Rational Choice Theory Applied to Over-the-Rhine, Cincinnati

Introduction and Problem Statement

When it comes to explaining disorder in neighborhoods and communities, there are many theories that can be applied. Broken Windows Theory, for example, posits that crime comes to communities when residents allow their neighborhood to become rundown and fail to clean up graffiti, litter, or abandoned buildings. Another theory—which this paper will examine—is rational choice theory, which can be used to explain how and why people make decisions in their lives and communities in ways that affect neighborhood order. This paper discusses how rational choice theory can be applied to the Over-the-Rhine neighborhood in downtown Cincinnati, Ohio, which has attracted significant attention from city planners and community organizers over the past century due to its historic landmarks and the broader effort to revitalize the area, attract new investment, and improve the city overall.

Understanding how communities operate and how disorder affects neighborhoods from a criminological perspective is important for developing appropriate policies to prevent crime and related problems in the future. In neighborhoods where improvement is needed, the city must implement the most effective strategies for reducing crime risk. Applying the right theoretical perspective is essential to developing that strategy.

Theoretical Framework and Literature Review

The framework applied in this study is based on the utilitarian principle that right and wrong are determined by what benefits society the most (Cahn & Markie, 2011). The utilitarian principle also serves as the basis of rational choice theory from a criminological standpoint, in that individuals are viewed as having needs—such as security, safety, money, and happiness—and that their situational circumstances will shape the choices they make in pursuit of those needs (Cornish & Clarke, 1987). This theory assumes that individualism is a primary aspect of human nature; that people are primarily concerned with self-interest; and that their main method of pursuing self-interest is to maximize their returns.

There are various ways to think about how rational choice applies to the real world. Criminologists must consider a variety of perspectives and variables when using the lens of rational choice theory. For example, a pleasure-pain principle applies to the decision-making process for most individuals. In any community, a rational individual will make decisions based on whether the outcome will yield pleasure or pain. The concept of deterrence theory is based on this idea: deterrents in society are placed so as to heighten individuals' awareness of the pain that will follow a bad decision—such as choosing to steal, rob, assault, or commit other crimes. Punishment as a form of deterrence fits into the rational choice model as one of the possible considerations a rational actor weighs when deciding on a course of action (Lyman & Potter, 2007).

How communities are arranged or how they succumb to disorder can also be explained by social disorganization theory and social control theory. In a neighborhood that lacks unity and communal responsibility, criminal elements are likely to find opportunities to exploit the gap created by disorganization. Social control theory posits that opportunities for control are what generate the most appeal for individuals seeking to gain from unethical decision-making and practices (Takagi, Ikeda, Kobayashi, Harihara & Kawachi, 2016). These theories are generally supported by the rational choice model, as each contains an element of the pleasure-pain principle and the utilitarian aim of maximizing the common good versus pursuing individual self-interest.

Rational Choice Theory: Origins and Key Theorists

The underlying idea in rational choice theory is that individuals will weigh the costs and benefits—the pleasure or pain—that a decision is likely to yield for them. This is why the theory is grounded in self-interest: it is assumed that individuals act in ways they perceive to be in their best interest, even if they are ultimately wrong or misguided about what would truly benefit them (Miller, 2001). The limitations of rational choice theory are built into its core assumptions. For instance, it cannot be said that every action results from a rational assessment of whether an outcome will bring pleasure or pain. Not every action has the same etiology; as Gibbs (1987) points out, "each theory should be limited to one type of crime if only because it is unlikely that any etiological or reactive variable is relevant for all crimes" (p. 830). In other words, rational choice theory is applicable in certain instances but certainly not all—particularly those in which passion is a primary cause of action. However, for assessing community organization and the impact of disorder, rational choice theory can serve as a suitable approach, since passion is less likely to be a major factor in the way communities are organized.

The historical roots of rational choice theory lie in social disorganization theory and systematic crime theory. The foundational idea was developed by Sutherland, who focused on how family breakdown leads to community disorganization. Culture plays a large part in how well organized a community will be, because culture guides the development of families, which in turn provides the mechanism for decision-making and the pursuit of what utilitarianism defines as the common good (Sutherland, Cressey & Luckenbill, 1992). In communities where families are not well-maintained, the state must assert law and order—but the immediacy with which that control is felt depends on the associations individual actors make between the state and their own risk-reward calculations. Ultimately, rational choice theory is rooted in economic principles of risk versus reward, tracing back to J. S. Mill's theory of utilitarianism, which holds that a thing is good insofar as it benefits the majority of people.

The main theorists of rational choice theory begin with Mill, who published his theory of utilitarianism in 1861. Utilitarian thought was subsequently applied in economics and later in criminology. Within criminology, Matza (1964) first introduced a related concept in his drift theory, which posited that individuals drift between good and bad behavior depending on a variety of factors and decisions. Edwin Sutherland further contributed to the development of the theory, and later Clarke and Cornish developed the method for applying it to situational crime prevention. The University of Chicago—often called the Chicago School—was the primary incubator for social theories in the first half of the 20th century. It was there that Sutherland developed systematic crime theory, and where Clarke and Cornish subsequently advanced situational crime theory, with rational choice theory serving as the theoretical nexus.

In summary, rational choice theory seeks to explain why individuals make decisions that affect their lives in one direction or another. It draws on Mill's philosophical position to explain how rational actors make choices based on the perceived costs and benefits of available options. The theory has been applied to explain why criminals make harmful decisions and how the state can prevent crime by strengthening communities so that they provide better opportunities for residents to pursue positive outcomes that benefit both themselves and the common good.

Over-the-Rhine: History and Neighborhood Profile

Over-the-Rhine in Cincinnati, Ohio, is one of the oldest districts in the city. Much of the original Italianate-style architecture of the 19th century remains intact throughout the community. The neighborhood has undergone many changes over the past century. In the 19th century, it was predominantly populated by German Americans—its name reflects the German settlers' sense that this part of the city resembled the Rhineland back home. By the early 20th century, much of the German population had left for newer suburban areas, and an influx of poor Appalachian migrants came into the area.

For the next several decades, the region was home to a mix of Appalachian and low-income African-American residents. From the 1970s onward, homelessness became the defining characteristic of the neighborhood. Activist Buddy Gray established the Drop-Inn Center for the homeless and those struggling with alcoholism. Gray was frequently in conflict with City Hall over the city's attempts to relocate low-income families and prevent gentrification. To block major city-led renovations, Gray organized a group to purchase parcels of land throughout the community (Miller & Tucker, 1998).

When Gray was murdered by a homeless man he had been helping at the Drop-Inn Center, the city began moving forward with revitalization plans. The Drop-Inn Center was relocated and many low-income families were displaced. New businesses—restaurants, shops, and clubs—began opening. A streetcar line was installed through the area to promote commercial activity. Many properties were renovated, and a major investment firm, 3CDC, poured millions of dollars into the community to attract the Millennial generation seeking an urban lifestyle.

Over-the-Rhine features a substantial number of 100-year-old brick row houses built in the 19th-century Italianate style, representing some of the most architecturally valuable real estate in the city. What was once known as Millionaire's Row—home to the old meat-packing families—sits at the heart of the community (Miller & Tucker, 1998). The area also contains a number of low-income housing units, consistent with the city's pledge to maintain affordable housing. However, as renovation has accelerated since Gray's death in the 1990s, real estate prices have risen sharply; a loft in Over-the-Rhine may now sell for half a million dollars.

Many new restaurants and breweries have opened as part of 3CDC's effort to attract investors and business owners. The city's historic Music Hall, located in the neighborhood, underwent a major renovation in recent years. Over-the-Rhine sits on the northern edge of the city's central business district, where major Fortune 500 companies—including Kroger, Procter & Gamble, and GE—have their headquarters. Professional sports stadiums and the commercial hub around Fountain Square are also nearby, with Over-the-Rhine reachable in just a few blocks heading north from the square.

The community today consists of a mix of upper-class, upper-middle-class, and low-income residents. The homeless population diminished following increased policing in the aftermath of civil unrest in the early 2000s, though homelessness has increased again in recent years. Shootings in the downtown and Over-the-Rhine areas have also risen, raising concerns among investors and residents alike. Prior to revitalization, few suburbanites or middle-class whites visited Over-the-Rhine, as it was considered unsafe and offered little in the way of dining, entertainment, or shopping. Today, an active nightlife draws many visitors from the suburbs. Some African-American residents remain, but many appear to be leaving as prices rise. Drug activity persists, particularly in the pockets of the neighborhood that still contain abandoned structures, which provide cover for homeless individuals and drug users.

References

Cahn, S. & Markie, P. (2011). Ethics: History, Theory and Contemporary Issues (5th ed.). Oxford University Press.

Cornish, D., & Clarke, R. (1987). Understanding crime displacement: An application of rational choice theory. Criminology, 25(4), 933–947.

Gibbs, J. P. (1987). The state of criminological theory. Criminology, 25(4), 821–840.

Lyman, M. & Potter, G. (2007). Organized Crime (4th ed.). Prentice Hall.

Matza, D. (1964). Delinquency and Drift. Wiley.

Miller, D. T. (2001). The norm of self-interest. In The next phase of business ethics: Integrating psychology and ethics (pp. 193–210). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

Miller, Z. L., & Tucker, B. (1998). Changing plans for America's inner cities: Cincinnati's Over-the-Rhine and twentieth-century urbanism. The Ohio State University Press.

Sutherland, E. H., Cressey, D. R., & Luckenbill, D. F. (1992). Principles of criminology. Rowman & Littlefield.

Takagi, D., Ikeda, K., Kobayashi, T., Harihara, M., & Kawachi, I. (2016). The impact of crime on social ties and civic participation. Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology, 26(2), 164–178.