Sosyal Çürüme ve Suç: Kriminolojik Teoriler Bağlamında Bir Değerlendirme

Öz

Bu çalışma; sosyal çürüme olgusunu kriminolojik teoriler çerçevesinde ele alarak, suç oluşumu ve yayılımı üzerindeki etkilerini incelemeyi amaçlamaktadır. Sosyal sermayenin erozyonu, kolektif etkililikteki azalma ve kentsel çöküntü alanlarının, toplumsal düzenin bozulması ve suç oranlarının artışı ile ilişkisi değerlendirilmiştir. Çalışma, sosyal çürümenin toplumsal bağların zayıflaması ve güven ortamının bozulmasıyla derinleşen dinamik bir süreç olduğunu vurgulamakta ve sosyal çürümenin kriminalistik boyutunu kriminolojik teorilerle birlikte ele alan diğer çalışmalardaki sınırlılığı gidermeye katkı sunmaktadır. Araştırmada; Sosyal Düzensizlik Teorisi, Anomi ve Gerilim Teorileri, Rutin Faaliyetler Teorisi ve Kırık Camlar Teorisi karşılaştırmalı olarak incelenmiş, her birinin sosyal çürüme-suç ilişkisine dair sunduğu açıklamalar değerlendirilmiştir. Böylece farklı teorik perspektiflerin güçlü ve sınırlı yönleri ortaya konmuştur. Bu çalışma, sosyal çürüme ile suç arasındaki ilişkiyi kriminoloji literatüründe öne çıkan teorik yaklaşımlar çerçevesinde kavramsal olarak değerlendirmektedir. Bu kapsamda sosyal düzensizlik teorisi, anomi ve gerilim teorileri, rutin faaliyetler teorisi ile kırık camlar teorisi karşılaştırmalı bir bakış açısıyla ele alınmış, söz konusu teorilerin sosyal çürümenin suçun oluşumu, yayılımı ve kriminalistik süreçler üzerindeki etkilerini açıklamadaki katkıları değerlendirilmiştir. Böylece sosyal çürümenin suç olgusuyla ilişkisi farklı kuramsal perspektifler üzerinden bütüncül bir yaklaşımla tartışılmıştır. Literatürde yer alan kuramsal yaklaşımlar ve kavramsal değerlendirmeler, sosyal çürümenin sosyal sermaye ve kolektif etkililiğin zayıflamasıyla gayriresmî sosyal kontrol mekanizmalarını işlevsizleştirdiğini, suçun belirli mekânlarda yoğunlaşmasını ve suç davranışının normalleşmesini kolaylaştırdığını göstermektedir. Ayrıca ilgili literatür, sosyal çürümenin olay yeri incelemesi, delil toplama, tanık iş birliği ve suç soruşturmalarının etkinliği gibi kriminalistik süreçleri olumsuz etkileyebildiğini ve bunun kamu düzeni ile toplumsal güvenliğin sağlanmasını güçleştirebildiğini ortaya koymaktadır. Bu çerçevede suçla mücadelede güvenlik politikalarının kriminolojik yaklaşımlar ve kriminalistik uygulamalarla bütüncül biçimde ele alınmasının önemli olduğu değerlendirilmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Sosyal Çürüme
• Kolektif Etkililik
• Sosyal Düzensizlik
• Suç Teorileri
• kriminalistik

The Social Decay and Crime: An Evaluation in the Context of Criminological Theories

Öz

This study aims to examine the phenomenon of social decay within the framework of criminological theories, investigating its effects on the formation and spread of crime. The relationship between the erosion of social capital, the decrease in collective effectiveness, and urban decay areas with the breakdown of social order and the increase in crime rates is evaluated. The study emphasizes that social decay is a dynamic process deepened by the weakening of social ties and the erosion of trust and contributes to overcoming the limitations of other studies that address the criminalistic dimension of social decay in conjunction with criminological theories. In this research, Social Disorder Theory, Anomie and Stress Theories, Routine Activities Theory, and Broken Windows Theory are examined comparatively, and the explanations each offers regarding the relationship between social decay and crime are evaluated. Thus, the strengths and limitations of different theoretical perspectives are revealed. This study conceptually evaluates the relationship between social decay and crime within the framework of prominent theoretical approaches in the criminology literature. In this context, social disorder theory, anomie and tension theories, routine activities theory, and broken windows theory are examined from a comparative perspective, and their contributions to explaining the effects of social decay on the formation, spread, and criminalistic processes of crime are evaluated. Thus, the relationship between social decay and the phenomenon of crime is discussed with a holistic approach through different theoretical perspectives. Theoretical approaches and conceptual evaluations in the literature show that social decay weakens social capital and collective effectiveness, rendering informal social control mechanisms dysfunctional, facilitating the concentration of crime in certain locations, and normalizing criminal behavior. Furthermore, the relevant literature reveals that social decay can negatively affect criminalistic processes such as crime scene investigation, evidence collection, witness cooperation, and the effectiveness of criminal investigations, making it more difficult to maintain public order and social security. In this framework, it is considered important that security policies in the fight against crime are addressed holistically using criminological approaches and criminalistic practices.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Social Decay
• Collective Efficacy
• Social Disorganization
• Crime Theories
• Criminology

Kaynakça

1. Agnew, R. (1992), Foundation For A General Strain Theory Of Crime And Delinquency. Criminology, 30, 47-88. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9125.1992.tb01093.x
2. Akıncıoğlu, N. U. (2025). Adli Vakalarda Olay Yeri İnceleme ve Delil Zincirinin Önemi. GAB Akademi, 5(2), 147-153. https://izlik.org/JA63BA45CE
3. Beqiri, R. (2011). Witness Protection in International Criminal Court. Lund University
4. Bursik Jr, R. J., & Grasmick, H. G. (2002). Neighborhoods and crime: The dimensions of effective community control. Bloomsbury Publishing PLC.
5. Casey, E. (2011). Digital evidence and computer crime: Forensic science, computers, and the internet. Academic press.
6. Clarke, R. V. (Ed.). (1997). Situational crime prevention: Successful case studies (2nd ed.). Harrow and Heston.
7. Chainey, S., & Ratcliffe, J. (2005). GIS and Crime Mapping. John Wiley & Sons.
8. Cohen, L. E., & Felson, M. (1979). Social change and crime rate trends: A routine activity approach. American Sociological Review, 44 (August) 588-608.

9. Cozens, P. M., Saville, G., & Hillier, D. (2005). Crime prevention through environmental design (CPTED): a review and modern bibliography. Property Management, 23(5), 328-356.
10. Durkheim, E. (2005). Suicide: A study in sociology. Routledge.
11. Fagan, J., & Davies, G. (2000). Street stops and broken windows: Terry, race, and disorder in New York City. Fordham Urban Law Journal, 28.
12. Fagan, J., Tyler, T.R. (2005). Legal Socialization of Children and Adolescents. Social Justtice Research, 18, 217–241 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11211-005-6823-3
13. Friedrichs, J. (2019). Empirical poverty research in a comparative perspective. Friedrichs, J. (Eds.), Do poor neighborhoods make their residents poorer? Context effects of poverty neighborhoods on residents. (s. 77-100). Routledge. DOI:10.4324/9780429442001-4
14. Gardner, R. M., & Bevel, T. (2009). Practical crime scene analysis and reconstruction. CRC press.
15. Harcourt, B. E. (2005). Illusion of order: The false promise of broken windows policing. Harvard University Press.
16. Hayward, K. J., & Young, J. (2004). Cultural criminology: Some notes on the script. Theoretical Criminology, 8(3), 259-273.
17. Herbert, S. (1996). The normative ordering of police territoriality: Making and marking space with the Los Angeles Police Department. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 86(3), 567-582.
18. Hinduja, S., & Patchin, J. W. (2014). Bullying beyond the schoolyard: Preventing and responding to cyberbullying. Corwin press.
19. Houck, M. M., & Siegel, J. A. (2015). Fundamentals of forensic science (3rd ed.). Academic Press.
20. Houck, M. M., Crispino, F., & McAdam, T. (2017). The science of crime scenes. Academic Press.
21. Kawachi, I., & Berkman, L. (2000). Social cohesion, social capital, and health. Social Epidemiology, 174(7), 290-319.
22. Kelling, G. L., & Coles, C. M. (1997). Fixing broken windows: Restoring order and reducing crime in our communities. Simon and Schuster.
23. Kelling, G. L., & Wilson, J. Q. (1982). Broken windows. Atlantic Monthly, 249(3), 29-38.
24. Kivisto, P. (2021). The Cambridge handbook of social theory. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316677445
25. Kornhauser, R. R. (1978). Social sources of delinquency: An appraisal of analytic models. University of Chicago Press
26. Lee, H. C., Palmbach, T., & Miller, M. T. (2001). Henry Lee's crime scene handbook. Academic Press.
27. Lee, A.S.G., Kirkland, K. & Bastian, B. (2026), Country-level instability is related to a stronger perceived climate of polarization across 44 countries. Commun Psychol 4 (63). https://doi.org/10.1038/s44271-026-00422-x
28. Merton, R. K. (1938). Social Structure and Anomie. American Sociological Review, 3(5), 672–682. https://doi.org/10.2307/2084686
29. Morenoff, J. D., Sampson, R. J., & Raudenbush, S. W. (2001). Neighborhood inequality, collective efficacy, and the spatial dynamics of urban violence. Criminology, 39(3), 517-558.
30. National Fire Protection Association. Technical Committee on Fire Investigations. (2004). NFPA 921, Guide for fire and explosion investigations. National Fire Protection Association.
31. Power, A. & Wilson, W. J. (2000) Social Exclusion and the Future of Cities. LSE STICERD, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1158926
32. Ratcliffe, J. (2006). Video surveillance of public places. Washington, DC: US Department of Justice, Office of Community Oriented Policing Services.
33. Ratcliffe, J. H. (2010). Crime Mapping: Spatial and Temporal Challenges. In A. R. Piquero & D. Weisburd (Eds.), Handbook of Quantitative Criminology.
34. Sampson, R. J. (2012). Great American city: Chicago and the enduring neighborhood effect. University of Chicago Press.
35. Sampson, R. J., Raudenbush, S. W., & Earls, F. (2005). A systematic method for measuring social processes in a neighborhood context. Sociological Methodology, 35(1), 83–130. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0081-1750.2005.00106.
36. Sampson, R. J., & Groves, W. B. (1989). Community structure and crime: Testing social-disorganization theory. American journal of sociology, 94(4), 774-802.
37. Sampson, R. J., & Wikström, P. O. (2008). The social order of violence in Chicago and Stockholm neighborhoods: A comparative inquiry. Order, conflict, and violence, 97-119.
38. Sampson, R. J., Raudenbush, S. W., ve Earls, F. (1997). Neighborhoods and violent crime: A multilevel study of collective efficacy. Science, 277(5328), 918-924.
39. Shaw, C. R., & McKay, H. D. (1942). Juvenile delinquency and urban areas. University of Chicago Press.
40. Skogan, W. G., & Hartnett, S. M. (1999). Community policing, Chicago style. Oxford University Press.
41. Sorokin, P. A. (1942). The crisis of our age: the social and cultural outlook. Science 96, s.495-496
42. Teymoori A, Jetten J, Bastian B, Ariyanto A, Autin F, Ayub N, et al. (2016) Revisiting the Measurement of Anomie. Plos One. 11(7). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0158370
43. Tyler, T. R. (2005). Policing in Black and White: Ethnic Group Differences in Trust and Confidence in the Police. Police Quarterly, 8(3), 322-342.
44. Twenge, J. M. (2017). The Costs of overprotecting the young-iGen: Why Today’s Super-Connected Kids Are Growing Up Less Rebellious, More Tolerant, Less Happy-and Completely Unprepared for Adulthood-and What That Means for the Rest of Us. Journal of Psychology, 1-13.