13. Green Criminology
Summary and Review
Dr. Gregory Simmons; Dr. Mark Vardy; and Dr. Rochelle Stevenson
✅ Summary
- Green criminology refers to the study of environmental crimes and harms affecting human and non‐human life, ecosystems and the biosphere.
- The core components of green criminology are: a focus on environment, animals and humans; a focus on crime; a focus on harm; and a focus on injustice.
- Green criminology’s focus is on both legal and illegal harm to the environment, humans, and animals, while environmental criminology focuses on the relationship between crime and space and place, or the geography of crime and criminal behaviour.
- The three main ecophilosophies within green criminology are: anthropocentrism, which prioritises human wants and needs; biocentrism, which perceives humans as simply one species within the natural world with instrinsic value; and ecocentrism, which is based on the idea that humans and their activities are inextricably interconnected with the rest of the natural world.
- Green victimology is the study of the social processes and institutional responses pertaining to victims of environmental crime.
- Three justice perspectives that provide a comprehensive picture of green victimisation are: the environmental justice perspective, which focuses on the disproportionate and unequal impact of environmental harms; the species justice perspective, which looks at the obligations and duties owed to all non-human animals; and the ecological justice perspective, which extends ethical concern to natural objects and nonhuman environmental entities.
- Ecocentrism’s relational understanding of social and environmental issues as intimately connected parallels with and connects to Indigenous worldviews that see humans and the natural world as imbricated in a reciprocal set of obligations and responsibilities.
🖊️ Key Terms
ag-gag laws: laws which criminalise actions which seek to render the animal agriculture and use industries more transparent, specifically, criminalising undercover investigations and recording of animal agriculture activities, limiting whistleblowing, and otherwise interfering with normal business operations.
anthropocentric: the idea that humans are the most important beings. In the context of green criminology, the exclusive focus is on humans as victims of crime and harm.
biocentrism: a perspective that sees every species and being as equal in worth.
ecocentrism: a perspective that holds that humans are relationally connected to the natural world and that, while humans need to utilise resources to survive, they have a duty to use resources responsibly and minimise their impact on other species and the environment.
ecological justice: a perspective holding that natural entities and the natural world is worthy of protection in their own right and not just as resources to be exploited or used instrumentally.
ecosystems: a dynamic complex of plant, animal and micro-organism communities and their non-living environment interacting as a functional unit.
environmental justice: an approach to justice that strives to overcome the manner in which negative impacts of environmental crimes and harms disproportionately affect marginalised groups in society, specifically based on race (Black, Indigenous, people of colour), class (e.g., low-income), and gender (e.g., dangers of male-dominated slaughterhouse work, effects of toxic chemicals on female reproduction).
environmental racism: policies or practices that result in a discriminatory environmental impact (whether intended on unintended) on racialised groups or individuals.
green criminology: a branch of criminology that deals with research into criminality against the environment and associated phenomena (e.g., animal cruelty).
green victimology: the study of the breadth of victims (environment, human, and animal) and avenues of victimisation related to environmental crime and harm, as well as the institutional and state responses to such victimisation.
greenwashing: the corporate practice of portraying a product as environmentally friendly or not harmful; for example, using images of plants on a bottle to imply connection to environmental sustainability but the ingredients contain harmful chemicals.
legal personhood: a person or other entity that at law has the powers and responsibilities normally associated with an ordinary human; legal personhood is not limited to flesh-and-blood humans but can extend to corporations, municipalities and, in some cases, natural entities.
speciesism: connected to anthropocentrism, this is the assumption that humans are the superior species; human needs are prioritised and needs of other species are deemed unimportant; most often connected to the privileging of humans over animals.
species justice: an approach to justice concerned with living creatures as having value in their own right; as such humans owe obligations and duties to them.
zemiological: the study of social harm; from the Greek zemia, meaning harm or damage.
🧠 Chapter Review
Crossword
Fill in the term in the right-hand column and it will display in the crossword puzzle. Be sure to include spaces where appropriate.
Discussion Questions
- How might the three justice perspectives (environmental, species, ecological) address the issue of the Aamjiwnaang First Nation and the Chemical Valley in southern Ontario? What would each perspective focus on, and what solutions would each perspective suggest?
- Imagine you are part of group of students planning a lawful and peaceful protest in order to pressure politicians to act on climate change. Do you feel that surveillance should be allowed? Would you feel differently about joining the protest if you knew that police were going to conduct surveillance at it? Why or why not?
- In what ways might being a member of a privileged group in society make somebody less likely to be aware of environmental racism? Is there evidence of environmental racism in your neighbourhood or broader community?
- Consider the article “A Scourge of the Sea” that discusses the environmental impact of salmon aquaculture in British Columbia. How could the issues raised be understood from each of the perspectives on environmental victimisation and justice (environmental, species, ecological)? How might they be viewed from an anthropocentric, biocentric or ecocentric “big philosophy”?
- Consider an example of marketing you have encountered in which a company makes claims regarding the positive environmental aspects of its product. Do these claims hold up when investigated further? Is this an example of greenwashing?
