Causes of Crime: Criminological Theories from Beccaria to Merton

Why does a person commit a crime. The question has occupied philosophers, jurists, priests, physicians, sociologists and legislators for two thousand years. No single answer has ever satisfied all of them. Each school of thought captures a truth. None captures the whole truth. This module walks through the principal theories, in the order in which they emerged, and closes with the modern integrated approach and the Indian policy response.

1. The Question of Causation in Criminology

Why the question matters

The answer to why people commit crimes shapes everything else in the criminal justice system. If crime is chosen freely, punishment is a fitting response. If crime is caused by illness, treatment is more appropriate. If crime is caused by poverty and inequality, social reform is the answer. If crime is caused by social learning and bad company, prevention through education and community structures is the way forward. Every school of criminology begins with a theory of the cause of crime, and every theory implies a set of remedies.

The moral and the scientific approach

Two great streams of thought run through the history of criminology. The moral stream, older and religious in origin, treats crime as sin, and the criminal as a person who has chosen evil. The scientific stream, born in the nineteenth century, treats crime as a natural phenomenon with identifiable causes, and the criminal as a person shaped by biology, psychology and society. Modern criminology draws on both streams, but its dominant vocabulary is scientific.

The four families of causal explanation

Biological. The cause lies in the body of the offender: heredity, brain chemistry, physical constitution.
Psychological. The cause lies in the mind of the offender: personality, cognition, early experience.
Sociological. The cause lies in the social environment: neighbourhood, peer group, class, culture.
Economic and political. The cause lies in the structure of the society: poverty, inequality, class conflict, colonial legacies.

2. The Classical School: Free Will and Rational Choice

Beccaria and Bentham

The Classical School of criminology emerged in the eighteenth century, out of the Enlightenment. Cesare Beccaria, in his short but immensely influential Dei Delitti e delle Pene (On Crimes and Punishments, 1764), argued that crime was the product of rational choice. A person weighed the pleasure of the offence against the pain of punishment and acted accordingly. Jeremy Bentham, in his Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation (1789), gave the argument its most systematic form. Human beings, he wrote, are governed by two sovereign masters, pain and pleasure. Crime occurs when the calculus tilts towards offence.

The premise of free choice

The Classical School assumed that all human beings are rational and free. It rejected explanations based on demonic possession or humoral imbalance. Its policy prescriptions were correspondingly rationalist: the punishment must be swift, certain and proportionate to the offence, so that the calculus of pain and pleasure always favours obedience to the law. Beccaria opposed torture, arbitrary punishment and the death penalty. His ideas influenced the French Revolutionary Penal Code of 1791 and, through Macaulay, the Indian Penal Code of 1860.

Modern rational choice theory

The Classical School fell out of favour in the nineteenth century, as the positivists took over. It returned, in a revised form, in the 1970s and 1980s. Modern rational choice theory (Cornish and Clarke, Situational Crime Prevention) accepts the Classical School's basic premise, but sees rational choice as bounded and context sensitive. Offenders make decisions based on the information available to them, the opportunities present, and the risks perceived. The theory has influenced modern crime prevention policy, from CCTV in public spaces to the design of ATM lobbies and gated communities.

The Classical School in one line

Crime is a rational choice. The offender weighs the pleasure of the offence against the pain of punishment. Prevent crime by tilting the calculus.

3. The Positivist School: Biological Theories

Lombroso and the born criminal

The Positivist School emerged in Italy in the late nineteenth century. It began with the work of Cesare Lombroso, a military doctor turned criminologist, whose L'Uomo Delinquente (The Criminal Man, 1876) argued that criminals were biological throwbacks, atavistic remnants of an earlier stage in human evolution. Lombroso claimed to have identified physical stigmata (large jaws, receding foreheads, unusually shaped ears, long arms) that marked the born criminal. The theory has since been discredited by better research, but Lombroso's importance lies in his method: he opened the door to a scientific criminology that studied the offender rather than only the offence.

Ferri and Garofalo

Enrico Ferri and Raffaele Garofalo, Lombroso's followers, softened the biological determinism. Ferri, in La Sociologia Criminale (1884), argued that crime was the product of three groups of factors, anthropological (biological), physical (climate, geography, weather), and social (economic, cultural, political). His pluralistic account was closer to modern thinking. Garofalo, in Criminologia (1885), introduced the influential concept of natural crime, acts that violated the two basic altruistic sentiments of pity and probity present in all human societies. Both moved criminology away from the born criminal and towards a broader multi-factor explanation.

Sheldon's somatotypes

In the mid twentieth century, William Sheldon revived the biological approach with his theory of somatotypes. He classified body types into three categories: the endomorph (fat, soft, sociable), the mesomorph (muscular, athletic, aggressive) and the ectomorph (thin, delicate, introverted). Sheldon and, later, the Gluecks (Sheldon and Eleanor Glueck) claimed that juvenile delinquents were disproportionately mesomorphic. The theory has been criticised for confusing correlation with causation, and modern criminology treats it as historical rather than operative.

Genetic and chromosomal theories

The mid twentieth century also saw a burst of interest in genetic explanations, particularly the XYY chromosomal theory. Some men have an extra Y chromosome (47,XYY instead of 46,XY), and early studies suggested a higher incidence of criminal behaviour among them. Later, larger studies showed the correlation to be weaker than initially claimed, and much of the effect was attributable to lower IQ and to social class rather than to the chromosome itself. Modern behavioural genetics accepts that heredity contributes to criminal behaviour (through impulsivity, temperament and other traits) but rejects the idea of a criminal gene.

The biological family in one line

Crime has roots in the body of the offender. The strength of the claim has softened over a century, from Lombroso's atavistic throwback to modern behavioural genetics's modest correlations.

4. Psychological Theories

Freud and the psychoanalytic account

Sigmund Freud did not write extensively about crime, but his followers applied the psychoanalytic framework to criminal behaviour. On the Freudian account, crime is a symptom of an unresolved conflict between the id (instinctual drives), the ego (rational self) and the super ego (internalised morality). A weak super ego, developed through inadequate early parenting, leaves the individual unable to control anti social impulses. August Aichhorn, in Wayward Youth (1925), applied Freudian ideas to juvenile delinquency and influenced generations of correctional practice.

Personality theory (Eysenck)

Hans Eysenck's theory of personality, developed from the 1960s onwards, treats crime as more likely in persons who score high on three dimensions: extraversion, neuroticism and psychoticism. High extraverts, Eysenck argued, are under stimulated and seek excitement, sometimes through offending. High neurotics have poor emotional control. High psychotics (a term Eysenck used broadly, closer to the modern notion of psychopathy) are cold, callous and impulsive. Eysenck's approach is empirically testable and has some support, though its predictive power is modest.

Cognitive and moral development theories

Lawrence Kohlberg's stages of moral development, and the later work of cognitive criminologists, argue that offenders think differently. They are more likely to be at lower stages of moral development, more likely to endorse cognitive distortions (minimising harm, blaming the victim), and less likely to see long term consequences of their actions. Modern cognitive behavioural therapy programmes for offenders are built on this account, and there is reasonable evidence that they reduce reoffending.

Mental illness and crime

The link between mental illness and crime is contested. Persons with serious mental illness (schizophrenia, bipolar disorder) commit only a small fraction of crime, and are more often the victims of crime than the perpetrators. But some specific conditions (antisocial personality disorder, psychopathy) are strongly associated with repeated offending. Robert Hare's Psychopathy Checklist (PCL R) is the standard tool. Indian criminal law addresses mental illness through the defence of unsoundness of mind under Section 22 BNS (formerly Section 84 IPC).

5. Sociological Theories

Social disorganisation (the Chicago School)

Between the 1920s and the 1940s, sociologists at the University of Chicago (Clifford Shaw, Henry McKay, Ernest Burgess) studied crime in the city and produced what came to be called the Chicago School of criminology. Their central claim was that crime is concentrated in zones of social disorganisation: neighbourhoods where population is transient, institutions are weak, and community norms are contested. Crime, on this account, is not the property of individuals but of neighbourhoods. Shaw and McKay's studies showed that certain areas of Chicago had high crime rates over decades, regardless of who lived there. The theory has been influential in urban planning and community policing.

Strain theory (Merton)

Robert K. Merton's theory of anomie and strain, developed in his 1938 paper Social Structure and Anomie, argued that crime arises from the mismatch between socially prescribed goals (in the American context, material success) and socially available means (education, employment). Where the goals are strongly held but the means are blocked, the resulting strain drives some people to innovate through illegitimate means, that is, to commit crimes. Merton's five modes of adaptation (conformity, innovation, ritualism, retreatism, rebellion) are a staple of criminology textbooks.

Merton's typology of adaptation

Conformity. Accepts goals and means. The obedient citizen.
Innovation. Accepts goals but rejects legitimate means. The criminal.
Ritualism. Rejects goals but sticks to means. The bureaucrat.
Retreatism. Rejects both. The dropout.
Rebellion. Rejects both and substitutes new goals and means. The revolutionary.

Differential association (Sutherland)

Edwin Sutherland's theory of differential association, developed in the 1930s and 1940s, argued that criminal behaviour is learned. A person becomes a criminal through interaction with others, in intimate personal groups, where the definitions favourable to violation of law outweigh the definitions unfavourable to violation of law. The theory explains why crime clusters in families, gangs and neighbourhoods. Sutherland's later work on white collar crime extended the theory beyond street offences. It remains one of the most cited theories in criminology.

Subcultural theory

Albert Cohen (Delinquent Boys, 1955) and Richard Cloward and Lloyd Ohlin (Delinquency and Opportunity, 1960) built on Merton and Sutherland. They argued that lower class boys, denied access to legitimate opportunities, form subcultures with their own values, which invert or reject middle class norms. Fighting, defiance of authority, and short term hedonism become badges of status. The theory illuminates gang delinquency and inner city crime.

Labelling theory

Labelling theory, developed by Howard Becker (Outsiders, 1963) and Edwin Lemert, shifted the focus from why people commit crimes to how society labels them as criminals. Once labelled, a person is likely to internalise the label, be excluded from legitimate opportunities, and continue offending. The primary offence may be trivial. It is the reaction of the community, the criminal justice system, and the media that produces the secondary deviance of a criminal career. The theory has influenced juvenile justice reform, diversion schemes, and restorative justice.

Control theory (Hirschi)

Travis Hirschi's Causes of Delinquency (1969) turned the question around. Instead of asking why some people commit crimes, he asked why most people do not. His answer was that most people are held back by social bonds: attachment (to family and friends), commitment (to conventional goals), involvement (in legitimate activities), and belief (in the moral validity of the law). Where these bonds are weak, crime becomes more likely. Hirschi's later work with Michael Gottfredson (A General Theory of Crime, 1990) argued that the master trait is self control, and that low self control, developed in early childhood, is the underlying cause of most crime.

6. Economic and Political Theories

Poverty and crime

The link between poverty and crime is one of the oldest in criminology, and one of the most contested. Poverty does not directly cause crime (most poor people do not commit crimes, and many crimes are committed by the wealthy). But poverty combined with inequality, unemployment and lack of opportunity is strongly associated with high crime rates. William Adrian Bonger (Criminality and Economic Conditions, 1905) was among the earliest to argue that capitalism itself, through the poverty and egoism it produces, is the root cause of crime.

Marxist and conflict theories

Marxist and conflict theorists (Bonger, Willem Bonger, Richard Quinney, William Chambliss) argue that crime is a product of class conflict. The criminal law reflects the interests of the dominant classes. What gets defined as crime, and what gets prosecuted, are political decisions that protect existing distributions of power and property. Ordinary property offences by the poor are heavily criminalised. Corporate wrongdoing, environmental damage and financial fraud, though often more harmful in aggregate, are lightly punished. The perspective illuminates the biases of law making and enforcement, but is criticised for reducing all crime to class conflict and for underestimating the moral seriousness of ordinary offences.

7. Integrated and Multi-factor Approaches

Modern criminology increasingly rejects the single factor theory and works with integrated multi-factor models. Three influential examples.

Terrie Moffitt's dual pathway theory (1993). Distinguishes between life course persistent offenders (a small group with early onset problems rooted in temperament and family adversity) and adolescence limited offenders (a larger group whose offending is confined to the teenage years). Different theories apply to different offenders.
Sampson and Laub's age graded theory of informal social control (1993). Focuses on turning points in adult life (marriage, employment, military service) that can end criminal careers. The theory grew out of a re analysis of the Gluecks' data and revitalised life course criminology.
Farrington's Integrated Cognitive Antisocial Potential (ICAP) theory. Combines strain, control, learning and cognitive theories in a single framework, distinguishing long term and short term antisocial potential and the immediate situational factors that translate potential into offence.

8. Causes of Crime in the Indian Context

Indian criminology draws on the international literature but must also grapple with distinctive social conditions.

Historical and colonial factors

The Indian criminal justice system inherited from the British operates against a background of colonial rule, partition, and the displacement of millions. Certain communities were labelled criminal tribes by the Criminal Tribes Act, 1871, and were subjected to discriminatory surveillance until the Act was repealed in 1952. The label persists in social memory, and the descendants of those communities still face stigma. The colonial legacy of the police, its emphasis on order rather than service, is another factor that shapes crime and its handling.

Poverty, illiteracy and unemployment

Roughly a fifth of the population lives below the poverty line. Unemployment among young men is high. Illiteracy, though falling, remains substantial. These structural conditions do not directly cause crime, but they create the strain, blocked opportunity, and weak social bonds that criminological theory identifies as risk factors. Studies by the National Crime Records Bureau show consistent correlations between poverty, low education, and property offences.

Caste, communal and social tensions

Caste and communal identities structure a great deal of Indian social life, and they structure a great deal of Indian crime. Atrocities against Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, communal riots, honour killings, and land disputes tied to caste hierarchies are all substantial categories of Indian crime. Special statutes (the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, the National Commission for Backward Classes) respond to these structural realities.

Urbanisation and migration

India is urbanising rapidly. Cities grow by absorbing migrants from the countryside, and the migrants often settle in informal settlements without adequate housing, water, sanitation, education or policing. These are precisely the zones of social disorganisation that the Chicago School identified. Property crime, gang crime and juvenile delinquency in Indian cities cluster in such settlements. The response has been mixed: some slum upgrading and rehabilitation, and some heavy handed policing.

Committees and Commissions

Santhanam Committee, 1964. Identified corruption and socio-economic offences as a distinctive Indian problem. Its analysis remains foundational.
Mulla Committee on Jail Reforms, 1980 to 1983. Studied the conditions of Indian prisons and their contribution to criminality (through overcrowding, mixing of accused and convicted, and lack of rehabilitation).
Committee on Reforms of the Criminal Justice System (Malimath Committee), 2003. Recommended a range of procedural changes to improve the efficiency of the criminal justice system.
Justice Verma Committee, 2013. Recommended changes to the criminal law on sexual violence, following the 2012 Delhi gang rape. Its recommendations shaped the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2013, and now the sexual offences chapters of the BNS.

9. Consolidated Reference Points

The scholars, works and ideas that recur in questions on the causes of crime. Learn the name, the book, the central claim, and the school.

Cesare Beccaria, On Crimes and Punishments (1764). Classical School. Crime is a rational choice. Prevent by making punishment swift, certain and proportionate.
Jeremy Bentham, Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation (1789). Classical School. Utilitarian calculus of pleasure and pain.
Cesare Lombroso, The Criminal Man (1876). Positivist School, biological. Born criminal, atavistic throwback.
Enrico Ferri, Criminal Sociology (1884). Positivist School, multi factor. Anthropological, physical and social causes.
Raffaele Garofalo, Criminology (1885). Positivist School. Natural crime and the sentiments of pity and probity.
Sigmund Freud (indirect) and August Aichhorn, Wayward Youth (1925). Psychoanalytic account. Weak super ego, unresolved conflict.
William Sheldon, Varieties of Delinquent Youth (1949). Somatotypes. Mesomorphs disproportionately delinquent.
Sheldon and Eleanor Glueck. Longitudinal studies of delinquency. Family and community factors.
Robert K. Merton, Social Structure and Anomie (1938). Strain theory. Innovation as adaptation.
Clifford Shaw and Henry McKay. Chicago School. Social disorganisation. Crime is a property of neighbourhoods.
Edwin H. Sutherland. Differential association. Crime is learned in intimate personal groups.
Albert Cohen, Delinquent Boys (1955). Subcultural theory. Delinquent subcultures invert middle class norms.
Howard Becker, Outsiders (1963). Labelling theory. Deviance is created by the reaction of society.
Travis Hirschi, Causes of Delinquency (1969). Control theory. Weak social bonds allow crime.
Michael Gottfredson and Travis Hirschi, A General Theory of Crime (1990). Low self control as the master trait.
Hans Eysenck. Personality theory. Extraversion, neuroticism, psychoticism.
Terrie Moffitt. Dual pathway theory. Life course persistent and adolescence limited offenders.
Sampson and Laub. Age graded informal social control. Turning points end criminal careers.
William Bonger, Criminality and Economic Conditions (1905). Marxist. Capitalism as root cause of crime.
Santhanam Committee, 1964. Indian focus on corruption and socio-economic offences.
Malimath Committee, 2003. Reforms to the Indian criminal justice system.
Justice Verma Committee, 2013. Reform of the criminal law on sexual violence.

Frequently Asked Questions

What are the main theories of the causes of crime?

Four families: (i) Classical School treating crime as rational choice; (ii) Positivist / biological theories tracing crime to the body; (iii) psychological theories tracing crime to the mind; (iv) sociological theories tracing crime to the social environment. Economic and political theories also contribute.

Who was Cesare Lombroso?

Cesare Lombroso (1836 to 1909) was an Italian doctor and criminologist. In L'Uomo Delinquente (1876), he argued that criminals were biological throwbacks with identifiable physical stigmata. The theory has been discredited but Lombroso opened the door to a scientific criminology.

What is Merton's strain theory?

Robert K Merton, in Social Structure and Anomie (1938), argued that crime arises from the mismatch between socially prescribed goals (material success) and the socially available means (education, employment). Where the goals are strongly held but the means are blocked, some people innovate through illegitimate means.

What is Sutherland's differential association theory?

Edwin H Sutherland argued that criminal behaviour is learned in intimate personal groups. A person becomes a criminal when definitions favourable to violation of law outweigh definitions unfavourable to it. The theory explains why crime clusters in families, gangs and neighbourhoods.

What are the causes of crime specific to India?

Colonial legacy including the Criminal Tribes Act (repealed 1952), poverty and unemployment, caste and communal tensions, rapid urbanisation and migration, and the aftermath of partition all contribute. The Santhanam Committee, Mulla Committee, Malimath Committee and Verma Committee have studied these causes.

What is control theory?

Travis Hirschi, in Causes of Delinquency (1969), asked why most people do not commit crimes. His answer: strong social bonds (attachment, commitment, involvement, belief) hold people back. Where these bonds are weak, crime becomes more likely.

Causes of Crime Criminological Theories