Contributions of Cross-National Research to Criminology at the Beginning of the 21st Century

  • Janet P. Stamatel
Part of the Handbooks of Sociology and Social Research book series (HSSR)

Although the study of crime did not originate in the United States, for much of the 20th century the discipline had a distinctively American flavor. Describing the state of criminology at the beginning of the 21st century, one scholar declared that “the American criminological enterprise is the largest in the world. Measured by the number of people who focus on the study of crime, law and social control, the number of university courses, the number of scholarly and professional publications and books, the number of research projects and the amount of funding, there is no question that the US takes the cake” (Marshall, 2008, p. 50). American criminologists have been responsible for developing many popular criminological theories, fostering methodological advancements for studying crime, and institutionalizing the discipline within academia. It is not surprising, then, that “for most American scholars, criminology is American criminology” (Marshall, 2008, p. 49, original emphasis).


Criminal Activity Crime Rate Property Crime Homicide Rate Qualitative Comparative Analysis 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Aas, K. F. (2007). Analysing a world in motion: Global flows meet “criminology of the other”. Theoretical Criminology, 11(2), 283–303.Google Scholar
  2. Abbott, A. (1997). Of time and space: The contemporary relevance of the Chicago School. Social Forces, 75(4), 1149–1182.Google Scholar
  3. Adler, F. (1983). Nations not obsessed with crime. Littleton, CO: Fred B. Rothman & Co.Google Scholar
  4. Agozino, B. (2004). Imperialism, crime and criminology: Towards the decolonisation of criminology. Crime, Law, and Social Change, 41, 343–358.Google Scholar
  5. Alvazzi del Frate, A. (2004). The international crime business survey: Findings from nine Central-Eastern European cities. European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research, 10(2–3), 137–161.Google Scholar
  6. Antonaccio, O., & Tittle, C. R. (2007). A cross-national test of Bonger’s theory of criminality and economic conditions. Criminology, 45(4), 925–958.Google Scholar
  7. Arthur, J. A. (1991). Development and crime in Africa: A test of modernization theory. Journal of Criminal Justice, 19(6), 499–513.Google Scholar
  8. Arthur, J. A., & Marenin, O. (1995). Explaining crime in developing countries: The need for a case study approach. Crime, Law, and Social Change, 23, 191–214.Google Scholar
  9. Barak, G. (Ed.). (2000). Crime and crime control: A global view. Westport, CT: Greenwood.Google Scholar
  10. Barak, G. (2001). Crime and crime control in an age of globalization: A theoretical discussion. Critical Criminology, 10(1), 57–72.Google Scholar
  11. Barberet, R. (2006). Preface. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 22(2), 88–89.Google Scholar
  12. Beck, N. (2007). From statistical nuisances to serious modeling: Changing how we think about the analysis of time-series-cross-section data. Political Analysis, 15, 97–100.Google Scholar
  13. Bennett, R., & Lynch, J. (1990). Does a difference make a difference? Comparing cross-national crime indicators. Criminology, 38(1), 153–181.Google Scholar
  14. Bennett, R. (1991). Routine activities: A cross-national assessment of a criminological perspective. Social Forces, 70(1), 147–163.Google Scholar
  15. Bennett, R. (2004). Comparative criminology and criminal justice research: The state of our knowledge. Justice Quarterly, 21(1), 1–21.Google Scholar
  16. Bierne, P. (1983). Generalization and its discontents: The comparative study of crime. In E. H. Johnson & I. L. Barak-Glantz (Eds.), Comparative criminology (pp. 19–38). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  17. Blumstein, A., & Wallman, J. (Eds.). (2000). The crime drop in America. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Bonger, W. A. (1916). Criminality and economic conditions. Boston: Little, Brown, and Co.Google Scholar
  19. Botchkovar, E. V., & Tittle, C. R. (2005). Crime, shame, and reintegration in Russia. Theoretical Criminology, 9(4), 401–442.Google Scholar
  20. Ceccato, V. (2007). Crime dynamics at Lithuanian borders. European Journal of Criminology, 4(2), 131–160.Google Scholar
  21. Chamlin, M. B., & Cochran, J. K. (2006). Economic inequality, legitimacy, and cross-national homicide rates. Homicide Studies, 10(4), 231–252.Google Scholar
  22. Chamlin M. B., & Cochran, J. K. (2007). An evaluation of the assumptions that underlie institutional anomie theory. Theoretical Criminology, 11(1), 39–61.Google Scholar
  23. Clinard, M. B., & Abbott, D. J. (1973). Crime in developing countries: A comparative perspective. New York: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
  24. Cohen, L. E., & Felson, M. (1979). Social change and crime rate trends: A routine activity approach. American Sociological Review, 44, 588–608.Google Scholar
  25. Cohen, S. (1982). Western crime control models in the third world: Benign or malignant? Research in Law, Deviance, and Social Control, 4, 85–119.Google Scholar
  26. Dammer, H. R., Reichel, P., & He, N. (2005). Comparing crime and justice. In P. Reichel (Ed.), Handbook of transnational crime and justice (pp. 20–42). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  27. Durkheim, E. (1933). Division of labor in society. New York: The Macmillan Co.Google Scholar
  28. Elias, N. (1982). The civilizing process, Vol. 2: Power and incivility. New York: Pantheon Books.Google Scholar
  29. Evans, T. D., LaGrange, R. L., & Willis, C. L. (1996). Theoretical development of comparative criminology: Rekindling an interest. International Journal of Comparative and Applied Criminal Justice, 20(1), 15–29.Google Scholar
  30. Fajnzylber, P., Lederman, D., & Loaza, N. (2002). Crime and violence in Latin America. In D. Levinson (Ed.), Encyclopedia of crime and punishment (pp. 1001–1008). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  31. Farrington, D. P. (1995). The development of offending and antisocial behavior from childhood: Key findings from the Cambridge study in delinquent development. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 36(6), 929–964.Google Scholar
  32. Farrington, D. P. (2000). Explaining and preventing crime: The globalization of knowledge – The American Society of Criminology 1999 presidential address. Criminology, 38(1), 1–24.Google Scholar
  33. Friday, P. C., Ren, X., Weitekamp, E., Kerner, H. -J., & Taylor, T. (2005). A Chinese birth cohort: Theoretical implications. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 42(2), 123–146.Google Scholar
  34. Gartner, R. (1990). The victims of homicide: A temporal and cross-national comparison. American Sociological Review, 55(1), 92–106.Google Scholar
  35. Gartner, R. (1995). Methodological issues in cross-cultural large-survey research on violence. In R. B. Ruback & N. A. Weiner (Eds.), Interpersonal violent behaviors: Social and cultural aspects (pp. 7–24). New York: Springer Publishing Co.Google Scholar
  36. Gartner, R., & Parker, R. N. (1990). Cross-national evidence on homicide and the age structure of the population. Social Forces, 69(2), 351–371.Google Scholar
  37. Giddens, A. (1990). The consequences of modernity. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  38. Gillis, A. R. (1989). Crime and state surveillance in 19th century France. American Journal of Sociology, 95(2), 307–341.Google Scholar
  39. Glueck, S. (1964 [1961]). Wanted: A comparative criminology. In S. Glueck & E. Glueck (Eds.), Ventures in criminology (pp. 306–322). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  40. Gottschalk, M., Smith, T., & Howard, G. J. (2006). Explaining differences in comparative criminological research: An empirical exhibition. International Journal of Comparative and Applied Criminal Justice, 30(2), 209–234.Google Scholar
  41. Gurr, T. R. (1977). Crime trends in modern democracies since 1945. International Annals of Criminology, 16, 41–85.Google Scholar
  42. Hajjar, L. (2004). Religion, state, power, and domestic violence in Muslim societies: A framework for comparative analysis. Law and Social Inquiry, 29(1), 1–38.Google Scholar
  43. Hardie-Bick, J., Sheptycki, J., & Wardak, A. (2005). Introduction: Transnational and comparative criminology in a global perspective. In J. Sheptycki & A. Wardak (Eds.), Transnational and comparative criminology (pp. 1–16). London: Glasshouse Press.Google Scholar
  44. Heiland, H., & Shelley, L. I. (1992). Civilization, modernization, and the development of crime and control. In H. Heiland, L. I. Shelley, & H. Katoh (Eds.), Crime and control in comparative perspectives (pp. 1–20). New York: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  45. Hippchen, L. (1977). The teaching of comparative and world criminology in graduate schools of sociology and criminal justice. International Journal of Comparative and Applied Criminal Justice, 1, 57–71.Google Scholar
  46. Howard, G. J., Newman, G., & Pridemore, W. A. (2000). Theory, method, and data in comparative criminology. In Criminal justice 2000, volume 4: Measurement and analysis of crime and justice (pp. 139–211). Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice: National Institute of Justice.Google Scholar
  47. Huang, W. S. W., & Wellford, C. F. (1989). Assessing indicators of crime among international crime data sources. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 3(1), 28–47.Google Scholar
  48. Johnson, E. H., & Barak-Glantz, I. L. (1983). Introduction. In E. H. Johnson & I. L. Barak-Glantz (Eds.), Comparative criminology (pp. 7–18). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  49. Johnson, H., Ollus, N., & Nevala, S. (2007). Violence against women: An international perspective. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  50. Junger-Tas, G. J., & Klein, M. W. (Eds.). (1994). Delinquent behavior among young people in the Western world: First results of the International Self-Report Delinquency Study. New York: Kluger Publications.Google Scholar
  51. Karstedt, S. (2001). Comparing cultures, comparing crime: Challenges, prospects and problems for a global criminology. Crime, Law, and Social Change, 36(3), 285–308.Google Scholar
  52. Karstedt, S. (2003). Legacies of a culture of inequality: The Janus face of crime in post-communist countries. Crime, Law, and Social Change, 40, 295–320.Google Scholar
  53. Karstedt, S. (2006). Democracy, values, and violence: Paradoxes, tensions, and comparative advantages of liberal inclusion. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 605, 50–81.Google Scholar
  54. Karstedt, S., & Farrall, S. (2006). The moral economy of everyday crime: Markets, consumers and citizens. British Journal of Criminology, 46, 1011–1036.Google Scholar
  55. Karstedt, S., & LaFree, G. (2006). Democracy, crime, and justice. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 605, 6–23.Google Scholar
  56. Killias, M., & Aebi, M. F. (2000). Crime trends in Europe from 1990 to 1996: How Europe illustrates the limits of the American experience. European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research, 8(1), 43–63.Google Scholar
  57. Killias, M., & Rau, W. (2000). The European Sourcebook of Crime and Criminal Justice Statistics: A new tool in assessing crime and policy issues. European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research, 8(1), 3–12.Google Scholar
  58. Kim, S. -W., & Pridemore, W. A. (2005). Social change, institutional anomie, and serious property crime in transitional Russia. British Journal of Criminology, 45, 5–23.Google Scholar
  59. LaFree, G. (1999). A summary and review of cross-national comparative studies of homicide. In M. D. Smith & M. A. Zahn (Eds.), Homicide: A sourcebook of social research (pp. 125–145). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  60. LaFree, G. (2005). Evidence for elite convergence in cross-national homicide victimization trends, 1956 to 2000. Sociological Quarterly, 46(1), 191–211.Google Scholar
  61. LaFree, G. (2007). Expanding criminology’s domain: The American Society of Criminology 2006 presidential address. Criminology, 45(1), 1–31.Google Scholar
  62. LaFree, G. D., & Drass, K. A. (2002). Counting crime booms among nations: Evidence for homicide victimization rates, 1956 to 1998. Criminology, 40(4), 769–800.Google Scholar
  63. LaFree, G. D., & Tseloni, A. (2006). Democracy and crime: A multilevel analysis of homicide trends in 44 countries, 1950–2000. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 26–49.Google Scholar
  64. Liang, B., & Lu, H. (2006). Conducting fieldwork in China: Observations on collecting primary data regarding crime, law, and the criminal justice system. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 22(2), 157–172.Google Scholar
  65. Lijphart, A. (1971). Comparative politics and the comparative method. The American Political Science Review, 65(3), 682–693.Google Scholar
  66. Liu, J. (2006). Modernization and crime patterns in China. Journal of Criminal Justice, 34(2), 118–130.Google Scholar
  67. Mahoney, J., & Rueschemeyer, D. (Eds.). (2003). Comparative historical analysis in the social sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  68. Mannheim, H. (1965). Comparative criminology. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.Google Scholar
  69. Marshall, I. H. (2008). The criminological enterprise in Europe and the United States: A contextual exploration. In N. Larsen & R. Smandych (Eds.), Global criminology and criminal justice: Current issues and perspectives (pp. 47–66). Peterborough, Ontario: Broadview Press.Google Scholar
  70. Marshall, I. H., & Block, R. (2004). Maximizing the availability of cross-national data on homicide. Homicide Studies, 8(3), 267–310.Google Scholar
  71. Marx, K. (1976 [1867]). Capital: A critique of political economy. Harmondsworth, England: Penguin.Google Scholar
  72. Merton, R. K. (1938). Social structure and anomie. American Sociological Review, 3, 672–682.Google Scholar
  73. Messner, S. F. (1992). Exploring the consequences of erratic data: Reporting for cross-national research on homicide. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 8(2), 155–173.Google Scholar
  74. Messner, S. F., Raffalovich, L. E., & Shrock, P. (2002). Reassessing the cross-national relationship between income inequality and homicide rates: Implications of data quality control in the measurement of income distribution. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 18(4), 377–395.Google Scholar
  75. Messner, S. F., & Rosenfeld, R. R. (1997). Political restraint of the market and levels of criminal homicide: A cross-national application of institutional anomie theory. Social Forces, 75(4), 1393–1416.Google Scholar
  76. Messner, S. F., & Rosenfeld, R. R. (2007). Crime and the American dream. 4th ed. Belmont, CA: Thomson Wadsworth.Google Scholar
  77. Miethe, T. D., Hart, T. C., & Regoeczi, W. C. (2008). The conjunctive analysis of case configurations: An exploratory method for discrete multivariate analyses of crime data. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 24, 227–241.Google Scholar
  78. Mills, M., van de Bunt, G. G., & de Bruijn, J. (2006). Comparative research: Persistent problems and promising solutions. International Sociology, 21, 619–631.Google Scholar
  79. Mjoset, L., & Clausen, T. H. (Eds.). (2007). Capitalisms compared (Vol. 24). Greenwich, CT: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  80. Morenoff, J. D. (1997). Violent crime and the spatial dynamics of neighborhood transition: Chicago, 1970–1990. Social Forces, 76(1), 31–64.Google Scholar
  81. Neapolitan, J. (1995). Differing theoretical perspectives and cross-national variation in thefts in less-developed nations. International Criminal Justice Review, 5, 17–31.Google Scholar
  82. Neapolitan, J. (1997). Cross-national crime: A research review and sourcebook. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.Google Scholar
  83. Nevares, D., Wolfgang, M. E., & Tracy, P. E. (1990). Delinquency in Puerto Rico: The 1970 birth cohort study. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.Google Scholar
  84. Piquero, N. L., & Piquero, A. R. (2006). Democracy and intellectual property: Examining trajectories of software piracy. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 605, 104–127.Google Scholar
  85. Pratt, T. C., & Godsey, T. W. (2003). Social support, inequality, and homicide: A cross-national test of an integrated theoretical model. Criminology, 41(3), 611–643.Google Scholar
  86. Pridemore, W. A. (2008). A methodological addition to the cross-national empirical literature on social structure and homicide: A first test of the poverty-homicide thesis. Criminology, 46(1), 133–154.Google Scholar
  87. Quinney, R. (1977). Class, state, and crime. New York: McKay.Google Scholar
  88. Quraishi, M. (2005). Muslims and crime: A comparative study. Aldershot, England: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  89. Ragin, C. C. (1987). The comparative method: Moving beyond qualitative and quantitative strategies. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  90. Robertson, A. (2006). The significance of language, culture, and communication in researching post-Soviet crime and policing. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 22(2), 137–156.Google Scholar
  91. Savage, J., Bennett, R. R., & Danner, M. (2008). Economic assistance and crime: A cross-national investigation. European Journal of Criminology, 5(2), 217–238.Google Scholar
  92. Savolainen, J. (2000). Inequality, welfare state, and homicide: Further support for the institutional anomie theory. Criminology, 38(4), 1021–1042.Google Scholar
  93. Shalev, M. (2007). Limits and alternatives to multiple regression in comparative research. In L. Mjoset & T. H. Clausen (Eds.), Capitalisms compared (pp. 261–308). Greenwich, CT: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  94. Shelley, L. I. (1981). Crime and modernization: The impact of industrialization and urbanization on crime. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.Google Scholar
  95. Sprott, J. B., & Cesaroni, C. (2002). Similarities in homicide trends in the United States and Canada. Homicide Studies, 6(4), 348–359.Google Scholar
  96. Stack, S., Cao, L., & Adamczyk, A. (2007). Crime volume and law and order culture. Justice Quarterly, 24(2), 291–308.Google Scholar
  97. Stamatel, J. P. (2006). Incorporating socio-historical context into quantitative cross-national criminology. International Journal of Comparative and Applied Criminal Justice, 30(2), 177–207.Google Scholar
  98. Stamatel, J. P. (2008a). Regime change and property crime variation in post-communist Eastern Europe. Paper presented at the American Sociological Association.Google Scholar
  99. Stamatel, J. P. (2008b). Using mortality data to refine our understanding of homicide patterns in select post-communist countries. Homicide Studies, 12(1), 117–135.Google Scholar
  100. Stamatel, J. P. (2009). Correlates of national-level homicide variation in post-communist East-Central Europe. Social Forces, 87(3), 1423–1448.Google Scholar
  101. Stamatel, J. P. (forthcoming). Special issue: New methodological directions for international and comparative criminology. International Journal of Comparative and Applied Criminal Justice.Google Scholar
  102. Sung, H. -E. (2004a). Democracy and political corruption: A cross-national comparison. Crime, Law, and Social Change, 41(2), 179–194.Google Scholar
  103. Sung, H. E. (2004b). State failure, economic failure, and predatory organized crime: A comparative analysis. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 41(2), 111–129.Google Scholar
  104. Tilly, C. (1984). Big structure, large processes, huge comparisons. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
  105. Tittle, C. R., & Botchkovar, E. V. (2005). Self-control, criminal motivation and deterrence: An investigation using Russian respondents. Criminology, 43(2), 307–353.Google Scholar
  106. Tonry, M. (2005, July). Why are Europe’s crime rates falling? Criminology in Europe: Newsletter of the European Society of Criminology, 4(1), 8–11.Google Scholar
  107. Vagg, J. (1993). Context and linkage: Reflections on comparative research and ‘internationalism’ in criminology. British Journal of Criminology, 33(4), 541–554.Google Scholar
  108. van Dijk, J. (2008). The world of crime. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  109. van Dijk, J., & Mayhew, P. (1993). Criminal victimisation in the industrialised world: Key findings of the 1989 and 1992 international crime surveys. In A. A. del Frate, U. Zvekic, & J. van Dijk (Eds.), Understanding crime: Experiences of crime and crime control (pp. 1–50). Rome: UNICRI.Google Scholar
  110. Wallerstein, I. (1983). Historical capitalism. London: Verso.Google Scholar
  111. Weisburd, D., Bushway, S., & Lum, C. (2004). Trajectories of crime at places: A longitudinal study of street segments in the city of Seattle. Criminology, 42(2), 283–321.Google Scholar
  112. Wolfgang, M. E., Figlio, R. M., & Sellin, T. (1972). Delinquency in a birth cohort. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  113. Wonders, N. A., & Michalowski, R. (2008). Bodies, borders, and sex tourism in a globalized world: A tale of two cities – Amsterdam and Havana. In N. Larsen & R. Smandych (Eds.), Global criminology and criminal justice. Peterborough, Ontario: Broadview Press.Google Scholar
  114. Yacoubian, G. (2003). Disentangling the definitional confusion between comparative and international criminology. International Journal of Comparative Criminology, 3(2), 223–226.Google Scholar
  115. Zimring, F. E. (2006). The necessity and value of transnational comparative study: Some preaching from a recent convert. Criminology and Public Policy, 5(4), 615–622.Google Scholar
  116. Zimring, F. E. (2007). The great American crime decline. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Janet P. Stamatel
    • 1
  1. 1.University at Albany, SUNYAlbanyUSA

Personalised recommendations