Social control encompasses many techniques, methods, and mechanisms that institutions employ to guide and regulate human behavior within a community. It is a vital socio-cultural tool to establish systematic and relatively consistent boundaries for individual conduct. These boundaries motivate people to adhere to traditions and behavioral norms crucial for the seamless functioning of a group or society (Greenberg, Rohe, 1986).
Most scholars generally agree on categorizing social control into formal and informal forms. However, there has been ongoing debate regarding the superior efficacy of one over the other. Some argue in favor of traditional social control, asserting that only the efficient sanctions imposed by the state’s judicial system can reduce crime and its prevention.
Classical theorists predominantly held this view, while sociologists like Durkheim believed that punitive measures subtly impacted crime prevention compared to informal control mechanisms (Sherman et al., 1992). Durkheim posited that the weaker the group to which an individual belongs, the less they depend on it, relying more on themselves and acknowledging only those behavioral rules that serve their interests (Durkheim, 1997).
Examining our current society, we can see this Durkheimian theory in action. The rise in poverty and the dwindling middle class have fostered an instinctual drive for survival. This heightened survival instinct often leads individuals to resort to unlawful means, such as appropriating others’ property or committing other criminal acts. This is also corroborated by Merton, who argued that deviance is a consequence of economic disparities and societal tensions hindering the achievement of culturally defined goals, particularly financial success (Merton, 1968). However, this phenomenon is not unique to Croatia or the Balkan countries but is a global issue that intensifies in nations with poor economic conditions.
Other anomie theorists have contributed to revising Merton’s model. For instance, A. Cohen focused on delinquent subcultures and the inability to attain middle-class social status (Cohen, 1955). Agnew (1992) concentrated on an individual’s immediate social environment in his anomie theory. He expanded his perspective beyond the failure to achieve positively valued goals and the absence of positive stimuli to encompass “all negative relations between an individual and others” (Agnew, 1992: 74). As communities grow, interpersonal distance increases, leading to reduced communication and heightened mutual distrust.
Smaller communities adhere more to traditional principles, with residents less likely to engage in criminal activities due to a profound sense of shame and social ostracization. Moreover, mutual respect and intense interpersonal relationships within the community are vital. Hirschi (1969) proposed four elements of social bonds that deter individuals from committing crimes: attachment, commitment, involvement, and belief (Hirschi, 2009). Williams and Hawkins noted that potential offenders fear not only the deprivations of prison but also the condemnation of people in their environment if they get arrested (Williams, Hawkins, 1986: 569). This underscores the idea that individuals in smaller communities are concerned about being rejected by their community. For example, Malta’s experience reveals that the informal social control system significantly contributes to crime prevention but complicates the reintegration of ex-convicts, as communities often reject them after serving their sentences.
Another critical factor contributing to Malta’s low crime rate is the integration of citizens into the community and the solidarity among its members—a rarity in many other countries (Ignjatovic, 2009). Conversely, residents of areas with high crime rates tend to be highly suspicious of one another. They report a weak sense of community, minimal influence on neighborhood events, and a belief that neighbors are the ones to watch out for.
This alienation is characteristic of modern societies, as traditional norms, respected in the past, diminish importance. Could any society today exist without legal standards and sanctions threatening criminal acts?
Primitive societies offer extreme examples of informal social control mechanisms like blood feuds. In areas where blood feuds are still practiced today, the rate of murder crimes is significantly lower. Perpetrators of blood feuds are not labeled murderers within their community but individuals fulfilling their obligation to restore family honor.
Foster concluded that in areas with high crime rates, active efforts should focus on constructing and strengthening existing informal social control mechanisms. Combined with broader social and economic programs, these initiatives represent the key to effective and long-term crime prevention (Foster, 1995).