Theory has three broad categories that can contain hundreds of specific strains. However not all the strains can lead to crime.

While strains like being homeless and in abject poverty is more likely to lead to crime, being punished by parents would very rarely lead to the child committing something illegal in the eyes of the law. According to the General Strain Theory, strains are most likely to lead to crime when the magnitude of the strain is very high and is perceived to be unjust.

Strains that are associated with a perception of little to lose from committing a crime and creating pressure to cope with strain by utilizing crime are more likely to result in a criminal act (BARON, 2004). For example, Agnew explains that being homeless is a strain of a high magnitude and is very often perceived as unjust as the homeless person would feel he did not deserve to be homeless and such individuals do not have much to lose by committing a crime.

There is also pressure on the homeless person to feed himself as he does not have money and engaging in a crime can feed him. Thus he is under pressure to engage in criminal activity. Thus he argued that strains like homelessness has the most propensity to be converted into a crime (BARON, 2004).

Some of the cases of strain that can lead to crime were identified by Agnew as: Rejection by Parents: this happens when love or affection is not expressed by the parents for the children and they remain busy in their world with little attention and support to the children. Harsh and excessive and sometimes unfair discipline: when physical punishment, humiliation and insults, screaming, and threats of injury become part of a discipline regime, the person being disciplined is expected to undergo strain of high magnitude.

Also strain occurs when someone if punished when that person feels that the punishment was not deserved. Neglect and child abuse: while not being able to provide adequate food and shelter to a child can be strain on the child and the parent, the physical, sexual and emotional abuse of a child creates strain in the mind of the child (Agnew, 2006).

Discouraging experience in school: children who do not like to go to school for several reasons, when relations with teachers and peers is not good or continuous bad grades on school can have strain in the mind of the student. Negative relations with peers: insults, gossip, threats and attempts to coerce by the peer causes strain Unsatisfied jobs: adults who find themselves in jobs that have low pay, little prestige, very little benefits and with virtually no opportunity to grow and advance causes strain on the adult.

Unemployment: causes strain when experienced for prolonged periods and when blamed on others. Marital Discord: fights and tensions between couples and verbal and physical abuse can leave one or both of the couples strained (Agnew, 2006). Facing criminality: when one is victimized in a criminal act it causes strain. Discrimination: any type of discrimination, based on ethnicity, economics, social, or sex, causes strain in individuals with the potential to be manifested in crime.

Cases of neighborhood Violence In the last century the world has seen a number of major urban riots that killed many and caused loss of property worth millions. Given below are some the most dreaded urban riots that took place since the 1920s. The England Riots of 2011 A riot rocked the area of Tottenham, North London on August 6, 2011 when police tried to stop protestors gathered to protest the shooting of Mark Duggan by the Metropolitan Police Service firearms officers.

The riots started in Tottenham and in the days that ensue, spread to a number of boroughs and districts in London and even to some other areas of England. The worst of the urban riots were witnessed in the cities of Birmingham, Bristol and Manchester along with some other cities in Midlands and North West of England. Rampant looting of private and public property was carried out by the rioters who also engaged in vandalism destroying cars and buildings and shops.

The death toll was five and number of injured were 16 with a total destruction of property worth more than 200 million pounds. The riots left the local economic activities in the affected area largely compromised (Listverse, 2011). The Chicago Riots of 1968 Following the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr., there was significant unrest in most parts of America. But the worst of the urban riots was seen in the city of Chicago on April 5, 1968.

The riots originated in a predominantly black dominated area on West side of the city and gradually encompassed more than 28-block stretch of West Madison Street. The worst affected area of the city was Roosevelt Road. The riot reuslte din wide spread looting and vandalism. The authorities had to deploy more than 10,000 police and 5,000 troops to douse the riots. The situation was finally brought under control but only after the death of 11 people and 125 raging fires all across the city (Listverse, 2011).

The Detroit Riot of 1967 The urban riot in Detroit in the U.S. began in 1967 after the police raided a drinking club on suspicion that it served liquor even after the closing hour. The club was situated in a predominantly black neighborhood at Twelfth Street and Clairmount Avenue. The police had anticipated to encounter a few people but instead stumble upon a group of 82 people inside the club who had gathered and were drinking to celebrate the home return of two Vietnam veterans.

Rioting began after police arrested all the people present in the drinking club. The riots, that began in the northeast section of the town ended after five days but not before it had engulfed to all parts of the city. Looting, fires and killing of people happened during the five days. The National Guard and the 82nd airborne division were pressed into service to stop the riot but not before the death of 43 people and severe injury to 1189 people.

More than 7000 people were arrested during the course of the riots and after the riots. The Brixton riots in England A simple case of misunderstanding turned into a full blown out urban riot in Brixton in England on April 10, 1981. Police wanted to take away a black youth, victim of stabbing, to the hospital and for questioning. But the locals intervened and an altercation with the police followed. The police managed to bring the situation under control but increased their presence on the streets.

The next day there was brick battering at the police and when the police retaliated, a full blown riot happened. The riot left 280 injured policemen and 45 injured civilians along with more than a hundred burnt vehicles (Listverse, 2011). The LA Riots of U.S. Rioters took to the streets after the court acquittal of two white police officers who were accused of brutally beating up black motorist Rodney King. The incident was captured on video tape and there was wide spread anger among the black population.

The riots continued for six consecutive days. there was rampant looting, arson and murders. 53 people died in the riots which included 10 civilians who were shot dead by the army and the police. More than 2000 people were critically injured and an estimated 800 million to 1 billon dollar loss happened due to the riots. More than 1100 buildings were destroyed in 3600 fires and the stores and shops were burned regardless of the ethnicity of the owners.

The Broadwater farm riots, London, England Residents of the Broadwater Farm, a housing estate in London where predominantly blacks lived, were enraged after Cynthia Jarrett collapsed and died at her home near the Broadwater Farm estate. Her son, a black youth, was arrested and the death occurred during police raid in her home. Following the incident, the enraged residents of the area, who were joined by others from the surrounding areas, engaged in wide spread rioting and looting. One person was stabbed to death in the violence (Hidden-london.com, 2015).

The link between poverty and housing circumstances The definitions that tend to explain poverty and depravation mostly has a link to housing. Housing is such a material asset that requires a substantial amount of income and even cash income. Researchers have always stressed on the greater recognition of the link between housing and poverty and material deprivation.

The proper explanation of the interaction between the two would be able to better define who are 'poor' and those who are 'living in poverty' as well as for those who form policies for such people.

The impact of poverty on housing In UK and in most parts of Europe, people in poverty or those who are believed to be experiencing poverty is defined as those who have an income of less than 60% of the national median income and the final calculation is done after taking into account the number of family members, adults and children, in the household. It is estimated that about one fifth of the total population of the UK suffers from poverty every year.

However around one tenth of the total population of the country experiences 'persistent poverty'-which means that such households have incomes of below the poverty level in three out of four consecutive years (Dewilde, 2003). The lack of adequate finances and poverty often prevents the people living in poverty access to potential housing options or make sustainable difficult in case access if available.

Researches in UK have shown that people with higher incomes often have access to more good and more desirable housing conditions than those who are poor and do not have adequate wealth. This is primarily due to the market driven economy of the country.

Recent researches and available data suggests that in the UK and in big cities like London, those who do not have access to enough wealth and are poor have the most chances of experiencing housing problems with respect to quality and neighborhood problems than those with access to adequate amount of wealth. Quality of housing would be measured in certain housing facilities like heating, indoor toilets and bath and showers and adequate social facilities in the nearby areas (Tunstall et al., 2013).

Researchers like Tunstall, (2011), have tried to impress the issues of increasing proportion of social housing residents who have to face problems. The studies have linked poverty to rent and tenure accommodation and housing for poor people. This is a very established form of index relating poverty to housing and is used in many o other broad social science and medical studies where the index of tenure is used to measure disadvantage (Malpass, 2004).

The impact of housing on poverty In the layman eyes, it is effect of poverty on housing that seems to be more profound than the other way around. However research has shown that housing also leaves a profound impact on poverty and often escalates it (Freeman, 2003). The cost of housing comprises one of the largest direct costs that households have to deal with. Studies have shown that housing costs have a direct impact on the poverty and material depravation.

In a report presented by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation titled 'The Link Between Housing and Poverty: An evidence Review' states that if the impact of the housing cost on the household income were to be taken into account while identifying people experiencing poverty then the total number in the UK would increase by more than 5% (Tunstall et al., 2013). In London which has greater divide in depravation and where the costs of living are higher, the percentage is expected to be even higher.

Hence if the cost of housing is not taken into account then the number of people at the risk of poverty is reduced. The report says that in the case of tenants, 18% of the population of private tenants was found to be poverty when the cost of housing was not taken into account (Fletcher, Andreyeva and Busch, 2009). However the number increased dramatically to 35% after the housing costs were written off from the household income. Thus it is evident that housing too has a direct impact on poverty.

London-Housing and Crime-evidence from Publications Community housing or the council housing estates in London saw their rise in the 1960s and the 1970s. With the aim to solve the then prevailing housing crisis in the country, the government subsidized and supported the building up of many such housing estates (Horwitz, 2013). Such housing estates, most of which were built in a hurry and without much attention on architecture and possible facilities and amenities, the construction was at best unsatisfactory as described by J. Stewart and M.

Rhoden in their work titled 'A review of social housing regeneration in the London Borough of Brent'. The housing estates failed to provide the ideal living conditions that people demanded and were initially conceived. Stacked one on top of another, the housing estates provided inhumane living conditions with communal features (Horwitz, 2013). As already discussed, such housings were mostly occupied by the not so affluent sections of the lower class of the society with limited access to social resources of health and education.

Hence a section of the poverty stricken residents of these housings often resorted to antisocial behaviors and thus the housings earned a stigma that was hard to remove. Such housings thus also became difficult to let out on rent or sell and became burden on the owners (Horwitz, 2013). The situation has degraded since many of the estates now adorn the picture of ghost towns with residents having left leaving the housing estates at the mercy of antisocial, drug dealers and criminals.

From the reports: 'Gang wars made estate a no-go zone for police -- until they found a supergrass' The Guardian, Tuesday December 15, 2009 Available at: http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2009/dec/15/gang-wars-police-supergrass-help Te report describes how a fourteen-year-old child openly roams around and brandishes guns in the Stonebridge estate in Harlseden.

The report further describes how the estate was at the center of a full blown out gang war where "the network of concrete blocks and walkways provided perfect cover for rival drug crews as police struggled to establish order." (Laville and Pidd, 2009) (Refer Appendix 4 for related pix) 'Council estate decline spawns new underclass' The Observer Sunday November 30, 2003 Available at: http://www.theguardian.com/society/2003/nov/30/housing.uknews This report describes the life of a 5-year-old boy who has to walk 15 minutes at 11 pm to get bread and milk at the Clyde Court housing estate in Leeds.

According to the locals, the child is well on his way to becoming like Steven Gedge, a 12-year-old local boy who had been recently arrested for the fifty-fifth time unless there is someone to rescue the 5-year-old child (Hill, 2003).

(Refer Appendix 5 for related pix) 'Southwark Council spent £140k on 'Berlin Wall-style' fence around housing estate' London Evening Standard, March 31, 2015 Available at: http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/revealed-council-spent-140000-on-berlin-wallstyle-fence-around-south-london-housing-estate-10146642.html The report describes how a massive 700 meter long wall worth 140000 pounds was put up surrounding four blocks on the Aylesbury Estate. The Southwark Council claimed that the wall was put up to protect residents from protesters protesting against the possible demolition of the estate. The incident shows the vulnerable nature of estates in London (The Evening Standard, 2015).

(Refer Appendix 6 for related pix) Income & Wealth inequality in London The income disparity in London is astounding and more than any other part of the country. Around 16% of the populations in London are in the lowest rank of the wealth chart while 17% are in the richest group. The 10% of the richest own 60% of the assets of the city while the 80% of the population share just 20% of the wealth and assets. The earning of the top 10% in London is four times the greater than the lowest 10%.

Very wide wage differences exist between the rich and the poor in the Kensington and Chelsea boroughs of London while in Westminster, more than half of the recipients of benefit live in the most deprived of housings while the least deprived are only 5%. Methods and challenges to the study The method used in the study is qualitative in nature with data collected from secondary sources. Extensive literature were studied that dealt with the topic. The paper studied literature and published in journals and books.

Two books were given the most consideration. These books were 'Strain Theory' by Robert Merton and 'Designing Out Crime' by Oscar Newman. Two other books- 'Doing research on crime and justice' by Roy D. King, and Emma Wincup and 'Doing social science: evidence and methods in empirical research' by Fiona Devine and Sue Heath, also provided valuable date and information for the study. Apart from these extensive data was collected from journals and research works available in the public domain.

The studies that were consulted were related to the definition and causes of poverty in developed economies including the UK, the impact of neighborhood on crime, the wealth inequality in London and in the UK, the relation between poverty and crime and the relations between poverty and housing. Literature and studies related to the impact of housing on poverty were also studied.

These sources of data were used to establish the relation between poverty and housing, poverty and crime and the influence and impact of neighborhood and peer influence on individuals and the perceptions to crime. Secondary data was also collected from various reports published in relevant London newspapers to showcase the present status of the council and housing estates and to establish the relation between the housing estates and crime and poverty.

The data and the sources were collected through library work and desk work from work that was available in the public domain. The aim of the research was to establish the core issues -- the relations between inequality, poverty and crime within London's housing structure and the housing estates of London. The sources of data were that were used were of recent nature so that the most recent and updated information and data were gathered.

Internet was also used for the research to gather as much credible data as possible apart from using the library for scouring through books, journal and research papers. Internet usage to collect data reduced both costs and time of research data collection. Stress on elements like authority, seminal, currency and relevance were given due importance in the data collection process by the secondary method for the study.

Data that are published by authorized agencies like reputed universities, books published by reputed publishers and journals of well-known organization were used for the research. Currency refers to the works that were published in recent time excepting for a few books t hat described the early formation of theories. The sources were so chosen that the research was enriched as the date that was collected was relevant and comprised only of such data that would be useful for the research.

The challenge however was to sometimes find relevant and dependable statistical data that helped identify the poverty and depravation condition in London. Through the study studied credible sources of information, the study would have been enriched with more dependable data had it been available in the public domain. Findings The secondary data collected from various sources has established poverty and crime are linked.

The strain theory by Robert Merton clearly helped establish the fact that inability to gain material benefits as deemed proper by the society in the way that the society deems proper often drives individuals to try alternative means of attaining them. While certain individuals create new goals to attain for themselves, others find new ways to attain them. Since the method deemed proper by society is generally legal in nature, the individuals seeking to find out new ways to attain material goals often use illegal or unlawful means.

Thus it is established by the strain theory of criminology that poverty leads to lack of access to proper social facilities which creates a gap between desires and achievement. This gap creates strain and forces unsatisfied individuals to opt the illegal way and enter the world of crime (Clarke and Newman, 2005). However other criminologists in recent years have identified other strains that are most likely to induce criminal behavior among individuals such strains are psychological and sociological in nature.

Individuals tend to get strained when they lose something valuable to them or get or are forced to get something bad or are unable to get what they want. Thus both negative and positive stimuli are responsible for criminal behavior. The research has also established the relation between neighborhood and crime. Sociologists and criminologists have established that the place a person stays in or the locality or the geographic area that an individual stays in often exerts a strong influence on individuals.

It has also been established that people of the same ethnic group or of the same class tend to live in clusters which creates neighborhoods. Similar ideologies and beliefs of people staying in a neighborhood create a support network for the residents (Clarke and.