Exploring Green Criminology: Toward a Green Criminological Revolution (original) (raw)
Introduction: Green Criminology in the 21st Century
The term 'Green Criminology' was first introduced by Lynch in 1990 although the history of criminologists concerning themselves with specific environmental and animal related crimes goes back further than this For example Pecar (1981) put forward an even earlier statement about new environmentally damaging forms of criminality in Slovenia and the role of criminology and sciences related to this (Eman, Meško and Fields 2009: 584) but with no English-language translation Pecar's article made no international impact. Furthermore, although Lynch set out the scope and aims of a green criminology in a way that can still stand as a 'manifesto' statement, its place of publication meant it did not reach a wide audience at the time (although once 'rediscovered' it proved highly influential). Potter (2012) has reviewed arguments that might be put in order to 'justify' a green criminology and this is a useful exercise. But in an important sense, a green criminology is justified because it was inevitable and necessary. It reflected scientific interests and political challenges of the moment, carried forward the momentum of critical non-conformist criminology, and offered a point of contact and convergence. So, no particular contribution was required as the 'first' or 'unique' catalyst for the development of a green or eco-criminology, for this was already underway in many places, for similar reasons, with teachers, researchers and writers expressing parallel concerns and proposing a similar project for criminology (see, for example, Clifford 1998; Edwards et al
Book Review | Routledge Handbook of Green Criminology
Journal of Qualitative Criminal Justice & Criminology, 2014
The first articulation of a 'green' criminology-that is, a criminology concerned with man-made environmental harm-is usually attributed to Michael in his essay The Greening of Criminology: A perspective on the 1990s. Although not the first criminological work on environmental harm, Lynch was one of the first to argue that environmental problems in themselves, and the social harms that so often stem from them, can be seen to be legitimate criminological concerns-and that criminologists, therefore, may be well positioned to contribute to analysis and discussion of the environmental degradation that has become characteristic of late-modern, super-industrialised global
Green Criminology: Reflections, Connections, Horizons
International Journal for Crime, Justice and Social Democracy, 2014
This paper traces aspects of the development of a ‘green’ criminology. It starts with personal reflections and then describes the emergence of explicit statements of a green criminological perspective. Initially these statements were independently voiced, in different parts of the world but they reflected shared concerns. These works have found unification as a ‘green’, ‘eco‐global’ or ‘conservation’ criminology. The paper reviews the classifications available when talking about not only legally‐defined crimes but also legally perpetrated harms, as well as typologies of such harms and crimes. It then looks at the integration of ‘green’ and ‘traditional’ criminological thinking before briefly exploring four dimensions of concern for today and the future.
Critical Criminology, 2017
To date, green criminologists have investigated the causes and consequences of environmental crimes and harms, as well as the meaning thereof and the responses thereto (e.g., law enforcement, punishment (or the lack thereof)). In October 2015, a seminar at the Department of Criminology and Sociology of Law, at the University of Oslo, organized by one of us (Sollund), brought together experienced green criminologists and younger academics. The goal of the seminar was to contemplate the meaning and parameters of green criminology, share previous and ongoing research, reflect on entry into this area of study, discuss different theoretical orientations and methodological approaches to the study of environmental crimes and harms, and consider future directions. This special issue, ''Researching Environmental Harm, Doing Green Criminology,'' develops some of the papers presented. In so doing, it serves as a ''companion'' of sorts to a forthcoming special issue of Theoretical Criminology, ''Twenty Years of Green Criminology,'' in May 2018 (Volume 22, Issue 2)-an issue co-edited by the two of us and Piers Beirne and Nigel South, which attempts to pay homage to the first special
Systematic Review Study: A Comparative Analysis of the State of the Art of Green Criminology
International Journal of Social Science Studies
Understanding the complex phenomena related to environmental damage requires multidisciplinary analyzes capable of producing different scientific perspectives. Based on the problems arising from issues involving environmental damage to natural resources, Flores, Konrad and Flores (2017) evaluated the studies about green criminology globally, using articles retrieved from indexed publications and available in digital databases. The present study aimed to survey the contributions that were added since the previous survey, to contribute to the understanding of what constitutes the essence of green criminology. To meet this purpose, we analyzed scientific articles published after the period investigated by Flores, Konrad and Flores (2017), which also allowed the comparison with the existing data. We employed a qualitative approach and the methodological procedure was a systematic bibliographic review. We concluded that in the last three years there has been an advance in studies about g...
Green criminology and green victimization
The Routledge Handbook of International Crime and Justice Studies, 2010
Researchers engaging in green criminological research and activists fighting for the environment and public health must take into consideration several challenges inherent in these pursuits. For one, the immediate consequences of an environmental offense may not appear obvious or severe. People may not become sick from exposure to toxic pollution, for example, for decades after their exposure. Consequently, green crime does not fit most people's perceptions of crime. Researchers must be prepared for the complexities associated with green crime research. It is possible to change public conceptions about certain issues but not without extensive time and effort. For example, we can look to the political and public attitudes toward smoking that have changed significantly since the 1960s, when the Surgeon General reported
The Neglect of Quantitative Research in Green Criminology and Its Consequences
Critical Criminology, 2017
While interest in green criminology has rapidly expanded over the past twenty-five years, much of this growth has occurred on the periphery of orthodox criminology. This article suggests that green criminology's marginalization is partially a result of its non-quantitative methodology. We hypothesize that non-quantitative tendencies within green criminology distance it from orthodox criminology because orthodox criminology values quantitative methods. Here, we examine how neglecting quantitative research methods may contribute to inattention to green criminology within orthodox criminology, and we consider what can be done to change that situation. We suggest that employing quantitative approaches within green criminology is one way to increase its appeal to mainstream criminology, and that quantitative studies, in conjunction with other research methodologies, can also enhance generalizability of findings, influence policy, and advance theory construction and hypothesis testing.