Green crime summary sheet

Green criminology as an area of sociological study is fairly new However, some commentators argue that harm to the
although Marxist criminologists have long argued that global
environment is an inevitable part of late modern society.
capitalism is causing extensive environmental damage to the
planet and those powerful individuals, corporations and
governments should be legally held responsible for it. In other
words, these environmental harms should be viewed as crimes.
There has been much debate into classifying green crimes as stated in item A, often no laws are broken. Therefore green
crimes are often referred to as green harms. South has attempted to classify green harms into two types; primary and
secondary harms. Primary harms directly result from the destruction and degradation of the earths resources and involve
direct damage to the Earths eco-system and life-forms including humanity. Multinational corporations and governments are
the main causes of this type of environmental harm. South has identified four types of primary harm. However, both primary
and secondary harms can be related to human activities.
Firstly, pollution caused by the burning of fossils fuels (and the resulting carbon emissions), industry and transport has led to
global warming which according to some experts, is having a severe and negative effect on the worlds weather system and
therefore crop production. South suggests that a number of groups governments, multinational corporations and consumers
are responsible for this type of green harm.
These types of green crime tend to have global consequences because pollution of the atmosphere, oceans etc. does not
respect national borders. For example, pollution from industry in one country can turn into acid rain that falls in another,
poisoning its watercourses and destroying its forests. Similarly, the radiation cloud after the Chernobyl nuclear reactor
exploded in 1986 travelled across Europe and there are areas of Scotland and Wales today that cannot be farmed as a result.
A second type of primary green harm according to South is deforestation for example, there is evidence that global fast food
chains such as McDonalds are clearing large tracts of jungle and rainforest in Latin America in order to rear beef for use in
burgers. Souths third primary green crime focuses on the decline in wildlife species as a result of deforestation 46% of
mammal species are at risk of extinction because of human actions. This has recently led David Attenborough to remark that
humans are a virus which is destroying the planet. Souths fourth type of primary green harm refers to the pollution of the
worlds rivers, seas, oceans and fresh water supplies because of the dumping of toxic waste, especially plastic and human
sewage. South notes that half a billion people lack access to clean water whilst 25 million people in the developing world die
annually from water-borne disease.
South also identifies what he calls secondary green harms.
Souths definitions are not only useful for identifying the
These are where governments or organised crime benefit either different types of green harms that are occurring on a global
politically or financially from environmental harms. For
scale. But also for highlighting the lack of accountability that
example, governments may fail to enforce laws with regard to
takes place for these harms. White argues that the role of
the dumping of hazardous waste. There is some evidence from green criminologists should be to develop a global

Italy that companies are paying corrupt elites to turn a blind

perspective on environment harm that can form the basis of
eye to the illegal dumping of chemical waste and that the Mafia future international laws that can be globally enforced.
are dumping such waste on behalf of respected chemical
companies. South also notes that secondary green harm may
involve states taking illegal action against eco-groups like
Greenpeace. For example, the French secret service blew up
the Greenpeace ship Rainbow Warrior and killed a crew
member whilst in the UK police officers have gone undercover
to spy on environmental groups. #
According to Marxists the rise in green crime is due to the
increasing Sociologists have offered a number of explanations
for green crime. Marxists blame capitalisms never-ending
search for profit. They point out that the bulk of environmental
damage is caused by multinational companies and their need
to make profit by increasing demand and consumption.
Marxists argue that such companies see profit as more
important than protecting the environment.

Marxists also point out that these types of harms are rarely
punished because responsibility within corporations is often
delegated and diffused and therefore it is difficult to pin down
which specific individuals are to blame. Environmental groups
often do not have the financial and legal resources compared
with the multinational corporations to pursue these cases
through the courts. Moreover, these companies have
tremendous power and influence over governments and
often put pressure on politicians either not to enforce
environmental laws or to prevent green harms being defined
as criminal.

Postmodernist, Ulrich Beck refers to industrial society as risk

society because industrialisation has hidden costs or sideeffects. He notes that there are short term risks (e.g. industrial
disasters such as Bhopal, deaths and injuries at work etc.) and
long-term risks (e.g. the slow steady pollution of the ecosystem, long-term health effects, climate change, resource
(e.g. oil) depletion. This has also implications when measuring
the types of green harm (as there are both short term and long
term). This is supported by White who argues that green
criminology should be based on an ecocentric view of
environmental harms. This sees an inter-dependent relationship
between humans and their environment or eco-system. From
this perspective, environmental harm will eventually lead to

According to Beck the cycle of conspicuous consumption is

likely to speed up environmental problems and lead to an
increase in green crime. This is because consumer goods
quickly become obsolete and are thrown away thus
increasing pollution. Moreover new goods are manufactured
to replace them so causing more carbon emissions and
environmental destruction. Becks theory is useful as it has
drawn our attention to manufactured risks to the
environment, i.e. those which have come about because of
our demand in the west for material goods.

major harm to humankind. In the long term, these

environmental harms may lead to the extinction of the human
race if these concerns are not addressed.
In conclusion, then, there is absolutely no doubt that the world is at global risk in the long term from green harms. However, as
green harms are difficult to define this also presents problems in establishing the patterns. This is partly because people often
do not recognise green harms because many of them are invisible and take years to take effect. Moreover, as stated in item A
global corporations and governments such as the USA and China see such harms as a necessary part of human progress,
economic growth and the materialistic lifestyle demanded by citizens. Consequently, it is extremely doubtful that the list of
harms generated by green sociologists such as South will produce the global laws required to criminalise these actions.