Tonry notes at the outset that crime is not related per se to particular racial or ethnic groups, but rather is related to the backgrounds and experiences that identifiable groups generally have within a particular country or dominant culture. The study focused primarily on the crime rates and sentencing patterns associated with various immigrant groups in the nine countries. One study objective was to determine the validity of the conventional view that second- and third-generation immigrant groups tend to have higher crime rates than their first- generation immigrant parents and grandparents. The study found this pattern to be generally true across all immigrant groups, but with notable exceptions and parameters that reveal factors which mitigate the general trend; for example, immigrants from older Asian cultures are typically more law abiding even than native populations in all of the examined generations. Also, certain immigrant groups fare better than other groups in their contacts with the criminal justice systems of their host countries. Variations are apparently due to the nature of the interaction between the immigrant cultures and the cultures of the host countries. The immigrant settlement strategies adopted by the host country also impact the crime patterns of second- and third-generation immigrants. Countries with relatively effective settlement policies, such as Sweden, tend to have less of a crime problem with succeeding generations of immigrant families. The way host-country laws and criminal justice policies impact the particular deviant behaviors of various immigrant groups is also a factor that determines arrest and imprisonment rates. Tonry suggests that the dynamics of crime patterns among various immigrant groups in Western Europe may provide some insight into the experiences of various African-American populations in their internal migrations to various regions of the United States, such as the migration of rural southern African-Americans to northern cities.