ABSTRACT
Crimes against the environment have been historically under-studied by social scientists. However, a burgeoning body of work from – especially – green criminologists has begun to shift this trend, highlighting, for example, the costs associated with environmental problems such as e-waste, air pollution, and climate change (Bisschop, 2014; Jarrell and Ozymy, 2010; White, 2012); the rights of animals and the crimes committed by humans against them (Beirne, 2009; Crow et al., 2013; Wyatt, 2010); and the enforcement of environmental regulations by government agencies (Atlas, 2001; Long et al., 2012; Stretesky et al., 2013). Additionally, green criminologists prioritize examining environmental harms; that is, actions and results that are not formally understood as violations of the law (South et al., 2013; White, 2013a). Thus, a number of researchers have positioned their work on pollution, environmental degradation, and the expansion of industry within this ‘harm perspective’ and illuminate the vast array of actions that negatively impact humans, animals, and the broader ecosystem (Carrington et al., 2011; Lynch and Stretesky, 2001; Ruggiero and South, 2013; White, 2013b). This socio-legal conceptualization is advantageous because it acknowledges that power is connected to who or what our government defines as criminal or crime (Quinney, 1972; Reiman and Leighton, 2010) and that even legal activities can create quite harmful impacts.
