Environmental crimes are crimes
that harm or damage the
environment.
These crimes can be
committed by: the individual
(littering, dealing in
endangered animals, illegal
dumping of waste), businesses
(pollution) and governments
(pollution, fly tipping).
Green crime can be linked to
globalisation - the planet is a single eco-
system and threats to the eco-system
are global rather than local in nature.
For example, atmospheric pollution in
one country can turn into acid rain
that falls into another, resulting in
destroying its forests.
Ukraine 1986 - an accident
in the nuclear industry can
spread radioactive material
over thousands of miles,
showing how a problem in
one area can have
worldwide effects,
Beck - Global risk society. As we have
now stepped into the late modern
society, there are resources for
everything. The increase in
technological resources means that
there are new manufactured risks
that involve harming the
environment in new ways.
Green Criminology
Traditional criminology: Situ and Emmons -
define environmental crime as 'an
unauthorised act that violates the law.'
Traditional criminology is defined by the
criminal law, and no law has been broken. It
investigates the patterns and causes of law
breaking. The advantage is that it has a
defined subject matter. However, it's criticised
for accepting the official definitions of
environmental crimes, which are shaped by
the powerful groups, such as big businesses.
White - he argues that criminology is any
action that harms the physical
environment and human & animals within
it, even if no law has been broken. Many of
the worst environmental harms aren't
illegal, so green criminology is much wider
than traditional criminology. Due to this
reason, green criminology is transgressive
(it oversteps the boundaries to include new
issues).
Different countries have
different laws, so what may be
a crime in one country won't
be regarded as a crime in
another. Therefore, legal
definitions can't state what is
a crime and what isn't. Green
criminology can form a global
view on green crime by
moving away from legality.
Green criminologists share a
similar view to Marxists. Marxists
state that capitalism is able to
shape laws that suits their needs
and benefits them. Similarly, green
criminologists argue that powerful
interests such as TNC's can define
environmental harm.
White - two views of harm:
1.) Anthropocentric -
humans have a right to
dominate nature for
their own ends, and
puts economic growth
before the environment.
2.) Ecocentric - sees
humans and their
environment as
interdependent, so that
environmental harm
hurts humans also. This
view sees both humans
and the environment
as open to exploitation
by global capitalism.
Green criminology
adopts this view as the
basis for judging
environmental harm.
South classifies green crime into 2 types: primary
and secondary.
Primary green crimes - crimes
that come from the destruction
and degradation of the earth's
resources.
Air pollution -
governments,
business and
consumers.
Deforestation - the state and
those who benefit from forest
destruction, i.e. logging
companies, cattle ranchers.
Species decline and
animal rights.
Water
pollution -
businesses and
governments.
Secondary green crimes -
crimes that go against the
rules aimed at preventing
environmental disasters.
State violence
against
oppositional
groups - states
critise terrorism,
but resort to
similar illegal
methods
themselves.
Hazardous waste and organised crime -
disposal of toxic waste is highly profitable
due to the high costs of legal disposal, so
businesses may dump illegally.