environmental crime dissertation

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• My Account Login
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Open access
• Published: 31 October 2017

Green criminology: shining a critical lens on environmental harm

• Angus Nurse 1  

Palgrave Communications volume  3 , Article number:  10 ( 2017 ) Cite this article

41k Accesses

17 Citations

24 Altmetric

Metrics details

• Criminology

Green criminology provides for inter-disciplinary and multi-disciplinary engagement with environmental crimes and wider environmental harms. Green criminology applies a broad ‘‘green’’ perspective to environmental harms, ecological justice, and the study of environmental laws and criminality, which includes crimes affecting the environment and non-human nature. Within the ecological justice and species justice perspectives of green criminology there is a contention that justice systems need to do more than just consider anthropocentric notions of criminal justice, they should also consider how justice systems can provide protection and redress for the environment and other species. Green criminological scholarship has, thus, paid direct attention to theoretical questions of whether and how justice systems deal with crimes against animals and the environment; it has begun to conceptualize policy perspectives that can provide contemporary ecological justice alongside mainstream criminal justice. Moving beyond mainstream criminology’s focus on individual offenders, green criminology also explores state failure in environmental protection and corporate offending and environmentally harmful business practices. A central discussion within green criminology is that of whether environmental harm rather than environmental crime should be its focus, and whether green ‘‘crimes’’ should be seen as the focus of mainstream criminal justice and dealt with by core criminal justice agencies such as the police, or whether they should be considered as being beyond the mainstream. This article provides an introductory overview that complements a multi- and inter-disciplinary article collection dedicated to green criminological thinking and research.

Introduction

Green Criminology as a field operates as a tool for studying, analyzing, and dealing with environmental crimes and wider environmental harms that are often ignored by mainstream criminology. It provides for an inter-disciplinary, and multi-disciplinary, engagement and approach, which redefines criminology as not just being concerned with crime or social harm falling within the remit of criminal justice systems. Green crime is a fast-moving and somewhat contested area in which academics, policymakers and practitioners frequently disagree not only on how green crimes should be defined but also on: the nature of the criminality involved; potential solutions to problems of green crime; and the content and priorities of policy (Nurse, 2016 ). Within ecological justice discourse, for example, there may be agreement that harms to the environment and non-human animals must be addressed (Benton, 1998 ). But debates continue over whether green crimes are best addressed through criminal justice systems or via civil or administrative mechanisms. Indeed, a central discussion within green criminology is that of whether environmental harm rather than environmental crime should be its focus, with the environmental harm perspective currently dominating green criminological discourse. In essence, there is ongoing fundamental debate over whether green crimes should be seen as the focus of mainstream criminal justice and dealt with by core criminal justice agencies such as the police, or whether they should be considered as being beyond the mainstream. This article provides an introductory overview to a multi- and inter-disciplinary thematic collection dedicated to green criminological thinking and research.

Green criminology: a call to arms

Green criminology is not easily categorized given that it draws together a number of different perspectives as well as theoretical and ideological conceptions. Thus, rather than there being one distinct green criminology, it is rather an umbrella term for a criminology concerned with the general neglect of ecological issues within criminology (Lynch and Stretesky, 2014 :1) as well as the incorporation of green perspectives within mainstream criminology. Indeed as Lynch and Stretesky succinctly state:

‘‘As criminologists we are not simply concerned that our discipline continues to neglect green issues, we are disturbed by the fact that, as a discipline, criminology is unable to perceive the wisdom of taking green harms more seriously, and the need to reorient itself in ways that make it part of the solution to the large global environmental problems we now face as the species that produces those problems’’ (2014: 2).

For mainstream criminology, restrictive notions of police and policing by state institutions and of crime as being solely that determined as such by the criminal law dominate. Yet Lynch and Stretesky ( 2014 ) highlight that environmental harms constitute a major threat to human survival and that green crimes such as pollution constitute a substantial threat to human life yet are often ignored by mainstream justice systems. Accordingly, green criminology, extends beyond the focus on street and interpersonal crimes to encompass consideration of ‘‘the destructive effects of human activities on local and global ecosystems’’ (South and Beirne, 1998 : 147). In doing so green criminology considers not just questions of crime as defined by a strict legalist/criminal law conception (Situ and Emmons, 2000 ), but also examines questions concerning rights, justice, morals, victimization, criminality, and the use of administrative, civil and regulatory justice systems. Green criminology also examines the actions of non-state criminal justice actors such as Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) and civil society organizations and the role of the state as a major contributor to environmental harm.

Given green criminology’s nature as a broad field encompassing discourse on a range of issues relating to environmental harm, this thematic article collection offers discussion of a range of issues that help to advance green criminological discussion.

State-crime is a concern of green criminology, particularly in respect of state responsibility for protecting the environment and natural resources, and the associated harm when states fail to comply with their obligations. Weston and Bollier identify that according to, Locke’s notion of res nullius , environmental and wildlife resources ‘‘belong to no one and are, therefore, free for the taking’’ (2013: 127). However, the public trust doctrine argues that environmental resources such as water and fisheries are held in trust for the public and so there is a responsibility to use such resources widely in the public interest (Blumm and Wood, 2013 ). As noted by Lynch, Stretesky and Long ( 2017 ), water pollution provides an example of both green victimization and of how green crimes can appear in societies on an everyday level. Scholars such as Johnson et al. ( 2016 ) and Lynch and Stretesky ( 2013 ) have examined how states and corporations have commodified water sources as something that can be owned or leased and subsequently can be exploited. Johnson et al. ( 2016 ) identify how in some jurisdictions, the privatization of water has enabled corporations and corrupt states to exploit a fundamental human right. At a basic level, examining the extent and control of water pollution by legal state water treatment facilities illuminates the extent to which state failings in use of water resources can constitute a state-crime. Publicly Owned Water Treatment Facilities (or POWTs) are usually owned by the state/government and represent a mechanism through which water is used as a public good. To quote, for example, from the California Constitution Article X Section 2:

‘‘It is hereby declared that because of the conditions prevailing in this State the general welfare requires that the water resources of the State be put to beneficial use to the fullest extent of which they are capable, and that the waste or unreasonable use or unreasonable method of use of water be prevented, and that the conservation of such waters is to be exercised with a view to the reasonable and beneficial use thereof in the interest of the people and for the public welfare.[…].’’

Similar provisions will be found elsewhere codifying the principle of efficient use of water resources. Thus, failure to effectively manage state water resources and to eliminate or control pollution that impacts negatively on water resources likely raises regulatory concerns. Waste treatment is often a regulated industry and regulations designed to control the emissions of water pollution into waterways (through such measures as the US Clean Water Act) combine with public trust concerns to ensure that natural resources are effectively used. Yet as the discussion in this collection illustrates, POWts release significant quantities of pollutants into waterways, contributing to environmental harm. Green criminologists interested in these areas may well note that water offenses will not always fall within the remit of the criminal law and may not be dealt with by mainstream policing agencies. Instead they may fall within the jurisdiction of environmental regulators like the Environmental Protection Agency who may choose from a menu of criminal, civil, or administrative sanctions when taking enforcement action. As the POWTs are legal actors operating a legitimate business, enforcement action may be regulatory or administrative, consisting of fines or other administrative action designed to correct the problem and allow the operator to continue their business rather than imposing incapacitating punishment. Such action illustrates a concern of many green criminologists in how neoliberal markets, capitalist systems, and the activities of otherwise legal corporate actors can cause significant environmental harm that arguably constitutes a crime against the environment. The relatively low level of prosecutions for pollution activity arguably illustrates this issue. This issue is explored by Ozymy and Jarrell ( 2017 ) who highlight the diffuse structure of the environmental regulatory regime in the United States and lack of governmental databases, which makes empirical assessment of environmental crimes and enforcement efforts particularly difficult.

Wildlife crime is also a core concern of green criminology (van Uhm, 2016 ; Nurse, 2015 , Wyatt, 2013 , Sollund, 2011 ; South and Wyatt, 2011 ). Much green criminological discourse is concerned with wildlife trafficking and the illegal trade in wildlife, particularly trafficking in endangered species (Schneider, 2008 ). However, the illegal killing of wildlife particularly within farming and ranching areas, has recently caught the attention of green criminological scholars. Killing of large predators such as wolves and lynx has been characterized as a form of resistance by some scholars (von Essen et al., 2016 ; von Essen and Allen, 2015 ) and illustrates the conflict between conservation and animal protection ideologies and the needs of rural communities. While most states have animal protection laws intended to protect wildlife from unnecessary human predation, hunting remains a legal and regulated activity. Thus, illegal killing of wildlife within hunting communities should in principle attract the attention of law enforcement agencies. Yet, such killings sometimes take place with the approval of the community and arguably constitute a form of organized crime. How the state deals with such illegal killings and its attitudes toward hunting communities who do so is of interest to determining how states implement species justice concerns (see Sollund, 2017 ). Sollund ( 2016 ) has previously illustrated how defining animals as ‘‘other’’ and their legal conception as property can help distance animal killing from other forms of violent crime. The case under discussion in this thematic collection illustrates how notions of folk crime and resistance can be employed to minimize the seriousness of illegal killing of endangered species. Yet at the same time, police and judicial responses to wildlife killing can view this as serious crime commensurate with global notions of wildlife crime as serious activity.

Green Criminology also examines mechanisms for disrupting and preventing environmental crime and reducing harms to non-human animals and the environment (Wellsmith, 2010 , 2011 ; Nurse, 2015 ). Traditional reactive policing models of detection, apprehension and punishment (Bright, 1993 ) risk being inadequate in the case of environmental harm where irreparable environmental damage or loss of animal life may have already been caused. Likewise, traditional justice systems are also often inadequate to redress the impact of environmental harm. Hall ( 2017 ) makes a case for the wider utilization of restorative justice and mediation-based approaches as a means of providing alternative or parallel justice mechanisms for both human and non-human victims of environmental crimes and broader environmental harms. Such consideration of alternatives is integral to green criminology’s critical approach, which also seeks to promote preventive or disruptive enforcement activity aimed at preventing environmental harm before it occurs. Collaborative and multi-agency approaches offer scope to disrupt environmentally harmful activity as the waste industry case study in this thematic collection illustrates. As a form of critical criminological discourse, green criminology arguably shines a light on the failure of mainstream and traditional justice approaches to deal with such complex crime and in their discussion of multi-agency collaboration in this collection, White and Barrett ( 2017 ) argue for innovative means to combat the multi-dimensional nature of environmental crimes.

The issues discussed within this thematic article collection help position green criminology as a discipline that considers not just questions of crime as defined by a strict legalist/criminal law conception (Situ and Emmons, 2000 ), but also questions concerning rights, justice, morals, victimization, criminality, and the use of administrative, civil and regulatory justice systems. The papers included all follow a critical path, expressing a claim of an alternative criminology consistent with South’s claim that addressing environmental harms and injustice requires ‘‘a new academic way of looking at the world but also a new global politics’’ (2010: 242).

Benton T (1998) Rights and justice on a shared planet: more rights or new relations? Theor Criminol 2(2):149–175

Article   Google Scholar  

Blumm MC, Wood MC (2013) The public trust doctrine in environmental and natural resources law. Carolina Academic Press, Durham, NC

Google Scholar  

Bright J (1993) ‘Crime Prevention: the British Experience’. In: Stenson K, Cowell D (eds) The politics of crime control. Sage, London, p 62–86

Hall M (2017) Exploring the cultural dimensions of environmental victimization https://doi.org/10.1057/palcomms.2017.76

Johnson H, South N and Walters R (2016) The commodification and exploitation of fresh water: Property, human rights and green criminology. Int J Law Crime Justice 44:146–162

Lynch MJ, Stretesky PB (2013) The distribution of water-monitoring organizations across states: Implications for community policing. Policing 36(1):6–26

Lynch MJ, Stretesky PB (2014) Exploring green criminology: Toward a green criminological revolution. Ashgate, Farnham

Lynch MJ, Stretesky PB, Long MA (2017) State and green crimes related to water pollution and ecological disorganization: water pollution from publicly owned treatment works (POTW) facilities across US states. Palgrave Communications. https://doi.org/10.1057/palcomms.2017.70

Nurse A (2015) Policing wildlife: Perspectives on the enforcement of wildlife legislation. Palgrave Macmillan, London

Book   Google Scholar  

Nurse A (2016) An introduction to green criminology and environmental justice. Sage, London

Ozymy J, Jarrell M (2017) Red state, blue state, green state: nalysing the geography of federal environmental crime prosecutions within and across the U.S. states. Palgrave Communications. https://doi.org/10.1057/palcomms.2017.63

Schneider JL (2008) Reducing the illicit trade in endangered wildlife: the market reduction approach. Int J Law Crime Justice 24(3):274–295

Situ Y, Emmons D (2000) Environmental crime: The criminal justice system’s role in protecting the environment. Sage, Thousand Oaks

Sollund R (2011) Expressions of speciesism: Animal trafficking and species decline. Crime Law Soc Chang 55(5):437–451

Sollund R (2016) The animal other. Legal and illegal theriocide. In: Hall M, Wyatt T, South N, Nurse A, Potter G, Maher J (eds) Greening criminology in the 21st century. Routledge, Abingdon, p 79–99

Sollund R (2017) Perceptions and law enforcement of illegal and legal wolf killing in Norway: organized crime or folk crime? Palgrave Communications https://doi.org/10.1057/palcomms.2017.59

South N (2010) The ecocidal tendencies of Late Modernity: Transnational crime, social exclusions, victims and rights. In White R (ed) Global environmental harm: Criminological perspective. Willan, Devon, p 228–247

South N, Beirne P (1998) Editors’ Introduction. Theor Criminol 2(2):147–148

South N, Wyatt T (2011) Comparing illicit trades in wildlife and drugs: An exploratory study. Deviant Behav 32(6):538–561

van Uhm D (2016) The illegal wildlife trade: Inside the world of poachers, smugglers and traders. Springer, Rotterdam

von Essen E, Allen MP (2015) Reconsidering Illegal hunting as a crime of dissent: Implications for justice and deliberative uptake. Crim Law Philos 11(2):213–228

von Essen E, Hansen HP, Nordström H, Källström M, Peterson N and Peterson TR (2016) Illegal hunting between social and criminal justice. In Donnermeyer J (ed) Routledge International Handbook of Rural Criminology, Routledge, London and New York, p 319–329

Wellsmith M (2010) The applicability of crime prevention to problems of environmental harm: A consideration of illicit trade in endangered species. In: White R (ed) Global environmental harm: Criminological perspectives. Willan Publishing, Cullompton, p 132–149. 2009

Wellsmith M (2011) Wildlife crime: The problems of enforcement. Eur J Crim Policy Res 17:125–148. 2

Weston B, Bollier D (2013) Green governance: Ecological survival, human rights and the law of the commons. Cambridge University Press, New York, NY

White R and Barrett S (2017) Disrupting Environmental Crime at the Local Level: An Operational Perspective. Palgrave Commun. (In press)

Wyatt T (2013) Wildlife trafficking: a deconstruction of the crime, the victims and the offenders. Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Criminology and Sociology, Middlesex University, The Burroughs, London, NW4 4BT, UK

Angus Nurse

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Angus Nurse .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The author declares no competing financial interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Nurse, A. Green criminology: shining a critical lens on environmental harm. Palgrave Commun 3 , 10 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-017-0007-2

Download citation

Received : 23 August 2017

Accepted : 11 September 2017

Published : 31 October 2017

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-017-0007-2

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

This article is cited by

The illegal trade in rosewood in indonesia.

• Vincent Nijman

European Journal of Forest Research (2024)

Green crime in West Africa: uncovering the threats to human security and ecosystem integrity in Cote d'Ivoire, Nigeria, and Senegal

• Ebimboere Seiyefa
• Felix Idongesit Oyosoro

GeoJournal (2024)

A Systems-Based Approach to Green Criminology

• Wesley Tourangeau

Critical Criminology (2022)

Latino Criminology: Unfucking Colonial Frameworks in “Latinos and Crime” Scholarship

• Kenneth Sebastián León

Critical Criminology (2021)

Water Crimes and Governance: The Slovenian Perspective

• Gorazd Meško

International Criminology (2021)

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

• Search Menu
• Browse content in Arts and Humanities
• Browse content in Archaeology
• Anglo-Saxon and Medieval Archaeology
• Archaeological Methodology and Techniques
• Archaeology by Region
• Archaeology of Religion
• Archaeology of Trade and Exchange
• Biblical Archaeology
• Contemporary and Public Archaeology
• Environmental Archaeology
• Historical Archaeology
• History and Theory of Archaeology
• Industrial Archaeology
• Landscape Archaeology
• Mortuary Archaeology
• Prehistoric Archaeology
• Underwater Archaeology
• Urban Archaeology
• Zooarchaeology
• Browse content in Architecture
• Architectural Structure and Design
• History of Architecture
• Residential and Domestic Buildings
• Theory of Architecture
• Browse content in Art
• Art Subjects and Themes
• History of Art
• Industrial and Commercial Art
• Theory of Art
• Biographical Studies
• Byzantine Studies
• Browse content in Classical Studies
• Classical History
• Classical Philosophy
• Classical Mythology
• Classical Literature
• Classical Reception
• Classical Art and Architecture
• Classical Oratory and Rhetoric
• Greek and Roman Papyrology
• Greek and Roman Epigraphy
• Greek and Roman Law
• Greek and Roman Archaeology
• Late Antiquity
• Religion in the Ancient World
• Digital Humanities
• Browse content in History
• Colonialism and Imperialism
• Diplomatic History
• Environmental History
• Genealogy, Heraldry, Names, and Honours
• Genocide and Ethnic Cleansing
• Historical Geography
• History by Period
• History of Emotions
• History of Agriculture
• History of Education
• History of Gender and Sexuality
• Industrial History
• Intellectual History
• International History
• Labour History
• Legal and Constitutional History
• Local and Family History
• Maritime History
• Military History
• National Liberation and Post-Colonialism
• Oral History
• Political History
• Public History
• Regional and National History
• Revolutions and Rebellions
• Slavery and Abolition of Slavery
• Social and Cultural History
• Theory, Methods, and Historiography
• Urban History
• World History
• Browse content in Language Teaching and Learning
• Language Learning (Specific Skills)
• Language Teaching Theory and Methods
• Browse content in Linguistics
• Applied Linguistics
• Cognitive Linguistics
• Computational Linguistics
• Forensic Linguistics
• Grammar, Syntax and Morphology
• Historical and Diachronic Linguistics
• History of English
• Language Evolution
• Language Reference
• Language Acquisition
• Language Variation
• Language Families
• Lexicography
• Linguistic Anthropology
• Linguistic Theories
• Linguistic Typology
• Phonetics and Phonology
• Psycholinguistics
• Sociolinguistics
• Translation and Interpretation
• Writing Systems
• Browse content in Literature
• Bibliography
• Children's Literature Studies
• Literary Studies (Romanticism)
• Literary Studies (American)
• Literary Studies (Asian)
• Literary Studies (European)
• Literary Studies (Eco-criticism)
• Literary Studies (Modernism)
• Literary Studies - World
• Literary Studies (1500 to 1800)
• Literary Studies (19th Century)
• Literary Studies (20th Century onwards)
• Literary Studies (African American Literature)
• Literary Studies (British and Irish)
• Literary Studies (Early and Medieval)
• Literary Studies (Fiction, Novelists, and Prose Writers)
• Literary Studies (Gender Studies)
• Literary Studies (Graphic Novels)
• Literary Studies (History of the Book)
• Literary Studies (Plays and Playwrights)
• Literary Studies (Poetry and Poets)
• Literary Studies (Postcolonial Literature)
• Literary Studies (Queer Studies)
• Literary Studies (Science Fiction)
• Literary Studies (Travel Literature)
• Literary Studies (War Literature)
• Literary Studies (Women's Writing)
• Literary Theory and Cultural Studies
• Mythology and Folklore
• Shakespeare Studies and Criticism
• Browse content in Media Studies
• Browse content in Music
• Applied Music
• Dance and Music
• Ethics in Music
• Ethnomusicology
• Gender and Sexuality in Music
• Medicine and Music
• Music Cultures
• Music and Media
• Music and Religion
• Music and Culture
• Music Education and Pedagogy
• Music Theory and Analysis
• Musical Scores, Lyrics, and Libretti
• Musical Structures, Styles, and Techniques
• Musicology and Music History
• Performance Practice and Studies
• Race and Ethnicity in Music
• Sound Studies
• Browse content in Performing Arts
• Browse content in Philosophy
• Aesthetics and Philosophy of Art
• Epistemology
• Feminist Philosophy
• History of Western Philosophy
• Metaphysics
• Moral Philosophy
• Non-Western Philosophy
• Philosophy of Language
• Philosophy of Mind
• Philosophy of Perception
• Philosophy of Science
• Philosophy of Action
• Philosophy of Law
• Philosophy of Religion
• Philosophy of Mathematics and Logic
• Practical Ethics
• Social and Political Philosophy
• Browse content in Religion
• Biblical Studies
• Christianity
• East Asian Religions
• History of Religion
• Judaism and Jewish Studies
• Qumran Studies
• Religion and Education
• Religion and Health
• Religion and Politics
• Religion and Science
• Religion and Law
• Religion and Art, Literature, and Music
• Religious Studies
• Browse content in Society and Culture
• Cookery, Food, and Drink
• Cultural Studies
• Customs and Traditions
• Ethical Issues and Debates
• Hobbies, Games, Arts and Crafts
• Lifestyle, Home, and Garden
• Natural world, Country Life, and Pets
• Popular Beliefs and Controversial Knowledge
• Sports and Outdoor Recreation
• Technology and Society
• Travel and Holiday
• Visual Culture
• Browse content in Law
• Arbitration
• Browse content in Company and Commercial Law
• Commercial Law
• Company Law
• Browse content in Comparative Law
• Systems of Law
• Competition Law
• Browse content in Constitutional and Administrative Law
• Government Powers
• Judicial Review
• Local Government Law
• Military and Defence Law
• Parliamentary and Legislative Practice
• Construction Law
• Contract Law
• Browse content in Criminal Law
• Criminal Procedure
• Criminal Evidence Law
• Sentencing and Punishment
• Employment and Labour Law
• Environment and Energy Law
• Browse content in Financial Law
• Banking Law
• Insolvency Law
• History of Law
• Human Rights and Immigration
• Intellectual Property Law
• Browse content in International Law
• Private International Law and Conflict of Laws
• Public International Law
• IT and Communications Law
• Jurisprudence and Philosophy of Law
• Law and Politics
• Law and Society
• Browse content in Legal System and Practice
• Courts and Procedure
• Legal Skills and Practice
• Primary Sources of Law
• Regulation of Legal Profession
• Medical and Healthcare Law
• Browse content in Policing
• Criminal Investigation and Detection
• Police and Security Services
• Police Procedure and Law
• Police Regional Planning
• Browse content in Property Law
• Personal Property Law
• Study and Revision
• Terrorism and National Security Law
• Browse content in Trusts Law
• Wills and Probate or Succession
• Browse content in Medicine and Health
• Browse content in Allied Health Professions
• Arts Therapies
• Clinical Science
• Dietetics and Nutrition
• Occupational Therapy
• Operating Department Practice
• Physiotherapy
• Radiography
• Speech and Language Therapy
• Browse content in Anaesthetics
• General Anaesthesia
• Neuroanaesthesia
• Clinical Neuroscience
• Browse content in Clinical Medicine
• Acute Medicine
• Cardiovascular Medicine
• Clinical Genetics
• Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics
• Dermatology
• Endocrinology and Diabetes
• Gastroenterology
• Genito-urinary Medicine
• Geriatric Medicine
• Infectious Diseases
• Medical Toxicology
• Medical Oncology
• Pain Medicine
• Palliative Medicine
• Rehabilitation Medicine
• Respiratory Medicine and Pulmonology
• Rheumatology
• Sleep Medicine
• Sports and Exercise Medicine
• Community Medical Services
• Critical Care
• Emergency Medicine
• Forensic Medicine
• Haematology
• History of Medicine
• Browse content in Medical Skills
• Clinical Skills
• Communication Skills
• Nursing Skills
• Surgical Skills
• Browse content in Medical Dentistry
• Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
• Paediatric Dentistry
• Restorative Dentistry and Orthodontics
• Surgical Dentistry
• Medical Ethics
• Medical Statistics and Methodology
• Browse content in Neurology
• Clinical Neurophysiology
• Neuropathology
• Nursing Studies
• Browse content in Obstetrics and Gynaecology
• Gynaecology
• Occupational Medicine
• Ophthalmology
• Otolaryngology (ENT)
• Browse content in Paediatrics
• Neonatology
• Browse content in Pathology
• Chemical Pathology
• Clinical Cytogenetics and Molecular Genetics
• Histopathology
• Medical Microbiology and Virology
• Patient Education and Information
• Browse content in Pharmacology
• Psychopharmacology
• Browse content in Popular Health
• Caring for Others
• Complementary and Alternative Medicine
• Self-help and Personal Development
• Browse content in Preclinical Medicine
• Cell Biology
• Molecular Biology and Genetics
• Reproduction, Growth and Development
• Primary Care
• Professional Development in Medicine
• Browse content in Psychiatry
• Addiction Medicine
• Child and Adolescent Psychiatry
• Forensic Psychiatry
• Learning Disabilities
• Old Age Psychiatry
• Psychotherapy
• Browse content in Public Health and Epidemiology
• Epidemiology
• Public Health
• Browse content in Radiology
• Clinical Radiology
• Interventional Radiology
• Nuclear Medicine
• Radiation Oncology
• Reproductive Medicine
• Browse content in Surgery
• Cardiothoracic Surgery
• Gastro-intestinal and Colorectal Surgery
• General Surgery
• Neurosurgery
• Paediatric Surgery
• Peri-operative Care
• Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery
• Surgical Oncology
• Transplant Surgery
• Trauma and Orthopaedic Surgery
• Vascular Surgery
• Browse content in Science and Mathematics
• Browse content in Biological Sciences
• Aquatic Biology
• Biochemistry
• Bioinformatics and Computational Biology
• Developmental Biology
• Ecology and Conservation
• Evolutionary Biology
• Genetics and Genomics
• Microbiology
• Molecular and Cell Biology
• Natural History
• Plant Sciences and Forestry
• Research Methods in Life Sciences
• Structural Biology
• Systems Biology
• Zoology and Animal Sciences
• Browse content in Chemistry
• Analytical Chemistry
• Computational Chemistry
• Crystallography
• Environmental Chemistry
• Industrial Chemistry
• Inorganic Chemistry
• Materials Chemistry
• Medicinal Chemistry
• Mineralogy and Gems
• Organic Chemistry
• Physical Chemistry
• Polymer Chemistry
• Study and Communication Skills in Chemistry
• Theoretical Chemistry
• Browse content in Computer Science
• Artificial Intelligence
• Computer Architecture and Logic Design
• Game Studies
• Human-Computer Interaction
• Mathematical Theory of Computation
• Programming Languages
• Software Engineering
• Systems Analysis and Design
• Virtual Reality
• Browse content in Computing
• Business Applications
• Computer Security
• Computer Games
• Computer Networking and Communications
• Digital Lifestyle
• Graphical and Digital Media Applications
• Operating Systems
• Browse content in Earth Sciences and Geography
• Atmospheric Sciences
• Environmental Geography
• Geology and the Lithosphere
• Maps and Map-making
• Meteorology and Climatology
• Oceanography and Hydrology
• Palaeontology
• Physical Geography and Topography
• Regional Geography
• Soil Science
• Urban Geography
• Browse content in Engineering and Technology
• Agriculture and Farming
• Biological Engineering
• Civil Engineering, Surveying, and Building
• Electronics and Communications Engineering
• Energy Technology
• Engineering (General)
• Environmental Science, Engineering, and Technology
• History of Engineering and Technology
• Mechanical Engineering and Materials
• Technology of Industrial Chemistry
• Transport Technology and Trades
• Browse content in Environmental Science
• Applied Ecology (Environmental Science)
• Conservation of the Environment (Environmental Science)
• Environmental Sustainability
• Environmentalist Thought and Ideology (Environmental Science)
• Management of Land and Natural Resources (Environmental Science)
• Natural Disasters (Environmental Science)
• Nuclear Issues (Environmental Science)
• Pollution and Threats to the Environment (Environmental Science)
• Social Impact of Environmental Issues (Environmental Science)
• History of Science and Technology
• Browse content in Materials Science
• Ceramics and Glasses
• Composite Materials
• Metals, Alloying, and Corrosion
• Nanotechnology
• Browse content in Mathematics
• Applied Mathematics
• Biomathematics and Statistics
• History of Mathematics
• Mathematical Education
• Mathematical Finance
• Mathematical Analysis
• Numerical and Computational Mathematics
• Probability and Statistics
• Pure Mathematics
• Browse content in Neuroscience
• Cognition and Behavioural Neuroscience
• Development of the Nervous System
• Disorders of the Nervous System
• History of Neuroscience
• Invertebrate Neurobiology
• Molecular and Cellular Systems
• Neuroendocrinology and Autonomic Nervous System
• Neuroscientific Techniques
• Sensory and Motor Systems
• Browse content in Physics
• Astronomy and Astrophysics
• Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics
• Biological and Medical Physics
• Classical Mechanics
• Computational Physics
• Condensed Matter Physics
• Electromagnetism, Optics, and Acoustics
• History of Physics
• Mathematical and Statistical Physics
• Measurement Science
• Nuclear Physics
• Particles and Fields
• Plasma Physics
• Quantum Physics
• Relativity and Gravitation
• Semiconductor and Mesoscopic Physics
• Browse content in Psychology
• Affective Sciences
• Clinical Psychology
• Cognitive Psychology
• Cognitive Neuroscience
• Criminal and Forensic Psychology
• Developmental Psychology
• Educational Psychology
• Evolutionary Psychology
• Health Psychology
• History and Systems in Psychology
• Music Psychology
• Neuropsychology
• Organizational Psychology
• Psychological Assessment and Testing
• Psychology of Human-Technology Interaction
• Psychology Professional Development and Training
• Research Methods in Psychology
• Social Psychology
• Browse content in Social Sciences
• Browse content in Anthropology
• Anthropology of Religion
• Human Evolution
• Medical Anthropology
• Physical Anthropology
• Regional Anthropology
• Social and Cultural Anthropology
• Theory and Practice of Anthropology
• Browse content in Business and Management
• Business Ethics
• Business Strategy
• Business History
• Business and Technology
• Business and Government
• Business and the Environment
• Comparative Management
• Corporate Governance
• Corporate Social Responsibility
• Entrepreneurship
• Health Management
• Human Resource Management
• Industrial and Employment Relations
• Industry Studies
• Information and Communication Technologies
• International Business
• Knowledge Management
• Management and Management Techniques
• Operations Management
• Organizational Theory and Behaviour
• Pensions and Pension Management
• Public and Nonprofit Management
• Strategic Management
• Supply Chain Management
• Browse content in Criminology and Criminal Justice
• Criminal Justice
• Criminology
• Forms of Crime
• International and Comparative Criminology
• Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice
• Development Studies
• Browse content in Economics
• Agricultural, Environmental, and Natural Resource Economics
• Asian Economics
• Behavioural Finance
• Behavioural Economics and Neuroeconomics
• Econometrics and Mathematical Economics
• Economic History
• Economic Systems
• Economic Methodology
• Economic Development and Growth
• Financial Markets
• Financial Institutions and Services
• General Economics and Teaching
• Health, Education, and Welfare
• History of Economic Thought
• International Economics
• Labour and Demographic Economics
• Law and Economics
• Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics
• Microeconomics
• Public Economics
• Urban, Rural, and Regional Economics
• Welfare Economics
• Browse content in Education
• Adult Education and Continuous Learning
• Care and Counselling of Students
• Early Childhood and Elementary Education
• Educational Equipment and Technology
• Educational Strategies and Policy
• Higher and Further Education
• Organization and Management of Education
• Philosophy and Theory of Education
• Schools Studies
• Secondary Education
• Teaching of a Specific Subject
• Teaching of Specific Groups and Special Educational Needs
• Teaching Skills and Techniques
• Browse content in Environment
• Applied Ecology (Social Science)
• Climate Change
• Conservation of the Environment (Social Science)
• Environmentalist Thought and Ideology (Social Science)
• Natural Disasters (Environment)
• Social Impact of Environmental Issues (Social Science)
• Browse content in Human Geography
• Cultural Geography
• Economic Geography
• Political Geography
• Browse content in Interdisciplinary Studies
• Communication Studies
• Museums, Libraries, and Information Sciences
• Browse content in Politics
• African Politics
• Asian Politics
• Chinese Politics
• Comparative Politics
• Conflict Politics
• Elections and Electoral Studies
• Environmental Politics
• European Union
• Foreign Policy
• Gender and Politics
• Human Rights and Politics
• Indian Politics
• International Relations
• International Organization (Politics)
• International Political Economy
• Irish Politics
• Latin American Politics
• Middle Eastern Politics
• Political Behaviour
• Political Economy
• Political Institutions
• Political Methodology
• Political Communication
• Political Philosophy
• Political Sociology
• Political Theory
• Politics and Law
• Public Policy
• Public Administration
• Quantitative Political Methodology
• Regional Political Studies
• Russian Politics
• Security Studies
• State and Local Government
• UK Politics
• US Politics
• Browse content in Regional and Area Studies
• African Studies
• Asian Studies
• East Asian Studies
• Japanese Studies
• Latin American Studies
• Middle Eastern Studies
• Native American Studies
• Scottish Studies
• Browse content in Research and Information
• Research Methods
• Browse content in Social Work
• Addictions and Substance Misuse
• Adoption and Fostering
• Care of the Elderly
• Child and Adolescent Social Work
• Couple and Family Social Work
• Developmental and Physical Disabilities Social Work
• Direct Practice and Clinical Social Work
• Emergency Services
• Human Behaviour and the Social Environment
• International and Global Issues in Social Work
• Mental and Behavioural Health
• Social Justice and Human Rights
• Social Policy and Advocacy
• Social Work and Crime and Justice
• Social Work Macro Practice
• Social Work Practice Settings
• Social Work Research and Evidence-based Practice
• Welfare and Benefit Systems
• Browse content in Sociology
• Childhood Studies
• Community Development
• Comparative and Historical Sociology
• Economic Sociology
• Gender and Sexuality
• Gerontology and Ageing
• Health, Illness, and Medicine
• Marriage and the Family
• Migration Studies
• Occupations, Professions, and Work
• Organizations
• Population and Demography
• Race and Ethnicity
• Social Theory
• Social Movements and Social Change
• Social Research and Statistics
• Social Stratification, Inequality, and Mobility
• Sociology of Religion
• Sociology of Education
• Sport and Leisure
• Urban and Rural Studies
• Browse content in Warfare and Defence
• Defence Strategy, Planning, and Research
• Land Forces and Warfare
• Military Administration
• Military Life and Institutions
• Naval Forces and Warfare
• Other Warfare and Defence Issues
• Peace Studies and Conflict Resolution
• Weapons and Equipment

• < Previous chapter
• Next chapter >

Conservation Criminology, Environmental Crime, and Risk: An Application to Climate Change

Edmund F. McGarrell is Director and Professor of the School of Criminal Justice at Michigan State University. His primary area of research focuses on communities and crime but he increasingly collaborates with a group of interdisciplinary scholars in the conservation criminology program at Michigan State University.

Carole Gibbs is an Associate Professor in the School of Criminal Justice and the Department of Fisheries and Wildlife at Michigan State University. Her research interests include environmental justice and corporate and white-collar crimes that harm the environment.

• Published: 03 November 2014
• Cite Icon Cite
• Permissions Icon Permissions

Conservation criminology emerges from the environmental movement and the development of green criminology as a subfield within criminology. Conservation criminology builds on this foundation and calls for interdisciplinary theory and methods for addressing legally defined harms as well as risks to human health, wildlife, ecosystems, and the environment. Conservation criminology complements and contributes to the green criminology perspective by integrating theory and methods drawn from criminology, natural resource management, and risk and decision sciences. This essay reviews the development of green and conservation criminology and compares and contrasts the perspectives. The essay then applies these perspectives to the issue of climate change. Conservation criminology, grounded in criminology, natural resource management, and risk perception and decision making, offers systematic tools for assessing and characterizing harm; analyzing risks; weighing costs and benefits; integrating and balancing technical, scientific, and lay perspectives; and informing governance at local and global levels.

Introduction

With the emergence of the environmental movement and greater understanding of the impacts of human behavior on air and water quality, wildlife, ecosystems, and natural resources, criminologists have increasingly focused on criminal and harmful human behavior affecting the environment. The first section of this essay begins with a description of the emergence of the green criminology (GC) perspective as a subfield within criminology focused on illegal and harmful behavior affecting the environment. This is followed by a description of the conservation criminology framework offered as a complementary approach for studying environmental and natural resource crimes and risks. Section III then compares and contrasts the green and conservation criminology perspectives. The two approaches are then applied to the issue of climate change in Section IV . The goal is to highlight the likely criminological implications associated with climate change and the complementary but distinct theoretical and methodological tools that green and conservation criminology bring to the study of climate change. Section V offers a concluding discussion noting that the value of the conservation criminology framework will be determined by the extent to which its interdisciplinary theories and tools advance knowledge and inform policy and practice with respect to risks and crimes affecting human health, wildlife, ecosystems, and the environment.

I. Emergence of Green Criminology

Historically, the criminological literature has contained some studies of environmental and natural resource crimes (e.g., Sutherland 1949 ; Trench 1967 ; Brown 1981 ), but discussions of a broader theoretical perspective or framework for understanding these types of crimes were limited prior to the introduction of the term “green criminology” (GC) by Michael Lynch (1990) . In his initial description of a GC perspective, Lynch (1990) argued that the green movement, green politics, and radical criminology could form a coherent theoretical basis for examining and addressing the economic, political, and class context of environmental degradation. 1 Specifically, studying harms to and regulation of the environment and wildlife could shed light on how power dynamics shape environmental destruction ( Lynch 1990 ). South and Beirne’s (1998) special issue on GC served as a catalyst for further work in this area ( Lynch 2013 ).

Most scholars (e.g., Halsey and White 2009 ) noted that simply relying on legal definitions of environmental crimes is problematic given that harmful behaviors to people, wildlife, natural resources, and the environment are not always defined as criminal. This can be due to power conflicts, changes in knowledge (e.g., understanding the harmful impacts of various toxins), and a variety of other factors. Multiple theoretical perspectives have since been developed to broaden the scope of GC beyond law violation to “environmental harm.” Scholars have taken specific philosophical stances to prioritize (or “weigh up”) the needs of humans, animals, and the environment to define specific behaviors as environmental harms ( White 2008 ; Gibbs et al. 2010 ). Eco- and biocentric perspectives, for example, prioritize the environment by defining all human activities that produce environmental damage as environmental harm (e.g., Lynch and Stretesky 2003 ). Animal rights scholars prioritize animals by redefining any type of animal exploitation as an environmental crime (e.g., Wise 2001 ). Initial assessments of environmental harm were primarily in the form of case studies that document harms. Green criminologists now propose relying on ecological scientists to assess harms that have occurred as a result of human activity ( Lynch et al. 2013 ).

Green criminologists have also established the link between power, inequality, and environmental harm (however defined) as a unifying theme for various green perspectives ( Lynch and Stretesky 2003 ; Halsey 2004 , 2006 ; White 2008 ). In a Marxist tradition, some argue that all environmental harms result from capitalism (e.g., Lynch 1990 ). Ecofeminists and environmental justice scholars explore the influence of patriarchy (e.g., Lane 1998 ) and racism (e.g., Stretesky and Lynch 1999 ) on environmental harm. 2 Others problematize the domination of people and nature more generally ( Bookchin 1987 ). Some argue that political economy theories (e.g., ecological Marxism, treadmill of production 3 ) must be used to analyze environmental harms to constitute GC ( Lynch et al. 2013 ).

In contrast to these perspectives, Halsey (2004 , 2006 ) argues that existing conceptualizations of harm and the philosophical perspectives that underlie them are inadequate. Framing environmental issues in terms of harm and reparation reflects a traditional dichotomy in which two sides are pitted against one another, one that limits the development of a system of rights and responsibilities. Halsey argues that we must return to a “plane of consistency” in which we cease to divide up the universe into defined units and view the world as it actually operates, as a system of flow ( Halsey 2004 ). Scholars should map the intersection of new technologies, laws, and regulations (or “general and specific accidents”) and “dromospheric” pollution (the “shrinking” of Earth from presuming that one can know and manage nature) that produce environmental risks. Understanding identity and difference, being more reflexive, is also necessary to improve policy and practice related to environmental risks ( Halsey 2013 ).

A. Typologies and Empirical Work

Rather than constructing a theoretical perspective or philosophy regarding green crime, others have developed typologies to define the scope of this area of inquiry. Herbig and Joubert (2006) referred to “illegal manipulation and exploitation of natural resources” including both biotic (wildlife and wild plants) and abiotic (pollution) natural resources. Drawing on Carrabine et al. (2004) , White included “primary green crimes” defined as crimes that directly result in destruction of natural resources such as air and water pollution, deforestation, and wildlife crime, as well as “secondary green crimes” that arise out of efforts to evade rules and regulations intended to prevent or regulate environmentally destructive harms. Examples of such secondary green crimes include the involvement of organized crime in the disposal or international transport of hazardous waste. White extended this model of “focal considerations” by considering geographical (local to international), locational (built vs. natural environments), and temporal (short/long term, manifest/latent, immediate/lasting) considerations ( White 2008 , pp. 92–102).

Empirical work typically reflects the typological approach of examining specific forms of environmental crime or harm and reflects the breadth of issues identified by Herbig and Joubert (2006) and White (2008) . This research increasingly focuses on biotic and abiotic crimes or primary and secondary green crimes, as well as on enforcement issues associated with these crimes and issues of environmental justice. Thus, for example, a number of studies related to the poaching of wildlife emerged. These included studies of the poaching of large mammals including elephants and rhinos (e.g., Stiles 2004 ; Lemieux and Clarke 2009 ; Ayling 2013 ), birds ( Lee et al. 2005 ; Pires and Clarke 2011 ), and reptiles ( Herbig 2009 ). Similar research emerged relating to illegal, unreported, and unregulated fishing (e.g., Kuperan and Sutinen 1998 ; Hauck 2008 ). Other researchers focused on natural resource crimes such as illegal logging (e.g., Smith et al. 2003 ; Bisschop 2012 ). Related scholarship focused on abiotic crimes consisting of a variety of pollution crimes (e.g., Yeager 1993 ; Gibbs, McGarrell, and Axelrod 2010 ).

Additionally, a number of scholars focused on enforcement issues ranging from local, state, and national (e.g., Falcone 2004 ; McMullan and Perrier 2002 ) to regional and international levels (e.g., Zimmerman 2003 ; McGarrell et al. 2013 ). Enforcement, or the lack thereof, and patterns of victimization structured along race, ethnicity, and class emerged as a line of research on environmental justice issues (e.g., Saha and Mohai 2009 ).

As demonstrated in the preceding discussion, GC is an open, “evolving perspective” ( South, Brisman, and Beirne 2013 , p. 28). This is necessitated by the breadth and complexity of environmental issues. In addition to sensitivity to the nonreciprocal effects between human and natural systems ( White 1998 ; Liu et al. 2007 ), understanding environmental harm requires analysis that is wide-ranging ( White 1998 ) and multi- and interdisciplinary ( South 1998 ; White 1998 ; South et al. 2013 ). To advance understanding and practice, environmental issues must be studied in a theoretically driven and systematic way that can account for (and balance) the victimization of humans, the environment, and animals ( White 2008 , 2009 ). To offer an additional perspective that compliments and expands on the original conceptualizations of GC, in 2010 we introduced a research framework called conservation criminology ( Gibbs et al. 2010 ).

B. Emergence of the Conservation Criminology Framework

Herbig and Joubert initially used the term “conservation criminology” in an article and dissertation ( Herbig and Joubert 2006 ; Herbig 2009 ). The authors argued that terms such as “green crime,” “ecological crime,” and “environmental crime” were ambiguous in distinguishing a unique form of crime and its associated regulation and enforcement ( Herbig and Joubert 2006 ). Our use of the term was also influenced by definitions of conservation as the wise use and management of all natural resources ( Allaby 1994 ), as opposed to preservationist philosophies focused on setting aside certain places for environmental and species protection (for a discussion, see Halsey 2013 ).

A central aspect of conservation criminology was offering a new perspective on the scope of environmental harms through the nexus between environmental risks and crime. The initial formulations of the scope of conservation criminology ( Herbig and Joubert 2006 ; Gibbs et al. 2010 ) were consistent with much of the prior scholarship on green, environmental, and ecological criminology, as it included pollution crimes, wildlife crimes, and crimes against natural resources. As previously stated, varying approaches to define environmental harm beyond the legal code based on philosophical and/or theoretical perspectives (e.g., Marxism, ecocentrism) emerged within the GC tradition. Although these perspectives offer valuable insights in terms of factors that may influence political decision making on the criminalization of harmful behaviors, they are limited in at least two respects. First, they do not offer a systematic approach to studying and characterizing harmful behaviors. Second, they do not provide a systematic approach for weighing relative costs and benefits of various behaviors that have an impact on human health, wildlife, natural resources, ecosystems, and the environment. 4

These limitations likely reflect the limits of criminology and sociology (or social science more generally). Although rooted in concepts of legal definitions, power, conflict, race, ethnicity, feminism, and justice/injustice, criminological theory and research is quite limited in measuring harm, costs, and benefits of anthropogenic behaviors that affect natural systems. To advance such understanding, interdisciplinary traditions are needed ( White 2008 ).

II. The Interdisciplinary Model of Conservation Criminology

The development of the conservation criminology framework was rooted in such an interdisciplinary approach ( Gibbs et al. 2010 ). At its broadest level, conservation criminology draws on the emerging interdisciplinary framework of Coupled Human and Natural Systems (CHANS). Recognized by the National Science Foundation ( Alberti et al. 2011 ), this emerging perspective focuses on the interaction of human and natural systems. Due to the complex nature of environmental problems, CHANS scholars call for interdisciplinary teams drawn from the natural and social sciences to understand the interactions and linkages between natural and human systems that range from local to global, simple to complex, and that often include emerging properties and reciprocal effects ( Liu et al. 2007 ). CHANS is also a problem-solving framework that seeks to develop solutions to environmental problems that balance human and natural systems sustainability. Although not explicitly focused on environmental crimes, the CHANS approach is being applied to environmentally harmful behaviors that may include criminal behavior (e.g., water scarcity, see Liu and Wang 2012 ; wildlife crime, see Hilborn et al. 2006 ). An advantage of the CHANS interdisciplinary perspective is that it provides criminologists with theoretical and methodological tools to better understand and assess the nature of the harm related to anthropogenic behavior affecting human and natural systems.

The conservation criminology framework introduced by Gibbs et al. (2010) followed this approach by calling for the integration of criminology, natural resource management, and risk and decision sciences. Criminology brings theory and methods related to offending behavior, victimization, enforcement, and compliance and the interaction between “law on the books” and “law in action.” Natural resource management brings theory and method relating to natural and human dimensions of ecosystems and the management and governance of natural resources. Risk and decision science brings theory and methods to assess technical and perceived risks related to human and natural systems, as well as methods to address risk through management and governance. All three disciplines arose from multidisciplinary traditions and are thus open to wide-ranging disciplinary perspectives in the natural and social sciences.

The contributions of risk and decision sciences represent one unique component of conservation criminology. The concept of risk (rather than harm) is used to expand the domain of inquiry beyond legal definitions of environmental crime. Technical risk assessments are based on the probability of exposure and the potential severity of harm if exposure occurs ( Arvai 2007 ). Risk scholars have also developed methods to assess public risk perceptions. The combined use of technical risk assessments, public risk perceptions, and public participation can make the process of “weighing up” risks more comprehensive and transparent. Ideally, risks can be defined, prioritized, and managed based on the potential consequences to all stakeholders and on a case-by-case basis rather than a priori privileging one group or entity. Assessments of the potential costs can be assessed in relation to the benefits of the source of the risk. Trade-offs inherent in decisions about risk can be made explicit, and the values used to make decisions about those trade-offs can be brought to light for greater public scrutiny. 5

In addition to the contributions of the individual disciplines, the interplay between risk and decision sciences, natural resources management, and criminology is also a distinctive component of conservation criminology, influencing the domain and the theoretical perspectives and interventions under consideration. The framework can be applied to environmental/conservation crimes and issues at the nexus of risk and crime, such as risks that are considered for regulation or environmental harms that result from criminal activity and risky behavior. The disciplines also contribute a range of theoretical frameworks and intervention strategies to improve our ability to understand and address these issues. Finally, these disciplines provide a base from which connections to the physical sciences can be made (e.g., risk assessments from engineering, public health, and other disciplinary perspectives).

III. Key Comparisons

Overall, conservation and GC share similarities. Both perspectives emphasize the importance of using criminological tools to help understand and address serious environmental problems. In addition, these perspectives seek to identify specific environmental issues (e.g., pollution crimes, wildlife crimes, crimes against natural resources) to build knowledge.

As summarized in Table 1 , conservation criminology also diverges from GC in some important ways. The integration of natural resource management and risk and decision sciences offers new ways to systematically measure environmental impacts (or potential impacts). In addition, the inclusion of other disciplines offers a broader set of theoretical orientations and tools for intervention. By working in interdisciplinary teams with scientists trained in other disciplines, theoretical explanations for and practical interventions to address environmental issues can be directly tested rather than providing fractured analysis from different disciplinary perspectives.

Whereas the commonalities between GC and conservation criminology point to similar lines of inquiry, it is these points of difference that have the potential to advance knowledge, inform theory, and identify and evaluate policy and interventions intended to reduce harm. Ultimately, the value of the conservation criminology framework will be determined empirically. Do systematic assessments of risk provide useful information beyond the concept of environmental harm? Does the framework and associated interdisciplinary approach contribute to new, theoretically informed understanding as well as a broader range of governance and management interventions? Do the contrasts in approaches generate productive debates, theoretical testing, and varied evaluation methods that advance knowledge and practice? As a step toward answering these questions, the following section offers examples of how one might use a green or a conservation criminology perspective to conduct research on climate change. One goal is to offer concrete examples of the contrast between these perspectives. The broader goal is to illustrate one line of research that would help answer the key questions raised by these different frameworks.

IV. The Issue of Climate Change

The National Research Council (2011) and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change identified climate change as a key challenge of the 21st Century ( IPCC 2007 , 2013 ). Although social scientists have been involved in the interdisciplinary research associated with understanding climate change as well as mitigation and adaptation strategies, criminological attention to climate change has been less apparent (but see Agnew 2012 ; White 2012 ). Consideration of climate change with respect to crime and criminology offers a valuable lens from which to consider environmental crime as well as the potential value of the conservation criminology model. Similarly, the associated issue of logging and deforestation offers similar opportunity to apply and assess the conservation criminology framework.

Although there is relative scientific consensus on the drivers of climate change ( IPCC 2007 ; National Research Council 2011 ), there is great uncertainty about many of the predicted outcomes and impacts of climate change and the effects of mitigation and adaptation strategies to address climate change. The risk and decision sciences provide theoretical and methodological tools for addressing this uncertainty. In assessing these risks, an understanding of ecosystems as well as the interaction of humans and natural systems and the impacts of such interaction, as provided by theories and methods developed in natural resource management, is critical for understanding risks posed by human actions as well as risks to humans through mitigation and adaptation actions. Criminology, with its focus on interpersonal and group conflict, as well as theories of compliance and noncompliance, offers insights into likely crime generating aspects of climate change as well as intended and unintended effects of policy and enforcement. Additionally, conservation criminology is characterized by several theoretical components that are well illustrated by climate change and that can advance understanding of the impacts of climate change and evaluation of mitigation and adaptation strategies. First, conservation criminology links risk to harm and offers systematic assessment and decision tools for considering the nexus of risk, harm, and crime. Second, conservation criminology includes a local to global perspective that considers local impacts (e.g., risk and/or harm to a specific ecosystem; interpersonal conflict) while also considering risks at global levels (e.g., deforestation of tropical forests) and the challenges of transnational criminal networks and jurisdictional complexity (e.g., international transport of waste). Third, drawing on GC and environmental justice scholarship, conservation criminology addresses issues of equity that are likely to structure the impacts of climate change as well as the differential impacts of mitigation and adaptation policies.

A. Dimensions of Climate Change

The scientific consensus indicates that anthropogenic-caused climate change poses significant risks to human health, the environment, and natural resources ( National Research Council 2011 ; IPCC 2013 ; Royal Society and US National Academy of Science 2013 ). This scientifically based risk of harm suggests that climate change is an issue of interest to criminologists. At the same time, there is uncertainty with respect to the specific causes, the imminence of these risks, and the solutions or action steps for mitigation and adaptation.

From a criminological perspective, climate change and logging raise a number of fundamental questions that point to both the need for criminologists to consider these issues and the limits of a traditional criminological disciplinary framework. Specifically, there are questions related to the drivers of climate change, to the criminogenic effects and justice implications of climate change, and to the crime and justice impacts associated with policy responses to climate change. Each of these dimensions (drivers, impacts, adaptation/mitigation strategies and policies) generates risks and harms that in turn have criminological and justice implications through the nexus to crime (see Figure 1 ).

Climate Change Risk, Harm, and the Nexus to Crime

In terms of the causes of climate change, increased “greenhouse” gas emissions, such as carbon dioxide (CO2) and methane, and deforestation have been identified as two of the key drivers of climate change ( IPCC 2013 ). As such, CO2 emissions and increased logging stand as risks to human and environmental health. Dealing with these risks, a key component of mitigation strategies, involves risk governance policy that includes both scientific probability assessments and political and cultural contests involving power, mobilization, and lay and expert judgments. The outcomes of these policy contests result in varying regulatory and criminal enforcement contexts that comprise legal definitions of criminality. The legal definitions also inform systems of regulation, compliance, and enforcement that span local, regional, national, and global boundaries.

Table 2 organizes the climate-change dimensions that appear to generate risks and harms with a nexus to crime and justice. As noted previously, the international scientific community (represented in the IPCC) argues that estimated increases in levels of greenhouse gas emissions pose significant risk of contributing to temperature rise and climate change. They also pose risks to human health, species sustainability, and ecological systems.

In the following sections, the issues surrounding climate change and deforestation and their nexus to crime and criminology are considered. Additionally, these issues are considered from the emerging conservation criminology perspective.

B. Drivers of Climate Change

Greenhouse gases (e.g., CO2, methane) are naturally generated and absorbed by microorganisms, plants, and animals in relative balance. Energy production, however, alters this balance by increasing the emission of these gases into the atmosphere where they tend to trap heat through the greenhouse gas effect ( National Research Council 2010 ). As represented in the IPCC (2013) , the scientific community points to two key anthropogenic drivers of climate change. The first is the release into the atmosphere of large amounts of greenhouse gases through the burning of fossil fuels (e.g., coal, gas, and oil) and farming practices. The second major cause is land use change through deforestation. This reduces the amount of carbon that can be stored in natural systems through carbon sinks such as forests ( IPCC 2013 ). Both greenhouse gas emissions and deforestation have increased significantly since the Industrial Revolution.

In many countries, greenhouse gas emissions have been regulated to some extent due to their potential negative effects on human health and the environment. Yet the problem continues to grow. CO2 emissions in the United States increased an estimated 10 percent between 1990 and 2011 due to factors such as an expanding economy and population growth that increased energy demand and consumption. Despite efforts in some regions to curb the growth of CO2 emissions (e.g., in the European Union), rapid economic and population growth in other parts of the world (e.g., China and India) have also contributed to increasing levels of greenhouse gases.

Similarly, management of forests in many countries of the world has involved restrictions on logging intended to serve a variety of goals. These include management for sustainable products, extraction of forest products, preventing soil erosion and flooding, sustaining wildlife, recreation, and so on. Yet despite efforts to restrict excess logging and more effectively manage forests, an estimated 13 million hectares of forest are lost annually ( United Nations Environment Program 2009 ).

Green criminologists advocate the use of critical perspectives to understand environmental harm ( Lynch et al. 2013 ), which would include greenhouse gas emissions and land use changes (e.g., timber harvesting and deforestation) that drive climate change. Specifically, green criminologists use ecological Marxism and the treadmill of production to understand how structural factors related to capitalism result in “ecological additions” to nature (i.e., pollutants) and ecological withdrawals from nature (i.e., removal of natural resources) that produce environmental harm (or ecological disorganization; Lynch et al. 2013 ). In empirical work, exports to the United States were positively related to national per capita CO2 emissions from 1989 to 2003, perhaps due to consumption practices in the United States and the movement of dirty industries from the United States to other countries ( Stretesky and Lynch 2009 ). Green criminological work has also highlighted the role of political-corporate connections in the limited regulation of greenhouse gases in the United States, conceptualizing the issue as state-corporate crime ( Lynch, Burns, and Stretesky 2010 ; Kramer and Michalowski 2012 ; Kramer 2013 ). Others implicate state-corporate crime in the Fukushima nuclear power plant “accident” and continued advocacy for nuclear power despite the increasing threat of natural disasters related to climate change ( Takemura 2012 ).

The conservation criminology framework also extends criminological understanding of the drivers of climate change through theory and methods for understanding and assessing the relative balance of risks (costs/benefits) associated with greenhouse emissions and land use changes. For example, scientific risk assessment has long contributed to assessing the relative risks of various emissions to human health and the environment. These technical assessments are weighed against benefits (e.g., power, electricity generation) to determine acceptable emission limits. Similarly, risk assessments can estimate relative benefits and costs of varied energy sources (e.g., nuclear, solar, coal). As scientific understanding of the impact of greenhouse gas emissions on climate-change increases, risk assessment is equipped to factor this knowledge into the probability-based cost/benefit analysis. In other words, the acceptable risk of greenhouse emissions may change due to the increased understanding of the contribution to, and effects of, climate change.

Similarly, technical risk assessment has been employed in forestry management to assess risks to human health and ecological systems. This has included the assessment of specific hazards such as applications of pesticides ( Durkin 2007 ) but also to forestry management decisions on whether to log and limits on levels of logging ( European Network and Information Security Agency 2011 ). These risk assessments draw on knowledge generated by natural resource management scholars that inform decisions balancing resource use and sustainability goals. Again, as knowledge and understanding increases about the role of healthy forests in carbon storage, risk assessments can be adjusted to account for the increased benefits of forestry management that limits deforestation and the increased costs and hazards of excessive logging.

As risk assessment informs forestry governance, the interdisciplinary conservation criminology framework can contribute to evaluation of such governance and management through greater understanding of the multiple drivers of deforestation. These factors include actions and policies by governments, companies, and local communities seeking to benefit from forestry resources; global interests in maintaining carbon sinks through healthy forest ecosystems; and transnational criminal networks that may seek to facilitate and benefit from illegal exploitation of forest products.

Similarly, the interdisciplinary nature of the conservation criminology framework would add a broader perspective to understand greenhouse gas emissions, attempting to build an understanding of the entire system by examining sources of and explanations for risk beyond the relationship between capitalism and environmental harm. For example, analysis of how culture is linked to environmental risk would offer insights beyond GC’s emphasis on political and economic structural factors. Analysis of individual behaviors related to climate change (e.g. automobile use, consumption habits) would also provide a fuller picture than a strict focus on industrial emissions. As hypothesized by green criminologists, individuals may consume in excess due to the influence of capitalism ( Kramer 2013 ), but individual decisions regarding automobile versus public transportation are also influenced by personal factors such as worldview ( Van Vugt et al. 1995 ). Examining how structural, cognitive, and social factors shape individual decisions ( Vandenbergh 2004 ) would produce a greater understanding of what drives climate change. This is not to downplay the role of industrial emissions but to also recognize the direct (e.g., mode of transportation decisions) and indirect (e.g., purchasing decisions) contributions of individuals to climate change (see also Mares 2010 ).

Whether discussing greenhouse gas emissions or forestry management, the technical risk assessment ultimately results in governance decisions that shape policy and management. As is discussed subsequently when considering mitigation and adaptation, risk and decision sciences and natural resource management also include theory and methods for risk governance that seek to include scientific and public knowledge and input to increase the legitimacy of governing decisions. Complementing these traditions, criminology contributes to governance through theory related to issues such as compliance/noncompliance, prevention, deterrence, enforcement, and equity/justice. The interplay between these disciplines also makes important contributions to understanding and assessing the impacts of climate change.

C. Impacts of Climate Change

Scientists predict that climate change will create a number of physical impacts to the natural environment and wildlife. Climate change poses significant threats to wildlife and particularly to endangered species ( IPCC 2002 ). 6 In fact, it has been described as “the major new threat that will confront biodiversity this century” ( Lovejoy and Hannah 2005 ). Criminologists have tended to focus on the risks to various species posed by excessive and often illegal hunting and taking (e.g., Pires and Clarke 2011 ), as well as the limited risks and costs compared to the economic and/or cultural benefits of such practices ( White 2008 ). More recent work has applied criminological theories such as situational crime prevention to promote more effective management practices ( Schneider 2008 ; Lemieux and Clarke 2009 ). Climate change, however, poses additional risks to species survival. For example, even with meaningful laws and effective enforcement protecting a species like the polar bear, science suggests that the bears are at considerable risk due to habitat change produced by climate change ( US Fish and Wildlife Service 2007 ). Indeed, some estimate that 20 to 30 percent of species may be extinct with a 2 to 3 degree (C) temperature increase ( Thomas et al. 2004 ; see also Sollund 2012 ).

Climate change is also predicted to affect forest systems due to increased CO2 in the atmosphere, warming, and droughts ( Climate Change Science Program 2008 ). The likely effects may be beneficial in some regions (e.g., increased growing seasons) and harmful in others (e.g., increased forest fires, insect outbreaks). Although there is a great deal of uncertainty about these impacts, the scientific consensus is that climate change will affect forest ecosystems (e.g., Climate Change Science Program 2008 ).

In addition to these risks to animals and forest ecosystems, climate change is likely to generate a variety of security risks that in turn will yield crime and enforcement challenges. These scale from local to global effects and from traditional forms of crime to nation/state conflicts. They include physical and social effects that increase risks for conflict. Agnew (2012) has identified a variety of direct and indirect causes of crime generated by the predicted effects of climate change. For example, prior research has indicated that some types of crime peak during warm periods. This includes interpersonal violence ( Anderson 2001 ; Bushman et al. 2005 ; Cheatwood 2009 ) as well as property crimes ( Rotton and Cohn 2004 ). Warmer temperatures are believed to serve as stressors related to higher levels of aggression. Warm weather is also believed to influence routine activities that increase opportunities and exposure to crime.

As Agnew (2012) notes, existing research is inconclusive in terms of the relationship between extreme weather events (e.g., floods, tornadoes, hurricanes, drought, fires) and crime. That is, studies have found instances where crime increased as well as decreased following natural disasters. Yet there seems to be reason to believe that an increase in extreme weather events will generate conflict and crime. This may be due to increased opportunities for fraud schemes, post-event conflicts as stressed governmental agencies cannot adequately respond to the extreme events, and resource conflicts such as food and water shortages. These events increase social strains through loss of life, property, and livelihoods, and increased strain is associated with increased crime ( Agnew 2012 ). Extreme weather events may also trigger increased migration and the growth of megacities, with increased concentrated disadvantage and inequality known to be associated with increased levels of crime and violence ( Land et al. 1990 ; Koonings and Kruijt 2010 ). In this respect, crime emerges as an adaptation to the conflicts produced by climate change. 7

At the macro level, extreme weather events, resource conflicts, migration, and failed states are predicted to increase the risk for intergroup, regional, and armed conflict ( National Research Council 2012 ). These assessments focus on the vulnerabilities of human systems to effectively respond to extreme weather events as well as food and water insecurities, sea-level rise, and vector-borne diseases. The impacts of climate change also are believed to result in risks and harms that are not equally distributed but rather associated with vulnerable populations. Environmental justice scholars and climate-change scholars predict that risks and harms will be inequitably distributed among individuals, groups, nations, and regions (e.g., Buhaug, Gleditsch, and Theisen 2010 ).

In research on the impacts of climate change, green criminologists have used a species justice framework to draw attention to climate-related impacts on wildlife ( Sollund 2012 ). In terms of human impacts, green criminologists use environmental justice perspectives to highlight inequities in harm experienced due to climate change. This might include discussions of the distribution of harm by race, gender, and class within a specific area of the world. For example, Heckenberg and Johnston (2012) examine how extreme events and natural disasters affect men and women differently. Others have analyzed the “climate divide,” arguing that those with the least resources are likely to experience the most significant harms, while those with resources will continue with “business as usual” ( Fussey and South 2012 ). On a larger scale, this same sort of analysis might show differential impacts between the Global North and the Global South.

The interdisciplinary nature of conservation criminology may increase understanding of impacts to wildlife. For example, natural resource scholars may document risks to wildlife from habitat destruction related to climate change, which could be coupled with criminological analysis of illegal wildlife trade to understand links between the two. For example, by exacerbating scarcity, climate change may increase the financial and cultural incentives for trade in endangered species as well as magnify the harm of such illegal activities. Similar analysis could be conducted regarding risks to forests associated with climate change. Forests have long been valued for providing a number of ecosystem services that include raw materials for wood and paper products, watershed protection, habitat for wildlife, and recreation. Awareness of the carbon storage value of forests adds to this list of ecosystem services. As climate change affects forests, and as healthy, intact forests are identified as a key mitigation resource to the threat of climate change, these ecosystem services are likely to increase in value through contradictory pressures (e.g., preservation for carbon storage vs. demand for timber) exacerbated by climate-change effects (e.g., loss of forests due to fires or insect-borne disease, conversion of forests to agricultural production). As with endangered species, increased scarcity may generate greater demand for forest products that may increase criminal opportunities ( Climate Change Science Program 2008 ).

Environmental justice perspectives on human impacts are also compatible with conservation criminology but would be framed using the concept of risk. Discussions of impacts could be distilled into the exposure, or level of impact, and the probability that it will occur. This would provide a systematic assessment of risks and the populations likely to experience them. Analysis of vulnerabilities could also incorporate variation in the ability to cope among different populations, which would provide data-driven opportunities to target preparations for impending impacts. For example, building on the work of Heckenberg and Johnston (2012) , application of the conservation criminology risk framework could be used to further quantify the risks and vulnerabilities of men and women to climate change. Their grounded theory development regarding when and under what circumstances gendered vulnerabilities occur could be incorporated into predictive models to develop preventative measures and other interventions.

The inclusion of criminologists who study street crime would also be beneficial for preparation. As previously stated, climate-change scholars expect that migration to avoid climate-change impacts will produce megacities with serious crime problems. Working with individuals who model or otherwise study migration could help develop theory regarding when and where risks to human and environmental security may be the greatest in the future and to initiate discussion of how the criminal justice system should or should not be used to address such issues. To avoid circumstances like those following Hurricane Katrina, we need scholars from multiple disciplines to design interventions to avoid inequities in the experience of and response to natural disasters.

D. Adaptation and Mitigation Strategies

Climate-change scholars are devising a variety of adaptation and mitigation strategies to reduce the drivers of climate change or cope with future impacts. As evident in the previous discussion, land management and emission control strategies must be constructed to decelerate climate change and limit impacts on society ( National Research Council 2010 ). Similarly, altering individual behavior may also be necessary to deal with the impacts of climate change, such as water and food shortages.

To advance this literature and reduce the impacts of climate change, green criminologists would likely propose focusing on industry/capitalism to mitigate climate change. However, some have hypothesized that companies may seek to use political power to avoid adjudication of environmental violations ( Long et al. 2012 ). In fact, Stretesky, Long, and Lynch (2013) suggest that the state may not be able to effectively address the issues through sanctions, as sanctions had little impact on emissions recorded in the toxic release inventory, a voluntarily reported record of legal industrial emissions. They argue that the problem is not limited punishment but rather the current economic arrangement ( Stretesky et al. 2013 ).

The alternative solution is unclear. Lynch et al. (2013) argue that GC is not yet radical enough and that green criminologists must be willing to connect ecological harms to capitalism in order to “understand the real problem and what must be done” (p. 1011). However, the authors do not state exactly what must be done. Given the emphasis of GC, a shift toward alternative economic arrangements is the likely strategy. However, in other work, the authors recommend a consumer tax on vehicles as a short-term strategy to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from automobiles ( Lynch and Stretesky 2012 ). Methods to evaluate adaptation and mitigation strategies have not been discussed.

Conservation criminology research would draw on the risk and decision sciences to take a broader approach. For instance, this framework can help further understand the absence (or lack of) policy to reduce industrial emissions in some countries. As noted in the risk literature, actuarial and public perceptions of risk must align in order for the political risk to be low enough to act ( Haines 2007–2008 ), as public support is a key factor in creating effective legislation. Similarly, Gilligan and Vandenbergh (2013) argue for considering political opportunity costs in the evaluation of potential climate change policy. Perhaps public support is influenced by corporate efforts to polarize the climate change issue (e.g., Brisman 2012 ; Kramer 2013 ), but it is also related to individual-level factors such as trust in environmentalists versus industry, personal worldviews, and environmental beliefs ( Dietz, Dan, and Shwom 2009 ). Thus research on contradictions between actuarial, sociocultural (public perception), and political risk would further advance understanding of policies to mitigate industrial contributions to climate change.

Through its attempt to balance social and environmental considerations, conservation criminology would also offer insights into the resistance to greenhouse gas restrictions in countries like China and India that are faced with the contradictory pressures of poverty alleviation through rapid economic growth. Indeed, such restrictions may be perceived from a social justice perspective that views regulation of greenhouse gas emissions as attempts by the West and North to restrict economic growth and maintain current global economic inequalities. The integration of risk and decision sciences may, however, provide additional theoretical and methodological tools for the assessment of the relative costs and benefits (i.e., risks, associated with climate change and associated mitigation and adaptation strategies).

Using the conservation criminology framework to develop policy would lead to questions regarding how to balance environmental and human needs, with efforts to avoid further burden on disadvantaged groups. How do we construct interventions to balance risks to people, wildlife, and the environment? A range of interventions could be derived from the base disciplines, such as risk communication, various forms of regulation, and community-based natural resources management. Rather than exclusively targeting industry, interventions could be designed to target multiple points in the system responsible for climate change. For example, research suggests that addressing household contributions to climate change might make significant impacts without reducing well-being ( Dietz et al. 2009 ; Dietz 2014 ).

Conservation criminology would also prioritize interdisciplinary work. Collaboration with physical scientists and the general public would produce opportunities to target resources toward the most significant risks. Structured decision-making methods could be used to make these decisions and the values on which they were based transparent. Integrating social and natural science methodologies will help to improve assessments of the intervention that can further inform policy approaches. For example, interdisciplinary collaboration with physical scientists can improve measurement of the dependent variable. Rather than bean counting (e.g., number of enforcement actions) or conceptually discussing harm, empirical work can assess whether interventions actually reduce risks (actuarial or perceived).

In developing and assessing policy, it will be important to integrate criminological perspectives to understand the potential misuse of formal regulation. In addition to climate change generating factors conducive to crime, strategies and policies intended to adapt to and mitigate the effects of climate change are also likely to increase crime, what White (2012) discusses as regulatory offenses arising from policy responses to climate change. These effects are likely to be unintended but also predictable. For example, crimes have emerged through fraudulent schemes to evade effective inspection systems of cars and trucks designed to ensure emissions fall within minimal standards ( McGarrell and Hipple 2013 ). Similarly, illicit global markets have emerged in the trade of chlorofluorocarbons as governments have tried to regulate and prohibit their use as coolants in refrigerators and air conditioners due to their greenhouse gas effects ( United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime 2013 ).

Carbon trading markets have emerged as a mechanism for reducing carbon emissions. These policies seek to use the marketplace to create incentives and disincentives intended to reduce levels of carbon emissions. However, an unintended consequence of these global trading markets is that they create opportunities for fraud, such as theft and resale of stolen carbon credits ( Gibbs, Cassidy, and Rivers 2013 ). Similarly, policies aimed at reducing deforestation are likely to generate forms of crime. These include both local efforts aimed at preserving forests, as well as global strategies intended to create economic incentives for protecting forests through sustainable management. At its simplest level, when forest management policy results in laws prohibiting or limiting forest harvest, opportunities for crime emerge. With increased regulation of forests, practices such as logging without permits, excessive harvest, road building, and trade in illicit forest products represent emerging forms of criminality (e.g., Bisschop 2012 ; Environmental Investigation Agency 2012 ). Thus forest management needs to consider crime prevention as well as equity issues (e.g., distinguishing small-scale subsistence harvest from unsustainable forest theft; e.g., Magrath et al. 2007 ).

Policies such as Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation (REDD) seek to create incentives for sustainable management of forests. Essentially REDD seeks to create economic incentives for developing countries to maintain their forests. REDD operates through the United Nations Convention on Climate Change and involves investment from developed countries into preserving forests in developing countries. Similar to carbon trading markets, however, the global REDD markets create opportunities for fraud ( INTERPOL 2013 ), as well as other unintended consequences including short-term harvesting before regulations are implemented ( Venter et al. 2010 ).

The role of forestry management in climate-change mitigation and adaptation also reflects the importance of focusing from local to global levels (see also White 2008 ). The interdisciplinary conservation criminology framework appears to be a useful lens for moving across these levels. Although most commonly used to address local environmental issues, risk assessment can also be employed to strategically address risks on a global scale. One example is the scientific identification of “biodiversity hotspots.” These hotspots refer to areas “where exceptional concentrations of endemic species are undergoing exceptional loss of habitat” ( Myers et al. 2000 , p. 853). One such approach focused on endemic plant species and four types of animal species (mammals, birds, reptiles, and amphibians). This study found that twenty-five biodiversity hotspots, comprising only 1.4 percent of the earth’s land mass, accounted for 44 percent of plant and 35 percent of these four types of animal species. This type of risk assessment also demonstrated that a subset of the hotspots were particularly rich and that there was variation across the hotspots by plant and animal species types ( Myers et al. 2000 ; see also Dunham, Erhart, and Wright 2010 ). Conservation criminology can build on this form of ecosystem risk assessment to focus research and practice drawing on risk and decision sciences, natural resource management, and criminology to test theory, inform practice, and evaluate interventions. Parallels of effective risk-based prevention are available in criminology when limited resources are focused on violent crime hotspots (e.g., Corsaro and McGarrell 2010 ).

V. Conclusion

As noted at the outset, the past twenty-five years have witnessed considerable development of criminological theory and research focused on environmental and natural resource crime. This GC subfield has produced new knowledge about the harms generated to human health, wildlife, and the environment as well as the inequitable distribution of these harms and insight into the systems of control with responsibility for addressing these harms. Conservation criminology builds on this foundation and calls for interdisciplinary theory and methods for addressing legally defined harms as well as risks to human health, wildlife, ecosystems, and the environment. Conservation criminology, grounded in criminology, natural resource management, and risk perception and decision making, offers systematic tools for assessing and characterizing harm; assessing risks and weighing costs and benefits; integrating and balancing technical, scientific, and lay perspectives; and informing governance at local and global levels.

The consideration of applying conservation criminology to the global issue of climate change was intended to demonstrate the potential application and utility of the conservation criminology framework. We argue that drawing on and integrating across multiple disciplines will provide a greater understanding of the complex problems associated with climate change. Examining the cultural, political, economic, industrial, and individual contributions to climate change side-by-side along with a range of theoretical perspectives and potential interventions would provide a more holistic understanding of the drivers of climate change, impacts of climate change, and efforts to address it. The interdisciplinary nature of the conservation criminology framework and the emphasis on issues at the intersection of risk and crime provides an ideal framework for this type of work.

Ultimately, the value of the conservation criminology framework will be determined empirically. Do systematic assessments of risk provide useful information beyond the concept of environmental harm? Do these assessments influence legal definitions of crime? Does the framework and associated interdisciplinary approach contribute to new theoretically informed understanding as well as a broader range of governance and management interventions? Do the contrasts in approaches generate productive debates, theoretical testing, and varied evaluation methods that advance knowledge and practice?

Alberti, M. , H. Asbjornsen , L. A. Baker , N. Brozovic , L. E. Drinkwater , S. A. Drzyzga , C. A. Jantz , J. Fragoso , D. S. Holland , T. A. Kohler , J. Liu , W. J. McConnell , H. D. J. Maschner , J. D. A. Millington , M. Monticino , G. Podestá , R. G. Pontius, Jr ., D. C. L. Redman , N. J. Reo , D. Sailor , and G. Urquhart . 2011 . “ Research on Coupled Human and Natural Systems (CHANS): Approach, Challenges, and Strategies. ” Bulletin of the Ecological Society of America 92:218–228.

Google Scholar

Allaby, M.   1994 . The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Ecology . Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Google Preview

Agnew, R.   2012 . “ Dire Forecast: A Theoretical Model of the Impact of Climate Change on Crime. ” Theoretical Criminology 16(1):21–42.

Anderson, C. A.   2001 . “ Heat and Violence. ” Current Directions in Psychological Science 10(1): 33–38.

Arvai, J.   2007 . “ Rethinking of Risk Communication: Lessons from the Decision Sciences. ” Tree Genetics and Genomes 3:173–85.

Ayling, J.   2013 . “ What Sustains Wildlife Crime? Rhino Horn Trading and the Resilience of Criminal Networks. ” Journal of International Wildlife Law and Policy 16(1):57–80.

Bisschop, L.   2012 . “ Out of the Woods: The Illegal Trade in Tropical Timber and a European Trade Hub. ” Global Crime 13(3):191–212.

Bookchin, M.   1987 . “ Social Ecology vs. ‘Deep Ecology’: A Challenge for the Ecology Movement. ” The Raven Anarchist Quarterly 1(3):219–50.

Brown, M.   1981 . Laying Waste: The Poisoning of America by Toxic Chemicals . New York: Washington Square Press.

Buhaug, H. , N. P. Gleditsch , and O. M. Theisen . 2010 . “Implications of Climate Change for Armed Conflict.” In Social Dimensions of Climate Change: Equity and Vulnerability in a Warming World , edited by R. Mearns and A. Norton . Washington, DC: World Bank.

Brisman, Avi . 2012 . “The Cultural Silence of Climate Change Contrarianism.” In Climate Change from a Criminological Perspective , edited by R. White . New York: Springer.

Bushman, Brad , Morgan Wang , and Craig Anderson . 2005 . “ Is the Curve Relating Temperature to Aggression Linear or Curvilinear? ” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 89(1):62–66.

Carrabine, E. , P. Iganski , M. Lee , K. Plummer , and N. South . 2004 . Criminology: A Sociological Introduction . London: Routledge.

Cheatwood, D.   2009 . “Weather and Crime.” In 21st Century Criminology , Vol. 1, edited by J. M. Miller . Los Angeles, CA: SAGE.

Climate Change Science Program. 2008 . The Effects of Climate Change on Agriculture, Land Resources, Water Resources, and Biodiversity in the United States . Report by the US Climate Change Science Program and the Subcommittee on Global Change Research. Washington, DC: US Department of Agriculture.

Corsaro, N. , and E. F. McGarrell . 2010 . “ Reducing Homicide Risk in Indianapolis between 1997 and 2000. ” Journal of Urban Health 87(5):851–64.

Dietz, T.   2014 . “ Understanding Environmentally Significant Consumption. ” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 111(14):5067–68. www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.1403169111 .

Dietz, T. , A. Dan , and R. Shwom . 2009 . “ Social Support for Climate Change Policy: Social Psychological and Social Structural Influences. ” Rural Sociology 72(2):185–214.

Dietz, T. , G. T. Gardner , J. Gilligan , P. C. Stern , and M. P. Vandenbergh . 2009 . “ Household Actions Can Provide a Behavioral Wedge to Rapidly Reduce Carbon Emissions. ” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 106(44):18452–56.

Dunham, A. E. , E. M. Erhart , and P. C. Wright . 2010 . “ Global Climate Cycles and Cyclones: Consequences for Rainfall Patterns and Lemur Production in Southeastern Madagascar. ” Global Change Biology 17:219–27.

Durkin, P.   2007 . Preparation of Environmental Documentation and Risk Assessments for the USDA/Forest Service . Fayetteville, NY: Syracuse Environmental Research Associates, Inc.

Environmental Investigation Agency. 2012 . Rosewood Robbery: The Case for Thailand to List Rosewood on CITES . London: Environmental Investigation Agency.

European Network and Information Security Agency. 2011 . To Log or Not to Log? Risks and Benefits of Emerging Lige-Logging Applications . Heraklion, Greece: European Network and Information Security Agency.

Falcone, D.   2004 . “ America’s Conservation Police: Agencies in Transition. ” Policing 27(1):56–66.

Fussey, Pete , and Nigel South . 2012 . “Heading Toward a New Criminogenic Climate: Climate Change, Political Economy and Environmental Security.” In Climate Change from a Criminological Perspective , edited by R. White . London: Springer.

Gibbs, C. , M. B. Cassidy , and L. Rivers III . 2013 . “ A Routine Activities Analysis of White-Collar Crime in Carbon Markets. ” Law and Policy 35(4):341–74.

Gibbs, C. , M. L. Gore , E. F. McGarrell , and L. Rivers III . 2010 . “ Introducing Conservation Criminology: Towards Interdisciplinary Scholarship on Environmental Crimes and Risks. ” British Journal of Criminology 50:124–44.

Gibbs, C. , E. F. McGarrell , and M. Axelrod . 2010 . “ Transnational White-Collar Crime and Risk: Lessons from the Global Trade in Electronic Waste. ” Criminology and Public Policy 9(3):543–60.

Gilligan, J. M. , and M. P. Vandenbergh . 2013. “Accounting for Political Feasibility in Climate Instrument Choice.” Vanderbilt Public Law Research Paper. Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University. http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2220788 .

Haines, F. , A. Sutton , and C. Platania-Phung . 2007 –2008. “ It’s All About Risk, Isn’t It? Science, Politics, Public Opinion and Regulatory Reform. ” Finders Journal of Law Reform 10:435–53.

Halsey, M.   2004 . “ Against ‘Green’ Criminology. ” British Journal of Criminology 44:833–53.

Halsey, M.   2006 . Deleuze and Environmental Damage . Aldershot: Ashgate.

Halsey, M.   2013 . “Conservation Criminology and the ‘General Accident’ of Climate Change. In Routledge International Handbook of Green Criminology , edited by N. South and A. Brisman . New York: Routledge.

Halsey, M. , and White, R.   2009 . “Crime, Ecophilosophy and Environmental Harm.” In Environmental Crime: A Reader , edited by R. White . Cullompton, UK: Willan.

Hauck, M.   2008 . “ Rethinking Small-Scale Fisheries Compliance. ” Marine Policy 32:635–42.

Heckenberg, D. , and I. Johnston . 2012 . “Climate Change, Gender and Natural Disasters: Social Differences and Environment-Related Victimization.” In Climate Change from a Criminological Perspective , edited by R. White . London: Springer.

Herbig, F. J. W. 2009. “The Illegal Trade Reptile Trade: A Criminological Perspective.” PhD dissertation, University of South Africa Institutional Repository.

Herbig, F. J. W. , and S. J. Joubert . 2006 . “ Criminological Semantics: Conservation Criminology—Vision or Vagary? ” Acta Criminologica 19:88–103.

Hilborn, R. , P. Arcese , M. Borner , J. Hando , G. Hopcraft , M. Loibooki , S. Mduma , and A. R. E. Sinclair . 2006 . “ Effective Enforcement in a Conservation Area. ” Science 314(5803): 1266.

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2002. Climate Change and Biodiversity . IPCC Technical Paper V. Geneva: IPCC. http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/technical-papers/climate-changes-biodiversity-en.pdf .

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2007. Climate Change 2007: Synthesis Report . An Assessment of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Geneva: IPCC. http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar4/syr/ar4_syr.pdf .

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2013 . “Summary for Policymakers.” In Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change , edited by T. F. Stocker , D. Qin , G.-K. Plattner , M. Tignor , S. K. Allen , J. Boschung , A. Nauels , Y. Xia , V. Bex , and P. M. Midgley . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

INTERPOL. 2013 . Guide to Carbon Trading Crime . Lyon, France: INTERPOL Environmental Crime Programme.

Koonings, K. , and D. Kruijt . 2010 . Megacities: The Politics of Urban Exclusion and Violence in the Global South . London: Zed Books.

Kramer, R. C.   2013 . “ Carbon in the Atmosphere and Power in America: Climate Change as State-Corporate Crime. ” Journal of Crime and Justice 36(2):153–70.

Kramer, R. C. , and R. Michalowski . 2012 . “Is Global Warming a State-Corporate Crime?” In Climate Change from a Criminological Perspective , edited by R. White . New York: Springer.

Kuperan, K. , and J. G. Sutinen . 1998 . “ Blue Water Crime: Deterrence, Legitimacy, and Compliance in Fisheries. ” Law and Society Review 32(2):309–37.

Land, K. C. , P. L. McCall , and L. E. Cohen . 1990 . “ Structural Covariates of Homicide Rates: Are There Any Invariances Across Time and Social Space? ” American Journal of Sociology 95:922–63.

Lane, Pauline . 1998 . “ Ecofeminism Meets Criminology. ” Theoretical Criminology 2(2):235–48.

Lee, R. , A. Gorog , A. Dwiyahreni , S. Siwu , J. Riley , H. Alexander , G. D. Paoli , and W. Ramano . 2005 . “ Wildlife Trade and Implications for Law Enforcement in Indonesia: A Case Study from North Sulawesi. ” Biological Conservation 123:477–88.

Lemieux, A. M. , and R. V. Clarke . 2009 . The International Ban on Ivory Sales and its Effects on Elephant Poaching in Africa.   British Journal of Criminology 49:451–71.

Liu, J. , T. Dietz , S. R. Carpenter , M. Alberti , C. Folke , E. Moran , A. N. Pell , P. Deadman , T. Kratz , J. Lubchenco , E. Ostrom , Z. Ouyang , W. Provencher , C. L. Redman , S. H. Schneider , and W. W Taylor . 2007 . “ Coupled Human and Natural Systems. ” Ambio 36:639–49.

Liu, J. , and W. Wang . 2012 . “ Water Sustainability for China and Beyond. ” Science 337:649–50.

Long, M. A. , P. B. Stretesky , M. J. Lynch , and E. Fenwick . 2012 . “ Crime in the Coal Industry: Implications for Green Criminology and Treadmill of Production. ” Organization and Environment 25(3):328–46.

Lovejoy, T. E. , and L. Hannah . 2005 . Climate Change and Biodiversity . New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Lynch, M. J.   1990 . “ The Greening of Criminology: A Perspective for the 1990s. ” The Critical Criminologist 2(3):3–4, 11–12.

Lynch, M. J.   2013 . “Reflecting on Green Criminology and Its Boundaries: Comparing Environmental and Criminal Victimization and Considering Crime from an Eco-City Perspective. In Routledge International Handbook of Green Criminology , edited by N. South and A. Brisman . New York: Routledge.

Lynch, M. J. , R. G. Burns , and P. B. Stretesky . 2010 . “ Global Warming and State-Corporate Crime: The Politicization of Global Warming Under the Bush Administration. ” Crime, Law and Social Change 54(3):213–39.

Lynch, M.J. , and Stretesky, P.B. ( 2012 ). “A Proposal for a New Vehicle-Based Carbon Tax (V-CART): Vehicle-Based Global Warming Policy and Green Criminology.” In Climate Change from a Criminological Perspective , edited by R. White , pp. 205–26. London: Springer.

Lynch, M. J. , M. Long , K. Barrett , and P. B. Stretesky . 2013 . “ Is it a Crime to Produce Ecological Disorganization? Why Green Criminology and Political Economy Matter in the Analysis of Global Ecological Harms. ” British Journal of Criminology 53:997–1016.

Lynch, M. J. , and P. B. Stretesky . 2003 . “ The Meaning of Green: Contrasting Criminological Perspectives. ” Theoretical Criminology 7:217–38.

Magrath, W. B. , R. L. Grandalski , G. L. Stuckey , G. B. Vikanes , and G. R. Wilkinson . 2007 . Timber Theft Prevention . Washington, DC: World Bank.

Mares, D.   2010 . “ Criminalizing Ecological Harm: Crimes Against Carrying Capacity and the Criminalization of Eco-Sinners. ” Critical Criminology 18:279–93.

McGarrell, E. F. , M. Suttmoeller , and C. Gibbs . 2013 . “Great Lakes Fisheries Law Enforcement.” In Great Lakes Fisheries Policy and Management: A Binational Perspective, 2d ed., edited by W. W. Taylor , A. J. Lynch , and N. J. Leonard . East Lansing: Michigan State University Press.

McGarrell, E. F. , and Hipple, N. K.   2013 . “ Environmental Resource Crimes: The Hidden Threat to Public Safety, Natural Resources, and the Environment. ” The Police Chief 80:110–13.

McMullan, J. L. , and D. C. Perrier . 2002 . “ Lobster Poaching and the Ironies of Law Enforcement. ” Law and Society Review 36(4):679–718.

Myers, N. , R. A. Mittermeier , C. G. Mittermeier , G. A. B. da Fonseca , and J. Kent . 2000 . “ Biodiversity Hotspots for Conservation Priorities. ” Science 403(24):853–58.

Natali, Lorenzo . 2013 . “The Contemporary Horizon of Green Criminology.” In Routledge International Handbook of Green Criminology , edited by N. South and A. Brisman . New York: Routledge.

National Research Council. 2010 . Advancing the Science of Climate Change . Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

National Research Council. 2011 . America’s Climate Choices. Committee on America’s Climate Choices. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

National Research Council. 2012 . Climate and Social Stress: Implications for Security Analysis . Committee on Assessing the Impacts of Climate Change on Social and Political Stresses, edited by John D. Steinbruner , Paul C. Stern , and Jo L. Husbands . Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

Pires, S. , and R. V. G. Clarke . 2011 . “ Sequential Foraging, Itinerant Fences and Parrot Poaching in Bolivia. ” British Journal of Criminology 51:314–35.

Renn, O.   2008 . Risk Governance: Coping with Uncertainty in a Complex World . London: Earthscan.

Rotton, J. , and E. G. Cohn . 2004 . “ Outdoor Temperature, Climate Control, and Criminal Assault: The Spatial and Temporal Ecology of Violence. ” Environment and Behavior 36(2):276–306.

Royal Society, and US National Academy of Sciences. 2013. Climate Change: Evidence & Causes . Washington, DC: National Research Council. http://dels.nas.edu/resources/static-assets/exec-office-other/climate-change-full.pdf .

Saha, R. , and P. Mohai . 2009 . “Historical Context and Hazardous Waste Facility Siting: Understanding Temporal Patterns in Michigan.” In Environmental Crime: A Reader , edited by R. White . Cullompton, UK: Willan.

Schnaiberg, A.   1980 . The Environment: From Surplus to Scarcity . New York: Oxford University Press.

Schneider, J. L.   2008 . “ Reducing the Illicit Trade in Endangered Wildlife: The Market Reduction Approach. ” Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice 24(3):274–95.

Smith, J. , K. Obidzinski , A. Subarudi , and I. Suramenggala . 2003 . “ Illegal Logging, Collusive Corruption and Fragmented Governments in Kalimantan, Indonesia. ” International Forestry Review 5(3):293–302.

Sollund, R.   2012 . “Oil Production, Climate Change and Species Decline: The Case of Norway.” In Climate Change from a Criminological Perspective , edited by R. White . New York: Springer.

South, N.   1998 . “ A Green Field for Criminology? A Proposal for a Perspective. ” Theoretical Criminology 2(2):211–33.

South, N. , A. Brisman , and P. Beirne . 2013 . “A Guide to a Green Criminology.” In The Routledge International Handbook of Green Criminology , edited by N. South and A. Brisman . New York: Routledge.

South, N., and P. Beirne . 1998 . “ Editors’ Introduction. ” Theoretical Criminology 2(2):147–48.

Sutherland, E.   1949 . White Collar Crime. New York: Dryden Press.

Stiles, D.   2004 . “ The Ivory Trade and Elephant Conservation. ” Environmental Conservation 31:309–21.

Stretesky, P. , M. A. Long , and M. J. Lynch . 2013 . “ Does Environmental Enforcement Slow the Treadmill of Production? The Relationship Between Large Monetary Penalties, Ecological Disorganization and Toxic Releases Within Offending Corporations. ” Journal of Crime and Justice 36(2):233–47.

Stretesky, P. , and M. J. Lynch . 1999 . “ Corporate Environmental Violence and Racism. ” Crime, Law and Social Change 30(2):163–84.

Stretesky, P. , and M. J. Lynch . 2009 . “ A Cross-National Study of the Association Between Per Capita Carbon Dioxide Emissions and Exports to the United States. ” Social Science Research 28(1):239–50.

Takemura, N.   2012 . “Uncontrollable Nuclear Power Accidents and Fatal Environmental Harm: Why We Have Not Been Ready for the Impacts of Climate Change.” In Climate Change from a Criminological Perspective , edited by R. White . London: Springer.

Thomas, C. D. , A. Cameron , R. E. Green , M. Bakkenes , L. J. Beaumont , Y. C. Collingham , B. F. N. Erasmus , Ferreira de Siqueira , M. Grainger , L. Hannah , L. Hughes , B. Huntley , A. S. van Jaarsveld , G. F. Midgley , L. Miles , M. A. Ortega-Huerta , A. T. Peterson , O. L. Phillips , and S. E. Williams . 2004 . “ Extinction Risk from Climate Change. ” Nature 427:145–48.

Trench, C. C.   1967 . The Poacher and the Squire: A History of Poaching and Game Preservation in England . London: Longmans, Green & Co.

United Nations Environment Program. 2009 . Vital Forest Graphics . Nairobi, Kenya: United Nations Environment Program, Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations, and United Nations Forum on Forests.

United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime. 2013 . “Illicit Trade in Ozone-depleting Substances (ODS) from East Asia to the World.” In Transnational Organized Crime in East Asia and the Pacific: A Threat Assessment . Bangkok, Thailand: United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, Regional Office for Southeast Asia and the Pacific.

US Fish and Wildlife Service. 2007 . “ Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 12-Month Petition Finding and Proposed Rule to List the Polar Bear (Ursus maritimus) as Threatened Throughout its Range. ” Washington, DC: Environmental Protection Agency. http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-SPECIES/2007/January/Day-09/e9962.htm .

Vandenbergh, M. P.   2004 . “ From Smokestack to SUV: The Individual as Regulated Entity in the New Era of Environmental Law. ” Vanderbilt Law Review 57(2):515–28.

Van Vugt, M. , R. M. Meertens , and P. A. M. Van Lange . 1995 . “ Car Versus Public Transportation? The Role of Social Value Orientation in Real-Life Social Dilemma. ” Journal of Applied Social Psychology 25:258–78.

Venter, O. , J. E. M. Watson , E. Meijaard , W. F. Laurance , and H. P. Possingham . 2010 . “ Avoiding Unintended Outcomes from REDD. ” Conservation Biology 24(1):5–6.

White, R.   1998 . “ Environmental Criminology and Sydney Water. ” Current Issues in Criminal Justice 10:214–19.

White, R.   2008 . Crimes against Nature: Environmental Criminology and Ecological Justice . Portland, OR: Willan.

White, R.   2009 . “Introduction: Environmental Crime and Eco-Global Criminology.” In Environmental Crime: A Reader , edited by R. White . Cullompton, UK: Willan.

White, R.   2012 . “The Criminology of Climate Change.” In Climate Change from a Criminological Perspective , edited by R. White . London: Springer.

Wise, S.   2001 . Rattling the Cage: Toward Legal Rights for Animals . Cambridge, MA: Perseus Books.

Yeager, P.   1993 . “Industrial Water Pollution.” In Beyond the Law: Crime in Complex Organizations , edited by M. Tonry and A. Reiss . Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Zimmerman, M.   2003 . “ The Black Market for Wildlife: Combating Transnational Organized Crime in the Illegal Wildlife Trade. ” Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law 36:1657–89.

The philosophy of the green movement and green politics use of activism to address environmental destruction are antithetical to industrialized capitalism and its associated consumption patterns that are maintained by politically and economically powerful groups (e.g., corporations, governments). The critique of capitalism inherent in these perspectives is consistent with radical criminology’s Marxist framework ( Lynch 1990 , 2013 ).

In his introduction of GC, Lynch (1990) acknowledged that inequities by race and sex are related to economic, political, and class interests (as demonstrated in his future work on environmental justice). These issues simply were not the initial ( Lynch 1990 ) or current ( Natali 2013 ) focus of GC as conceptualized by Lynch.

“Treadmill of production” refers to a theoretical model that argues that environmental problems in modern societies are inevitable due to the reliance of both public and private institutions on continued economic growth through the interaction of production and consumption. Continued growth drives resource extraction and pollution, and the model predicts that environmental problems cannot be solved absent radical alteration of this system of growth, production, and consumption ( Schnaiberg 1980 ).

They also narrow the theoretical focus of empirical work as well as potential interventions.

Risk governance scholars (e.g., Renn 2008 ) provide insight into cultural variations in risk perception when contrasting public and political support for genetically modified organisms and nuclear power in countries such as France and the United States. They also provide theory and methods for studying such variation in public, elite and scientific communities. Criminologists have rarely employed such approaches.

The IPCC (2002) notes that there is considerable uncertainty about the impact of climate change on species and that such impact is likely to vary regionally. However, the greatest impact is likely to be on those species most at risk for extinction.

To summarize, and drawing on Agnew (2012) , a number of criminogenic mechanisms are likely to increase due to the impacts of climate change. These include increased strain; reduced formal and informal controls; reduced social support; the emergence of beliefs, values, and traits conducive to crime; increased opportunities for crime; and increased social conflict.

• About Oxford Academic
• Publish journals with us
• University press partners
• What we publish
• New features  
• Open access
• Institutional account management
• Rights and permissions
• Get help with access
• Accessibility
• Advertising
• Media enquiries
• Oxford University Press
• Oxford Languages
• University of Oxford

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

• Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
• Cookie settings
• Cookie policy
• Privacy policy
• Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

• Reference Manager
• Simple TEXT file

People also looked at

Original research article, environmental crime and the harm prevention criminalist.

• School of Social Sciences, University of Tasmania, Hobart, TS, Australia

The role of the ‘pracademic’ comes in the fore in the interface between academia and environmental protection. This article explores the translation of evidence-based research and theoretical innovation in environmental crime prevention into ground level practice. Crime prevention as applied to illegal fishing forms the initial focus of the discussions. This is followed by discussion of pracademics and the importance of combining academic work and practitioner experience as part of applied criminology. The paper then discusses the potential role of a ‘harm prevention criminalist’ in crime prevention interventions. As something potentially at the frontier of future work, this position involves a combination of skills including site and crime assessment, interpersonal communication, collaborative engagement, and horizon scanning.

Introduction

Jobs for the future need to be created in the present. Environmental degradation, threats to biodiversity, and climate change are the most important systemic issues facing humanity. How we respond to these challenges is not only a matter of strategic planning and marshalling of resources, but workforce development. Addressing environmental crime requires agencies equipped with appropriate professional human resource capabilities, both in responding to crime and preventing it.

This article explores links between academic research in environmental crime prevention and ground level practice. Crime prevention as applied to illegal fishing forms the initial focus of the discussions. As part of this, the article discusses the knowledge and reception of academic literature on crime prevention in a government authority tasked with stopping illegal fishing, a task made particularly complex given that it occurs in a community that is highly culturally and linguistically diverse. Attention then turns to the role of a ‘harm prevention criminalist’ in crime prevention interventions. Being at the frontier of future work, this potential position involves a combination of skills including site and crime assessment, interpersonal communication, collaborative engagement, and horizon scanning.

The article speaks to the necessity for both theoretical and applied criminology and acknowledges the role of pracademics in trying to ‘make a difference’ with respect to real world policies, programs, projects, and politics. The main orientation of the discussion is toward the future – both in terms of general environmental developments and a potential role for criminologists as practitioners in responding to environmental calamity.

The practice of prevention: Illegal fishing

Environmental crime prevention as a specific type of crime prevention encompasses a range of considerations. Different kinds of harm require different kinds of responses. There is now an extensive body of work that deals with preventing environmental crime in different geographical locations, in relation to different types of commodities and crimes, and utilising many different techniques and approaches (see for examples, Pires and Moreto, 2011 ; Lemieux, 2014 ; Sollund et al., 2016 ; van Uhm, 2016 ; Cao, 2017 ; Moreto, 2018 ; Sollund, 2019 ; Wong, 2019 ; Wyatt, 2022 ). As these studies indicate, general pronouncements about the nature of harm need to be accompanied by analyses of specific sites and crimes. This applies to illegal fishing as it does to other types of environmental crimes and harms.

There are, for instance, major variations in illegal fishing as this pertains to criminal activity and this in turn is shaped by context and purpose, such as fishing for subsistence versus money-making ( White, 2008 ). Studies of specific types of illegal fishing (e.g., abalone, crab, lobster and toothfish) show marked differences in motives, techniques, local cultures, and scale of operation ( McMullan and Perrier, 2002 ; Tailby and Gant, 2002 ; Smith and Anderson, 2004 ; Anderson and McCusker, 2005 ; de Coning and Witbooi, 2015 ; Petrossian et al., 2015 ; Petrossian et al., 2016 ). Within specific fishing sectors, there may also be great variation. For example, abalone theft includes organised poachers, licensed divers, shore-based divers, extended family groups, and individuals, all of whom differ in methods, motivation and use of the abalone catch ( Tailby and Gant, 2002 ). Moreover, different actors may be involved at different points – harvesting, processing, transporting, retailing, consuming – requiring different skills, such as diving, canning, driving, selling, and cooking.

Environmental crime prevention, therefore, needs to be tailored to fit circumstance.

Models and techniques of prevention

Accordingly, a range of crime prevention approaches have been developed in relation to illegal fishing – that incorporate social developmental and community measures as well as those that are situational and techniques oriented ( Sutton et al., 2021 ). Recent methods and techniques of environmental crime prevention, specifically as applied to illegal fishing, include:

● application of Situational Crime Prevention that features increasing the effort of crime through target hardening, increasing the risks through enhanced satellite surveillance, reducing rewards by disrupting markets, reducing provocations by neutralising peer pressure that sustains a culture of offending, and removing excuses by measures such as posting instructions about compliance and enforcement regimes ( Kurland et al., 2017 ).

● employment of the CRAVED Theft Model , which refers to Concealable [size, overall catch load]; Removable [easy to catch]; Abundant/Accessible/Available [hot spots]; Valuable [larger, scarce]; E njoyable [found in recipes]; and Disposable [highly commercial] ( Petrossian and Clarke, 2014 ). Using this model, investigators can provide analyses applied to multiple illegally-caught species, make comparison across species and locations; focus on methods, perpetrators, consumers; and be informed by the notion of ‘suitable targets of crime’.

● a Crime Script Analysis considers the variety of motives, different sets of skills and knowledge, and different modus operandi involved in criminality ( Sahramaki and Kankaanranta, 2017 ; Petrossian and Pezzella, 2018 ; Dehghannirir and Borrion, 2021 ). Crime is a process, and the actual criminal event is only one of the ‘events’ in this process. Accordingly, the task is to lay out a ‘script’ and carefully scrutinise the sequential steps. This leads to policy and programmatic responses built upon the knowledge provided by script analyses. A crime prevention response is based upon ‘reading’ the script based upon the responses and information provided in investigation.

● a Market Reduction Approach , as applied to the illicit endangered species trade, seeks to identify the routine patterns of those involved, such as poachers, handlers, and consumers ( Schneider, 2012 ) and is also relevant to investigation of illegal fishing. Issues of seasonality, how harvested, demand, and processing are all included in such analyses. As applied to fishing, key agencies include fisheries, customs, marine park authorities, port authorities and the navy; key stakeholders include commercial and recreational fishers, tourism operators, local residents and biologists.

● a fisheries Value-Chain Model refers to an abstract rendition of typical progressions based on experience and prior examinations of an industry ( UNODC, 2019a ). For instance, the fisheries ‘process value chain’ occurs on shore and at sea, and involves standard stages including preparation, fishing, landing, processing, sales, transport, and the consumer. Each of these stages simultaneously reflects various social control processes – for example, during ‘preparations’ matters might include licenses, quotas, crew, captain and vessel registration, while ‘sales’ involves things such as invoice, accounting, product yields, bank transactions, correspondence, and contracts. This is not a crime script as such, but it does provide crime prevention practitioners with a sense of ‘where to look’ and ‘who to watch’ as part of the fisheries value chain model.

● Trade-related measures involve schemes that require documentation to accompany the product to authenticate its legitimacy ( Lack, 2007 ). In regards illegal fishing, vessel lists can be drawn up and used to identify authorised vessels (‘white lists’) and vessels considered to be fishing in breach of the law (‘black lists’). The lists are then used to restrict the access of black listed vessels to ports and port services. Such lists may also involve trade bans on specific States that are considered to have failed to co-operate in the implementation of regional conservation and management measures.

● Community Crime Prevention measures include working at the local level to address issues ( Moreto, 2018 ). These issues include the ambiguities surrounding fishing, given that it is legal and it is only certain regulations that make it illegal, and where local cultures view it as a ‘folk crime’ and not really that serious ( McMullan and Perrier, 2002 ). Prevention involves encouraging citizen engagement as guardians of nature and having local tourism and other commercial interests as natural resource managers (through initiatives such as ‘Fish Watch’ and confidential phone-in hot lines) and use of relevant technology (GPS-linked photos; fish identification). Coastal watch schemes and monitoring programs, as well as Indi genous coastal patrols, are also community-based measures.

● Focusing on high-risk locations is common to crime prevention approaches generally and this has also been applied to identification of the places where illegal fishing occurs ( Weekers and Zahnow, 2018 ). For example, detailed analyses show a distinctive spatial distribution of poaching events within the no-take Marine National Parks of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park. Based on these findings, that demonstrate most crimes of a particular type occur in a small number of ‘risky’ places, tailored crime prevention measures can be applied, such as random patrolling, deployment of surveillance cameras, and GPS tracking of boats from nearby launch sites, in these high-risk areas.

As with other types of environmental crime, illegal fishing may stem from the exclusion of small-scale fishers from traditional fishing spots or species, and reflect historical inequalities and colonial experiences ( Hubschle et al., 2021 ). A holistic approach to crime prevention acknowledges that diverse interests need to be accommodated as part of the crime prevention problem-solving process ( Sutton et al., 2021 ) and that environmental restorative justice should likewise be considered part of the crime prevention toolkit ( Pali et al., 2022 ). As applied here, such an approach attempts to foster community-level compliance and engagement in guardianship, the tackling of economic and cultural factors that legitimate illegal fishing, uses the full suite of techniques and technologies to monitor and address issues, and situates fish (and the protection of fish) within the context of both ecological and social environments.

Smaller scale interventions and prevention

While sophisticated methods and models of environmental crime intervention have been developed by criminologists, policymakers and practitioners operating at high levels of office, at the ground level the situation is somewhat different. Here work tends to be much more constrained by circumstance and limited resources.

For example, the main orientation of fisheries officers in the State of Victoria in Australia is on ‘catching the bad guys’ rather than prevention as such. It is notable, therefore, that Fisheries Victoria recently organised one of its first ever conferences and related activities on crime prevention (2020-2021). The chief organiser wanted to impress upon her colleagues the importance of crime prevention (rather than focussing solely on reactive investigation and prosecution). She, too, had to learn much ‘from scratch’ as crime prevention had not been part of either her training or her day-to-day job mandate.

Several criminologists, including myself, were invited to present overarching explanatory papers at the conference. Much of the work of Fisheries Victoria relates to freshwater fishing and breaches of fisheries law. Two things immediate stood out for me as a conference participant. First, it was basically just the one person driving the ‘crime prevention’ agenda (most of the regulatory activity is reactive not proactive), and she was trying to organise training and materials without any previous exposure to criminology or crime prevention literature. Second, a vital issue in the State of Victoria is ‘community crime prevention’ insofar as the culturally and linguistically diverse population means that there are challenges in regards communication, expectations, relationships to ‘authority’, and notions/knowledge of acceptable behaviour. Practitioners were thus simultaneously endeavoring to learn the essential concepts and models of crime prevention, how best to achieve behaviour change and prevent crime, and how to strengthen community engagement to make prevention programs stronger.

The challenge for practitioners was to learn more about prevention techniques that resonated with their own jobs and experiences, as well as social crime prevention approaches to address the diversity of the regulated communities. The challenge for academics was to move from abstract models to try to pinpoint specific tactics and techniques that would be seen as useable by practitioners, relevant to policymakers, and affordable from the viewpoint of those controlling the agency purse strings. On either side, the problem of language is formidable – since specific terms frequently mean quite different things to different people (see Pink, 2021 on diverse uses of terminology in regulation and law enforcement), and there are varying degrees of understanding across the technical, experiential, applied and intellectual domains. Practitioners in Fisheries Victoria and agencies such as the Environmental Protection Agency, for example, come from a variety of backgrounds – including marine science, ichthyology, economics, chemistry, and law enforcement – and this is partly reflected in the variable ways in which they apply their specific knowledge and skills in undertaking regulatory work. Not everyone is on the same page when it comes to mission and role.

As a result of this engagement with Fisheries Victoria, my attention turned toward initiatives that could help to translate academic knowledge into grounded practice. Part of this involved interrogating the nature and role of ‘pracademics’ in environmental crime prevention. This was grounded in experiences such as the previously mentioned conference and has led to further consideration of the potential role of criminologists in working with people at the coalface. The emergence of new types of harms, such as those pertaining to global warming, also propelled interest in how changing ‘harmscapes’ ( Mutongwizo et al., 2021 ) are rapidly shifting the terrain of both conceptions of harm and practitioner responses. For example, these profound changes have huge implications for aquatic and marine life (e.g., migration of fish species in the oceans, the impact of drought and algae blooms on fish populations in freshwater systems). For environmental crime generally, it points to larger issues of perspective and approach that need further unpacking.

Pracademics and applied criminology

The term ‘pracademic’ is based on the words, ‘practitioner’ and ‘academic’. It alludes to persons who strive to combine elements of applied, practical knowledge with the insights of abstract research and/or scholarly knowledge.

Practitioners tend to be focussed on the tasks at hand, drawing upon experience, expertise, and technical skills to address matters such as, for example, crime scene examination, criminal investigation, legal advocacy and DNA analysis. There is a defined project, defined goal and defined outcome, whether this relates to scientific analysis, police work, regulatory compliance, or court adjudication. Academics carry out studies and evaluations of policy and practice, and impacts and risks, and less frequently engage directly in practical interventions. Some concentrate on consolidating knowledge in the form of developing theories and concepts, categorising previous research into conceptual models, and summarising existing findings and/or writing histories of knowledge ( White, 2023 ).

The role of the pracademic comes to the fore in the interface between academia and environmental protection. It finds its best purchase when evidence-based research and theoretical innovation in environmental crime prevention is translated into ground level regulatory and law enforcement practice. This sort of ‘applied criminology’ involves academic and practitioner attempts to concretely address environmental crimes and harms. That is, the emphasis is on action and intervention. Rather than simply or solely studying an environmental issue or problem (e.g., the causes of climate change, the impact of city air pollution on children), the point of applied criminology is to prevent, stop and/or deter perpetrators as well as support environmental victims (however defined). It is about (in)justice in the here and now, occurring in specific places, and involving specific actors, situations, commodities, and institutions. Academic interest lies in how the stakeholders and institutions of criminal justice perform their roles and how they might improve their strategic, operational, and tactical capacities, based on comparative research, practice evaluations, improvements in technology and conceptual innovation.

Addressing environmental crime requires official state agencies that are equipped with appropriate professional human resource capabilities, in at least two areas. First, in the global setting there is presently a lack of consistency in approach to training environmental officers. This applies to services that include ‘green police’ through to environmental regulators whose task is to monitor compliance and enforce laws in areas such as national parks, wildlife protection and pollution control. International organisations such as the International Network for Environmental Compliance (INECE), INTERPOL and the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, and their counterpart domestic organisations such as the Australasian Environmental law and Regulators Network (AELERT) provide increasing support for improved training and capacity-building measures. In regards environmental crime, for example, the UNODC has recently produced guides on drafting legislation to combat wildlife crime and addressing corruption in the fisheries sector ( UNODC, 2019a ; UNODC, 2019b ). As part of its ‘Global Programme for Combatting Wildlife and Forest Crime’, the UNODC is working to enhance capacity-building and wildlife law enforcement networks. Its work also includes the delivery of specific technical assistance activities, such as coordinating the implementation of the Wildlife and Forest Crime Analytic Toolkit ( UNODC, 2012 ).

As part of these developments, there is a need to develop further a professionalised workforce with an appropriate and recognised career structure. Academics can play an important part in professional training and education by conveying knowledge and skills in a structured work-relevant manner. For instance, the ‘Education for Justice’[E4J] initiative seeks to prevent crime and promote a culture of lawfulness through education activities designed for primary, secondary, and tertiary levels. The intention is that these activities will help educators teach the next generation to better understand and address problems, including actively engaging in their communities and future professions to do so. The UNODC has coordinated the preparation of E4J tertiary level materials, consisting of peer-reviewed university modules. In the specific area of environmental crime, the tertiary modules include modules on wildlife, fisheries, and forestry crime . Module 5: Sustainable livelihoods and community engagement (/34j/en/wildlife-crime/module5/index.html) provides an exemplary model of community crime prevention as applied to wildlife crime including illegal fishing. These resources are ‘open access’ and thus not subject to copyright restrictions.

Second, there is the need for a new type of professional whose specific function is to provide improved assessments of environmental harm and collaborative methods of responding to them. Such a position would be at the fulcrum of diverse disciplines (for example, toxicology, marine science, biology, law) and provide the organisational lever for the establishment of multi-agency task forces. What is needed is a working model of collaborative practice that from the very beginning is organised around specific purpose and intended outcomes, that would include investigation across the retrospective (past harms) and prospective (future harms) continuum, inclusive of different levels of scale (local, national, regional, transnational, global), with a view to enhancing strategies for crime prevention, environmental regulation, law enforcement, emergency services planning, and crisis response.

The use of multidisciplinary teams ensures deployment of skills that combine scientific and technical expertise, crime scene expertise, and expertise in detection of illegality and criminality. Likewise, the institutional culture surrounding regulation, compliance and enforcement activities has a great bearing on how work to monitor, investigate, prevent and prosecute environmental crime is carried out in practice. The push for professionalisation of environmental intervention is a move which would help institutionalise a consistent approach to the prevention and policing of environmental crime.

Clearly defined areas of expertise, supported by ongoing training and education, can instil a strong sense of mission and independent critical thinking. An example of this is the FloraGuard project in the United Kingdom. This project set out to develop a methodological approach that combines the efficiency of Artificial Intelligence [AI] search algorithms with a suitable level of human analysis ( Whitehead et al., 2021 ). To tackle the problem of online trading in illegally sourced wildlife, several disciplines needed to be involved to combine expertise in the fields of conservation science, criminology, law enforcement, and information and communications technology (ICT). This, in turn, required the creation of a novel socio-technical workflow, one that involved the different disciplines at different stages or steps in the investigation of Internet-facilitated illegal wildlife trade. For example, at Step 1 the concern is to identify species of interest. This involved conservation scientists and law enforcement officers. Step 2 is concerned with developing a lexicon suitable for the website search. This step involved the conservation scientists, law enforcement officers, ICT scientists and criminologists. Each step therefore involved diverse participants depending upon the expertise required and the insights needed.

Importantly, this methodological approach required an intensely multidisciplinary approach that approached the transdisciplinary. While each discipline performed specialist tasks, a cross-disciplinary exchange of information was frequently essential for the successful execution of those tasks. Knowledge transfer occurred not only between disciplines at the designated stages of the workflow (for example, Step 1) but also more organically, as key inputs and outputs were produced. As the project developed, therefore, knowledge sharing led to deeper understanding across the team. Not only was the workflow planning itself novel (and, effectively, multidisciplinary), but the process likewise led to a greater sense of interdisciplinary participation and experience.

Projects such as FloraGuard provide working tools whereby forensic computing can be mobilised to assist conservation practitioners and law enforcement agencies in detecting poachers online with the potential of disrupting their means of profiting from illegally sourced specimens. Diverse skills and knowledge are required for this to happen, including the use of algorithms to direct searches for online posts, plant identification, knowledge of trade names of the plants being bought and sold (rather than formal scientific descriptors) of sought-after plant species, and behavioural analysis associated with online activity including evidence of illegal trade.

Environmental harm prevention

Fundamentally, discussion of pracademics and applied green criminology point in the direction of ‘praxis’ – the synthesis of theory, research, and intervention. Praxis is the unity of ‘theory’ and ‘practice’ in motion at the ground level of action. We learn by ‘doing’; we learn by ‘reflecting’. How we act in preventing and responding to environmental crimes and harms depends on the sophistication of our understanding of the issues. It also depends on the skilfulness of our interventions in communities and across diverse social contexts. For pracademics the importance of praxis is that it bridges artificial divisions between academic study and grounded practice.

We stand at a pivotal point in human history, one that is witnessing systematic destruction of the basic environmental contours of our planet. The three greatest threats to humankind and myriad other species, ecosystems and the Earth generally are climate change, rapidly diminishing biodiversity, and pollution and contamination of land, air and water. Social intervention to counter these trends, and the implementation of suitable mitigation and adaptation strategies, is urgently needed. The field of criminology and its associated disciplines such as law, sociology, psychology, political science, international relations, and economics should and must play a part in the needed institutional shake-up and system transformation. This requires concerted activity around environmental issues. It also demands creative thinking and innovative ways in which to construct professional roles.

For instance, we can start by analysing environmental harm as a crime scene. Some preliminary work along these lines has already begun ( Lam and Tegelberg, 2021 ). This kind of re-imagining also suggests a new type of investigator: the harm prevention criminalist. This position could have wide and diverse applications including contributions to effective disaster relief, policing, emergency service provision, and more. There is urgent need to develop an integrated approach to environmental harms. Creating this new occupational category, informed by criminological theory and practice, is a means by which to do this. The vision is of improved assessments of environmental harm, and collaborative methods of response. Courts, police, and environmental protection agencies are crucial actors here, as are the emerging environmental enforcement networks ( Pink and Lehane, 2012 ; Pink and White, 2016 ) – along with scientific experts, non-government organisations, and citizen scientists.

Matters pertaining to social and environmental justice in the context of present institutional arrangements are also of concern. For instance, the environmental justice framework seeks to prevent environmental threats and is premised upon a series of interlinked propositions and principles ( Bullard, 2005 ). These principles emphasise values such as social equity (in which all individuals should have a right to be protected from environmental degradation) and harm prevention (that focuses on eliminating a threat before harm occurs). Each of these areas requires that considerable resources be devoted to measuring things such as human exposure to environmental chemicals, and sociological analysis of harm and risk distributions among diverse population groups.

It asks “How little harm is possible?” rather than “How much harm is allowable?” This principle demands that decision makers set goals for safe environments and examine all available alternatives for achieving the goals, and it places the burden of proof of safety on those who propose to use inherently dangerous and risky technologies.

Moreover, the environmental justice framework requires that: ‘[those] parties applying for operating permits for landfills, incinerators, smelters, refineries, chemical plants, and similar operations must prove that their operations are not harmful to human health, will not disproportionately affect racial and ethnic minorities and other protected groups, and are nondiscriminatory’ Bullard (2005 : 28–9).

Taking precaution is not only about risk assessment. It is about marshalling requisite expertise in order to best understand the specific problem at hand. Science can and must be a major tool in deliberations over human interventions and human impacts. But this is only one sort of knowledge. Expertise is also developed from the ground up, not simply on the basis of experiment and scientific method. Farmers on the land, and fishers of the sea, for example, have generations of expertise built up over time and under varying environmental conditions. Indigenous peoples frequently have knowledge and understandings of their environments that go back to time immemorial. The fact that some Indigenous people have survived for thousands of years, and thrived, in extremely hostile environments (the frozen lands of the north, the deserts of the dry continents) is testimony to human practices that are positively connected to immediate environs ( Robyn, 2002 ). Discussions of conservation and wildlife protection in Africa highlight the fundamental importance of local communities as ‘fulcrum institutions’ which, accordingly, means they ought to occupy centre stage in such efforts ( Hubschle and Shearing, 2018 ). A public participatory process of deliberation needs to incorporate all these kinds of voices. It also needs to be able to challenge the ‘wisdom’ and ‘truth’ of each, without prejudice and without fear.

The harm prevention criminalist

Today, a major consideration is how to translate future projections, particularly around climate change, into the realm of applied criminology. This is precisely the intent behind the creation of the harm prevention criminalist position, which would formally bridge the gap between disciplines and thus constitute a practical demonstration of how cross-disciplinary, multi-disciplinary and transdisciplinary research and practice can be institutionalised (in this instance around the frame of ‘environmental harm’). This is not simply about sciences and disciplines ‘talking with each other’. It presents a working model of collaborative practice that from the very beginning is organised around specific purpose and intended outcomes, incorporating community collaborations and co-design as part of its mandate.

The accompanying figure ( Figure 1 ) provides a schematic portrayal of the key dimensions of the proposed harm prevention criminalist.

Figure 1 Dimentions of the environmental harm criminalist.

The specific skills and intellectual input associated with forensic science/studies, environmental/social impact assessment, and crime prevention are unique insofar these are quite specific areas of endeavour (see for example, Burdge, 2004 ; Elliot, 2014 ; Taylor et al., 2004 ; Peel, 2005 ; Morrison-Saunders, 2018 ; Julian et al., 2022 ). The harm prevention criminalist would need to tap into each of these areas and apply relevant concepts, techniques, technologies, and methods to specific types of environmental harm, such as for example, legacy mining, eco-damage stemming from salmon farms, plastic in oceans, water theft, and bush fires (exploring each of these in terms of past, present, and future harms). These examples of environmental harm have temporal and geographical dimensions, with diverse consequences and impacts on industries, human and non-human species and environments depending on extreme weather events, the cumulative build-up of risk, efficacy of regulatory systems, and shifts in overarching climate conditions.

Applied investigation is needed across the retrospective (past harms) and prospective (future harms) continuum, inclusive of different levels of scale (local, national, regional, transnational, global), with a view to enhancing strategies for crime prevention, environmental regulation, law enforcement, emergency services planning, and crisis response. Tasks of the harm prevention criminalist include skills and knowledge audits in support of forming relevant task forces; incorporation of eco-justice considerations in analyses of harm (humans, ecosystems and non-human entities as subjected to harms); modelling collaboration (vertical, horizontal, diagonal) suited to the issue at hand; comparative analyses (over time, and with respect to different places); and horizon scanning oriented toward identification of trends and issues into the future (and applications of the precautionary principle). Issues of intelligence gathering and forward planning are essential to the tasks and duties of the harm prevention criminalist, as are the soft skills of interpersonal communication.

The necessity for a harm prevention criminalist is demonstrated in discussions surrounding the environment and security. Hall (2013 : 36) observes that definitions of ‘environmental security’ differ, but generally the concept tends to link environmental degradation and associated scarcity of resources with human conflict at individual, group, and state levels. Scarcity is tied to the over-exploitation of natural resources. It is also increasingly linked to the consequences of global warming ( IPCC, 2014 ; White, 2018 ; IPCC, 2022 ). Environmental harm is a contributor to and outcome of human insecurities. Illegal and over-fishing, side-stepping of hazardous waste disposal regulations, water and land theft, rorting of alternative energy subsidies and policies, and transference of toxicity and contaminated products across national borders are driven by different motivations and involve a wide range of actors. Yet, the consequence of such activities contributes to even more ruthless exploitation of rapidly vanishing natural resources, as well as the further diminishment of air, soil and water quality, thereby exacerbating the competition by individuals, groups and nations for what is left.

Old crimes are presenting in new contexts (e.g., water theft), and new crimes are emerging out of changing circumstances (e.g., carbon emissions fraud). Crime prevention strategies and rapid response efforts are needed for both kinds of crime.

This occupational proposal is fundamentally about prediction and prevention, and therefore must include a typology of environmental harms that reference diverse situations, settings, offenders, and offences. For example, consideration has to be given to crimes such as water theft for family farm use related to basic survival (caused by lack of rain and changes in temperatures), through to new opportunities for organised crime networks to be involved in activities such as illegal trade in water. A vital component is an orientation toward building social resilience within and among communities, and as part of this enhancing the capabilities of specific institutions and agencies in dealing with the foreseeable and unanticipated consequences of environmental harms and climate change. This parallels similar arguments with respect to the notion of ‘resilience policing’, which envisages a role for police in enabling communities and other actors to develop strategies for adapting and surviving broader societal shocks and harms ( Mutongwizo et al., 2021 ).

Diverse skills, knowledge and collaborations are required in each instance of environmental harm, and it is the bringing together of these that forms the basis of the harm prevention criminalist role. This role is not conceived as ‘project management’; rather, the intention is that it be a mid-range position within a strategic hierarchy of intervention as this pertains to specific kinds of environmental harms. Thus, for example, the key administrator or organisational lead is dictated by the nature of the environmental issue – for example, environmental protection agency in regards fish farms, fire services in relation to bush fires and arson, police with respect to water theft and illegal waste disposal issues, and so on. The role is envisaged as a professional officer position within the context of investigation and response to specific environmental harms. It would involve a sophisticated suite of and familiarity with practice-relevant concepts, techniques, skills, technologies, personnel, and intelligence gathering and analysis.

At the heart of the harm prevention criminalist role is brokerage. This refers to the ability to know who to link up with whom, which knowledge and techniques to be deployed in which circumstance, and how to maximise the effective use of material and human resources within existing fiscal limits and community settings. One does not need to be a criminologist to work as a criminalist, but criminology is an essential foundational field (parenthetically, it can be added that not all criminologists would wish to be criminalists – a diversity of research, teaching, policy, and practice roles exist, and ‘applied criminology’ of this sort is only one option).

Earlier in this article, various models and approaches to tackling illegal fishing were summarily outlined. Each of these, in turn, rests upon a much more detailed series of processes and procedures. Familiarity with this detail is vital to knowing the best fit when it comes to intervention tactics and strategies (including combinations of techniques and approaches) in specific circumstances. The criminalist can be an organising figure who assists in building the right kinds of teams, community connections, and the necessary multidisciplinary responses to specific kinds of environmental crime.

Collaborative practice

Collaboration not only involves work across areas of professional and scientific expertise (such as the Floraguard project). It is also central to practitioner engagement in combatting environmental crime. The activities and collaborations of environmental crime response agencies have tended to naturally occur around networks which are geographically-based (for example, known transit points and destinations), discipline-based (for example, environmental regulators) and commodity-based (for example, waste). Collaboration across these dimensions and involving these networks can be predominantly horizontal, vertical, or diagonal (see Figure 2 ).

Figure 2 Dimensions of Collaborative Practice. Source: Pink and White, 2016 .

Criminal groups and networks have the advantage generally of flexibility and a good working knowledge of local conditions and actors, which facilitate the crimes in question. In some instances, they garner buy-in by local community members and/or rely on community participation in illegal economies ( Hubschle and Shearing, 2018 ). A collaborative response needs to mirror these attributes. For example, it can mobilise a broad range of actors, with varying types and levels of expertise, with local through to international connections, around single-purpose interventions. It should have the capacity to provide ‘eyes on the ground’ as well as a ‘bird’s eye’ view of commodity chains and criminal networks. At the core of collaboration activities is information sharing. If this is accommodated and accomplished between and among the various agencies and actors within a particular group, then it opens the door to application of intelligence-led policing initiatives (based on tactical, operational, and strategic assessment of intelligence databases) as well as market reduction approaches (that target disposal markets, including handlers and consumers). These require systematic and detailed analysis of specific information. Two-way sharing of information demands that specific protocols be put into place. Accountability to local people is essential as well.

What is most important in joint working arrangements, however, is the human element. At an operational level, things seem to work best when relationships are built upon trust . This takes time. It also frequently involves informal as well as formal contact. Relationships of trust can take years to build – between individuals, teams/groups, agencies, and institutions. They can also take seconds to unravel (one person betraying a confidence; an event that goes pear-shaped). Resilience must be built into the equation, in part by establishing protocols, but also by ensuring that teams as well as individuals are highly engaged. At a practical level, this means that the skills of interpersonal communication are critically important ( Pink and White, 2016 ).

Anticipating change

There is increasing criminological interest in analysing and understanding existing and future threats to environmental wellbeing (see for example, Agnew, 2011 ). A recent innovation in this area has been work coupling the analytical framework of eco-global criminology with the futures orientation of horizon scanning ( White, 2011 ; White and Heckenberg, 2011 ). The result is an approach that provides a broad methodological framework that can inform the study of specific environmental harms. The various orientations in the model – substantive (that deals with risk, harm, and causes), justice (environmental, ecological species), and futures (based around concepts of intergenerational equity, precautionary principle, transferences over time) – are intended to provide direction and the conceptual building blocks for more detailed analysis of specific issues and trends, including those relating directly to criminality. Taken as a whole, these constitute the basis for an environmental horizon scanning exercise.

For horizon scanning, the focus of analysis is on current developments pertaining to the environment and extrapolating from these potential harms and transgressions that may be problematic in the future. Underpinning this process is the use of a mixed-methods approach that draws upon a variety of sources and data collecting strategies. The use and need for horizon scanning as an intellectual exercise and planning tool is related to the idea that many threats and opportunities are presently poorly recognised (see Sutherland and Woodroof, 2009 ). Accordingly, a more systematic approach to identification and solution of issues is required rather than reliance upon ad hoc or reactive approaches. For example, work around the implications of climate change for policing has been undertaken by the Australian Strategic Policy Institute ( Bergin and Allen, 2008 ) and individual police practitioners ( Chambers, 2011 ), and more recently from a criminological perspective ( Mutongwizo et al., 2021 ). The process of horizon scanning involves detailed study of the specific trends and issues associated with environmental degradation and destruction ( White and Heckenberg, 2011 ).

One of the key lessons of conventional crime prevention is that it ought to be based largely on a problem-solving, rather than policy-prescribed, model of intervention ( Sutton et al., 2021 ). For this reason, future work should include discrete case studies of environmental harm, in the process developing new and innovative ways to investigate these via development of the harm prevention criminalist position. In this regard, it would parallel and build upon previous work on bushfire arson ( Willis, 2004 ) and how to prevent it ( Anderson, 2010 ). Different places and people are vulnerable to different sorts of environmental harms and crimes. A problem-solving approach to crime prevention demands specificity. While grounded in the realities of existing environmental harms today, intervention also needs to have a clear future orientation and preventative focus.

Where to from here?

The implementation tasks associated with establishment of HPC roles are interrelated and include endeavours such as:

● Constructing an inventory of the ideal attributes of a harm prevention criminalist. In other words, what kinds of skills and knowledge are required for the position of harm prevention criminalist? This would involve the construction of an inventory of techniques and technologies, concepts and practices, associated with relevant fields and disciplines (e.g., conservation sciences, forensic studies, criminology, environmental impact assessment, restorative justice).

● Analysing regulatory, investigatory, enforcement and sanctioning practices in relation to environmental harms. We need to know how different agencies are responding to criminality and offending behaviour associated with environmental harms. This involves systematic identification of agencies involved in environmental regulation and policing (e.g., water theft), the changing legislative parameters within which they work (e.g., laws introducing a general ‘environmental duty of care’), and the experiences and exposure of special emergency services to crime and harms arising from or related to environmental disasters (e.g., pollution).

● Assessing crime prevention strategies and the role of the harm prevention criminalist in responding to environmental harms. For this we need to ask what can be done proactively, utilising a harm prevention criminalist, to prevent the negative consequences of environmental harms? Work would be directed at developing strategic crime prevention plans that incorporate forward planning and training and resource needs, based on assessments of existing and projected environmental harms.

● The position of harm prevention criminalist is meant to bring together diverse skills sets, knowledge, and agencies in assessing and addressing specific kinds of environmental harm. This process would be ongoing and be informed by the accumulation of specific case studies and the development of holistic expertise.

Preventing environmental crime is a complicated social process. It involves bringing together different agencies (e.g., regulatory, enforcement, emergency services) and practitioners (e.g., scientists, technicians, lawyers, police, NGOs) who collaborate in various ways to address specific types of crime such as illegal fishing and illegal waste disposal. It also needs to be contextually specific in regards to geography and community. To be effective, crime prevention must be forward looking, planning oriented, and operationally ‘fit for purpose’.

Criminologists concerned with analysing and understanding threats to the environment face one central question: How can we best interpret, respond to, and prevent environmental harms and crimes? To answer this, we need to seek innovative ways to conceive these issues as well as measures that will address them, according to our best appraisal of emerging needs. Environmental degradation, pollution and climate change are the most important issues humanity confronts. One response is to establish a harm prevention criminalist position – a role that can connect key stakeholders and knowledge holders so that expertise and experience is directed in the most effective and efficient manner.

Data availability statement

The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/supplementary material. Further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.

Author contributions

The author confirms being the sole contributor of this work and has approved it for publication.

Conflict of interest

The author declares that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Publisher’s note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Agnew R. (2011). Dire forecast: A theoretical model of the impact of climate change on crime. Theor. Criminol. 16 (1), 21–46. doi: 10.1177/1362480611416843

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Anderson J. (2010). “Bushfire arson prevention handbook,” in Research in practice No.11 (Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology).

Google Scholar

Anderson K., McCusker R. (2005). “Crime in the Australian fishing industry: Key issues,” in Trends & issues in crime and criminal justice No.297 (Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology).

Bergin A., Allen R. (2008). The thin green line: Climate change and Australian policing (Canberra: Australian Strategic Policy Institute).

Bullard R. (2005). The quest for environmental justice: Human rights and the politics of pollution (San Francisco: Sierra Club Books).

Burdge R. (2004). The concepts, process and methods of social impact assessment (Middleton, Wisconsin: Social Ecology Press).

Cao N. (2017). Timber trafficking in Vietnam (London: Palgrave Macmillan).

Chambers D. (2011). Policing and climate change. Aust. J. Emergency Manage. 26 (3), 52–59.

de Coning E., Witbooi E. (2015). Towards a new “Fisheries crime” paradigm: South Africa as an illustrative example. Mar. Policy 60 (2), 208–215. doi: 10.1016/j.marpol.2015.06.024

Dehghannirir H., Borrion H. (2021). Crime scripting: A systematic review. Eur. J. Criminol. 18 (4), 504–525. doi: 10.1177/1477370819850943

Elliot M. (2014). Environmental impact assessment in Australia (Sydney: The Federation Press).

Hall M. (2013). Exploring green crime: Introducing the legal, social & criminological contexts of environmental harm (Basingstoke: Palgrave).

Hubschle A., Dore A., Davis-Mostert H. (2021). Focus on victims and the community: applying restorative justice principles to wildlife crime offences in south Africa. Int. J. Restorative Justice 4 (1), 141–150. doi: 10.5553/TIJRJ.000068

Hubschle A., Shearing C. (2018). Wildlife trafficking: Local communities as change agents (Geneva: The Global Initiative Against Transnational Organized Crime).

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2014). Climate change 2014 synthesis report, approved summary for policymakers . (Geneva: United Nations/World Meteorological Organization)

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2022). Climate change 2022: Impacts, adaptation and vulnerability (Geneva: United Nations/World Meteorological Organization).

Julian R., Howes L., White R. (2022). Critical forensic studies (London: Routledge).

Kurland J., Pires S., McFann S., Moreto W. (2017). Wildlife crime: A conceptual integration, literature review, and methodological critique. Crime Sci. 6 (4), 1–15. doi: 10.1186/s40163-017-0066-0

Lack M. (2007). Catching on? trade-related measures as a fisheries management tool (Cambridge: TRAFFIC International).

Lam A., Tegelberg M. (2021). Criminal anthropocenes: Media and crime in the vanishing Arctic (London: Palgrave Macmillan).

Lemieux A. (2014). Situational prevention of poaching (London: Routledge).

McMullan J., Perrier D. (2002). Lobster poaching and the ironies of law enforcement. Law Soc. Rev. 36 (4), 679–720. doi: 10.2307/1512168

Moreto W. (2018). Wildlife crime: From theory to practice (Philadelphia: Temple University Press).

Morrison-Saunders A. (2018). Advanced introduction to environmental impact assessment (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar).

Mutongwizo T., Holley C., Shearing D., Simpson N. (2021). Resilience policing: An emerging response to shifting harm landscapes and reshaping community policing. Policing: A. J. Policy Pract. 15 (1), 606–621. doi: 10.1093/police/paz033

Pali B., Forsyth M., Tepper F. (2022). The palgrave handbook of environmental restorative justice (London: Palgrave Macmillan).

Peel J. (2005). The precautionary principle in practice: Environmental decision-making and scientific uncertainty (Sydney: The Federation Press).

Petrossian G., Clarke R. (2014). Explaining and controlling illegal commercial fishing: An application of the CRAVED theft model. Br. J. Criminol. 54 (1), 73–90. doi: 10.1093/bjc/azt061

Petrossian G., Pezzella F. (2018). IUU fishing and seafood fraud: Using crime script analysis to inform intervention. Ann. Am. Acad. 679, 121–139. doi: 10.1177/0002716218784533

Petrossian G., Pires S., van Uhm D. (2016). An overview of seized illegal wildlife entering the united states. Global Crime 17 (2), 181–201. doi: 10.1080/17440572.2016.1152548

Petrossian G., Weis J., Pires S. (2015). Factors affecting crab and lobster species subject to IUU fishing. Ocean Coast. Manage. 106, 29–34. doi: 10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2015.01.014

Pink G. (2021). Navigating regulatory language: An a to z guide (Canberra: Recap Consultants Pty Ltd).

Pink G., Lehane J. (2012). “Environmental enforcement networks: Their role in climate change enforcement,” in Climate change from a criminological perspective . Ed. White R. (New York: Springer).

Pink G., White R. (2016). “Collaboration in combating environmental crime – making it matter,” in Environmental crime and collaborative state intervention . Eds. Pink G., White R. (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan).

Pires S., Moreto W. (2011). Preventing wildlife crimes: Solutions that can overcome the “tragedy of the commons”. Eur. J. Criminal Policy Res. 17 (2), 101–123. doi: 10.1007/s10610-011-9141-3

Robyn L. (2002). Indigenous knowledge and technology. Am. Indian Q. 26 (2), 198–220. doi: 10.1353/aiq.2003.0028

Sahramaki I., Kankaanranta T. (2017). Waste no money – reducing opportunities for illicit waste dumping. Crime Law Soc. Change 68 (1-2), 217–232. doi: 10.1007/s10611-016-9674-y

Schneider J. (2012). Sold into extinction: The global trade in endangered species (New York: Praeger).

Smith R., and Anderson K (2004). ‘Understanding non-compliance in the marine environment’, Trends & Issues in Crime and Criminal Justice, no. 275 (Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology).

Sollund R. (2019). The crimes of wildlife trafficking: Issues of justice, legality and morality (London: Routledge).

Sollund R., Stefes C., Germani A. (2016). Fighting environmental crime in Europe and beyond: The role of the EU and its member states (London: Palgrave Macmillan).

Sutherland W. J., Woodroof H. J. (2009). The need for environmental horizon scanning. Trends Ecol. Evol. 24 (10), 523–527. doi: 10.1016/j.tree.2009.04.008

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Sutton A., Cherney A., White R., Clancy G. (2021). Crime prevention: Principles, policies and practices . 3rd (Melbourne: Cambridge University Press).

Tailby R., Gant F. (2002). The illegal market in Australian abalone, trends & issues in crime and criminal justice No.225 (Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology).

Taylor C., Bryan C., Goodrich C. (2004). Social assessment: Theory, process and techniques (Middleton, Wisconsin: Social Ecology Press).

United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (2012). Wildlife and forest crime analytic toolkit (Geneva: ONODC).

United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (2019a). Rotten fish: A guide on addressing corruption in the fisheries sector (Vienna: UNODC).

United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (2019b). Guide on drafting legislation to combat wildlife crime (Vienna: UNODC).

van Uhm D. (2016). The illegal wildlife trade: Inside the world of poachers, smugglers and traders (London: Springer).

Weekers D., Zahnow R. (2018). Risky facilities: Analysis of illegal recreational fishing in the great barrier reef marine park, Australia. Aust. New Z. J. Criminol. 52 (3), 368–389. doi: 10.1177/0004865818804021

White R. (2008). Crimes against nature (London: Routledge).

White R. (2011). Transnational environmental crime: Towards an eco-global criminology (London: Routledge).

White R. (2018). Climate change criminology (Bristol: Bristol University Press).

White R. (2023). Advanced introduction to applied green criminology (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar).

Whitehead D., Cowell C., Lavorgna A., Middleton S. (2021). Countering plant crime online: Cross-disciplinary collaboration in the FloraGuard study. Forensic Sci. Int.: Anim. Environments 1 (100007), 1–11. doi: 10.1016/j.fsiae.2021.100007

White R., Heckenberg D. (2011). Environmental horizon scanning and criminological theory and practice. Eur. J. Criminal Policy Res. 17 (1), 87–100. doi: 10.1007/s10610-011-9138-y

Willis M. (2004). “Bushfire arson: A review of the literature,” in Research and public policy series No.61 (Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology).

Wong R. (2019). The illegal wildlife trade in China: Understanding the distribution networks (London: Palgrave Macmillan).

Wyatt T. (2022). Wildlife trafficking: A deconstruction of the crime, the victims, and the offenders (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan).

Keywords: collaboration, criminalist, crime prevention, environmental harm, horizon scanning, Illegal fishing, pracademic

Citation: White R (2022) Environmental crime and the harm prevention criminalist. Front. Conserv. Sci. 3:1049160. doi: 10.3389/fcosc.2022.1049160

Received: 20 September 2022; Accepted: 17 November 2022; Published: 01 December 2022.

Reviewed by:

Copyright © 2022 White. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: Rob White, [email protected]

This article is part of the Research Topic

Empirical Approaches to Wildlife Crime Prevention

• Print this article

Crime Without Punishment: Exploring Corporate Liability for Climate Crimes at the International Criminal Court

• Published on 31 Jul 2021
• Peer Reviewed

Segregations at antiphase boundaries in HCP superstructures. III

• Published: February 1970
• Volume 13 , pages 226–229, ( 1970 )

Cite this article

• V. S. Kobytev 1 ,
• M. B. Makogon 1 &
• L. K. Tregubova 1  

15 Accesses

Explore all metrics

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Literature cited

V. S. Kobytev, M. B. Makogon, and L. K. Tregubova, Izv. VUZ. Fiz., No. 4 (1969).

V. S. Kobytev, M. B. Makogon, and L. K. Tregubova, Izv. VUZ. Fiz., No. 5 (1969).

P. B. Price, in: Electron Microscopy and Strength of Crystals [Russian translation], Moscow (1968).

N. S. Stoloff and R. G. Davies, Trans. ASM, 57 , 247 (1964).

Google Scholar  

L. E. Popov, É. V. Kozlov, and N. V. Kozhemyakin, Izv. VUZ. Fiz., No. 1 (1965).

L. E. Popov, É. V. Kozlov, and N. S. Golosov, Izv. VUZ. Fiz., No. 2 (1966).

A. A. Tukhfatullin, Report of the Metal Physics Laboratory [in Russian], SFTI, Tomsk (1968).

L. E. Popov and N. S. Golosov, Izv. VUZ. Fiz., No. 1 (1968).

É. V. Kozlov, Dissertation, Tomsk (1965).

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

V. D. Kuznetsov Siberian Physicotechnical Institute, Tomsk State University, USSR

V. S. Kobytev, M. B. Makogon & L. K. Tregubova

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Additional information

Translated from Izvestiya VUZ. Fizika, No. 2, pp. 111–116, February, 1970.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Kobytev, V.S., Makogon, M.B. & Tregubova, L.K. Segregations at antiphase boundaries in HCP superstructures. III. Soviet Physics Journal 13 , 226–229 (1970). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00814106

Download citation

Received : 04 March 1969

Issue Date : February 1970

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00814106

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Antiphase Boundary
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research