Last Updated on October 2, 2025 by Karl Thompson
The functionalist perspective on crime, as developed by Émile Durkheim, sees crime and deviance as an inevitable and even necessary feature of social life. Durkheim argued that crime has positive functions: it reinforces shared norms and values, strengthens collective conscience, and can stimulate social change. While crime can be disruptive, Durkheim maintained that societies could not exist without it.
This post explores Durkheim’s functionalist view of crime, focusing on his theory of the positive functions of crime, and considers how relevant his ideas are in understanding crime in contemporary society. it also considers some other Functionalist views of crime.
Durkheim on Crime Three Key Ideas
There are three main aspects to Durkheim’s theory of crime:
- A limited amount of crime is inevitable and even necessary
- Crime has positive functions -A certain amount of crime contributes to the well-being of a society.
- On the other hand, too much crime is bad for society and can help bring about its collapse, hence institutions of social control are necessary to keep the amount of crime in check. Refer here to Durkheim’s Theory of Suicide.
Durkheim developed his theory of crime and deviance in The Rules of Sociological Method, first published in 1895.
Crime is Inevitable
Durkheim argued that crime is an inevitable and normal aspect of social life. He pointed out that crime is inevitable in all societies, and that the crime rate was in fact higher in more advanced, industrial societies.
Durkheim theorised crime was inevitable because not every member of society can be equally committed to the collective sentiments (the shared values and moral beliefs of society). Since individuals are exposed to different influences and circumstances, it was ‘impossible for them to be all alike’ and hence some people would inevitably break the law.
Durkheim also theorised that deviance would still exist even in a ‘society of saints’ populated by ‘perfect’ individuals. The general standards of behaviour would be so high that the slightest slip would be regarded as a serious offence. Thus the individual who simply showed bad taste, or was merely impolite, would attract strong disapproval.
A good example of this are the laws surrounding grass cutting in many towns in America. These laws stipulate a maximum grass height, typically of eight inches. If the grass grows above this, the local council may fine them, and they can even go to jail. Some people have been fined thousands of dollars for letting their lawns grow too long.
Society of Saints: in some towns in America you can be fined if you let your grass grow too long!
Crime Performs Positive Functions
Durkheim went a step further and argued that a certain amount of crime was functional for society. He argued that crime performed THREE positive functions for societies…
- Social regulation
- Social integration
- Social change
Social Regulation
Crime performs the function of social regulation by reaffirming the boundaries of acceptable behaviour.
When a crime occurs and and individuals are punished it becomes clear to the rest of society that the particular action concerned is unacceptable.
In contemporary society newspapers also help to perform the publicity function, with their often-lurid accounts of criminal acts.
In effect, the courts and the media are ‘broadcasting’ the boundaries of acceptable behaviour, warning others not to breach the walls of the law (and therefore society)
Social Integration
A second function of crime is to strengthen social cohesion. For example, when particularly horrific crimes have been committed the whole community joins together in outrage and the sense of belonging to a community is therefore strengthened.
Social Change
A further action performed by the criminals is to provide a constant test of the boundaries of permitted action. When the law is clearly out of step with the feelings and values of the majority, legal reform is necessary. Criminals therefore, perform a crucial service in helping the law to reflect the wishes of the population and legitimising social change.
Durkheim further argued deviance was necessary for social change to occur because all social change began with some form of deviance. In order for changes to occur, yesterday’s deviance becomes today’s norm.
Too much Crime is Dysfunctional
Durkheim argued that crime only became dysfunctional when there was too much or too little of it – too much and social order would break down, too little and there would not be sufficient capacity for positive social change.
One of the main problems with this aspect of Durkheim’s theory is that he did not specify precisely how much crime a society needed, or what types of crime!
Durkheim’s view of punishment
Durkheim suggested that the function of punishment was not to remove crime from society altogether, because society ‘needed’ crime. The point of punishment was to control crime and to maintain the collective sentiments. In Durkheim’s own words punishment ‘serves to heal the wounds done to the collective sentiments’.
According to Durkheim a healthy society requires BOTH crime and punishment to be in balance and to be able to change.
Contemporary Relevance and Evaluation
Is Durkheim’s functionalist perspective on crime still useful today?
- Terrorism and violent crime: The Manchester Arena bombing (2017) briefly unified the public in grief and solidarity, an example of boundary maintenance — but it also generated long-lasting fear, showing the negative impact can outweigh any solidarity.
- Knife crime in London: Rising stabbings among young people (over 13,500 knife crime offences recorded in 2023, ONS) may spark media campaigns and community action, but the human costs challenge Durkheim’s optimism.
- Cybercrime: Online fraud and hacking now cost the UK economy over £1.2 billion annually (UK Finance, 2023). It’s difficult to see how such crimes perform any “positive function.”
- Social change movements: The Black Lives Matter protests (2020) and climate activism (Extinction Rebellion) illustrate Durkheim’s point about deviance driving reform. Law-breaking in these contexts has led to public debate and, in some cases, policy responses.
- Corporate and state crime: Scandals such as the Post Office Horizon IT case (ongoing into 2024–25) show how institutional wrongdoing devastates victims and undermines trust — contradicting the idea of crime strengthening collective conscience.
Evaluation of the Functionalist View of Crime
- Durkheim talks about crime in very general terms. He theorises that ‘crime’ is necessary and even functional but fails to distinguish between different types of crime. It could be that some crimes may be so harmful that they will always be dysfunctional rather than functional.
- Functionalists suggest that the criminal justice system benefits everyone in society by punishing criminals and reinforcing the acceptable boundaries of behaviour. However, Marxist and Feminist analysis of crime demonstrates that not all criminals are punished equally and thus crime and punishment benefit the powerful for than the powerless
- Interactionists would suggest that whether or not a crime is functional cannot be determined objectively; surely it depends on an individual’s relationship to the crime.
- Functionalists assume that society has universal norms and values that are reinforced by certain crimes being punished in public. Postmodernists argue society is so diverse, there is no such thing as ‘normal’.
- The Functionalist theory of crime is teleological. It operates a reverse logic by turning effects into causes. I.e. in reality the cause of crime is the dysfunctional system. However in functionalist theory crime becomes the necessary cause which makes a system functional. This really makes no sense!
Additional Functionalist Theorists on the Functions of Crime and Deviance
Many theorists have developed Durkheim’s work over the years….
Kingsley Davis (1937)
- Davis argued that prostitution helps to stabilise monogamous relationships. He suggested it provides an unemotional, impersonal and unthreatening outlet for the sexual desires of married men, thereby protecting the family from the destabilising effects of affairs.
- In this way, prostitution was viewed as a “safety valve” that prevented greater disruption to the institution of marriage.
- Criticism: Feminists strongly reject this view, arguing it ignores the exploitation of women and says nothing about women’s own sexual frustrations or desires. It also reduces women to tools for male sexual release, reinforcing patriarchy.
Ned Polsky (1967)
- Polsky extended Davis’s argument to pornography, claiming that porn provides a similar “safety valve” by giving men a harmless outlet for sexual urges.
- He argued that without such outlets, men might seek sexual satisfaction in ways that could threaten marriage or social order.
- Criticism: Like Davis, this view is criticised as androcentric — focusing only on male sexuality and ignoring harms such as objectification, the porn industry’s exploitation, or its possible links to distorted sexual expectations.
Daniel Bell (1960)
- In his study of American organised crime, Bell suggested that racketeering in New York’s dockyards provided “queer ladders for success.”
- This meant that organised crime could offer opportunities for upward mobility and alternative routes to status and success for working-class men who were otherwise blocked from mainstream achievement.
- Bell even argued that organised crime could contribute to social stability by reducing frustration among disadvantaged groups, offering them a way to achieve financial security and even political influence.
- Criticism: Critics point out that this normalises criminal exploitation, and that such “success” often comes at the expense of victims and wider social trust.
Mary Douglas (1966)
- Douglas offered a more abstract but important interpretation: she argued that deviance functions as an educational tool for society.
- By confronting acts that threaten cultural categories or challenge social norms, societies are forced to clarify how they manage ambiguities and anomalies.
- For example, cases of witchcraft, taboo violations, or even modern controversies over sexual morality force communities to reflect on where they draw the line between acceptable and unacceptable behaviour.
- In this way, deviance helps societies to reaffirm boundaries and manage threats to their classification systems.
Talcott Parsons (1951)
- Parsons, unlike other functionalists, openly admitted that crime is not always beneficial.
- He argued that while some deviance may contribute to adaptation and change, crime often proves dysfunctional by undermining trust, stability, and the smooth functioning of social institutions.
- Parsons therefore offered a more balanced view — recognising Durkheim’s point that deviance can perform functions, but also stressing that crime can seriously damage social order when it becomes too frequent or severe.
How These Ideas Fit Together
- Parsons reminds us that functionalists were not naïve: deviance can be both functional and dysfunctional depending on its scale and context.
- All of these theorists broadly fit within a functionalist perspective, emphasising how deviance can help maintain or stabilise the social system.
- Davis and Polsky highlight “safety valve” mechanisms that protect core institutions like marriage.
- Bell shows how crime can even serve as an alternative route to integration and success for marginalised groups.
- Douglas provides a theoretical angle on how deviance forces societies to clarify moral boundaries.
In defence of Functionalism….
Functionalism has many critics. HOWEVER, there are a lot of contemporary theories and thinking which have implicit Functionalist ideas in them. For example:
- Merton’s Anomie theory builds on Functionalism -this is still a very popular theory today.
- There is something of the Functionalist and neo-Marxism. The Function of crime, scapegoated via the media, is to distract attention away fro more complex and larger political problems.
- Anything that argues we should look at unintended consequences or we should mistrust people’s own accounts of their actions is basically a functionalist argument!
Functionalism and Crime: FAQs
What was Durkheim’s theory about crime?
Durkheim argued that crime was inevitable because societies could never fully constrain individual freedom. This freedom meant some individuals were always going to be criminal. Durkheim argued crime performed three positive functions: it allowed social change to occur, and it resulted in social regulation and social integration.
What is the Functionalist theory of crime?
There are three main Functionalists who theorise about Crime. Durkheim (1890s) argued that crime was inevitable and performed three positive functions (social integration, regulation and chance). Merton (writing in the 1940s) developed the theory of Anomie: crime happens when there is a strain between society’s goals and the ability of people to achieve those goals legitimately. Hirshi (1960s) argued that crime increases when individuals are less attached to society.
What does Durkheim mean by the “positive functions of crime”?
Crime can reaffirm social boundaries, unite communities against wrongdoing, and encourage adaptation by highlighting laws or norms that need reform.
Revision Bundle for Sale
If you like this sort of thing, then you might like my Crime and Deviance Revision Bundle.
It contains
- 12 exam practice questions including short answer, 10 mark and essay question exemplars.
- 32 pages of revision notes covering the entire A-level sociology crime and deviance specification
- Seven colour mind maps covering sociological perspective on crime and deviance
Written specifically for the AQA sociology A-level specification.
Related Posts
- Durkheim’s Functionalist Theory is taught as part of consensus theory within the A-level sociology Crime and Deviance syllabus. Other consensus theories include:
- Merton’s Strain Theory of Crime
- The ‘Social Control’ Theory of Crime
- Subcultural Theories of Deviance
Sources used to write this post
Liebling, Maruna and McAra (2023) The Oxford Handbook of Criminology
Haralambos and Holborn: sociology themes and perspectives, edition 8.
External Links (for further reading)
- ONS (2024) – Crime in England and Wales: https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/crimeandjustice
- UK Finance (2023) – Fraud and Cybercrime Statistics: https://www.ukfinance.org.uk
- The Conversation – Does crime have social benefits? Revisiting Durkheim: https://theconversation.com
Why is there so little about Murton?