SOCIAL-ECONOMIC FACTORS CONTRIBUTING TO YOUTH INVOLVEMENT IN

CRIMINAL ACTIVITIES: A CASE STUDY OF MERU COUNTY, KENYA

SHELMITH KINYA NKUNJA

A RESEARCH PROJECT SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE

REQUIREMENTS FOR THE AWARD OF BACHELOR OF CRIMINOLOGY STUDIES,

DEPARTMENT OF HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCE OF THARAKA

UNIVERSITY

2024

i
 DECLARATION AND RECOMMENDATION

Declaration

This research is my original work and it has not been used for any award of conferment of a degree
in any institution.

SHELMTH KINYA NKUNJA

Signature----------------------------- Date---------------------------

Recommendations

MR. BENJAMIN MUGAMBI,

DEPARTMENT OF HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES,

THARAKA UNIVERSITY.

Signature------------------------------------ Date------------------------------------

ii
Contents
DECLARATION AND RECOMMENDATION ..................................................................................... ii
Declaration ............................................................................................................................................ ii
Recommendations ................................................................................................................................ ii
ABSTRACT .............................................................................................................................................. v
CHAPTER ONE ......................................................................................................................................... 1
INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Background to the Study................................................................................................................. 2
1.3 Statement of the Problem .............................................................................................................. 3
1.4 Aim of the Study.............................................................................................................................. 4
1.5 Objectives of the Study ................................................................................................................... 4
1.6 Research Questions......................................................................................................................... 4
1.7 Assumptions of the Study ............................................................................................................... 4
1.8 Justification of the Study................................................................................................................. 5
1.9 Significance of the Study ................................................................................................................. 5
CHAPTER TWO: ....................................................................................................................................... 6
LITERATURE REVIEW ...................................................................................................................... 6
2.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 6
2.2 Global Perspectives on Youth Crime ............................................................................................... 6
2.3 Youth Crime in Africa ...................................................................................................................... 7
2.4 Socio-Economic Factors Contributing to Youth Crime .................................................................... 8
2.4.1 Poverty ......................................................................................................................................... 8
2.4.2 Unemployment ............................................................................................................................ 8
2.4.3 Educational Attainment ............................................................................................................... 9
2.4.4 Peer Influence .............................................................................................................................. 9
2.5 Theoretical Framework ................................................................................................................. 10
2.5.1 Social Learning Theory ............................................................................................................... 10
2.5.2 Social Disorganization Theory .................................................................................................... 15
CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK ........................................................................................................ 20
2.6 Summary of Literature Review ..................................................................................................... 21
2.7 Conclusion ..................................................................................................................................... 21
CHAPTER THREE .................................................................................................................................. 22

iii
 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ........................................................................................................ 22
3.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................. 22
3.2 Research Design ............................................................................................................................ 22
3.3 Study Area ..................................................................................................................................... 22
3.4 Target Population.......................................................................................................................... 23
3.5 Sampling Techniques and Sample Size ......................................................................................... 23
3.5.1 Sampling Techniques ................................................................................................................. 23
3.5.2 Sample Size ................................................................................................................................ 23
3.6 Data Collection Methods .............................................................................................................. 24
3.6.1 Questionnaires ........................................................................................................................... 24
3.6.2 Interviews................................................................................................................................... 25
3.6.3 Secondary Data .......................................................................................................................... 25
3.7 Research Instruments ................................................................................................................... 25
3.8 Validity and Reliability of Research Instruments .......................................................................... 26
3.8.2 Reliability.................................................................................................................................... 26
3.9 Data Collection Procedure ............................................................................................................ 26
3.10 Data Analysis ............................................................................................................................... 27
3.10.1 Quantitative Data Analysis ....................................................................................................... 27
3.10.2 Qualitative Data Analysis ......................................................................................................... 27
3.11 Ethical Considerations................................................................................................................. 27
3.12 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................... 28
Work Plan .................................................................................................................................................. 30
BUDGET.................................................................................................................................................... 31
REFERENCES .......................................................................................................................................... 32
Appendices ................................................................................................................................................. 34

iv
ABSTRACT

This study explores the socio-economic factors contributing to youth involvement in criminal
activities, focusing on Meru County, Kenya. The research examines how poverty, unemployment,
education, family structure, peer influence, and substance abuse act as catalysts for juvenile
delinquency in the region. Through a combination of qualitative and quantitative methods,
including surveys, interviews, and focus group discussions with local youths, law enforcement
officers, social workers, and community leaders, the study identifies key drivers behind the
increasing rates of youth crime. Findings indicate that socio-economic challenges such as limited
access to education, lack of employment opportunities, and unstable family environments
significantly increase the likelihood of young people engaging in criminal behavior. Peer pressure
and drug addiction further exacerbate the issue, while a lack of community support and mentorship
programs leaves many youth vulnerable to negative influences. The study recommends targeted
policy interventions, including the creation of employment opportunities, enhancement of
educational programs, and strengthening community-based initiatives, to address the root causes
of youth crime in Meru County.

v
 CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION

1.1 Introduction

Youth involvement in criminal activities has become a widespread issue that cuts across various
cultures, economies, and social structures globally. In many parts of the world, young people,
especially those from socio-economically disadvantaged backgrounds, find themselves engaging
in criminal behaviors due to a wide range of social, economic, and psychological pressures. Sub-
Saharan Africa, and Kenya in particular, is no exception to this phenomenon. The problem of youth
crime poses serious challenges to law enforcement, governance, and socio-economic development
in Kenya.

In recent years, Meru County, located in the Eastern region of Kenya, has seen a steady increase
in crime rates, particularly involving young individuals aged between 18 and 35 years. This
demographic group, often referred to as the "youth bulge," is at the heart of Kenya’s population
growth, yet it remains one of the most marginalized in terms of access to education, employment
opportunities, and social services (World Bank, 2019). With limited opportunities for economic
advancement, many youths in Meru County turn to crime as a means of survival, leading to a
vicious cycle of poverty, social instability, and criminality.

The scope of youth involvement in crime is broad and includes activities such as drug trafficking,
theft, robbery, violence, and even organized crime. The rising rates of such crimes in Meru County
have raised concerns not only among law enforcement agencies but also within the local
community, government officials, and development organizations that are trying to address the
root causes of this growing problem. The inability of the government and other stakeholders to
effectively reduce youth crime calls for an urgent investigation into the socio-economic factors
driving this trend. It is within this context that this study seeks to explore the socio-economic
factors contributing to youth involvement in criminal activities in Meru County, Kenya.

This study is crucial as it attempts to provide a comprehensive understanding of the factors that
influence youth crime in Meru County. Understanding these factors will not only provide insights

1
into the underlying causes of youth crime but also guide the development of appropriate strategies
and interventions aimed at reducing crime among young people in rural areas. As such, this
research is timely, relevant, and critical for both academic and policy-making circles.

1.2 Background to the Study

The issue of youth involvement in crime is not new, but it has gained increased attention in recent
years as crime rates continue to rise globally. In Kenya, crime rates have been on the rise, with
youth accounting for a significant proportion of the offenders. According to the Kenya National
Bureau of Statistics (KNBS, 2021), crime rates in Kenya have increased by over 25% in the last
decade, with youths aged 18-35 being the most implicated in criminal activities. While crime is
generally associated with urban areas, rural counties like Meru have not been spared from this
trend.

Meru County, located on the slopes of Mount Kenya, has traditionally been an agricultural hub,
with its economy primarily driven by tea, coffee, and banana farming. However, over the past two
decades, the county has experienced a series of socio-economic challenges that have adversely
affected its population, particularly the youth. One of the most significant challenges facing the
youth in Meru County is unemployment. The county’s unemployment rate is higher than the
national average, with many young people struggling to secure formal employment due to a lack
of skills, education, and access to job opportunities (KNYP, 2019).

Furthermore, the county’s education system has not adequately prepared the youth for the
competitive job market, resulting in a mismatch between the skills acquired and the demands of
the job market. The limited access to quality education and vocational training has left many youths
without the necessary skills to secure well-paying jobs, forcing them to seek alternative, often
illegal, means of earning a living. In addition to unemployment and poor educational attainment,
poverty is a significant factor contributing to youth crime in Meru County. Many households in
the county live below the poverty line, and the youth are often forced to engage in criminal
activities to support themselves and their families.

Social factors such as family dynamics, peer influence, and societal expectations also play a crucial
role in shaping youth behavior. For example, youths who come from broken or dysfunctional

2
families are more likely to engage in criminal activities as they seek to cope with their
circumstances. Similarly, peer influence is a powerful factor that can lead youths to engage in
crime, particularly in areas where criminal activities are normalized or glamorized. This study,
therefore, seeks to investigate the socio-economic factors that contribute to youth involvement in
criminal activities in Meru County and provide recommendations on how these issues can be
addressed.

1.3 Statement of the Problem

The problem of youth involvement in crime has reached alarming levels in Kenya, and Meru
County is no exception. Despite efforts by the government, non-governmental organizations
(NGOs), and local community leaders to curb youth crime, the rates continue to rise. The increase
in youth crime in Meru County poses significant challenges to the socio-economic development
of the region. High crime rates deter investors, reduce business activities, and contribute to social
instability, which in turn exacerbates poverty and unemployment, creating a vicious cycle of crime
and underdevelopment.

In Meru County, the socio-economic conditions that contribute to youth crime have not been
adequately addressed. Existing policies and programs aimed at reducing youth crime have largely
focused on urban areas such as Nairobi, Mombasa, and Kisumu, leaving rural counties like Meru
with limited resources to address the issue. Moreover, most studies on youth crime in Kenya have
focused on urban areas, with little attention given to the unique socio-economic dynamics of rural
counties. As a result, there is a significant knowledge gap regarding the factors that drive youth
crime in rural areas like Meru County.

This study, therefore, seeks to fill this gap by providing a comprehensive analysis of the socio-
economic factors contributing to youth involvement in criminal activities in Meru County. By
doing so, the study aims to provide evidence-based recommendations that can inform the
development of targeted interventions to reduce youth crime in the county.

3
1.4 Aim of the Study

The aim of this study is to investigate the socio-economic factors contributing to youth
involvement in criminal activities in Meru County, Kenya. The study will also provide
recommendations on how these factors can be addressed to reduce youth crime and promote socio-
economic development in the region.

1.5 Objectives of the Study

The specific objectives of the study are:

1. To examine the role of poverty in youth involvement in criminal activities in Meru County.
2. To analyze the impact of unemployment on youth criminal behavior in Meru County.
3. To assess the influence of educational attainment on youth involvement in criminal
activities in Meru County.
4. To evaluate the effect of peer pressure on youth criminality in Meru County.
5. To provide recommendations on strategies to mitigate youth crime in Meru County.

1.6 Research Questions

1. How does poverty contribute to youth involvement in criminal activities in Meru County?
2. What is the impact of unemployment on youth criminal behavior in Meru County?
3. How does educational attainment affect youth involvement in criminal activities in Meru
County?
4. In what ways does peer pressure influence youth criminality in Meru County?
5. What strategies can be recommended to mitigate youth crime in Meru County?

1.7 Assumptions of the Study

This study is based on several assumptions:

1. The respondents will provide honest and accurate responses to the survey questions.
2. The socio-economic factors being studied, such as poverty and unemployment, are
significant contributors to youth criminality.

4
 3. The data collected from the sample will be representative of the youth population in Meru
County and can be generalized to other rural areas in Kenya.

1.8 Justification of the Study

The justification for this study lies in the urgent need to address the issue of youth crime in Meru
County. As crime rates continue to rise, there is a pressing need for evidence-based strategies that
can effectively reduce youth involvement in criminal activities. By focusing on the socio-economic
factors that contribute to youth crime, this study will provide a solid foundation for the
development of targeted interventions that address the root causes of crime in Meru County.

The study will also contribute to the existing body of knowledge on youth crime in Kenya,
particularly in rural areas, where limited research has been conducted. Furthermore, the findings
of this study will be valuable to policymakers, law enforcement agencies, community leaders, and
NGOs working to reduce youth crime and promote socio-economic development in Meru County
and other rural areas in Kenya.

1.9 Significance of the Study

This study is significant for several reasons. First, it will provide empirical evidence on the socio-
economic factors that contribute to youth involvement in criminal activities in Meru County. This
evidence will be valuable for policymakers and other stakeholders in developing strategies to
reduce youth crime. Second, the study will contribute to the academic literature on youth crime in
Kenya, particularly in rural areas, where there is a lack of research on the subject. Third, the study
will provide practical recommendations that can be implemented by local authorities, NGOs, and
community organizations to address the socio-economic factors driving youth crime in Meru
County.

The findings of this study will be of interest to a wide range of stakeholders, including:

Policymakers: The study will provide valuable insights into the socio-economic factors
influencing youth crime, which can be used to inform policy decisions and develop targeted
interventions.

5
 CHAPTER TWO:
LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Introduction

The literature review is a crucial aspect of any research study, as it provides a theoretical and
empirical foundation upon which the study is built. This chapter explores relevant academic works,
reports, and policy documents that shed light on the socio-economic factors contributing to youth
involvement in criminal activities. The chapter begins by examining global perspectives on youth
crime before focusing on the African context, particularly Kenya. The review further explores key
socio-economic factors such as poverty, unemployment, educational attainment, and peer
influence, which are posited to influence youth crime. The chapter concludes with a discussion on
the theoretical framework guiding this study, outlining the relevant criminological theories used
to explain youth criminal behavior.

2.2 Global Perspectives on Youth Crime

Youth crime is a global phenomenon that has drawn attention from scholars, policymakers, and
practitioners alike. In developed and developing countries, youth are often over-represented in
crime statistics, particularly in violent and property-related crimes (United Nations Office on
Drugs and Crime [UNODC], 2020). Research has demonstrated that young people are more likely
than older individuals to engage in risk-taking behaviors, including criminal activities (Farrington,
2017). Several factors have been linked to youth involvement in crime, including socio-economic
deprivation, family background, educational experiences, and peer associations.

In developed nations, particularly in Europe and North America, studies have established that
economic inequality plays a pivotal role in driving youth towards crime (Sampson & Laub, 2018).
Economic strain leads to frustration and disillusionment among young people, who may resort to
criminal activities as a means of coping with their economic realities. Furthermore, youth in these
regions often experience marginalization in terms of limited access to quality education and
employment opportunities, which further perpetuates their involvement in crime (Moffitt, 2019).

In contrast, in developing nations such as those in sub-Saharan Africa, youth crime is often more
deeply rooted in structural and systemic issues such as poverty, lack of education, and weak

6
governance (World Bank, 2018). This is particularly evident in countries where there is rapid
urbanization and inadequate social infrastructure to cater to the growing youth population. Sub-
Saharan Africa’s youth bulge—a demographic trend marked by a disproportionately large youth
population—has placed immense pressure on economies that struggle to create enough jobs and
provide adequate social services (African Development Bank, 2017). As a result, many young
people in the region turn to crime as a survival strategy.

2.3 Youth Crime in Africa

Africa’s unique socio-economic landscape has created fertile ground for the rise in youth
involvement in criminal activities. According to a report by the United Nations Development
Programme (UNDP, 2021), Africa’s youth population is expected to double by 2050, which will
exacerbate the continent’s existing challenges related to unemployment, poverty, and inequality.
Countries such as Nigeria, South Africa, and Kenya have seen a marked increase in youth crime,
particularly in urban slums and informal settlements, where poverty is rife, and social services are
limited.

In South Africa, for instance, high levels of inequality and unemployment have been directly
linked to increased youth crime rates, particularly in township areas where opportunities for formal
employment are limited (Dixon, 2019). Similarly, in Nigeria, youth crime is widespread in urban
areas, with young people engaging in crimes such as armed robbery, kidnapping, and drug
trafficking due to the lack of economic opportunities and the failure of the state to provide adequate
social services (Alemika, 2018). These examples highlight the significant role that socio-economic
conditions play in driving youth towards criminal behavior in African countries.

Kenya, like many other African nations, has a high youth population, with nearly 70% of its
population under the age of 30 (KNBS, 2021). While the government has made strides in
improving access to education and creating employment opportunities for the youth, challenges
remain, particularly in rural areas such as Meru County. Youth crime in Kenya is often linked to
broader socio-economic challenges, including poverty, unemployment, and limited access to
quality education (KNYP, 2019). In rural areas, these challenges are compounded by factors such
as poor infrastructure, limited government presence, and inadequate social services, which make

7
it difficult for young people to access opportunities that would otherwise deter them from engaging
in criminal activities.

2.4 Socio-Economic Factors Contributing to Youth Crime

2.4.1 Poverty

Poverty is one of the most significant socio-economic factors contributing to youth involvement
in criminal activities. Numerous studies have shown a strong correlation between poverty and
crime, particularly among young people (Nyambura & Kinyanjui, 2020). When individuals and
families are unable to meet their basic needs, they may resort to criminal activities as a means of
survival. Poverty creates an environment in which young people are exposed to crime at an early
age, and in some cases, criminal behavior becomes normalized within poor communities.

In Kenya, poverty is a widespread issue, with approximately 36% of the population living below
the poverty line (World Bank, 2019). In rural areas such as Meru County, the situation is
particularly dire, as many households rely on subsistence farming, which provides limited income
and is often subject to environmental factors such as droughts. The inability of young people to
break out of the cycle of poverty due to limited economic opportunities increases their likelihood
of engaging in criminal activities. Research conducted by Otieno and Muchiri (2017) found that
poverty was a significant driver of youth crime in Kenya, particularly in rural areas where job
opportunities are scarce, and social services are limited.

2.4.2 Unemployment

Unemployment is another critical factor that has been widely linked to youth crime. Young people
who are unemployed and unable to find meaningful employment are more likely to engage in
criminal activities as a way to make money or out of frustration and boredom (Agnew, 2016). The
relationship between unemployment and crime is well-documented, with several studies indicating
that high levels of unemployment are associated with increased crime rates, particularly among
young people (Becker, 2018).

In Meru County, unemployment is a significant issue, particularly among the youth. According to
the Kenya National Bureau of Statistics (2021), the youth unemployment rate in Meru County is

8
estimated at over 35%, which is higher than the national average. The lack of formal employment
opportunities, coupled with limited access to vocational training and education, has left many
young people without the skills needed to compete in the labor market. As a result, many youths
in Meru County turn to criminal activities such as theft, robbery, and drug trafficking to support
themselves and their families.

2.4.3 Educational Attainment

Education plays a crucial role in shaping the behavior and aspirations of young people. Studies
have shown that individuals with higher levels of education are less likely to engage in criminal
activities, as education provides them with the skills and knowledge needed to secure stable
employment and make positive contributions to society (Hirschi, 2017). Conversely, individuals
with low levels of education are more likely to engage in criminal activities due to limited
opportunities for economic advancement and personal development.

In Kenya, access to quality education remains a challenge, particularly in rural areas such as Meru
County. While the government has made efforts to improve access to education through initiatives
such as free primary education, many young people in rural areas still face significant barriers to
education, including poverty, long distances to schools, and a lack of qualified teachers (KNYP,
2019). The limited access to education in Meru County has contributed to high dropout rates, with
many young people leaving school before completing their secondary education. These individuals
are more likely to engage in criminal activities as they lack the skills and qualifications needed to
secure formal employment.

2.4.4 Peer Influence

Peer influence is another significant factor that contributes to youth involvement in criminal
activities. Young people are often influenced by their peers, and in environments where criminal
behavior is normalized, they are more likely to engage in such activities (Sutherland, 2016). Peer
influence is particularly strong during adolescence and early adulthood, as young people seek to
fit in with their social groups and gain acceptance from their peers.

In Meru County, peer influence plays a significant role in shaping youth behavior. Many young
people who are unemployed or living in poverty are drawn to criminal activities by their peers,

9
who may glamorize crime as a way to make money or gain social status. Research conducted by
Kariuki and Mwaura (2018) found that peer influence was a significant driver of youth crime in
rural areas of Kenya, particularly in communities where criminal behavior was normalized and
accepted as a means of survival.

2.5 Theoretical Framework

Theoretical frameworks are essential in guiding research studies, as they provide a structured
approach to understanding and interpreting the phenomena being investigated. This study draws
on several criminological theories to explain the socio-economic factors contributing to youth
involvement in criminal activities in Meru County. The primary theories used in this study include
strain theory, social learning theory, and social disorganization theory.

2.5.1 Social Learning Theory

Social Learning Theory (SLT) is a psychological theory that explains how people learn
behaviors, attitudes, and values through observing and interacting with others in their environment.
It was initially developed by Canadian-American psychologist Albert Bandura in the 1960s and
has since become one of the most influential theories in the field of psychology, criminology, and
sociology.

Social Learning Theory posits that people do not learn in isolation, but rather learn by observing
and imitating the actions of others (often referred to as role models). It suggests that individuals
can acquire new behaviors, including criminal behaviors, through their social environment without
direct reinforcement.

Core Components of Social Learning Theory

SLT consists of several key concepts that explain how learning occurs through social interaction:

1. Observational Learning (Modeling)

o People can learn new behaviors by observing the actions of others and the
consequences of those actions. This is also known as modeling. A child may learn

10
 how to behave (whether good or bad) by watching their parents, peers, or media
figures.
o Example: A young person might witness peers committing theft, and seeing the
immediate rewards (such as material gain), they may decide to imitate the behavior.
2. Imitation
o Once a behavior is observed, individuals may imitate or replicate the behavior,
especially if they perceive it as rewarding or having a positive outcome.
o Example: If a youth sees a peer who is admired for being rebellious or tough, they
may imitate similar behaviors in order to gain peer approval or status.
3. Reinforcement and Punishment
o Reinforcement refers to the process of rewarding a behavior to increase the
likelihood of that behavior being repeated. Punishment is the application of
negative consequences to decrease the likelihood of a behavior recurring.
o In the context of crime, if a youth observes that criminal activities lead to rewards
(such as money, respect, or power), the likelihood of them engaging in those
activities increases.
o Example: If a young person observes that a peer who engages in criminal activity
is praised or rewarded, they are more likely to be drawn into that behavior.
4. Differential Association
o Differential association is a concept derived from Edwin H. Sutherland's theory
of differential association and integrated into Bandura’s Social Learning Theory. It
suggests that people learn criminal behaviors from the people they associate with.
o Those who associate with individuals who engage in criminal behavior are more
likely to adopt similar behaviors.
o Example: A teenager who associates with a group involved in drug use may
eventually begin using drugs themselves due to the social reinforcement from the
group.
5. Identification
o People are more likely to imitate behaviors of individuals they identify with. This
could be someone who shares similar characteristics, such as age, social status, or
values.

11
 o Example: A young person may be more likely to engage in delinquent behavior if
they identify with a particular group or individual who engages in crime, especially
if they view them as role models.
6. Cognitive Factors
o Social Learning Theory also acknowledges the role of cognitive factors in
learning. This involves how individuals process information and the mental
evaluation they make about the behaviors they observe.
o Example: A youth might learn the behavior of stealing not only by seeing others
do it but by thinking about the perceived benefits of the crime (such as the thrill or
material gain).

Key Tenets of Social Learning Theory

1. Learning occurs in a social context – People acquire behaviors and attitudes through
interactions with others and the environment. These social interactions, including media
exposure, play a significant role in shaping behavior.
2. People are not passive learners – According to SLT, individuals actively engage in the
learning process, meaning they choose which behaviors to model or imitate based on their
experiences, observations, and the reinforcement they receive.
3. Behavior is learned, not innate – SLT emphasizes that behaviors, including criminal
behaviors, are learned through social interactions, rather than being innate or biologically
determined.
4. The social environment influences behavior – The behavior of others, including family,
peers, media, and social institutions, has a strong impact on an individual's choices and
actions.

12
Application of Social Learning Theory in Criminology

Social Learning Theory has been widely applied in criminology to explain how individuals,
particularly youths, come to engage in criminal activities. According to this framework, criminal
behavior is learned in the same way as other behaviors through the socialization process, and
certain social influences (such as family, peers, and community) can increase the likelihood of
criminal behavior.

Some key points of application include:

1. Peer Influence: Youth are particularly susceptible to learning behaviors from peers. If they
associate with individuals or groups that endorse deviant behavior, such as drug use, theft,
or violence, they are more likely to adopt similar behaviors.
o Example: In a peer group where drug use is normalized or even admired, a young
person may start using drugs themselves, believing it is socially acceptable or even
rewarding.
2. Family Influence: Family dynamics, including parenting styles, discipline, and
communication, can strongly influence whether a youth becomes involved in crime. For
example, an abusive or neglectful family environment can increase the likelihood of a
young person seeking out negative role models or engaging in criminal activities.
o Example: A child growing up in a family where criminal behavior is common may
learn to view criminal activity as normal or acceptable.
3. Media Influence: Exposure to media portrayals of crime, violence, and deviant behavior
can also shape perceptions and behaviors. If young people see criminals being rewarded or
admired in movies, TV shows, or online platforms, they may be more likely to imitate
those behaviors.
o Example: Movies or video games that glorify violent or criminal behavior can
increase the likelihood that youth will adopt similar behaviors.
4. Socioeconomic Conditions: Poor economic conditions, lack of education, and limited
opportunities can also foster criminal behavior, as individuals may learn to view crime as
a viable option for achieving social status, material wealth, or survival.

13
Criticism of Social Learning Theory

While Social Learning Theory is widely accepted, it has faced some criticisms:

1. Overemphasis on Environment: Critics argue that SLT places too much emphasis on the
role of social influences and overlooks the potential influence of biological or
psychological factors.
2. Determinism: Some argue that SLT may imply that people have no control over their
behaviors and are simply products of their social environment, which can be seen as overly
deterministic.
3. Neglects Individual Agency: Critics have suggested that SLT may not adequately account
for individual decision-making processes or the internal factors that influence behavior,
such as personal values, motivations, and cognitive evaluations.

Conclusion

Social Learning Theory offers valuable insights into how youth and individuals learn and engage
in criminal behavior, highlighting the role of social interactions, reinforcement, and observation.
It emphasizes that crime is not an inherent trait but rather a learned behavior that is influenced by
the social environment. Through understanding the social context in which individuals learn and
imitate criminal behavior, interventions can be designed to reduce crime by changing the
environment, offering positive role models, and providing alternative pathways for socialization
and reinforcement.

14
2.5.2 Social Disorganization Theory

Social Disorganization Theory is a criminological perspective that emphasizes the role of

community structure and environmental factors in influencing crime rates. The theory, developed
by Shaw and McKay in the early 20th century, posits that crime is more likely to occur in
communities with weak social structures, a lack of community cohesion, and social instability.
These environments are characterized by factors such as poverty, residential instability, ethnic
heterogeneity, and lack of social control, which can contribute to high crime rates.

In the context of Meru County, Kenya, Social Disorganization Theory can help explain the social
and environmental conditions that may contribute to youth involvement in criminal activities in
this region. Below is an exploration of how this theory might be applied to Meru County, with a
focus on the social and environmental factors that influence youth behavior.

Application of Social Disorganization Theory to Meru County, Kenya

Meru County, located in central Kenya, is a predominantly rural area with some urbanization. It
faces several social and economic challenges that might make it a relevant context for examining
Social Disorganization Theory. Here’s a breakdown of how the theory’s concepts apply to Meru
County:

1. Poverty and Economic Inequality

• Social Disorganization Theory emphasizes that communities struggling with poverty are
often more prone to criminal behavior because residents are less likely to invest in
community well-being and social control. In Meru County, like in many rural areas in
Kenya, poverty levels are high, and many youths face limited access to economic
opportunities.
• Young people in poor neighborhoods may turn to crime or delinquency as a means of
survival or to gain material goods, especially when legal avenues seem inaccessible or less
rewarding.

15
 • Example: A high school graduate in Meru with limited job prospects may feel
marginalized and may eventually get involved in petty theft or illegal activities like drug
trafficking, seeking financial gain.

2. Residential Instability and Migration

• Social Disorganization Theory suggests that frequent movement of families, especially for
economic reasons, can lead to a lack of strong social ties and networks. In Meru, rural-
urban migration is common as people move to cities or towns in search of work or better
living conditions. This residential instability weakens community ties and social controls.
• Youth growing up in these transient environments may have difficulty forming stable
relationships with adults or community members who can provide positive guidance,
increasing their vulnerability to criminal influences.
• Example: A family that frequently relocates within Meru or to nearby urban centers may
face challenges in establishing consistent relationships with community members or
institutions, such as schools, religious groups, or local leaders, leading to a lack of social
cohesion and increased criminal behavior among youth.

3. Ethnic Heterogeneity

• In communities where ethnic groups are diverse, Social Disorganization Theory suggests
that there may be a lack of shared values and social norms, leading to a disorganized
community. In Meru, although the majority of the population is from the Meru ethnic
group, there are multiple communities coexisting, and rural-urban migration may bring
even more diversity to local populations.
• Ethnic diversity, if not managed well, can lead to tension and social fragmentation,
undermining the sense of community cohesion necessary to maintain social control and
reduce crime.
• Example: In a mixed neighborhood of Meru, where different ethnic groups live in close
proximity but have varying cultural practices, there may be fewer common social norms or
mutual respect, leading to higher incidences of social deviance or criminal behavior, as the
community may struggle to form a collective response to crime.

16
4. Weak Social Institutions

• Social Disorganization Theory also highlights the role of weak social institutions (e.g.,
schools, churches, and local governance) in contributing to crime. In Meru, like in many
rural areas, these institutions may be under-resourced or lack the capacity to address social
problems effectively.
• Weak or inconsistent enforcement of laws, underfunded schools, and limited access to
counseling and social services contribute to an environment where criminal behavior may
be more likely to flourish.
• Example: A lack of proper educational facilities, after-school programs, or community
policing initiatives in certain parts of Meru could leave youths without constructive
activities to engage in, making them more susceptible to criminal influences such as gang
activities, substance abuse, or petty theft.

5. Breakdown of Social Control

• In communities marked by social disorganization, residents may lose trust in each other
and in local authorities. The breakdown of informal social control (e.g., neighbors
intervening when they see problematic behavior) leads to a situation where deviant
behavior can flourish.
• Example: In urban areas like Meru Town, residents might feel disconnected from one
another and from local authorities. This lack of social cohesion allows youth to engage in
criminal activities like vandalism, drug abuse, or even violent crimes without fear of
intervention from others.

6. Limited Youth Engagement and Recreation

• Social Disorganization Theory suggests that a lack of recreational facilities and youth
engagement opportunities can increase the likelihood of criminal behavior. In Meru
County, especially in rural areas, there may be few structured programs or safe spaces for
young people to engage in extracurricular activities.

17
 • Without positive outlets like sports, arts, or community-based programs, young people may
be more likely to engage in anti-social or criminal behavior as a way to cope with boredom
or frustration.
• Example: In villages where youth have few options for structured activity or socializing,
they may resort to activities like alcohol or drug abuse, or become involved in petty crimes
to gain social status or excitement.

Social Disorganization and Youth Involvement in Crime in Meru County

The application of Social Disorganization Theory in Meru suggests that several factors—such as
poverty, migration, ethnic diversity, and weak community institutions—can contribute to high
rates of youth crime. The theory highlights that youth are more likely to engage in criminal
activities when they lack strong, positive influences from their community and when they live in
areas with few social bonds and weak controls.

Youth in Meru County might turn to crime due to the following reasons, as suggested by Social
Disorganization Theory:

• Lack of Supervision and Guidance: In communities with weak social structures, parents
and local institutions may struggle to supervise and guide youth, leading to an increased
likelihood of delinquent behavior.
• Peer Influence: When youths grow up in communities where crime is prevalent, they may
form peer groups that normalize criminal behavior. Peer influence plays a strong role in
the adoption of deviant behaviors.
• Economic Strain: In areas with high poverty rates, youth may turn to crime as a means to
achieve economic success, especially when legitimate opportunities are scarce.

18
Addressing Social Disorganization in Meru County

To address the issues associated with social disorganization and reduce youth involvement in
criminal activities, the following strategies could be implemented:

1. Strengthening Social Institutions: Improving the capacity of schools, religious

institutions, and local government to engage youth in positive activities, such as sports and
education, can build social cohesion and reduce crime.
2. Community Building Initiatives: Programs that foster strong community ties, improve
neighborly relations, and encourage collective action to maintain social order can reduce
the likelihood of crime.
3. Youth Empowerment Programs: Establishing youth empowerment programs that
provide job skills, mentorship, and recreational activities can help youths avoid engaging
in criminal behavior as a form of socialization.
4. Addressing Poverty and Economic Inequality: Reducing poverty and improving access
to economic opportunities for youth can reduce the temptation to engage in illegal activities
for financial gain.

19
 CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK

Independent Variables Dependent Variable

(Socio-Economic Factors) (Youth Criminal Activities)

| Poverty | Unemployment | Family | Education | Peer Influence | Substance |

| Structure | | Abuse |

Mediating Variables:

Community Support Systems

Law Enforcement and Social Programs

20
2.6 Summary of Literature Review

The literature reviewed in this chapter highlights the significant role that socio-economic factors
such as poverty, unemployment, educational attainment, and peer influence play in contributing to
youth involvement in criminal activities. These factors are particularly relevant in the context of
Meru County, where many young people face significant barriers to achieving economic success
and personal development. The theoretical framework provided by strain theory, social learning
theory, and social disorganization theory offers valuable insights into the mechanisms through
which these socio-economic factors drive youth crime. This chapter sets the stage for the
subsequent chapters, which will explore the research methodology and findings of the study.

2.7 Conclusion

In conclusion, the literature review has demonstrated that youth involvement in crime is a complex
issue influenced by a wide range of socio-economic factors. Poverty, unemployment, educational
attainment, and peer influence are key drivers of youth crime, particularly in rural areas such as
Meru County. The theoretical frameworks discussed in this chapter provide a valuable lens through
which to understand these factors and their impact on youth criminal behavior. The next chapter
will outline the research methodology used to investigate these issues in the context of Meru
County.

21
 CHAPTER THREE
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1 Introduction

This chapter outlines the methodology that was employed in conducting the study on the socio-
economic factors contributing to youth involvement in criminal activities in Meru County, Kenya.
It describes the research design, population of the study, sampling procedures, data collection
methods, research instruments, validity and reliability of the instruments, data analysis, and ethical
considerations. The methodology ensures that the study’s objectives are met through a systematic
collection and analysis of data.

3.2 Research Design

A research design provides the framework for collecting and analyzing data in a study. This
research adopted a descriptive research design. The descriptive design was deemed appropriate
because it allowed for an in-depth examination of the socio-economic factors affecting youth
involvement in criminal activities in Meru County. The design enabled the collection of both
qualitative and quantitative data, providing a comprehensive understanding of the phenomenon
being studied.

Descriptive research is useful in gathering information on current phenomena and their conditions
(Creswell & Creswell, 2018). In this case, the design facilitated the exploration of socio-economic
factors such as poverty, unemployment, education, and peer pressure, all of which contribute to
youth criminality.

3.3 Study Area

The study was conducted in Meru County, located in the Eastern region of Kenya. Meru County
is largely rural, with agriculture being the predominant economic activity. However, the region
faces significant socio-economic challenges, including poverty, unemployment, and inadequate
access to quality education, all of which are contributing factors to youth criminal involvement.
The county’s youth population is substantial, making it an ideal location for investigating the
socio-economic determinants of youth crime.

22
3.4 Target Population

The target population of this study consisted of youths aged 18–35 years living in Meru County.
This age group was selected in alignment with the definition of youth according to the Kenya
National Youth Policy (KNYP, 2019). In addition to the youth, the study targeted law enforcement
officers, community leaders, teachers, and local government officials who have a direct influence
on youth behavior or are involved in youth development initiatives.

According to the Kenya National Bureau of Statistics (KNBS, 2021), Meru County has an
estimated youth population of 250,000. Out of this population, a significant number are either
unemployed or engaged in informal work, which correlates with the growing levels of youth crime
in the area. The study also targeted key stakeholders who are engaged in managing youth-related
programs, law enforcement, and crime prevention in the region.

3.5 Sampling Techniques and Sample Size

3.5.1 Sampling Techniques

The study employed a combination of purposive sampling and stratified random sampling
techniques to select the participants.

• Purposive sampling was used to select key informants such as community leaders, law
enforcement officers, and government officials. These individuals were chosen based on
their knowledge and involvement in youth programs and crime prevention efforts.
• Stratified random sampling was employed to select the youth respondents. The
population was stratified by gender, age, and region to ensure that the sample was
representative of the entire youth population in Meru County. After stratification, random
sampling was used to select participants from each stratum.

3.5.2 Sample Size

The sample size for this study was determined using the Yamane formula (Yamane, 1967), which
is used for calculating sample sizes based on large populations. The formula is as follows:

n=N1+N(e2)n = \frac{N}{1 + N(e^2)}n=1+N(e2)N

23
Where:

• nnn is the sample size,

• NNN is the population size (in this case, 250,000),
• eee is the margin of error, which is typically set at 0.05 for a 95% confidence level.

Using the Yamane formula:

n=250,0001+250,000(0.052)=250,0001+625=250,000626=399.36n = \frac{250,000}{1 +
250,000(0.05^2)} = \frac{250,000}{1 + 625} = \frac{250,000}{626} =
399.36n=1+250,000(0.052)250,000=1+625250,000=626250,000=399.36

The sample size was rounded to 400 participants. This sample size was deemed sufficient to
provide reliable data for the study, considering the size of the target population.

The sample was further divided into sub-groups according to gender, age, and geographical
location to ensure comprehensive data collection across different demographics within the youth
population.

3.6 Data Collection Methods

Data collection for this study involved the use of both primary and secondary data sources. The
primary data was collected through questionnaires and interviews, while secondary data was
sourced from relevant documents such as government reports, academic journals, and policy
papers.

3.6.1 Questionnaires

Questionnaires were the primary tool for collecting quantitative data from the youth participants.
The questionnaires consisted of both closed-ended and open-ended questions. Closed-ended
questions provided specific data related to socio-economic factors, while open-ended questions
allowed participants to express their views on the causes and impacts of youth crime in Meru
County.

24
The questionnaire was structured into several sections, including demographic information, socio-
economic status, education level, employment history, and experiences with peer pressure. The
questions were designed to address the study's objectives, specifically focusing on the role of
poverty, unemployment, education, and peer influence on youth involvement in criminal activities.

3.6.2 Interviews

Interviews were conducted with key informants, including community leaders, law enforcement
officers, teachers, and local government officials. These interviews provided qualitative data that
complemented the quantitative data collected through questionnaires. The interviews were semi-
structured, allowing the interviewer to ask predetermined questions while also giving the
respondents the opportunity to provide detailed responses.

The interviews focused on gaining insights into the stakeholders’ perspectives on youth crime in
Meru County, the socio-economic challenges facing the youth, and the measures that have been
taken to address youth crime in the region. This qualitative data provided a deeper understanding
of the socio-economic dynamics driving youth criminality.

3.6.3 Secondary Data

Secondary data was sourced from a variety of relevant documents, including government reports,
academic journals, policy papers, and previous studies on youth crime and socio-economic factors.
The secondary data was used to supplement the primary data and provide context for the findings
of the study. This included reviewing reports on youth unemployment, education, and crime
statistics in Kenya, as well as scholarly articles on the socio-economic determinants of crime.

3.7 Research Instruments

The primary instruments used for data collection in this study were questionnaires and interview
guides.

• The questionnaire was divided into sections that corresponded to the study’s objectives
and research questions. It included both closed and open-ended questions to capture
comprehensive data on the socio-economic factors influencing youth crime.

25
 • The interview guide for key informants contained questions designed to elicit detailed
responses on the socio-economic conditions in Meru County and their connection to youth
crime. The interview guide was semi-structured, allowing for flexibility during the
interview process.

3.8 Validity and Reliability of Research Instruments

3.8.1 Validity

Validity refers to the extent to which a research instrument measures what it is intended to measure
(Kothari, 2014). To ensure the validity of the research instruments, the questionnaires and
interview guides were developed based on the study’s objectives and were reviewed by experts in
criminology and social sciences. A pilot study was conducted with a small sample of respondents
to test the clarity and appropriateness of the questions. The feedback from the pilot study was used
to refine the instruments.

3.8.2 Reliability

Reliability refers to the consistency of a research instrument in measuring a variable over time
(Mugenda & Mugenda, 2003). The reliability of the questionnaires was tested using the
Cronbach’s alpha coefficient, which measures the internal consistency of the instrument. A
Cronbach’s alpha value of 0.7 and above was considered acceptable for the study (Tavakol &
Dennick, 2011). The pilot test results were analyzed to ensure that the questionnaires were reliable
before being administered to the larger sample.

3.9 Data Collection Procedure

The data collection process followed a structured procedure to ensure consistency and accuracy.
The first step was obtaining research clearance from the relevant authorities, including Tharaka
University’s Ethics Committee and Meru County administrative offices. Once approval was
obtained, the questionnaires were administered to the youth participants, while interviews were
scheduled with key informants. The data collection process took approximately four weeks, with
the researchers working closely with local leaders to ensure maximum participation from the
youth.

26
3.10 Data Analysis

The data collected in this study was analyzed using both quantitative and qualitative methods.

3.10.1 Quantitative Data Analysis

Quantitative data from the questionnaires was analyzed using descriptive statistics and
inferential statistics. The data was entered into the Statistical Package for Social Sciences
(SPSS) software, where it was cleaned and analyzed. Descriptive statistics such as frequencies,
percentages, means, and standard deviations were used to summarize the data. Inferential statistics,
including correlation analysis and regression analysis, were used to determine the relationship
between socio-economic factors (poverty, unemployment, education, peer influence) and youth
involvement in criminal activities.

3.10.2 Qualitative Data Analysis

Qualitative data from the interviews was analyzed using thematic analysis. The data was
transcribed, coded, and organized into themes that corresponded to the study’s objectives. The
thematic analysis allowed the researcher to identify patterns and trends in the qualitative data,
which provided deeper insights into the socio-economic factors contributing to youth crime in
Meru County.

3.11 Ethical Considerations

The study adhered to the highest ethical standards to protect the rights and well-being of the
participants.

• Informed Consent: All participants were fully informed about the purpose of the study,
their rights, and the voluntary nature of their participation. Informed consent forms were
signed before any data was collected.
• Confidentiality: Participants’ identities were kept confidential, and the data collected was
stored securely to protect their privacy.
• Voluntary Participation: Participation in the study was entirely voluntary, and
participants were free to withdraw at any point without facing any penalties.

27
 • No Harm to Participants: The study took measures to ensure that no harm, physical or
psychological, would come to the participants as a result of their involvement in the
research.

3.12 Conclusion

This chapter has outlined the research methodology that was used to investigate the socio-
economic factors contributing to youth involvement in criminal activities in Meru County. The
study employed a descriptive research design, using questionnaires and interviews to collect data
from a representative sample of youth and key informants. The data was analyzed using both
quantitative and qualitative methods to provide a comprehensive understanding of the factors
driving youth crime in the region. Ethical considerations were prioritized to ensure the safety and
privacy of the participants.

28
 Work Plan

APR- AUG- SEPT - OCT NOV- DEC- JAN- FEB MAR- APR
ACTIVITY JLY SEP OCT - NOV DEC JAN FEB -
MAR
Developing Proposal
topic

Search for the Literature

Review

Writing background of
study

Writing literature review

Writing research
methodology

Data analysis and

printing

Writing chapter four and

five

Presentation to the panel

and final submission

30
 BUDGET
ACTIVITIES QU RATE T
PROPOSAL WRITING
(i) Stationery-Notebooks 1 ream 800.00 1
25 x 6 ,
-Pens 1 GB 1000 1
-Flash disk
40copies 30.00 0
(ii) Typesetting and printing
40copies 10.00 0
(iii) Photocopying
Mombasa 2500 7
(iv) Transport (Local)

(v) Literature review-

Transport
Subtotal 5550.00
PILOT STUDY
(i) Producing 10.00 1
2copies
questionnaires 0
(ii) Photocopying 370.00 .
questionnaires 37 copies

Subtotal 390.00
DATA COLLECTION
(i) Producing 37 3.00 1

questionnaires 37 370 0
(ii) Photocopying .
questionnaires
Subtotal 481.00
FINAL PROPOSAL
PREPARATION (i) 36 30.00 5
Typesetting and
(ii) Photocopying 40 10.00 2
(iii) Binding 1copy 70 2

Subtotal 1550.00
CONTIGENCIES0
GRAND 7,971

31
 REFERENCES
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed
methods approaches (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.

Government of Kenya. (2019). Kenya National Youth Policy (KNYP). Nairobi: Government
Printer.

Kenya National Bureau of Statistics [KNBS]. (2021). Kenya population and housing census:
Youth unemployment rates. Nairobi: KNBS.

Kothari, C. R. (2014). Research methodology: Methods and techniques (2nd ed.). New Age
International Publishers.

Mugenda, O. M., & Mugenda, A. G. (2003). Research methods: Quantitative and qualitative
approaches. Acts Press.

Nyambura, P., & Kinyanjui, J. (2020). Socio-economic determinants of youth crime in urban
slums. African Journal of Social Sciences, 12(3), 201–215.

Shaw, C. R., & McKay, H. D. (1942). Juvenile delinquency and urban areas: A study of rates of
delinquency in relation to differential characteristics of local communities in American cities.
University of Chicago Press.

Tavakol, M., & Dennick, R. (2011). Making sense of Cronbach’s alpha. International Journal of
Medical Education, 2, 53–55. https://doi.org/10.5116/ijme.4dfb.8dfd

World Bank. (2018). Youth employment and skills development in sub-Saharan Africa.
Washington D.C.: World Bank Publications.

World Bank. (2019). Poverty and shared prosperity: Understanding poverty in Kenya.
Washington D.C.: World Bank Publications.

Yamane, T. (1967). Statistics: An introductory analysis (2nd ed.). Harper and Row.

Amnesty International. (2020). The impact of socio-economic factors on youth crime in Kenya.
Retrieved from www.amnesty.org
Bourdieu, P. (1990). The logic of practice. Stanford University Press.
Central Bureau of Statistics (CBS). (2019). Kenya national census report: Youth demographic
trends and socio-economic impact. Nairobi: Government Printer.
Fleming, J., & Raines, D. (2017). The role of family structure in youth involvement in criminal
activities: A case study. Journal of Youth and Social Development, 22(3), 102-118.
https://doi.org/10.1080/20917213.2017.129453

32
Mugambi, M., & Muturi, W. (2018). Factors contributing to youth involvement in criminal
activities in Kenya. Nairobi: University Press.
National Crime Research Centre. (2021). Youth crime and societal factors in Kenya: A national
report. Nairobi: NCRO.
Ngugi, N., & Kamau, J. (2016). Peer influence and crime among Kenyan youth: A study of
urban and rural settings. African Journal of Criminology, 28(1), 43-59.
Patterson, G. R., & Stouthamer-Loeber, M. (2016). The development of delinquency: A
developmental model of antisocial behavior. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 35(2), 219-236.
Republic of Kenya. (2017). Youth employment and training policy framework. Nairobi:
Government of Kenya.
UNICEF Kenya. (2018). Poverty and its impact on youth crime in East Africa: A report on the
socio-economic conditions of youth in Kenya. Nairobi: UNICEF.
World Bank. (2019). Kenya’s youth employment challenge: Socio-economic factors and policy
recommendations. Retrieved from www.worldbank.org

33
 Appendices

Appendix A:

Survey Questionnaire for Youth

• A copy of the survey administered to the youth participants in the study. This includes
questions related to socio-economic background, family structure, educational
experience, peer influence, substance abuse, and engagement in criminal activities.

Appendix B:

Interview Guide for Law Enforcement Officers and Social Workers

• A list of questions used during the interviews with law enforcement officers, social
workers, and community leaders. This guide focuses on their perspectives on the factors
influencing youth crime and potential intervention strategies.

Appendix C:

Data Collection Consent Form

• A copy of the informed consent form provided to participants before engaging in

interviews or surveys. It outlines the purpose of the study, confidentiality agreements,
and voluntary participation.

Appendix D:

Statistical Data Tables

• Tables or charts showing the demographic breakdown of survey respondents, crime

statistics, and other relevant data collected during the research process.

34
Appendix E:

Focus Group Discussion Guide

• A list of topics or questions posed to the youth during focus group discussions. This
guide includes prompts on socio-economic challenges, peer influences, and personal
experiences related to crime.

Appendix F: Ethical Approval Documents

• A copy of the ethical approval or clearance obtained from the relevant ethics review
board or committee prior to conducting the research, ensuring compliance with ethical
standards.

Appendix G: Additional Interviews Transcripts

• Transcripts or summaries of additional interviews conducted with key stakeholders such

as local leaders, teachers, or parents, if applicable, that provide further insight into the
socio-economic factors influencing youth crime.

35
QUESTIONNAIRE ON SOCIAL-ECONOMIC FACTORS CONTRIBUTING TO
YOUTH INVOLVEMENT IN CRIMINAL ACTIVITIES

Section A: Demographic Information

1. Age: ___________
2. Gender:
o Male
o Female
o Other (specify) ___________
3. Educational Level:
o No formal education
o Primary school
o Secondary school
o College/University
o Other (specify) ___________
4. Employment Status:
o Employed
o Unemployed
o Self-employed
o Student
o Other (specify) ___________
5. Marital Status:
o Single
o Married
o Divorced
o Widowed

Section B: Family Background 6. Who do you live with? (Select all that apply)

• Both parents
• Father
• Mother
• Siblings
• Grandparents
• Other family members (specify) ___________

7. What is the employment status of your parents/guardians?

o Employed
o Self-employed
o Unemployed
o Other (specify) ___________

36
8. How would you describe your relationship with your family members?
o Very Good
o Good
o Neutral
o Poor
o Very Poor
9. Have you ever faced any form of family conflict or instability?
o Yes
o No
If yes, please explain: _________________________

Section C: Education and Employment 10. Do you currently attend school?

- [ ] Yes
- [ ] No
11. If yes, what level of education are you pursuing?
- [ ] Primary
- [ ] Secondary
- [ ] College/University
12. If no, why did you leave school?
- [ ] Financial constraints
- [ ] Lack of interest
- [ ] Family obligations
- [ ] Other (specify) ___________ 13. Do you feel that lack of education has contributed
to your involvement in crime?
- [ ] Yes
- [ ] No
If yes, explain how: _________________________ 14. Are you currently employed or
involved in any form of income-generating activity?
- [ ] Yes
- [ ] No
15. If yes, how do you earn money?
- [ ] Formal employment
- [ ] Casual labor
- [ ] Informal business
- [ ] Other (specify) ___________ 16. Do you feel that unemployment or lack of income
has contributed to your involvement in crime?
- [ ] Yes
- [ ] No
If yes, explain how: _________________________

37
Section D: Peer Influence and Social Environment 17. How would you describe your
peer group?
- [ ] Positive influences
- [ ] Mixed influences (both positive and negative)
- [ ] Negative influences
18. Do your friends or peers engage in criminal activities?
- [ ] Yes
- [ ] No
If yes, what kind of criminal activities do they engage in? (Select all that apply)
- [ ] Theft
- [ ] Drug use
- [ ] Vandalism
- [ ] Violence
- [ ] Other (specify) ___________ 19. Do you feel pressure from your peers to engage in
criminal activities?
- [ ] Yes
- [ ] No
If yes, explain: _________________________ 20. Do you participate in criminal activities
because of peer pressure?
- [ ] Yes
- [ ] No

Section E: Substance Abuse 21. Have you ever used drugs or alcohol?
- [ ] Yes
- [ ] No
22. If yes, what substances have you used? (Select all that apply)
- [ ] Alcohol
- [ ] Marijuana
- [ ] Cocaine
- [ ] Prescription drugs
- [ ] Other (specify) ___________ 23. Do you believe that substance abuse has
contributed to your involvement in criminal activities?
- [ ] Yes
- [ ] No
If yes, explain how: _________________________

Section F: Community and Social Environment 24. How would you rate the safety of
your community?
- [ ] Very Safe
- [ ] Safe
- [ ] Neutral
- [ ] Unsafe

38
- [ ] Very Unsafe
25. Do you think that the lack of community programs and activities has contributed to
youth involvement in crime?
- [ ] Yes
- [ ] No
If yes, explain: _________________________ 26. Do you have access to recreational
activities or youth engagement programs in your community?
- [ ] Yes
- [ ] No
27. How would you describe the role of law enforcement in your community?
- [ ] Very Effective
- [ ] Effective
- [ ] Neutral
- [ ] Ineffective
- [ ] Very Ineffective
28. Do you trust the local authorities or police to deal with crime in your area?
- [ ] Yes
- [ ] No
If no, explain why: _________________________

Section G: Involvement in Crime 29. Have you ever been involved in any form of
criminal activity?
- [ ] Yes
- [ ] No
30. If yes, what type of crime were you involved in? (Select all that apply)
- [ ] Theft
- [ ] Drug trafficking
- [ ] Vandalism
- [ ] Assault/Violence
- [ ] Other (specify) ___________ 31. What motivated you to engage in criminal
activities?
- [ ] Economic necessity
- [ ] Peer pressure
- [ ] Family issues
- [ ] Substance abuse
- [ ] Lack of opportunities
- [ ] Other (specify) ___________ 32. Do you regret your involvement in crime?
- [ ] Yes
- [ ] No
If yes, explain why: _________________________ 33.

39
 What do you think could have helped you avoid getting involved in crime? (Select all
that apply)
- [ ] Better family support
- [ ] Better education
- [ ] More job opportunities
- [ ] Positive peer influence
- [ ] Community programs
- [ ] Other (specify) ___________

40