Deviant Youth Groups in Italy and France: Prevalenceand Characteristics

Catherine Blaya & Uberto Gatti

Published online: 9 June 2010# Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Abstract This paper sets out to compare the existence of Juvenile deviant groups in bothFrance and Italy and their characteristics. The comparison between Italy (N=5,236) andFrance (N=3, 353) is based on the ISRD study of the year 2006 and shows that the term“gang” is commonly used to refer to a group of friends only. The strongest associatedvariables in both countries to illegal acts are the acceptance of doing illegal things, takingpart in delinquent acts, considering the group as a gang as well as spending a lot of time inpublic places. Delinquent activity of Juvenile delinquent groups varies from one country toanother and the French respondents show a greater participation in deviant youth groupsthan the Italians. Results show some differences in gender participation with a greaterinvolvement of boys, although girls also take part in deviant or delinquent activities, both inItaly and France. At risk behaviour significantly characterises the young participants as wellas victimisation. This last point highlights that although deviant or potentially dangerous,these young people are also more vulnerable and in need of protection.

Keywords Delinquency . Deviance . Gangs . Youth

Introduction

Juvenile delinquency and Juvenile delinquent groups or gangs have been one of the majorpreoccupations in criminology research in recent years. In France, the number of youngdelinquents and their activities have noticeably increased since the 1970s (Mucchielli andRobert 2002, p. 162).

In France, although some sociologists have argued that gangs no longer exist, there isevidence for the existence of Juvenile delinquent groups (Debarbieux et al. 2002; Bradshaw

Eur J Crim Policy Res (2010) 16:127–144DOI 10.1007/s10610-010-9124-9

C. Blaya (*)IREDU - University of Bourgogne, Dijon, Francee-mail: Catherine.blaya@u-bourgogne.fr

U. GattiUniversity of Genoa, Genoa, Italye-mail: ugatti@unige.it

2005; Moignard 2008), which was greatly confirmed by the youth riots and gang fights inParis, in autumn 2005. However, most of the existing research on the issue is qualitativeand whilst enabling a better understanding of the underlying process of gang or deviantyouth group membership in a particular context and environment, it neither measures thesize of the problem nor assesses the prevalence of this process.

In Italy, since the 1990s and in line with the extreme focus on security of the sameperiod throughout Europe, there have been several safety and anti delinquency campaignswith the usual common scapegoats, the homeless, young people, drug addicts, prostitutesand gypsies (Stefanizzi 1996). In Italy, there have been several safety and anti-delinquencycampaigns with the usual common scapegoats that is to say the homeless, young people,drug addicts, prostitutes and gypsies (Stefanizzi 1996). This was corresponding to thestrong focus on safety that was emerging throughout Europe during the same period oftime. More recently, the media have drawn attention to young immigrant delinquent groups,mainly from Latin America, who behave aggressively and have a high level of alcoholconsumption. Nevertheless, there is little knowledge of the extent of the phenomenon andwhether or not the existing feeling of insecurity is based on an excessive generalisationleading to the creation of negative stereotypes associated with young people from ethnicminorities (Queirolo Palmas e Torre 2005).

This paper is based on the ISRD2 research completed in 2006. After a brief presentationof the literature review as research background, it sets out to compare the existence ofjuvenile deviant groups in both France and Italy and their characteristics. The comparisonbetween France and Italy seemed relevant to the researchers since a recent study (Klein etal. 2006) shows that delinquent activity of juvenile delinquent groups varies from onecountry to another. The researchers shall also describe the type of deviant and delinquentactivities of young group members, compared to young people who are not group members,since some previous research shows that being a member of a deviant youth group doesresult in a greater involvement in delinquent activities at an individual level (Klein andMaxson 2006). One of the objectives of this article is to study what the risk factorscharacterising the delinquent group members are, in order to try and better understand whatleads these young people to join such a group and to which risk factors, such asvictimisation, they are most vulnerable due to their group membership.

As the definition and use of the term “gang” is still under debate, we have opted to usethe expression “deviant youth group” which we will refer to as “DYG” throughout thispaper, thus avoiding any possible confusion with organised crime (even if organised crimeis committed by groups, all groups are not involved in this type of delinquency).

Literature Review

What Do We Know About Youth Gangs or Delinquent Youth Groups?

According to some previous research, DYG are an expanding phenomenon in Europe(Klein and Maxson 1996). Research shows evidence of a genuine concern and problemthroughout Europe (Klein et al. 2006). The Eurogang research group has identified theexistence of youth gangs or DYG throughout Europe and the media indicate that thephenomenon should not be attributed to a feeling of insecurity. In England, for example, inNovember 2007, a campaign against gangs lead to the arrest of 118 people in Manchester,Birmingham, London and Liverpool. In France, the scientific community of the 1990swas divided. Some thought that young people from segregated urban areas were vulnerable

128 C. Blaya, U. Gatti

and thus unable to organise themselves into groups (Dubet 1987). Others stressed theexistence of DYG such as the Zulus (Louis and Prinaz 1990 quoted in Esterle-Hediberle2001:p.204). Currently the existence of DYG is no longer questioned, as recent incidentsand fights between DYG have affirmed it to be a reality and the emergence of new surveysabout the phenomenon provide evidence of their importance (Esterle-Hedibel 1997;Debarbieux et al. 2002; Rubi 2005; Moignard 2008).

In Italy, criminologists and psychologists have observed that juvenile delinquency ismainly group behaviour and that delinquent youths do not usually act alone. According toofficial statistics (1999), out of 100 minors reported to the judicial authorities, 67%committed crimes with other persons, usually minors (Gatti et al. 2005). The percentage ishigher for property crime (theft, robbery, etc).

The mass media publicise the most shocking crimes committed by youth gangs, andthere is general concern about juvenile group violence. Public concern also centres on theinvolvement of juveniles in organised crime, mainly in the south of Italy, and the possibleexploitation of minors in Mafia crime. Despite this social alarm, few empirical studies havebeen conducted, and no large systematic study has investigated juvenile gangs in Italy.

Some empirical studies have focused on particular types of juvenile phenomena, such asviolence in sport and hooliganism. According to an ethnographic study of footballsupporters conducted by Dal Lago (1990), hooliganism in Italy seems to be less "deviant"and less violent than in other European countries. Similar results emerged from the studiesconducted by Francia (1990) and by Gaddi and Calvanese (1993), who interviewed samplesof football supporters. An investigation aimed at providing an overview of youth gangs inItaly was conducted in 2002 by the Ministry of Justice– Office of Social Services forMinors (Gatti et al. 2005). To gather their information on youths prosecuted along withother co-defendants, the Ministry’s researchers conducted semi-structured telephoneinterviews with 28 social workers (one social worker from each one of the 28 SocialServices Offices for Minors in the country). They also analysed the 1999 dossiers of theJuvenile Courts State Prosecutors of a few large cities. The analysis was restricted to youthsprosecuted together with at least three co-defendants for crimes in which no adults had beeninvolved. In reality, the term “gang” was used in this study with regard to the phenomenonof co-offending minors. Though taking into account the social and family conditions of theyouths involved, the study did not consider the gang as an autonomous entity.

Another study that indirectly touched upon the issue of gangs was carried out by DalLago and Quadrelli (2002), within the framework of a broader investigation that utilised theethnographic method in order to examine the crime situation in Genoa in the 1970s. Byinterviewing members of the criminal fraternity, the authors attempted, retrospectively, tounderstand not only the peculiarities of the individuals interviewed (thieves, prostitutes,etc), but also the mentality that characterised problem neighbourhoods. These areas of thecity were home to “neighbourhood youth gangs, which in some cases will evolve intosomething more serious”; that is to say, micro-gangs, of two or three members, thatemerged on the streets and that were composed of the children of southern Italianimmigrants who indulged in fighting with other gangs and committed petty thefts. Theyhated the police and young people from the middle-class neighbourhoods, whom theyenjoyed to torment. They had a vindictive culture, especially towards anyone who dared toreport their crimes to the police, and attached great importance to respect and trust, whichwere regarded as fundamental values in social relationships. While the investigation carriedout by Dal Lago and Quadrelli provides useful information that can help us to understandgangs which were active in the 1970s, their questions focused on the criminal careers ofindividuals, not on the life of a gang.

Deviant Youth Groups in Italy and France: Prevalence and Characteristics 129

Until the 1990s Italian immigration was mainly an internal migration process from thepoorest areas in the South of Italy to the wealthiest areas in the North of the country wherethere were higher rates of employment. However, the situation has been changing and evenin Italy some problems of adaptation and integration have started to emerge (Barbagli2008), along with some social concern regarding foreign immigrants (Dal Lago 1999;Querolo Palmas and Torre 2005).

An in-depth study of a very particular environment was carried out by Colombo (1998).The study lasted a year and a half. He went around the Porta Venezia railway station inMilan, where he interviewed Algerian immigrants, both young and old. As he himselfpoints out, this research was conducted among, and not on, the subjects concerned. Byliving among them and experiencing their haunts, he was able to construct a very detailedview of their life stories and habits. One of the topics he looked at was the social groupingsof these people.

These groups were determined by three elements. The first concerned bonds offriendship that had already been forged in their home country, the second regardedrelationships founded on their common origin, and the third stemmed from the sharedexperience of life as an immigrant. These three elements, however, are rarely found in theirpure form. Often, they occur spontaneously and are influenced by the degree of importancethat the individual attaches to the group. Once the group has been formed, it brings certainadvantages to its members. In addition to providing leisure-time company, it becomes aresource for the individual. A new arrival can exploit the group’s experience, and a memberwho commits a crime can obtain help and reassurance from his companions, therebysuffering less from loneliness or feelings of guilt at having broken the law. While suchgroups do not have leaders, they do display a strong sense of solidarity towards memberswho have been arrested, especially if that member’s arrest enables the other members of thegroup to escape arrest. A necessary condition, however, is that this solidarity be negotiatedbeforehand among the members, given that the group is not a cohesive unit.

The few Italian studies that have approached the subject of youth gangs have notgenerally examined this phenomenon directly. As a result, a considerable gap exists in ourknowledge base, and this gap undermines our ability to understand and respond effectivelyto gangs.

It would be a mistake to consider DYG’s as a new phenomenon in Europe. In Spain forinstance, in 1959, Carlos Saura made a film called “Los Golfos” in which he followed theadventures of a group of four delinquent youths from a segregated urban area, frustrated bythe post-war economical development promoted by Franco and from which they wereexcluded. In England, the identification of DYG’s dates back to the 17th century and hadterritorial characteristics (Mares 2001). In the 1920s, the Birmingham boys street behaviourfollowed the Italian Mafia model. The 1980s was the period in which not only ethnicJuvenile delinquent groups involved in drug trafficking emerged, but also hooligans andviolent soccer supporters (Bodin 2003). In France, Research on DYG started mainly in the1970s with the study of the “Blousons Noirs” (Robert and Lascoumes 1974; Tétard 1988)or later with the skinheads (Petrova 1997) and also the Hip Hop groups (Tichit 1996;Milliot 1997). The “Blousons Noirs” were extremely violent and used to fight other groups,mainly for territory (Michard 1973). Skinheads are distinct from others because their maincharacteristic is racist hatred, while Hip Hop group members come together according tomusical tastes and trends.

Debates concerning the definition of delinquent youth groups differ according toexisting scientific surveys. For instance, when studied from a “territory” perspective whereyoung people from one area oppose those from another (Esterle-Hedibel 2002; Moignard

130 C. Blaya, U. Gatti

2007) or when studied from a “status” perspective, that is to say, young peopleexperiencing social and school difficulties involved in deviant activities within their ownterritory (Robert and Lascoumes 1974; Debarbieux et al. 2002; Rubi 2005). Their successin terms of social integration and employment is limited due to the growing gap betweenthe excluded and the included (Lagrange and Oberti 2006). They sometimes participate indelinquent activities when in a group, in order to gain the status, they cannot benefit from inmainstream society (Lagrange 2003, 2007; Mucchielli 2001). Research by Moignard (2007)highlights that young people group together because they live in the same neighbourhood,in the same block and attend the same school. They occupy a territory, smoke, argue andcreate disorder. They are in common spaces such as building entrances, corridors and streetsand contribute to the feeling of insecurity within the neighbourhood. The case of thehooligans or organised groups of violent soccer supporters is different, in the sense thattheir feeling of belonging to the group is not due to a territorial logic or social exclusion asmentioned previously, but to the feeling of belonging to a sports club in a spirit ofcompetition, pride and opposition to other teams and it gathers individuals from all socialbackgrounds (Bodin and Héas 2002).

In France, urban riots have been the subject in most social and political debates duringthe last four years and have motivated the publication of several studies and essays(Lagrange and Oberti 2006; Mucchielli and Le Goaziou 2006). These urban riots originatedin a territorial attitude and inter-groups (crews) rivalries, oppositions, competition orstimulation. For example, when administrating this study’s questionnaire in Eastern France,some of the participating young people cited what was happening in another city in theSouth of the country as an example. The media play a role in the dissemination of the youthculture and the values and cultural codes of youth groups. According to Papachristos(2005), the new communication technologies (Blogs, cell phones, SMS) are sometimesused to declare verbal or digital fights between rival youth groups and contribute todisseminate the DYG culture all over the world. Moignard (2007) stresses, on the basis ofhis ethnographical survey on DYG’s in the outskirts of Paris, that the young people do notrecognise themselves under the commonly used banner “gang”, which they perceive as anextra stigmatisation on top of the urban segregation they face in the neighbourhood inwhich they live (although they strongly reiterate their belonging to that very neighbourhood),and prefer to be called “team”, “clique” or “crews”/”crou” (p. 355).

The statistical imprecision on the existence of such groups is vast and figures differ fromone source to another. As a matter of fact, data reflect more the level of activity of theorganisation in charge of collecting these data than the reality (Killias 1991; Matelly andMouhanna 2007). Most of the existing research data show higher percentages ofdelinquency. In France, census data on gang fights defined as “fights between organisedor opportunity gangs” suffer from the lack of a proper and precise definition (OND 2006).This is why it is necessary to complete self-reported surveys on delinquency not only toreduce what is unknown on youth delinquency but also to better understand what thereasons and factors associated to the phenomenon are (Junger-Tas et al. 2003).

Factors Associated with Belonging to Youth Gangs or Deviant Youth Groups

Being part of a youth gang or a DYG has some important consequences for the futureperspectives of its members, since it does contribute to the further marginalisation ofindividuals (youth pregnancy, drugs addiction, further violent delinquency etc.). Reasonswhy some young people join such groups are complex and multiple. However, someresearch on the issue shows that the main factors which influence a young person’s choice

Deviant Youth Groups in Italy and France: Prevalence and Characteristics 131

to join a group include the want for friendship and self-affirmation (Campbell 1987; Moore1991; Lagrange and Oberti 2006). Additional factors comprise social exclusion (Thornberryet al. 2003), together with the feeling of no future perspective that leads the youth to opposeadults and whatsoever represents them, including the social institutions designed to supportand help youths, as happened in France during the 2005 riots when young peoplevandalised and set fire to not only police stations but also to schools, including primaryschools (Stefanizzi 1996; Lagrange and Oberti 2006). Family functioning has also beenidentified as a risk factor. North American research provides evidence of young girlsjoining groups as a result of domestic violence (Moore 1991). However, research generallyconcludes that girls are less involved in gangs or DYG’s and are less delinquent than boys.When girls form part of a DYG, they are often sexually used and abused for prostitution,group rapes or as a valorisation tool for male members. Females are treated this way tocomfort males in their collective role of masculinity or for a group in a search of collectiveaffirmation of masculinity (Bourgois 2001). Miller (1958) considers that being part of aDYG is a way of showing one’s virility. Nevertheless, in recent years, some opposingliterature has emerged. Research conducted by Rubi (2005, 2007) on female delinquencyshows that females can adopt delinquent and violent behaviour for their own identity andstatus building process and that the “law of the strongest” can take some extremely violentforms. However, their belonging to DYG or their adopting some violent or deviantbehaviour does not constitute a protective factor against male domination. Research in theUnited Kingdom (Sharp et al. 2004) highlights that 6% of young people belong todelinquent youth groups, with an equal involvement of both boys and girls. Subsequentlythese results contradict North American research which shows that more boys are involvedin delinquent groups and that being male is a risk factor (Klein et al. 2006).

Joining a DYG is considered by some researchers as the response to structuralconstraints, the origin of which is social marginalisation and exclusion. School dropouts,living in segregated neighbourhoods, coming from ethnic minorities and the lack of socialimprovement perspective are risk factors which, when cumulated, can lead a youngster tobecome a member of a delinquent group (Esterle-Hedibel 2001; Van Gemert 2001). Youngpeople group together in order to cope with daily boredom and the lack of positiveperspectives (Lapeyronnie 2008). DYG’s in England, as in most European countries, areoften associated with an ethnic minority background (Jamaican Yardies; MuslimBirmingham Paki Panthers) or with racism (National Front political party). Youth gangsare increasingly based on ethnicity, a process that is certainly not new as shown by Petrova(1997) in her study of skinheads. The latter are clearly grouped according to racist and evenneo-Nazi beliefs. In France, not only schools, but also the social composition ofneighbourhoods, through discrimination and segregation practices contribute to theformation of ethnicity based opposing delinquent youth groups such as Caucasians/Arabs;Blacks/Caucasians; Blacks/Arabs according to the individuals’ ethnic origin and the natureof the conflicts and identity feelings when these conflicts occur (Felouzis et al. 2005;Debarbieux and Blaya 2008). This type of ethnicisation process is in permanent interactionwith discrimination towards youth from segregated neighbourhoods. Unemployment andinactivity contribute to the development of parallel illegal activities in order to fill the gapcreated by the lack of social integration and professional opportunities (Hagedorn 1988;Moore 1991; Bourgois 2001). The riots that occurred in France are a complex combinationof all these factors.

Moreover, being part of a DYG is also viewed as a means of protecting oneself or one’scommunity from others (Lagrange 2001; Minayo 1999; Innes and Jones 2006). HoweverInnes and Jones (2006), show how much being part of a youth gang contributes to the

132 C. Blaya, U. Gatti

marginalisation of the neighbourhoods in which these groups are settled, adding to thealready existing social discrimination and stigmatisation, the one of delinquency anddisorganisation. Living in a disorganised neighbourhood and being friends with youngdelinquents is significantly correlated to the belonging of a DYG (Hill et al. 2001;Thornberry et al. 2003; Bradshaw 2005; Budd et al. 2005).

This literature review highlights the lack of existing empirical statistical data regardingthe growing concern about DYG incidents, whilst at the same time qualitative research onthe subject has developed in recent years. These research surveys show that being part of ayouth gang or DYG is the consequence of a combination of factors such as socialmarginalisation, discrimination, isolation and ethnicisation at individual and neighbourhoodlevels, both of them being interactive. The findings presented in this paper focus on thecomparison of DYG’s in both France and Italy with respect to their activities and to theirlevel of victimisation.

Research Method

Background of the Study

The objective of the research was to assess young people’s involvement in DYG’s and theconsequences this form of involvement has on various types of behaviour, such as deviantand delinquent behaviour in both France and Italy.

In France fieldwork was carried out under difficult circumstances due to the social unrestat the time of the survey. Two weeks after having contacted the schools in which theresearcher hoped to complete the survey, the longest and most violent urban riots since1968 started as a result of the death of a youngster who had been chased/had been run overby the police. About 280 cities and towns were affected by violent incidents and someschools were vandalised or set on fire, which resulted in emergency security measuresbeing taken with a curfew being imposed until the fourth of January 2006 in some cities.The violence mostly occurred in segregated and disorganised neighbourhoods. As aconsequence, this situation affected the participation of schools in the survey as schoolprincipals were concerned about the reaction from the potential participants to a survey ondelinquency.

Method and Sampling

The survey was completed using the ISRD2 questionnaire that was administered in schoolswhich accepted to volunteer. This questionnaire includes the Eurogang1 group‘s questionsabout youth gangs (Klein 2002). The definition of a street gang as designed by Klein is “….any durable, street oriented youth group whose own identity includes involvement in illegalactivity”. The questions are as follows:

Do you have a group of friends? How long has this group existed? (more than3 months); Does this group spend a lot of time together in public places?; Is doing illegalthings accepted by your group?; Do people in your group actually do illegal thingstogether?; Do you consider your group as a gang?

This paper is mainly based on the answers to these questions.

1 The Eurogang research group

Deviant Youth Groups in Italy and France: Prevalence and Characteristics 133

The sample is made up of 5236 Italian students and 3353 French students, from 12 to16 years of age, who attend state schools. The sample takes into account similar genderpercentages. The survey was completed in 17 municipalities in France (6 small cities, 6medium cities and 5 large cities according to the INSEE criteria), while in Italy the surveywas completed in 15 cities, each of which presented all the required characteristics.

The Italian survey used a city-based sample. The sample comprised 15 cities/towns. Amultistage stratified design was drawn up for population sampling. This involved threestages: in the first stage involved the selection of 15 towns and cities as the PrimarySampling Units. The second stage involved the selection of 95 schools (SecondarySampling Unit) within the Primary Sampling Units. In the third stage, 375 classes wereselected within the Secondary Sampling Units.

The French survey also used a city- based sample. The multistage sample comprised 17towns and cities. In the first stage 14 academies2 were selected, then, 250 schools wereselected from the academies’ sample. The schools were contacted and 23 agreed toparticipate in the survey.

During stage 1, the towns were chosen according to a non-probabilistic method, byconsidering the size (number of inhabitants) and the availability of research units willing tocollaborate.

The Italian cities were also chosen on the basis of their geographical location along theNorth-South axis. Indeed, it is well known that social phenomena in Italy must be observedwith particular reference to geographical location, as there are often marked economic,social and cultural differences between one region and another. The second step involvedrandomly selecting schools in each city sampled in the previous stage. Since the targetpopulation attends two different school types, it is necessary to distinguish betweenstudents who are still at school age (primary grade: age-group 12–14) and those attendingschool on a voluntary basis (secondary grade: age-group => 14).

In addition, secondary school students display different social and cultural features inaccordance to the school curriculum they decide to undertake. Here, the three types ofeducational institution are: high school, technical institutes and vocational institutes.

Overall, for each city, four school sampling frames were drawn up:

a) a sampling frame of compulsory schools (primary schools),

(for secondary schools):

b) A sampling frame of “high schools” (higher secondary education),c) A sampling frame of “technical institutes” (technical education)d) A sampling frame of “vocational institutes” (vocational education)

From each sampling frame—produced by a local team—the national team randomlyselected a number of schools. For each study course a), up to 7 schools (8 in metropolitanareas) were selected, and for each of the courses b), c) and d), up to 6 schools (7 inmetropolitan areas) were selected. Normally, for each city, three primary schools and threesecondary schools (one school for each course of study) were sampled.

The participation rates were 84.1% by schools and 98% by students and parents.The year groups that were surveyed were grades 8, 9, 10 for France and grades 7, 8, 9,

10 for Italy. The French sample was weighted in order to be representative at the nationallevel. Consequently, participants over 16 years of age were omitted, along with youngparticipants who were attending vocational courses. The sample was then weighted for age,

2 Academies correspond to the administrative distribution of school districts. There are 27 academies in France.

134 C. Blaya, U. Gatti

gender, and the percentage of participants attending schools in priority education areasfollowing national percentages. For this purpose the substitution method was used. As forthe Italian sample, grade 4 was eliminated, along with students under the age of 12 andthose over the age of 16 in order to create greater homogeneity. The sample is nationallyrepresentative and it is composed of schools from various cities.

Research Findings

Prevalence of Deviant Youth Group (DYG) Members

An individual is considered to be a member of a DYG when he/she answered yes to the sixEurogang questions as explained in the method section.

Table 1 shows the percentage of students who responded “yes” to the different Eurogangquestions. As we can see, the Italian respondents are more numerous in having a group offriends, which is stable and street oriented. However, Italian group members are lessnumerous than the French when it comes to being members of delinquency oriented groups.Also, in comparison to Italian respondents, twice as many French respondents considertheir group as a gang (17.5% vs 34.2%). These results show that despite differencesbetween the two countries, the term “gang” is commonly (although not all the time) used torefer to a group of friends (see Tables 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9).

In order to better evaluate the relevance of the definition based on the 6 questions, wehave crossed compared the answers to the various questions. Results highlight that amongstthe students who define their group as a gang, there are only 42.2% of the Italian studentsand 35.9% of the French students who stated that the group was involved into illegalactivities (Table 2), while 51.5% of the Italian respondents and 39.9% of the French ones

Table 1 Percentage of students who responded positively to the Eurogang questions

Italy (N=5236) France (N=3353)

Do you have a group of friends? 83,8 75,7***

How long has this group existed? (>3 months) 77,9 70,5***

Does this group spend a lot of time together in public places? 61,6 53,4***

Is doing illegal things accepted by your group? 20,8 21,4

Do people in your group actually do illegal this together? 15,7 19,4***

Do you consider your group a gang? 17,5 34,2***

**Significant difference between Italy and France: p<0.01

***Significant difference between Italy and France: p<0.001

Table 2 Number of students who consider their group to be a gang and the percentage who declared thattheir group accepts illegal acts and has participated in committing some sort of crime

Group is defined as a gang Italy (N=1120) France (N=1090)

Group accepts illegal acts 51,5 39,9***

Group does illegal acts 42,7 35,8***

**Significant difference between Italy and France: p<0.01

***Significant difference between Italy and France: p<0.001

Deviant Youth Groups in Italy and France: Prevalence and Characteristics 135

declared that doing illegal activities was accepted in their group. As results show, manyyoung people who defined their own group as a gang, were members of groups that did notaccepted illegal behaviour. There were also juveniles who did actually take part in illegalactivities. and this was more prevalent in France than in Italy. Yes you are right here: thisshould be “and this was more prevalent in Italy than in France.

These results show evidence of the importance of a more detailed and precise definitionof a group’s characteristics (Sharp et al. 2006) and not a definition based only on the feelingof belonging to a gang. In both Italy and France, and probably in other participatingcountries, the situation is quite different from the North American one, where when asked“Do you belong to a gang” or “Have you been member of a gang in the past”, a positiveanswer is enough to make the respondent a gang member (Curry et al. 2002) and whereself-nomination is considered a “particularly robust measure of gang membership capableof distinguishing gang from non-gang youth” (Esbensen et al. 2001). As for our analysisprocess, defining the group as a gang is a necessary condition but this is not enough toconclude the respondent is a gang member. In view of the fact that various definitions usedby youths link the term “gang” to organised crime we prefer to use the expression “Deviantyouth group”. This seems more appropriate to qualify young people who form part ofgroups where delinquency is part of the activity, but it also covers deviant behaviour suchas the consumption of alcohol or drugs, truancy etc.

Throughout this paper, when referring to participants of the survey who respondedpositively to the six questions about gangs, we shall consider them as a “deviant youthgroup members”, including their deviant behaviour and victimisation experiences. Havingsorted this problem of terminology, the researchers stress that the definition adopted by the

Table 3 Effect of group questions on illegal acts (one or more in last 12 months)—Logistic regression

Italy (N=5326) France (N=3436)

B S.E. Exp(B) B S.E. Exp(B)

Do you have a group of friends? −.208 .185 .812 −.254 .242 .776

How long has this group existed? (>3 months) −.018 .150 .982 .167 .210 1.182

Does this group spend a lot of time togetherin public places?

.424*** .092 1.528 .601*** .121 .1.823

Is doing illegal things accepted by your group? 1159*** .104 3.188 .619*** .119 1.858

Do people in your group actually doillegal things together?

.877*** .114 2.404 .970*** .121 2.638

Do you consider your group a gang? .570*** .088 1.769 .386*** .100 1.471

Nagelkerke R2 .211 .182

*p<.05; **p<.01; ***p<.001

Table 4 Deviant youth group membership by gender

Italy France

DYG member Females Males Females Males

3,2% 6,5% 5,1% 10,1%

Significant differences between boys and girls p<.001

136 C. Blaya, U. Gatti

Eurogang, based on the already described six questions, is largely acknowledged atinternational level. It facilitates cross-national comparative studies which in turn allow toassess the relationship between young people, juvenile delinquency and group membership,within different social and cultural contexts.

We also studied the specific effect of each question about groups and delinquency with alogistic regression analysis.

The highest odds ratios in both countries, with respect to illegal acts, are the acceptanceof doing illegal things, taking part into delinquent acts, considering the group as a gang, aswell as spending a lot of time in public places. As we can see in Table 3, spending a lot oftime in public places and doing illegal things show very similar scores within the Frenchsample while spending a lot of time together in public places is less important in Italy. TheFrench respondents perceive themselves more as gang members than the Italian (34.2% vs17.5%—see Tab. 1), and the Italian odd ratio is higher than the French one. This might bedue to a different perception of what a gang actually represents. In France, when talkingabout “gangs”, people understand an organised group focused on delinquency and illegalbusiness with a strong leadership and hierarchy similar to the North American gangsinvolved in organised crime while a group of youngsters who happen to do illegal thingstogether is not called a “gang” but a “bande” (Fize 2008; Marwan and Mucchielli 2007).

The following table shows gender differences in the involvement in deviant youthgroups.

As we can note from these results, twice as many boys are part of delinquent juvenilegroups than girls. This confirms previous research on the involvement of girls in youthdelinquency (Roché 2001). However, these results also confirm that girls can be membersof such groups and can also be active offenders. We may note that there is quite a bigdifference between Italy and France, mainly when comparing boys, seeing there is morethan a three point difference between the two countries. Nevertheless the participation ofgirls is also higher in France.

After comparing the percentages of boy and girl DYG members, researchers calculatedthe level of participation with respect to age and country. The results are presented here, inTable 5.

Table 5 Percentage of deviant youth group membership by age

Age

12 ys 13ys 14ys 15ys 16ys

Italy 2,8 3,8 5,0 7,5 13,1

France 3,5 6,2 9,3 13,9 12,5

Significant difference between different ages p<.001

Table 6 Percent of DYG members by immigration

Native 1st gen. Migrants 2nd gen. Migrants

Italy 4,8 3,3 6,3

France 6,9 7,3 8,5

Differences among natives, 1st gen. Immigrant and 2nd gen. Immigrants: non significant

Deviant Youth Groups in Italy and France: Prevalence and Characteristics 137

Early onset of delinquency is one of the major concerns for the Police and judicialservices at the moment. The data released by the National Observatory of Delinquency(OND) in 2007 in France showed a 4% rise in youngsters under the age of 18 who wereconvicted compared to the year 2005, while the number of persons over the age of 18showed a 3% increase (OND 2007). The most common delinquent acts among teenagersare vandalism and theft. Robert published a report on the age of gang members. Accordingto his study, in 1960, half of all gang members (53%) were 15 years of age, while one in tenmembers was under 12 years of age. Results in Table 5 show a similar pattern for France,since the highest percentages of respondents who declared to be members of a delinquentyouth group are above 15 (27.3%), while 12 year olds show the lowest level ofparticipation in such groups. It is to be noted that Italian youngsters seems to joindelinquent youth groups at a later stage. This result surfaced in view of the fact that,

Table 7 Delinquency of DYG members and non members

Italy (N=5159) France (N=3274)

DYGmembers

Nonmembers

Ratio DYGm./Non members

DYGmembers

Nonmembers

Ratio DYGm./Non members

Theft of bicycle, moped,scooter

13,1 1,6 8,2 18,0 1,6 11,3

Theft of a motorcycleor a car

3,3 0,4 8,3 6,8 0,7 9,7

Theft from a car 10,3 1,7 6,1 8,9 0,8 11,1

Shoplifting 27,9 6,3 4,4 35,3 8,5 4,2

Bag snatching 8,6 1,2 7,2 8,6 1,0 8,6

Vandalism 37,0 7,8 4,7 35,7 4,7 7,6

Burglary 6,2 1,2 5,2 8,2 1,3 6,3

Hacking 19,9 7,1 2,8 13,4 4,6 2,9

Assaults 10,0 1,1 9,1 11,0 1,5 7,3

Robbery 8,4 1,2 7,0 8,6 0,9 9,6

Group fight 46,5 13,5 3,4 52,9 15,6 3,4

Carry a weapon 25,1 4,1 6,1 28,8 6,4 4,5

Drugs deal 10,2 1,3 7,8 6,0 1,1 5,5

At least one illegal act 70,9 26,0 2,7 74,3 26,1 2,8

Table 8 Victimisation of DYG members and non members

Italy (N=5159) France (N=3274)

DYGmembers

Nonmembers

Ratio DYGm./Non members

DYGmembers

Nonmembers

Ratio DYGm./Non members

Robbery 4,7 2,2* 2,1 4,5 2,5 1,8

Assault 8,6 2,9*** 3,0 9,5 3,7*** 2,6

Theft 19,2 15,8 1,2 17,4 13,8 1,3

Bullying 6,9 14,2** 0,5 16,5 17,3 1,0

Significant differences between DYG members and non members *p<0.05 **p<0.01 ***p<0,001

138 C. Blaya, U. Gatti

opposed to their French counterparts, only half as many 15 year old Italian studentsdeclared to have been involved in delinquent behaviour (respectively 13.9% and 7.5%).However, there is a sudden and dramatic rise in DYG participation among Italianrespondents aged 16.

Table 6 cross examines the percentages of young people who are considered to bemembers of a deviant youth group and the migrant background of these respondents.

Even if the percentage of deviant youth groups is somewhat higher among 2ndgeneration migrants than on the 1st generation, the difference is not significant. Theseresults show that at least for those boys and girls who attend school, the immigration factordoes not promote involvement in deviant youth groups.

Table 7 highlights the delinquent acts committed by youths who are part of deviantyouth groups in Italy and France. The table comprises the 13 different items which wereincluded in the ISRD2 questionnaire plus an extra item which represents the percentage ofstudents who declared to have committed at least one illegal act.

In line with some previous research, young people who are part of deviant youth groupsare much more involved in delinquency than others. As a whole, young people who reportoffending are most likely to commit a criminal offence with their friends rather than on theirown (MORI youth survey, 2008). This is particularly the case with respect to physicalviolence, seeing that percentages of declared group fights are more than three times higheramong DYG members than among non DYG members. This might be related to the factthat individuals are more daring when in a group and with the fact that group members aremore likely to carry a weapon and thus are more prone to provoke violent situations(Canada 1998). Property offences such as vandalism and shoplifting are also dominantactivities among group members. We can state that these results are in line with someprevious research on youth gang membership (Mazdou and Bacque 2008; Marwan 2007)stating that it is related to “having fun” and looking for risky situations (vandalism). Youthsmay commit mentioned offences in order to feel part of a group. Also, for youths who findthemselves in a situation of economic deprivation, such delinquent acts give them access togoods they would not have otherwise. The outcome of the survey showed that a higherpercentage of Italian respondents declared to have committed the specific crimes of carhacking and drug dealing. We believe that such rates might be the result of a higherorganisation of these groups around business crime, while in France shoplifting and the theftof mopeds, scooters, motorcycles or cars are more common offences. Percentages show asimilar involvement in assaults and bag snatching (often combined with violence). Researchhas provided evidence that a greater involvement in delinquency also generates higher risksof becoming a victim. This is what the researchers seek to confirm in the following table.

Table 9 Alcohol and drugs consumption by DYG members and non members

Italy (N=5159) France (N=3274)

DYGmembers

Nonmembers

Ratio DYGm./Non members

DYGmembers

Nonmembers

Ratio DYGm./Non members

Beer/wine 63,4 27,5*** 2,3 28,0 12,7*** 2,2

Spirits 40,3 9,3*** 4,3 15,4 5,8*** 2,7

Hashish, marij. 19,7 2,8*** 7,0 18,5 2,5*** 7,4

XTC, coc. 3,8 0,3*** 12,7 1,6 0,4* 4,0

Significant differences between DYG members and non members *p<0.05 **p<0.01 ***p<0.001

Deviant Youth Groups in Italy and France: Prevalence and Characteristics 139

Confirming previous research, DYG members are more often victimised than nonmembers. However we note that the difference in theft victimisation between DYGmembers and others is not statistically significant. If robbery shows a significant differenceas far as the identified Italian DYG members are concerned, this is not the case in France.As for being assaulted, this type of victimisation is strongly linked to DYG membershipthan to non membership in both countries (p<0.001). This may be the result of groupmembers being responsible for more assaults (see Table 7). While in Italy being bullied isnotably linked to being a DYG member, results do not show any significant differenceamong the French participants in the ISRD survey. Research showed evidence that socialisolation is a high risk factor for being bullied (Smith et al. 2004). These findings leadresearchers to think that there might be some bullying within the group itself as a result ofcompetition among peers seeking a distinguished status and/or leadership within the group(Mazdou and Bacque 2008). It could also be argued that higher rates of victimisationamong DYG members compared to non members are linked to higher levels of at riskbehaviour, such as drug use or alcohol consumption.

This table shows that, from a statistical point of view, DYG members are significantlymore involved in risky consumption habits than non members in all respects, although nonDYG members may also be involved risky behaviour, such as the consumption of alcohol,which is quite high in both groups. We also note that French non DYG members have loweralcohol consumption rates than the Italians, while drug consumption rates are very similar.

Discussion and Conclusion

This paper set out to assess and compare the involvement of young people in deviant groups,as well as their deviant or delinquent behaviour in France and Italy. ISRD findings show thatthe research participants most commonly use the term “gang” to qualify their group of friendswhile, in both countries, this refers only to a group of friends. This confirms some previousethnographic research on skating- or roller groups that show that the groups of young peoplecalling themselves “gangs” are not always geared towards delinquent activities (Fize 1993,2008). If gangs are built on a strong feeling of belonging and of identity construction basedon an “us”/ ”them”—“excluded”/”included” process, they are not systematically involvedin violent behaviour or organised delinquency (Fize 2008).

The French respondents show a greater participation in youth deviant groups than theItalians. As researchers explained when presenting the outcomes of the survey, the studywas performed while urban riots were taking place in France, consequently the socialclimate was very tense. This might have exacerbated the feeling of belonging to a groupamong the young people. This might also be the mere reflection of social exclusion thatmany youngsters experience in urban segregated areas and which leads them to groupformation and to adopt deviant or delinquent behaviour patterns. When focussing on genderdifferences, our research findings confirm some previous research on female participationin delinquency. That is to say that it is lower than male participation. However, about a thirdof deviant youth groups are girls, both in Italy and France. Some researchers conclude thatfemale delinquency and violence is partly explained by the necessity to protect oneself orgain respect and resist male domination. As a consequence the adoption of “macho”behaviour including their dress code can be part of that process (Duret 1999; Rubi 2005). Itis also a means of boosting one’s self-esteem and gaining power as explained by Nimmo inher research on female gangs in Canada (2001). Some severe incidents committed by girlgangs have been reported by the police and the media during the past decade in France. For

140 C. Blaya, U. Gatti

example, in the year 1998 in Toulon, an ethnic minority group of girls aged 10–17 years oldassaulted female “bloody Frenchies” in the wealthy neighbourhoods of the city. In 2002,about 15 young girls from a lower secondary school followed four school mates into theirschool and assaulted them with cutters and nightsticks. Research on violence in schoolsshowed evidence that girls are delinquent too, since 6.8% of female respondents statedhaving extorted others (Debarbieux 2006). Summarising, research showed that femaleparticipation in delinquency can be as strong as male participation, except for violence andassaults (Roché 2001). The more amount of time spent with a large peer group leads to ahigher probability of involement in delinquent acts. According to Junger-Tas et al. (2001),joining a peer group is mainly a male activity while females tend to associate with smallernumbers of friends and this could partly explain the lower involvement of girls indelinquency in comparison to boys.

Ethnic minorities who are 2nd generation migrants show a slightly higher percentage ofparticipation in deviant youth groups, but the difference is not significant. The results fromItaly show lower percentages of participation of ethnic minorities, which might beexplained by a different migration history. In France, immigration is mainly characterisedby its post-colonial background. The post-colonial period created a new public issue, theone of integration. This public issue focused on collective identity and unity, morespecifically it focused on national unity which was perceived as lost or endangered due toimmigration from non Western countries. This led to various forms of discrimination basedon ethnic, cultural and religious characteristics, which were mainly directed towardsMuslims (Lorcerie 2003, Poiret 2000). In France, as opposed to their French counterparts,only half the amount of youths from different ethnic minorities, and in particular those fromnorthern Africa, are employed (Laurence and Vaïsse 2007, p.85). These youngsters faceacademic difficulties in school and, as a consequence, may drop out of school. They hangaround and take control over the common areas in their neighbourhood. They occasionallyadopt some deviant behaviour (Bordet 1998). They often express a feeling of frustrationand unfairness (Marlière 2008). These events also have an impact on the way students, whoare at school, behave. School attending students live in the same neighbourhoods as theirpeers who have dropped out of school , along with the ones who are unemployed and thosewho behave in a deviant manner. Referring to the differential association theory ofSutherland et al. (1992), according to which criminal behaviour is learned from interactionwith other persons in mainly intimate personal groups (p.88–89), these students becomeinvolved in groups and deviant activities too. Furthermore, some students remain in schoolsand are unaffected by the presented situations. This is because they are well aware of thefact that the effort required for their studies is considerable and they take into account theirfuture prospects of employment and of climbing the social scale. As a result they just waitto complete compulsory education, even though they may not like school, in order to findother occupations.

At risk behaviour significantly characterises the young participants from both countries, aswell as victimisation. Group members are more likely to be victims of physical assault. Thismay be explained by their greater involvement in risky behaviour, but there is also somevictimisation within the group itself as part of some status gaining process. These lastconclusions lead us to think that although these youngsters are more prone to adopt somedeviant attitudes and aggressive behaviour (they are more likely to be aggressors as resultsshow) and considering that deviance is more strongly associated to youth groups, asDebarbieux showed for school violence (2002) or Lagrange for juvenile delinquency (2001),they are also more vulnerable and in need of protection. This could be a first step towardsprevention. Prevention should also take into account the length of time the groups have

Deviant Youth Groups in Italy and France: Prevalence and Characteristics 141

existed. The groups taken into consideration at the time of the Survey were at least threemonths old. This contradicts what is commonly thought in France, that group violence is theresult of groups that are not structured but gather and change according to situationalopportunities.

References

Barbagli, M. (2008). Immigrazione e sicurezza in Italia. Bologna: Il Mulino.Bodin, D., & Héas, S. (2002). Introduction à la sociologie des sports. Paris: Editions Chiron.Bodin, D. (2003). Le hooliganisme. Paris: PUF. coll. Que sais-je.Bordet, J. (1998). Les « jeunes de la cité ». Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.Bourgois, P. (2001). En quête de respect. Le crack à New York. Paris: Le Seuil.Bradshaw, P. (2005). Terrors and young teams: youth gangs and delinquency in Edinburgh. In: (dir). S. H.

Decker & F. M. Weerman. European Street Gangs and Troublesome Youth Groups. Alta Mira Press. Pp.193–218.

Budd, T., Sharp, C., Weir, G., Wilson, D., & Owen, N. (2005). Young people and crime: findings from the2004 Offending, Crime and Justice Survey. Home Office Statistical Bulletin 20/05. London: HomeOffice.

Campbell, A. (1987). Self-definition by rejection: the case of gang girls. Social Problems, 34(5), 451–466.Canada, G. (1998). Etats-Unis des enfants et des armes. Paris. ESF.Colombo, A. (1998). Etnografia di un’economia clandestina. Immigrati algerini a Milano. Bologna: Il Mulino.Curry, G.D., & Decker, S. (2002). Confronting gangs: crime and community. Los Angeles: Roxbury.Dal Lago, A. (1990). Descrizione di una battaglia. I rituali del calcio. Bologna: Il Mulino.Dal Lago, A. (1999). Non-persone. L’esclusione dei migranti in una società globale. Milano: Feltrinelli.Dal Lago, A., & Quadrelli, E. (2002). Etnografia di una professione criminale. In A. Dal Lago & R. De Biasi

(Eds.), Un certo sguado. Introduzione all’etnografia sociale. Rome: Laterza.Debarbieux, E. (2006). Violences à l’école: un défi mondial? Paris: Armand Colin.Debarbieux, E., & Blaya, C. (2008). « An interactive construction of gangs and ethnicity: the role of school

segregation in France ». In F. Van Gemert, D. Peterson, I.L. Lien (eds). Street Gangs, Migration andEthnicity. Collumpton: Willan Publishing.

Debarbieux, E., Blaya, C., Mancel, C., Montoya, Y., & Rubi, S. (2002). L’Oppression quotidienne. Paris: LaDocumentation française.

Dubet, F. (1987). La Galère: jeunes en survie. Paris: Fayard.Duret, P. (1999). Les jeunes et l’identité masculine. Paris: PUF. “Sociologie d’aujourd’hui”.Esbensen, F. A., Winfree, L. T., He, Ni, Jr., & Taylor, T. J. (2001). Youth gangs and definitional issues: When

is a gang a gang, and why does it matter? Crime and Delinquency, 47, 105–130.Esterle-Hedibel, M. (1997). La bande, le risque et l’accident. Paris: L’Harmattan.Esterle-Hedibel, M. (2001). Jeunes des cités, police et désordre urbains. In L. Mucchielli (dir.), Crime et

sécurité: l’état des savoirs. Paris: La Découverte.Esterle-Hedibel, M. (2002). Les bandes de jeunes. In Mucchielli, L. Robert, P. (eds.), Crimes et sécurité,

l’état des savoirs (pp. 178–186).Felouzis, G., Liot, F., & Perroton, J. (2005). L'apartheid scolaire: Enquête sur la ségrégation ethnique dans

les collèges. Paris: Seuil.Fize, M. (1993). Du stade au quartier, socialisation, socialité. Paris: PUF.Fize, M. (2008). Les bandes. De l’entre soi adolescent à l’autre-ennemi ». Paris: Desclée de Brouwer.Francia, A. (1990). Le caratteristiche socio-culturali di 100 tifosi ultras, sostenitori del Pisa sporting club,

rilevate mediante questionario. Dati preliminari. Rassegna Italiana di criminologia, 2, 231–247.Gaddi, D., & Calvanese, E. (1993). Il tifo ultras. Marginalité e Societa, 21, 79–103.Gatti, U., Angelini, F., Marengo, G., Melchiorre, N., & Sasso, M. (2005). An Old-Fashioned Youth Gang in

Genoa. In D. Scott & F. Weerman (Eds.), European Street Gangs and Troublesome Youth Groups (pp.51–80). New York: Alta Mira Press.

Hagedorn, J. (1988). People and Folks. Chicago, IL: Lakeview Press.Hill, K. G., Lui, C., & Hawkins, J. D. (2001). Early Precursors of Gang Membership: A Study of Seattle Youth.

Bulletin. Youth Gang Series. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice andDelinquency Prevention. Available for download at http://www.ncjrs.org/pdffiles1/ojjdp/190106.pdf.

Innes, M., & Jones, V. (2006). Neighbourhood security and urban change: Risk, resilience and recovery.York: Joseph Rowntree Foundation.

142 C. Blaya, U. Gatti

Junger-Tas, J., Cruyff, M., Van de Looij, P., Reelick, F., Bun, C. (2001) Causes of Delinquency in EthnicMinority Groups—A Comparative Study, Paper presened at the meeting of the European Society ofCriminology, Lausanne, 6–8, 10–27.

Junger-Tas, J., Marshall, I. H., & Ribeaud, D. (2003). Delinquency in an international perspective. TheHague: Kluger.

Killias, M. (1991). Précis de criminologie. Berne: Stämpfli.Klein, M. (2002). Street gangs: a cross-national perspective. In R. Huff. (Ed.), Gangs in America. Southand

Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Klein, M. W., & Maxson, C. L. (1996). Street gangs patterns and policies. USA: Oxford University Press.Klein, M., Weerman, F., & Thornberry, T. P. (2006). Street gang violence in Europe Klein et al. European

Journal of Criminology, 3, 413–437.Lagrange, H. (2001). De l'affrontement à l'esquive. Violences, délinquances et usages de drogues. Paris: Syros.Lagrange, H. (2003). Demandes de sécurité, France, Europe, Etats-Unis. Paris: Seuil, La république des

idées.Lagrange, H. (2007). L’épreuve des inégalités. Paris: PUF.Lagrange, H., & Oberti, M. (2006). Emeutes urbaines et protestations. Une singularité française. Paris:

Sciences Po. Presses.Lapeyronnie, D. (2008). Ghetto urbain—Ségrégation, violence, pauvreté en France. Paris: Robert Laffont.Laurence, J., & Vaïsse, J. (2007). Integrating Islam: Political and religious challenges in contemporary

France. Brookings Institution Press.Lorcerie Françoise, dir. (2003). L’Ecole et le défi ethnique. Immigration et intégration. Paris ESF et INRP

(2ème et 3ème parties).Louis, P., & Prinaz, L. (1990). Skinheads-taggers-zulus et compagnies. Paris: Table Ronde (coll. Essai).Mares, D. (2001). Gangsta or lager louts? Working class street gangs in Manchester. In M. Klein, Y. Kerner,

C. Maxson, E. G. M. Weitekamp (Eds.), The eurogang paradox. Street gangs and youth groups in theUS and Europe. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Marlière, E. (2008). Les jeunes des cités. Territoires et pratiques culturelles.Ethnologie Française, 38(4), 711–721.Marwan, M. (2007). « Des “bandes d’ici” aux “gangs d’ailleurs”: comment définir et comparer? », in

Mohammed Marwan, Mucchielli Laurent, 2007, Les bandes de jeunes, des “Blousons noirs” à nos jour.La Découverte. « Reserches ». Paris, p. 265–286.

Marwan, M., & Mucchielli, L. (2007). Les bandes de jeunes - « des blousons noirs » à nos jours. Paris: LaDécouverte.

Matelly, J. H., & Mouhanna, C. (2007). Police—Des chiffres et des doutes. Paris: Michalon.Mazdou, M. H., & Bacque, L. (2008). J’étais un chef de gang.Michard, H. (1973). La délinquance des jeunes en France, Paris. La Documentation française.Miller, W. B. (1958). Lower class as a generating milieu of gang delinquency. Review of Social Issues, XIV.Milliot, V. (1997). Les fleurs sauvages de la ville et de l’art. Analyse anthropologique de l’émergence et de la

sédimentation du mouvement hip-hop lyonnais. Thèse de doctorat d’Ethnologie, Université Lumière Lyon 2.Minayo, M. C. de Souza et al. (1999). Say it people: Youth, violence and citizenship in the city of Rio de

Janeiro. Rio de Janeiro: Garamond.Moignard, B. (2007). Bandes d’adolescents de la France au Brésil: comparer l’incomparable? In Marwan,

M., Mucchielli, L. (dir.). (Pp. 203–215). Paris: La Découverte.Moignard, B. (2008). L’école et la rue: fabrique de délinquance. Paris. PUF.Moore, J. W. (1991). Going down to the barrio. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.MORI youth survey. (2008). Youth Justice Board.Mucchielli, L. (2001). Violences et insécurité. Fantasmes et réalités dans le débat français. Paris: La découverte.Mucchielli, L., & Le Goaziou, V. (2006). Quand les banlieues brûlent…retour sur les émeutes de novembre

2005. Paris: La Découverte.Mucchielli, L., & Robert, P. (2002). Crimes et sécurité, l’état des savoirs. Paris: Les Éditions La Découverte.Nimmo, M. (2001). The «Invisible » Gang Members. A Report on Female Gang Association in Winnipeg,

Canadian Centre for Policy Alernatives. Manitoba. http://www.policyalternatives.ca/mb/.OND (Observatoire National de la Délinquance). (2006). Les principaux enseignements. Rapport annuel sur

la délinquance. INHES.OND. (2007). La criminalité en France-rapport de l’Observatoire national de la délinquance 2007. Bauer A.

(dir.). CNRS éditions.Papachristos, A. V. (2005). Interpreting Inkblots: Deciphering and Doing Something About Modern Street

Gangs. Criminology and Public Policy, 4(3), 643–652.Petrova, Y. (1997). Les skinheads: solidarité de classe ou combat national? Agora, Débats jeunesss, 9, 77–92.Poiret, C. (2000). « La construction de l'altérité à l'école de la République », VEI Enjeux (121), dossier «

L'Universel républicain à l'épreuve. Discrimination, ethnicisation, ségrégation », pp. 148–177.

Deviant Youth Groups in Italy and France: Prevalence and Characteristics 143

Queirolo Palmas, L., Torre, A. T. (a cura di) (2005). Il fantasma delle bande. Genova e i Latinos. Genova:Fratelli Frilli Editori.

Robert, P., & Lascoumes, P. (1974). Les bandes d’adolescents. Paris: les Editions ouvrières.Roché, S. (2001). La délinquance des jeunes—Les 13–19 ans racontent leurs délits. Paris: Seuil.Rubi, S. (2005). Les crapuleuses, ces adolescentes déviantes. Paris: PUF.Rubi, S. (2007). Des filles dans les bandes aux bandes de filles. In M. Marwan & L. Mucchielli (Eds.), Les

bandes de jeunes. Des blousons noirs à nos jours (pp. 203–215). Paris: La Découverte.Sharp, C., Aldridge, J., Medina, J. (2004). Delinquent youth groups and offending behaviour: findings from

the 2004 Offending, Crime and Justice Survey. Home Office. Online report 14/06. http://www.law.man.ac.uk/aboutus/staff

Sharp, C., Altridge, J., Medina, J. (2006). Delinquent youth groups and offending behaviour: findings fromthe 2004 Offending, Crime and Justice Survey. Home Office online report 14/06.

Smith, P. K., et al. (2004). Bullying in Schools—How successful can interventions be? Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.

Stefanizzi, S. (1996). Reflections on Juvenile Delinquency in the Urban Area of Milan (From Juveniles andDelinquency in the Italian and European Context: Proceedings of the International ConferenceOrganized by ISPAC and Centro Nazionale di Prevenzione e Difesa Sociale, Milan, Italy, December1995, P 31–32, 1996. http://www.ncjrs.gov/App/Publications/abstract.aspx?ID=165322.

Sutherland, E., Cressey, D. R., & Luckenbill, D. F. (1992). Principles of criminology (11th ed.). Oxford:General Hall. 1947.

Tétard, F. (1988). Le phénomène “blouson noir” en France, fin des années 1950-début des années 1960, inCollectif Révolte et société. Paris: Publications de La Sorbonne.

Thornberry, T. P., Krohn, M. D., Lizotte, A. J., Smith, C. A., & Tobin, K. (2003). Gangs and delinquency indevelopmental perspective. New York, New York: Cambridge University Press.

Tichit, L. (1996). Violence et exclusion. Violence à l’école : état et discussion des recherches conjointes desministères de l’Education nationale et de l’Intérieur. Université d’été. IHESI. Gif sur Yvette. 8-12 juillet.

Van Gemert, F. (2001). Youth Groups and Gangs in Amsterdam : A pretest of the Eurogang expert survey. In(dir). S. H. Decker & F. M. Weerman. European Street Gangs and Troublesome Youth Groups. Alta MiraPress. Pp. 147–168.

144 C. Blaya, U. Gatti