Defining environmental crime: The perspective of farmers

Political ecology of health in the Land of Fires: a hotspot of environmental crimes in the south of Italy

“…Even victimologists have dedicated scarce attention to the victims of EC (Skinnider, 2011). Some empirical investigations have analyzed peoples' perceptions of EC (Martín et al, 2013), and only very recently a study has taken into account the perspective of environmental victims themselves (Barclay and Bartel, 2015). The present study is a contribution to this nascent literature; it will do so through the lens of political ecology by investigating the self-perception of being a victim of EC.…”

Property and place attachment: a legal geographical analysis of biodiversity law reform in New South Wales

“…There are synergies between agricultural land use and native vegetation conservation, based on common commitments to environmentally beneficial activities (Burdon, , 130). Law reforms based on duty of care (Shepheard and Martin, ; Earl et al ., ) and environmental stewardship (Ahnstrom et al ., ; Trigger et al ., ; Gill, ) may have greater resonance with farmers than current regimes which effect social distance through positioning farmers as ‘environmental vandals’ and ‘criminals’ (Lowe and Ward, ; Witt et al ., ; Bartel and Barclay, ; Barclay and Bartel, ). The NSW Farmers Association spokesperson Cameron Rowntree has disputed suggestions that farmers are ‘destroying the landscape’ (Hasham, ) and the President of the NSW Farmers Association, Fiona Simson, has claimed that farmers are:

responsible custodians of our land who have a direct interest in looking after the environmental values of the landscape (Makim, ).

The validation and inclusion of vernacular knowledge‐holders such as farmers in law development and reform, through participatory processes, in addition to scientific knowledge, may ensure greater success, through reducing social distance and including relevant facts which are applicable to local environmental management (Reed, ; Bartel, ).…”

Water theft in rural contexts

“…The introduction of water restrictions and stricter approaches to managing Australia's water resources, most prominently the Murray-Darling Basin, potentially (and probably) increases the temptation to take water that one is not entitled to. Water theft covers not only taking from natural water courses, but also the stealing of harnessed or piped water (Barclay & Bartel, 2015). The latter takes in offences of actual theft, breach of extraction conditions and construction of works to illegally take water, tampering with meters to relay false readings, and contravening declared water restrictions.…”

“…An Australian study on the perspectives of farmers by Barclay and Bartel (2015) provides insight into how fresh water is being 'stolen' through diversion, despoiling and depletion, on the drivers or incentives for water theft, issues of non-compliance, and how water theft results in availability and access injustices. Drawing upon this and other literature a range of specific transgressions can be identified: for example, water theft, water contamination, waterway diversion, and over-extraction of coastal groundwater, all of which have significant social and ecological impacts (Barclay & Bartel, 2015;Poff & Zimmerman, 2010;Vörösmarty et al, 2010;Narayan et al, 2007;Werner, 2010;Greiner et al, 2016, p. 27). Other matters warranting further consideration include the risks and threats of waterrelated terrorism (for example, the intentional poisoning of freshwater supply), and the waterrelated consequences of poorly regulated storage of toxic chemicals and hazardous waste (which are vulnerable to being swept up in flood waters and thereby pollute freshwater systems).…”