Liberation and Economic Marginalization: A Reformulation and Test of (Formerly?) Competing Models

TLDR

The debate over female crime has focused on liberation and economic marginality theories, which this study argues should be viewed as interacting forces rather than opposing explanations, with economic marginality partly arising from mismatched expectations of women’s independence. The authors aim to reconceptualize and test liberation and economic marginality as complementary explanations for female offending patterns and to evaluate the model’s explanatory power for both male and female conviction rates. They employ a pooled time‑series, least‑squares regression with dummy variables and cross‑national analysis to assess the reformulated model. The model predicts female conviction rates accurately but not male rates, and female conviction rates are significantly influenced by male employment status.

Abstract

This study reconceptualizes and tests liberation and economic marginality hypotheses as complementary explanations for female offending patterns. Both explanations are relevant in explaining female crime, but need to be reframed as interacting forces not opposing theories. It is suggested that economic marginality is in part a consequence of liberation, where the expectation of women’s independence may not be consistent with their actual social circumstances. This study also assesses the explanatory power of this model for both male and female conviction rates. Results from a pooled time series, least squares with dummy variables, cross-national analysis supports this reformulated model. Although this model is a good predictor of female conviction rates, it does not appear to be good a predictor of male conviction rates. Female conviction rates are significantly affected by male employment status, indicating that social conditions that are linked to female crime are a function of the economic and social position of both sexes.