Criminology is one of the human sciences whose intellectual roots can be traced back to early philosophical reflections on crime, morality, and social order. Ancient Greek philosophers, particularly Plato and Aristotle, sought to understand criminal behavior through ethical reasoning and the pursuit of justice, viewing crime as a moral deviation that threatened the harmony of society. These early interpretations, however, remained largely philosophical and normative in nature, lacking a systematic scientific framework capable of explaining crime as a social phenomenon.

A fundamental transformation occurred during the nineteenth century, within the broader context of scientific progress and profound social change in European societies. Criminology gradually moved beyond abstract philosophical speculation and legal formalism to establish itself as an autonomous scientific discipline grounded in empirical observation and analysis. This shift marked a departure from the traditional legal approach, which confined crime to the violation of legal norms, toward a broader scientific inquiry aimed at uncovering the causes, conditions, and dynamics underlying criminal behavior.

As scientific research advanced and social structures became increasingly complex, it became evident that a narrow conception of criminology—limited to the study of crime or the offender in isolation—was no longer sufficient. This realization led to the emergence of expanded concepts of criminology, which redefined the field as an interdisciplinary science concerned with the interaction of multiple factors shaping criminal behavior. Modern criminology thus began to examine individual, social, economic, and cultural determinants of crime, while extending its analytical scope to include the victim, mechanisms of social control, and policies of prevention and punishment.

In this intellectual context, the contributions of several thinkers and scientific schools played a decisive role in shaping the expanded conceptual framework of criminology. Enrico Ferri, for instance, advanced a comprehensive vision of criminology through his theory of multiple causation, emphasizing the interaction between biological, psychological, and social factors in the production of crime. Similarly, the Austrian School reinforced the social and economic dimensions of criminal behavior, interpreting crime as a product of structural conditions and objective social realities. The classical American School further enriched criminological thought by adopting a pragmatic social approach, focusing on social interaction, urban environments, and systems of social control, thereby bringing criminological analysis closer to lived social realities.

However, this expansion of the criminological concept raises a critical scientific and methodological question regarding the discipline’s ability to maintain its theoretical identity and epistemological autonomy amid increasing overlap with neighboring social sciences. Accordingly, this study seeks to address the following central research question: To what extent have the perspectives of Enrico Ferri, the Austrian School, and the classical American School contributed to the formulation of an expanded concept of criminology, and what are the points of convergence and divergence among them in defining its subject matter, scope, and methodology?

Based on this problem statement, the study adopts a tripartite methodological structure. It first examines the concept of criminology as articulated by Enrico Ferri, then analyzes its formulation within the Austrian School, and finally explores the conception of criminology advanced by the classical American School.

1. Enrico Ferri and the Italian Positivist Vision of Criminology

1.1 Who Is Enrico Ferri?

Enrico Ferri (1856–1929) is one of the most influential Italian criminologists and a leading figure of the positivist school, alongside Cesare Lombroso and Raffaele Garofalo. Unlike Lombroso, who focused primarily on biological determinism, Ferri developed a comprehensive sociological approach to crime. His work bridged the gap between biological traits, environmental influences, psychological states, and social conditions. He is the founder of the Theory of Multiple Causation.

1.2 Ferri’s Expanded Definition of Criminology

Ferri believed criminology should not be limited to studying criminals or biological anomalies. Instead, he argued that criminology must study:

• The offender
• The crime
• The physical environment
• The social environment
• Economic and cultural factors
• Collective influences

For Ferri, crime is a natural and social phenomenon that results from the interaction of three categories of factors:

1. Anthropological factors: biological and psychological characteristics of the offender.
2. Physical factors: climate, geography, temperature, seasons.
3. Social factors: education, poverty, urbanization, family breakdown, moral values, economic pressure.

Because crime arises from multiple variables, Ferri argued that criminology must integrate all available sciences—biology, psychology, sociology, economics, and law—to understand it.

In this sense, Ferri’s definition of criminology is one of the broadest in the history of the field.

1.3 Why Is Ferri’s Approach a Broad Definition?

• It expands criminology beyond legal definitions.
• It considers crime a social fact shaped by environmental and collective conditions.
• It integrates more than ten scientific domains.
• It seeks to understand preventive strategies linked to education, welfare, and social reform.

1.4 Contribution to Modern Criminology

Ferri’s approach laid the foundation for contemporary criminology, especially:

• Multidisciplinary research
• Integrated crime-prevention strategies
• Social policy approaches
• The belief that crime is not only a personal choice but a product of complex forces

Ferri transformed criminology from the study of “born criminals” into the study of “social causes of crime.”

2. The Austrian School: Hans Gross, Ernst Seelig, and Franz von Liszt

2.1 Overview of the Austrian Criminological Tradition

The Austrian School is another pillar of broad definitions. Rather than focusing exclusively on theoretical concepts, Austrian thinkers paid great attention to the practical side of criminology, especially criminal investigation, forensic science, applied psychology, and court procedures.

2.2 Hans Gross (1847–1915): Founder of Criminal Investigation Science

Hans Gross is widely considered the father of the modern criminal investigation system. His book Criminal Investigation: A Practical Handbook for Magistrates and Police Officers remains a classic.

Gross defined criminology as a practical science that examines:

• The offender
• The criminal act
• The investigative process
• Physical evidence
• Witness behavior
• Psychological influences
• Court procedures
• Police methods

This broad perspective integrates law, psychology, forensic sciences, logic, and field investigations.

2.3 Ernst Seelig and Franz von Liszt

Ernst Seelig and Franz von Liszt expanded Gross’s ideas and emphasized:

• The role of criminology in understanding criminal techniques
• The study of victim psychology
• The importance of scientific investigation
• The link between crime scenes and offender behavior
• The need for interdisciplinary cooperation in the justice system

2.4 Why Is the Austrian Approach a Broad Definition?

Because it combines:

• Legal studies
• Forensic science
• Investigative techniques
• Social behavior
• Psychological analysis

The Austrian thinkers moved criminology far beyond the offender, giving space to investigation, evidence, court dynamics, and behavioral observation.

2.5 Impact on Modern Criminology

The Austrian School influenced:

• Criminal profiling
• Modern police science
• Forensic psychology
• Evidence-based investigation
• Practical criminological training

Their broad definition is foundational to what we now call applied criminology.

3. The Traditional American School: Edwin H. Sutherland

The Traditional American School of Criminology represents a major turning point in the development of criminological thought, particularly through the pioneering contributions of Edwin H. Sutherland. Emerging in the early twentieth century, this school marked a clear shift away from biological determinism and individual pathology toward a sociological understanding of crime. Within the framework of expanded concepts of criminology, Sutherland’s work stands as a foundational pillar that redefined crime as a social phenomenon shaped by interaction, learning, and structural conditions rather than innate criminal tendencies.

Edwin H. Sutherland (1883–1950) is widely regarded as one of the most influential criminologists in American history. His intellectual project was rooted in the belief that crime cannot be adequately explained by biological inferiority, psychological abnormality, or moral weakness alone. Instead, Sutherland argued that criminal behavior is learned through social processes, much like any other form of human behavior. This perspective placed society, culture, and social organization at the center of criminological analysis, aligning the Traditional American School with broader sociological traditions.

One of Sutherland’s most significant contributions is the theory of Differential Association, which became the cornerstone of the Traditional American School. According to this theory, criminal behavior is learned through interaction with others, particularly within intimate social groups such as family, peers, and close associates. Individuals learn not only techniques of committing crime but also motives, rationalizations, and attitudes that justify criminal conduct. Crime, in this sense, is not an isolated act but the result of continuous social learning within specific environments.

The theory of Differential Association challenged earlier criminological schools by rejecting the idea that criminals are fundamentally different from non-criminals. Sutherland emphasized that everyone is exposed to both criminal and non-criminal definitions, but criminal behavior emerges when definitions favorable to law violation outweigh those unfavorable to it. This approach reflects an expanded concept of criminology that goes beyond the individual offender to examine social relationships, cultural norms, and patterns of interaction that shape behavior over time.

Another groundbreaking aspect of Sutherland’s work was his introduction of the concept of White-Collar Crime. Prior to Sutherland, criminology focused almost exclusively on street crime, poverty-related offenses, and lower-class offenders. Sutherland radically expanded the scope of criminology by demonstrating that crime is also prevalent among the upper classes and within legitimate organizations. He defined white-collar crime as offenses committed by individuals of high social status in the course of their occupation, such as fraud, embezzlement, and corporate misconduct.

By introducing white-collar crime into criminological analysis, Sutherland exposed the class bias inherent in traditional crime statistics and criminal justice practices. He argued that official crime data often reflect the selective enforcement of laws against marginalized groups while ignoring or minimizing crimes committed by powerful individuals and institutions. This insight significantly contributed to the expanded conceptualization of criminology, emphasizing that crime is a social construct influenced by power, inequality, and legal definitions.

The Traditional American School, as shaped by Sutherland, also emphasized the importance of empirical research and scientific methodology. Sutherland advocated for systematic observation, comparative analysis, and the use of sociological data to understand crime patterns. His approach reinforced the scientific nature of criminology as an interdisciplinary field that draws on sociology, law, economics, and psychology while maintaining a strong empirical foundation.

Within the broader framework of expanded concepts of criminology, Sutherland’s ideas helped shift the focus from individual blame to social responsibility. Crime was no longer seen merely as a personal failure but as a product of social environments, economic structures, and cultural influences. This perspective encouraged criminologists to examine issues such as urbanization, social disorganization, inequality, and institutional practices as key factors in criminal behavior.

Moreover, Sutherland’s work influenced later theoretical developments, including symbolic interactionism, labeling theory, and conflict criminology. His emphasis on learning, interaction, and social context laid the groundwork for understanding how individuals come to define themselves and others as criminal or non-criminal. In this sense, the Traditional American School represents a bridge between classical sociological criminology and modern critical approaches.

In conclusion, the Traditional American School of Criminology, embodied in the work of Edwin H. Sutherland, represents a fundamental expansion of criminological thought. By framing crime as a learned social behavior and exposing the role of power and inequality in defining and responding to crime, Sutherland transformed criminology into a more comprehensive and socially grounded science. His contributions remain essential for understanding crime not only as a legal violation but as a complex social phenomenon deeply embedded in the structure and dynamics of modern society.

Conclusion

The Italian scholar Enrico Ferri regarded criminology as a science that encompasses all criminal sciences, particularly criminal law, which he considered the legal branch of criminology. In contrast, the Austrian school, represented by Hans Gross, Ernst Seelig, and Franz von Liszt, although excluding criminal law from the scope of criminology, incorporated criminal investigation and penology, alongside the study of criminal behavior. As for the traditional American school, the American sociologist Edwin H. Sutherland further expanded this definition by defining criminology as the science that studies crime as a social phenomenon.

---

References

Ferri, E. (1917). Criminal sociology (J. I. Kelly & J. Lisle, Trans.).
New York, NY: D. Appleton and Company.
https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/58636

Sutherland, E. H. (1947). Principles of criminology (4th ed.).
Philadelphia, PA: J. B. Lippincott Company.
https://archive.org/details/principlesofcrim00suth

Sutherland, E. H., Cressey, D. R., & Luckenbill, D. F. (1992). Principles of criminology (11th ed.).
Lanham, MD: General Hall.
https://archive.org/details/principlesofcrim0000suth

Gross, H. (1906). Criminal investigation: A practical handbook for magistrates, police officers, and lawyers.
London: Sweet & Maxwell.
https://archive.org/details/criminalinvestig00gros

Seelig, E. (1943). Criminology (Foundations of a scientific criminology).
Vienna: Springer.
https://archive.org/details/criminologyseelig

von Liszt, F. (1911). The purpose of punishment.
Boston, MA: Little, Brown, and Company.
https://archive.org/details/purposeofpunishm00lisz

Sutherland, E. H. (1939). White-collar criminality. American Sociological Review, 5(1), 1–12.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/2083937

Differential association theory. (n.d.). Wikipedia.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Differential_association

White-collar crime. (n.d.). Wikipedia.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White-collar_crime

Criminology: www.crimpsy.com