1. SCLY4 Crime and Deviance Revision Cards 2014 1

2. The specification at a glance 2 Different theories of crime, deviance,social order and social control. Consensus theories vs Conflict theories Functionalism Ecological Subcultural New Right/Control Marxism Neo-Marxism Labelling The social distribution of crime and deviance: Age Ethnicity Gender, Locality Social class Globalisation and crime in contemporary society; the mass media and crime Globalisation and crime Green crime Human rights and state crimes. Crime control, prevention and punishment, victims, and the role of the criminal justice system and other agencies Policing and the courts Crime prevention Punishment (inc. Prisons) Victimology The sociological study of suicide Studies of suicide Theoretical and methodological implications The connections between sociological theory and methods and the study of crime and deviance. Measuring crime (stats etc) Methods in Context

3. Contents 1.Theories of Crime and Deviance 2.Gender and crime 3.Age and Crime 4.Ethnicity and Crime 5.Social class and crime 6.Area and Crime 7.Mass Media and Crime 8.Globalisation and Crime 9.Policing and Courts 10.Crime Prevention 11.Punishment 12.Victimology 13.Suicide 14.Measuring crime (usefulness of statistics) 3

4. Consensus TheoriesConflict Theories Functionalist Subcultural Ecological New Right/Control Theory Marxist Neo-Marxist Feminist Anti-Racist Sociology Labelling Harmony Social control and socialisation Community Shared values Police/courts/media fulfil a positive function Trust crime statistics Blame ‘criminal’ Conflict Social control and ideology Police/courts/media serve the powerful Crime is socially constructed/ distrust statistics Blame ‘society’ 1. Theories of Crime and Deviance 4

5. For each theory ask…. What influences our definition of deviance/crime? What is the cause of crime and deviance? Who are likely to commit crime and deviance? What is social order based upon? 5

6. CONSENSUS THEORIES 6

7. 7 CONSENSUS THEORIES – at a glance FunctionalismSubculturalEcologicalNew Right/Control Functions of deviance Shared values Test boundaries Punishment unifies Social rules = clear Anomie Strengthen community Strain theory Alternative values Delinquency Status frustration Self-esteem/rebellion Illegitimate Opportunity Structure Focal concerns Urban areas Lack of community Disorganisation Zone of transition Informal social control Differential association Sink estates Tipping Nocturnal economy Underclass Moral decay Welfare dependency ‘broken windows’ Families without fatherhood Community decline Cost-benefit analysis Attachments/bonds Communitarianism Poor socialisation

8. 8 StudiesEvaluation FunctionalistDurkheim Functions of deviance Reinforces solidarity/commitment to shared values Punishment unifies community Social rules = clear Singles out undesirables Boundaries reinforces/tested = change Dysfunctions Crime is threat to social order Anomie – normlessness = deviance Causes of crime Anomie from rapid social change Boundaries unclear/uncertainty Social order & social control Consensus = shared values = order Social control = socialisation = cohesion = integration = community Institutions restrict deviant behaviour Merton Strain theory (goals and means) Anomie = strain between goals/means American Dream = pressure 5 responses to anomie (eg, innovation) Durkheim What is the right amount of crime? (not scientific) Would victims find crime beneficial? Does not explain why certain people commit crime (and what crimes they choose to do) Assume that laws reflect the interests of all in society (ignores power/ideology) Tends to ‘blame’ the deviant Merton How can ‘anomie’ be measured? (not scientific) Where do goals/means come from? (he ignores role of capitalism) Ignores subcultures driving the choice of individuals Doesn’t explain crimes that are not driven by ‘economic goal’ General Ignore conflict in society (and power) Values are manipulated by the ruling class Laws are biased and serve the powerful Ignores crimes of the powerful Ignores group nature of crime Ignores selective policing/bias in the criminal justice system Ignore how the media can create crime

9. 9 StudiesEvaluation Subcultural (Functionalist) Albert Cohen 1950s USA – juvenile delinquency Working class youths – socialised into ‘alternative’ norms and values Caused by status frustration & blocked opportunities = sense of failure Rejection of mainstream values No monetary gain crime – vandalism and fighting Gained status & rebellion Cloward & Ohlin Illegitimate opportunity structure Career ladder – opportunities/status 3 structures (criminal/conflict /retreatist) Criminal subculture – working class areas/networks/role models etc Miller Lower class values – socialisation into these ‘focal concerns’ Focal concerns – smartness/toughness/ excitement/fatalism etc A source of status/self-esteem Most working class boys do not commit crime They ignore female deviance Ignore middle class subcultures Ignore crimes of the powerful Most youths grow out of it Assume working class youth are raised in a vacuum and cut off from wider society/values They ignore labelling/biased policing Deterministic – ignore free will Accept crime statistics as true Matza notes how subcultural membership is transitory

10. 10 StudiesEvaluation Ecological Urban areas = high crime rate City centre = less cohesion/ommunity Normlessness = anomie Social control is limited (informal) Shaw & McKay Neighbourhoods/zones Zones have distinct cultures/values Zone of transition = ‘twilight zone’ – inner city (cheap rented housing, poverty, high immigration, transitory population) = No bonds…crime! Social disorganisation = no sense of community – unstable..no controls Subculture = cultural transmission Shaped by people around them (differential association – Sutherland) Marshall Sink estates in UK = crime Baldwin & Bottoms Tipping – problem families onto certain estates Morris – Found similar results when problem families concentrated in area (diff. assoc.) Skogan (USA) – noted public space and disorder there..decline of neighbourhood Hobbs Nocturnal economy – city centres- pubs/clubs..expansion..more chance of criminal activity there Which comes first? (crime or social disorganisation)? Most people in these areas do not commit crime Ignores white collar crime by wealthy people in suburbs It may be that in urban areas there is a high concentration of young, deprived people…rather than area Most youth crime is transitory..not permanent/fixed Maybe urban areas are policed more and crime figures reflect the fact they are over-policed Some areas are treated as ‘problem areas’ by councils/police Ignores ‘gentrification’ of cities in recent years, ie) Yuppie flats etc Ignores strong sense of community on working class estates

11. 11 StudiesEvaluation New Right/ Control Theory -Underclass theory -Rational choice theory -Control theory Fears of moral decay Desire for greater control of people who harm normal society Critical of welfare state Murray Underclass reject mainstream norms and values Dependency culture Rise of single parents – lack of discipline/no father figure/ poor socialisation/instability Families without fatherhood (Dennis) Communities damaged – no bonds - ‘good people’ move away Wilson (Broken Windows) Communities need informal soc. Cont. to reglate deviance Cost-benefit analysis = less chance of getting caught/no fear punishment Etzioni Government is disempowering communities Hirschi Low attachments = high crime Bonds (attachment/commitment/belief/ involvement Family = vital for socialisation Marxists are critical as the right use this theory to justify inequality Contradiction – belief in selfish interests and community Most working class citizen are moral even though struggling in poverty Ignores middle class crime Ignores how the powerful manipulate society to control poor Attack on single parents Ethnocentricism – bias

12. 12 Norman Dennis - ‘Families without Fatherhood’ (1993) Trends 30 years = family changes = weakened Decline of the traditional family Rise in cohabitation and decline of marriage Issue Family/community used to be a form of social control They used to restrict the extremes behaviour of youth People today struggle with ‘inner policeman’ Crime related to: 1.Changing role of women = fathers now marginal 2.Fathers leaving families = no role model/discipline 3.Cohabitation = no moral fabric…values/morals are relative Farrington & West - 1990 Findings Study – Cambridge – Longitudinal study (1953-1990) 1/3 of 411 boys = offenders by age 25 Delinquency linked to: Types of family linked to crime Poor parenting Fathers had criminal records Poverty & single parenthood

13. CONFLICT THEORIES 13

14. 14 CONFLICT THEORIES – at a glance Traditional Marxism Neo-MarxismLabelling Criminogenic capitalism Laws serve ruling class Ideological role of law/social control White collar crime Selective law enforcement Crisis of hegemony Symbolic resistance CCCS (Marxist Subcultural theory) Fully social theory of deviance Selective policing Social construction of deviance Deviance as relative concept Labelling process and selective policing Effects of labelling (primary-secondary deviance) Deviance amplification Rule Creation

15. 15 StudiesEvaluation Traditional Marxist Theories Society shaped by economic base Capitalist class exploit working class Society is based on conflict – inequality and power central to crime an deviance Laws serve the powerful – ideological Law serves ruling class R/C control laws Law enforcement benefits R/C Chambliss – protect private property – business interest = profits (tax loopholes/Vagrancy laws) Snider – serve business – state avoids tighter laws on pollution/Safety etc Law as ideology & social control Althusser – Ideological State App. Law (and crime) is defined by R/C Crime is seen as blood on streets & w/c White collar crime Crimes of the powerful (see next slide) Criminogenic Capitalism Crime is normal under capitalism = greed/competition (Gordon) Poverty is created by capitalism = frustration/alienation Selective Law enforcement Reiman – w/c crime most pursued Gordon – selective policing feeds stereotype and divides w/c Not all laws are just serving R/C – many benefit workers Laws reflect value consensus Too deterministic – ignores power of SFP High crime rates in socialist countries Ignore the importance of values/culture and socialisation in criminality Ignores individual motivation Ignores gender/ethnic inequality Not all w/c people commit crime Left-Realists not how this focuses too much on crimes of the powerful Laws can act against the R/C

16. 16 White-Collar Crime What is it? Middle class crime – by people of ‘high social status/ respectability’ (Sutherland) Corporate crimes (business) White collar (employees) Types Employee theft Fraud Computer crime Tax fraud Crimes against consumers Crimes against employees Level of harm 20 times more harmful than street crime (Snider) Harm from faulty goods/safety infringements/pollution etc Fraud – far greater than burglary, mugging, theft (millions) (Levi) Why hard to detect/police? (Croall) Invisibility Hard to isolate blame No direct victim Law is ambiguous/grey area Consumers don’t report – trivial Policed by inspections (not police) – warnings/fines..not conviction! Technical knowledge/complex ahead of police skill set METHODS ISSUE White collar crime is very hard to investigate due to its invisible nature!

17. 17 StudiesEvaluation Neo-Marxist Theories (1) New Criminology (1973) Taylor, Walton & Young (1973) Blended Marxism and Labelling See Trad. Marxism as deterministic Working class have choice Fully social theory of deviance which looks at structure and individual Marxist Subcultural Theory (see next slide) Ethnicity & Crime studies Gilroy – ‘black youth crime’ in 1970s = political response to racism/oppression Selective policing – racist Hall - 1970s economic crisis = and a crisis of hegemony = scapegoating of black youths for problems = moral panic ‘mugging scare’ (see ethnicity and crime slide also) Ignore female criminality Romanticises w/c criminal as a Robin Hood ‘stealing from the rich’ (but left realists note their main victims are also working class/the poor) They ignore the ‘seriousness’ of these crimes on w/c victims Now described as ‘Left Idealism’ as it was over-optimistic about the oppressed and their ability to exploit the ‘crisis of hegemony’ and find a true class consciousness Wider origins of act, immediate origins of act, the act itself, immediate origins of societal reaction, wider origins of societal reaction, effects of labelling Look back at your notes on GRAMSCI Hegemony Humanistic Marxism Voluntarism

18. 18 Subcultural Theories – Brief comparison FunctionalistMarxistLabelling Albert Cohen – juvenile delinquency Socialisation – alt. norms and values Status frustration Reject mainstream values Gain status & rebellion Cloward & Ohlin Illegitimate Opportunity Structures Careers in crime Networks/role models Miller Focal concerns of lower class culture Source of status/ self- esteem CCCS (Birmingham Uni 1970s) Youth subcultures linked within a wider structural context Crisis in hegemony = working class youths see through R/C hegemony Working class youths find ‘magical solutions’ to their oppression…resistance through rituals (Stuart Hall/Dick Hebdige) Symbolic resistance expressed through subcultures Stealing signs and distorting their meaning (subcultural bricolage) Phil Cohen Skinheads – ultra w/c symbols as a response to destruction of working class communities in 60s Hebdige Punk – nihilistic/shock collaging of symbols and distorted meanings Hall Rastas/Rudies – challenges to racist Babylon Goffman – ‘deviant career’ How outsiders/stigmatised are rejected by society and form their own ‘subculture’ Becker Self-concept/shared identity – new ‘master status’ Learn culture – novice to expert = learning meanings and symbols – gradual adjusting identity Goffman Deeper level of ‘secondary deviance’ Lemert socialisation Identity Resistance

19. 19 StudiesEvaluation Neo-Marxist Theories (2) Also see ‘Realism’ cards later on with focus on crime policy/solutions New Left Realism (1984) British Crime Survey 1983 = poor and marginal = main victims of crime (not the rich/powerful – “sack Robin Hood!” UK riots 1981 Crime = a REAL problem Main criminals = working class/Afro- Caribbean youths Lea & Young – 3 factors Relative deprivation Feel deprived compared to others Advertising/consumerism = pressure Lack of means to reach goals = frustration Growth of ‘self-interest which undermine family values/community Subculture Collective solutions to a group’s problems Anti-mainstream values/culture as rejected by wider society Develop a way of life = street crime Marginality Groups – lack power – no voice Violence = political action Hostility with police/authority Too much focus on w/c crime – ignores white collar crime and its level of harm Over reliance on statistical data Seem to have too much faith in the police as ‘neutral’ What’s so new? – Merton/Cohen What’s so left? – anti-w/c Underplay the role of the media in influencing police Ignores the labelling process and its effect..need to use more qualitative data to explore motives Deterministic = not everyone who experience relative poverty = criminal Too much focus on ‘urban’ crime in inner cities = makes it seem a greater problem

20. 20 Right RealismLeft Realism Basic beliefs People = naturally selfish Need control through laws Rational choice – cost/benefit analysis Capitalism creates crime Inequality = frustration/tension Welfare reduces inequality & problems Cause of crime How does this link back to Functionalism? Decline of responsibility Collapse of community and bonds (Hirschi) Moral decline (Murray) Welfare = dependency = laziness = damage bonds and informal social controls Underclass – with a way of life ‘dependency culture’ and role models Rise of ‘fatherless families’ and no positive role model/lack of discipline in home Clarke (rational choice) – crime is a choice when rewards outweigh costs = low chance of being caught + punishment does not deter criminality Felson – absence of a ‘capable guardian’ – need informal social control/community to trigger the ‘inner policeman’ – morality/duty Relative deprivation/Marginality/ Subculture (Lea & Young) Victims of crime are poor/deprived Unemployment = deprivation/marginality Racism/inequality = frustration facing Afro-Caribbean youth Media images/advertising/consumerism = frustrated youth Rise of individualism/selfism = decline of community/mutual bonds/support/ duty and responsibility Decline of informal social control Solutions (see policy and prevention slides ) Wilson – Broken Windows – strengthen communities, surveillance and chance of being caught Neighbourhood Watch/Situational Prevention Zero tolerance/ASBOs/Tagging/dispersal order Accountable policing/community links Reduce inequalities in society social and community crime prevention – housing/poverty/jobs/education/job creation (multi-agency approach) Evaluation Ignores wider structural causes, ie) poverty Assumes rational-choice – not explain violence Blames crime on socialisation and blame w/c Charlesworth – Rotherham study – blames poverty/environment…not values/culture No empirical evidence of underclass subculture Not very new – no insights Too much focus on ethnic minorities – borders on racism How realistic are these policy ideas? Ignores white collar crime Comparing ‘Realist Theories’ of Crime & Deviance

21. 21 StudiesEvaluation Labelling Theories (1) Note how these differ to ‘structural theories’ as they focus on interaction/social constructionism Distrust official stats on crime Police not neutral Use qualitative methods (ethnographic) Committed sociology Society ‘creates’ deviance – social constructionism They do not discuss economic matters (capitalism) Origins – Chicago School ‘symbolic interactionism’ and later phenomenology Thinkers – Becker/Goffman/Cicourel/Lemert Deviance as relative Normal/deviant are defined by society – not fixed Becker ‘deviant behaviour is behaviour so labelled’ Who controls definitions? (not the underdog) Social construction of deviance Becker – society applies this label to certain groups..defines their actions as deviant = create outsiders Labels = stereotypes Selective policing of W/C, youths, males Greater surveillance of powerless groups ‘seek and ye shall find’ Becker – M/C negotiate with police more Lambert – policing w/c estates in UK Cicourel – stereotyping in courtrooms Kalven & Zaesel – chivalry thesis (females) Effects of labelling Self concept shaped (Cooley) = SFP Primary & secondary deviance (Lemert) Stigmatisation & societal reaction = increases Label = master status (Becker) = identity Rejection = outsider = join deviant subculture Goffman ‘deviant career’ – learn culture – deeper Young – hippy marijuana users – drug use more important after police sensitisation and negative societal reaction to hippies…defined as ‘junkies’ Over romantic – ‘too committed’ and see criminal as not so bad Too much focus on exotic and bizarre deviance (drugs use etc) Ignores origins of deviant acts There is absolute deviance Labelling is too deterministic – simplistic – one direction Deviants can adopt identity without being labelled Where do the stereotypes come from and why do the police use some and not others Out of date –police today are trained to not be prejudiced They ignore economic power and the nature of capitalism in deviance Ignore women in research Cooley ‘looking glass self’

22. 22 StudiesEvaluation Labelling Theories (2) Deviance Amplification This is how efforts to control/limit deviance = create more deviance Look back at Lemert – secondary deviance grows after sensitisation & societal reaction Stan Cohen – Folk Devils & Moral Panics (1972) Role of media in ‘amplifying’ deviance Newspaper reporting of ‘mods and rockers’ fighting and how it created more deviance Youths (folk devils) and media promoted a (moral panic) surrounding them…needed a solution! Media exaggerated the problem = public concern (sensitisation & societal reaction) Moral entrepreneurs – magistrates/police/local council wanted to ‘stamp it out’ = more concern More arrests and convictions Demonising mods/rockers (folk devils) = marginalisation = affected their identity/self concept - ‘fighting was normalised’ Media = key role in causing public fear/concern about certain groups (immigrants/single mums etc) Rule creation Becker - Laws = relative = serve interests of minority - conservative Moral entrepreneurs – campaign to change law to serve their interests/values Use of media to stir ‘moral crusades’ to influence the public’s view and law makers The underdog has very little say in the process – driven by powerful minority, eg) Marijuana Tax Act 1937 – Reefer Madness campaign Ignores the benefits of the mass media (Functionalist) – public awareness/crime reduction/ promoting social solidarity and shared values/public drama linked to punishment People today are more ‘media savvy’ and sceptical about media stories

23. 2. Gender and Crime 23 Why women are less criminal than men? ExplanationsIn brief Biology Sex role theory/Socialisation Poverty/marginalisation Control theory Women are maternal and ‘wired’ differently to men Girls are raised to be passive/domestic – take less risks Working class women are deprived and are promised rewards for conforming (gender deal and the class deal) Women/girls are controlled by men = less opportunity to commit crime Women are not less criminal than men Chivalry Thesis Liberation Theory Police and courts are lenient towards women and let them off = not visible in crime statistics Women now are more equal and have more opportunity to commit crime

24. 24 StudiesEvaluation Biology Sex role theory/ Socialisation Poverty/ marginalisation Control theory Chivalry Thesis Liberation Theory Women are biologically less deviant Parsons – women = expressive role – mum is adult role model Carlen – women encouraged to conform = class deal/gender deal But marginal women = rational decision to do crime to get rewards denied by class/gender deal failing Heidensohn – patriarchy – control in domestic sphere/public sphere/work Supervised/fear of violence/loss of reputation (Lees) = avoid crime Avoid urban space at night (Evans) Men socialised to be lenient and chivalrous towards women Pollack – less likely to arrest women = biased statistics Women = more cautions than men Graham & Bowling/Hood findings Kalven & Zaesel – selective policing Adler – equal opportunities in society = same opportunities as men to commit crime Adopting male roles/behaviour patterns = ladette (Denscombe) – police dealing seriously Non-sociological – gender is socially constructed not biological (Oakley) Socialisation = less traditional expectations now Post-modernists = decline of trad. Gender role Rise of the ‘ladette’ Why do so many women in poverty commit crime? Ignores ‘non-monetary gain crime’ Changing social attitudes – more ‘liberation’ from controls Women are not treated leniently (Farrington) Severe offences are punished harshly, ie) violence = against feminine expectations Many women = remanded prior to prison Improvements in society mainly benefitted m/c women Female offenders are mainly w/c = linked to poverty (marginalisation/frustration) rather than ‘liberation’

26. 2. Gender and Crime 26 Why men are more criminal than women? ExplanationsIn brief Biology Sex role theory/Socialisation Control theory Masculinity & crime Crime as enjoyable Men are biologically more ‘physical’ and prone to aggression Boys are socialised to be more aggressive/active/risk-takers Less control of boys than girls = more freedom Boys/men have to ‘prove’ they are masculine/macho Crime is done for pleasure

27. 27 StudiesEvaluation Sex role theory/ Socialisation Control theory Accomplishing masculinity Postmodernity Crime as enjoyable Globalisation & decline of traditional jobs (see globalisation slides) Parsons – male role models Expectations to be active/aggressive Male peer group – pressure Less control by parents Dominate public space = opportunity Pressure = macho reputation Messerschmidt – hegemonic masculinity = ‘real man’ Toughness/competitive/power over others (like ‘Focal concerns’) w/c males = frustrated/failure at school = so crime becomes a way of ‘achieving’ hegemonic masculinity m/c males = ruthless = white collar Explains domestic violence/rape Katz – pleasure from thrill of ‘risk’ of being caught/power over others Transgression = moral transcendence (like Matza) Exercise a form of control in lives Lyng – Edgework (risky behaviour) Winlow – globalisation = decline of trad. Industry (source of masculinity) Rise of ‘nocturnal economy’ – bouncers/body capital/networks Violence more common – source of status/overcome boredom Changing gender role expectations Does not explain why not all men use crime to achieve hegemonic masculinity Is masculinity a cause of crime or just a way that crime can be expressed (ie, being tough) Some crimes by men are not an expression of masculinity Mainly a working class issue linked to working class subculture (Miller) Only relevant to certain types of men in certain situations

29. 3. Age and Crime 29

30. 4. Ethnicity and Crime 30

31. 4. Ethnicity and Crime 31 The trends Afro-Caribbeans: More likely arrested for robbery than other ethnic groups More likely to experience the criminal justice system (caution/arrest/court/prison) Asians: More likely to face court rather than caution/go prison if found guilty More likely to be arrested for fraud/forgery The debate for us to consider is this: “ Are Afro-Caribbeans and Asians (Pakistani/Bangladeshi) actually committing more crime than other ethnic groups (and if so…WHY?)….or are they being policed more and punished more than other ethnic groups (racist treatment by CJS) ?” Look back at this divide…. Consensus TheoriesConflict Theories Blame criminal for actions Focus on values/frustration etc Trust police/courts/media Have faith in official stats. Blame society/ ‘the system’ Focus on poverty/inequality/labelling Distrust police/courts/media Official statistics = social constructs

32. 32 Consensus approaches StudiesEvaluation

33. 5. Class and Crime 33

34. 6. Area and Crime 34

35. 7. Mass Media and Crime 35

36. Includes: What is globalisation? The extent of the global crime economy Globalisation and :risk consciousness, capitalism and organisation Green crime Human rights and state crimes 8. Globalisation and Crime 36 Think about: Power, harm and interconnectedness Crimes of the powerful Nation states/large corporations power Cause major harm Hidden crime Unpunished crime Zemiology Beyond traditional criminology How crime is defined The study of harm Crimes without frontiers Beyond national boundaries Global connections = more opportunities

37. 37 How to focus on this topic.. Globalisation is a ‘game-changer’ for the study of crime Globalisation = new forms of crime/new opportunities Global crime = a challenge for ‘nation-states’ and law making/jurisdiction (hard to police) Global crimes by powerful groups = able to define laws (to serve selves), able to hide crimes, able to escape punishment Global crimes = high level of harm/damage (to environment or to citizens) You can use these as strands to return to again and again in your analysis of them. These revision cards try to focus on these strands for you.

38. 38 The extent of Global crime What is globalisation? The increasing interconnectedness of societies ‘the widening, deepening and speeding up of world wide interconnectedness’ (Held) causes: global media, cheap travel, ICT, migration, business links Crime across national borders The level of Global crime Manuel Castells – global crime economy = £1 trillion per year Arms trafficking Trafficking nuclear materials People smuggling/illegal immigrants Prostitution/slavery Sex tourism Cyber crimes (fraud/pornography) Terrorism Green crime Drugs trade Money laundering Global risk consciousness (Beck) Fears of harm/need protection Media exaggeration/moral panics Immigration worries (welfare/jobs) Led to tighter border controls 9/11 terrorism and consequences Capitalism and crime Ian Taylor – greater inequality = crime Businesses (TNCs) switch to low-wage countries = poverty = insecurity + frustration = poor people turn to crime New crim. Opportunities for rich and powerful = insider trading/tax avoidance/moving funds Capitalist employers using foreign labour + breaching laws Demand (rich west) + Supply (3 rd world)

39. 39 New patterns of criminal organisation GLOCAL organisation Hobbs & Dunningham Global economic changes = local crime organisation Individuals with contacts form a ‘hub’ Loose-knit networks – NOT hierarchy (different to subcultures and traditional ‘mafia’ style gangs) Key root = local context But has global connections Each locality will affect the nature of the criminal organisation (global crime filtered through a local lens) Example – old industry shut because of global competition = nocturnal economy in Sunderland – bouncers/body capital Evaluation Not clear if these hubs are ‘new’ Older structures may still run alongside McMafia Glenny Organisations emerging after fall of communism in 1989 Deregulation of global markets Communism falls = free market except for natural resources, ie) oil Russian govt controlled these and kept prices low (communist officials bought these for next to nothing) They sold them abroad = high price Became very rich/powerful – oligarchs Ex-KGB/former convicts formed mafias - used to protect this new wealthy class, ie) Chechen Mafia Not like Italian mafia – kin/hierarchy These mafias were purely economic/ driven by greed Chechen Mafia became a brand – ruthless/protection rackets Exported brand elsewhere Built links around the world

40. 40 Green Crime 1.Global risk society and environment Crime against the environment Planet is a single eco-system (goes beyond national boundaries) Examples: air pollution, water pollution, nuclear disasters Mainly ‘man-made’ risks today Beck – manufactured risks are damaging humanity (made by industry/transport etc)..go beyond national boudaries 2. Green Criminology Traditional criminology Harm to the environment may be defined as ‘legal’ though Traditional criminology is tied to ‘criminal law’ and green crime ignored Situ & Emmons – see env. Crime as ‘an unauthorised act or omission that violates the law’ – a definition that is limited by the law and who control it Green criminology (Rob White) Focus on harm rather than law Some of worst harm = not illegal This is transgressive criminology that moves beyond traditional criminology Different countries have diff. laws Looks at crimes of the powerful – like Marxists note invisible/escape punish. 2 views of harm Anthropocentric view – human view – man can exploit envt. (businesses) Ecocentric view – humans and envt. are linked…envt. needs protecting from global capitalism 3.Types of Green Crime (Nigel South) Primary crimes Direct result of destroying Earth’s resources: (a) crimes of air pollution (b) crimes of deforestation (c) crimes of species decline/animal rights (d) crime of water pollution Secondary crimes Result from flouting the rules to prevent disasters: (a)State violence against opp. Groups eg) French Govt – Greenpeace ship attack (b)Hazardous waste and organised crime eg) business dispose of waste illegally, ship waste to 3 rd world/role of ‘ecomafia’ Italy

41. 41 Examples of ‘Green’ crimes/studiesEvaluation Bhopal disaster 1984 - India – Union Carbide Leaking cyanide – safety failure 30 tons of gas = 20’000 deaths and 120’000 continue suffering Air pollution – from industry/transport Deforestation – Amazon for beef cattle Water Pollution – 25 million die each yr from contaminated water (toxic waste and untreated sewage) Day – those who oppose governments supporting nuclear power/arms are seen as ‘enemies of the state’ (Greenpeace) Walters– ‘ocean floor has been a radioactive rubbish dump for decades’ Bridgland – 2004 Tsunami = barrels of radioactive waste dumped by European countries washed up by Somalia Rosoff – notes how cheap disposing of toxic waste in 3 rd World coiuntries recognises importance of global issues shows where law is lacking where harm is concerned reveals how the powerful define laws and hide crimes  hard to define the boundaries of ‘green criminology’  definitions are value-laden with moral criteria used

42. The extent of ‘state crime’ What are state crimes? Crimes of the powerful - ‘state organised crime’ (Chambliss) Green & Ward ‘illegal or deviant activities perpetrated by, or with complicity of, state agencies’ The state is able to define what is criminal Examples – genocide, torture, imprisonment without trial, assassination McLaughlin – 4 categories of state crime Political crimes Crime by security/police forces Economic crimes Social/cultural crimes The extent of state crime Michalowski & Kramer argue that these crimes are s0 serious because: The state has a monopoly on violence – potential to cause much harm It can conceal it’s crimes and avoid punishment It is hard to police the actions of these states (by other states) It makes laws and can use them to control/persecute their enemies 42

43. The extent of ‘state crime’ Example of state crimes? Cambodia (1975-8) – Pol Pot’s Khmer Rouge government killed 2 million people Nazi Germany – persecution of Jews, the Final Solution Guantanamo Bay – US using excessive methods with terror ‘suspects’ Iraq – Saddam Hussein attacking the Kurds in Northern Iraq Vietnam – My Lai massacre of 400 civilians by US troops during Vietnam war Hiroshima/Nagasaki – Atomic bombs dropped by US on Japanese cities in WW2 The Violation of Human Rights Natural Rights/Civil Rights Protection from state Schwendinger & Schwendinger Crime = level of violation of human rights (harm/zemiology) States denying basic human rights Crimes include: racism, sexism, homophobia, economic exploitation Evaluation Cohen – not objective/easy to explore ‘economic exploitation’ There is limited agreement on what is classed as a human right 43

44. How states crimes become possible States ‘hiding’ their crimes Cohen – state crimes are being explored more within criminology and notes how states try to hide/ legitimate their crimes Denial 3 stages – didn’t happen/its not what it seems/its justified Neutralisation theory Applies Matza’s model for justifying deviant behaviour Techniques : denial of victim, denial of injury, denial of responsibility, condemning the condemners, appeal to higher loyalty State crime as acceptable How normal people perform evil acts on behalf of states Kelman & Hamilton – 3 factors that create ‘crimes of obedience’: Authorisation – given permission = duty to obey Routinisation – role/detached Dehumanisation – enemy seen as sub- human (linked to propaganda) Dehumanisation and modernisation Science and technology help states to commit these crimes (Bauman) They dehumanise and turn mass murder in a routine/admin task 44 Negotiation/social construction

45. Globalisation & Crime (bring together) 45 Examine Globalisation & Crime GREEN CRIME Global risk consciousness Green criminology + harm Types of green crime Examples Evaluation STATE CRIME Risk consciousness Organisations Glocal McMafia Global capitalism What are state crimes? The level of harm Examples Violations of human rights How states conceal crimes (denial) How states make such crime acceptable GLOBAL CRIME Levels/types(Castells) Evaluation Issue of defining crime Objectivity/values Political flavour (committed sociology)

46. 9. Policing & Courts 46