ABSTRACT

This chapter attempts to situate ‘green criminology’ within the larger discipline of criminology, drawing on existing social-psychological theories of crime (e.g., strain theory, social control theory, social learning and rational choice theories, biosocial theories, opportunity theories) to explain why individuals and small groups engage in a range of ‘ordinary’ acts that contribute to the destruction of the natural environment. In so doing, the chapter considers, inter alia, strains that increase the likelihood of ordinary harms (e.g., material deprivation, relative deprivation, status frustration); the role of direct control and the significance of conformity; and differential reinforcement (benefits and costs) of ordinary harms. This chapter contemplates examples of ‘ordinary harms’, such as driving automobiles with poor gas mileage, living in relatively large homes and consuming large amounts of meat. The chapter concludes by claiming that leading crime theories have much to say about why individuals engage in ordinary harms that contribute to ecocide, even though these harms represent conformist behaviour, and by reminding readers why the application of leading crime theories to ordinary harms is important.