Understanding animal (ab)use: Green criminological contributions, missed opportunities and a way forward

Abstract

While the last two decades have witnessed considerable growth in green criminology, the positioning of nonhuman animals within the field remains unclear and contested. This article provides an analysis of green criminological work—published since the 1998 special issue of Theoretical Criminology—that addresses harms and crime perpetrated against nonhuman animals. We assess trends in the quantity of the work over time and how the treatment of nonhuman animals has unfolded through an analysis of green criminology articles, chapters in edited volumes and monographs. We find that while the amount of consideration given to nonhuman animals by green criminologists has increased dramatically over the years, much of this work has focused on crimes and harms against wild animals (e.g. “wildlife poaching”, “trafficking”), comparatively less attention has been paid to so-called “domesticated animals” or to larger questions of species justice. Based on these findings, we consider how concepts in critical animal studies, ecofeminism and feminist intersectional theories may be utilized in green criminological debates regarding animal (ab)use. With the goal of stimulating further work in this vein, we outline three areas where green criminology has much to offer: (1) researching and exposing meat production and consumption as a form of animal abuse and as a major contributor to global climate change; (2) bridging the divide between environmentalism, animal advocacy and their associated areas of academic study; and (3) refining and reflecting on methodological choices, all with the aim of developing a nonspeciesist green criminology.

“Whenever there’s trouble, just yelp for help”: Crime, conservation, and corporatization in Paw Patrol

“…On separate occasions, elephants (S1E7) and hippos (S3E7) escape from a traveling circus troupe and are found and returned to Raimundo, the ringmaster, by the PAW Patrol. Much of the green criminological scholarship on this topic has focused on wildlife poaching and trafficking (Taylor and Fitzgerald, 2018; see, for example, Runhovde, 2017; Sollund, 2019), despite growing concern among activists and legislators about animal cruelty and abuse in circuses (see Hobson, 2015; Takiff, 2016). Indeed, while animal harm takes various other forms, it is entrenched and normalized in some zoos and circuses (Nurse, 2016).…”

For an Emancipatory Animal Sociology

“…A notable limitation to this method is that it does not include book chapters and/or books, as many of the databases searched do not cover them. It may be that more critical and/or radical statements are made in books or book chapters, particularly early in the development of new fields of research (Taylor and Fitzgerald, 2018). While certainly an important area for future study, this exclusion should not detract from the value of the current project, which maps the field of peer-reviewed journal articles – often held up as the most highly prized of research outputs in research metrics.…”

Mapping Emotions: Exploring the Impact of the Aussie Farms Map

“…Nonspeciesist criminology, as a particular subfield, is similarly connected to the more radical wings of green criminology. It aims to extend the moral and legal scope to include consideration of nonhuman animals (Benton, 1998) and is frequently associated with "activist scholarship," a form of intellectual labor that challenges systems designed primarily for humans and that lead to nonhuman species injustice (Drew & Taylor, 2014;Sollund, 2008;Taylor & Fitzgerald, 2018;Taylor & Twine, 2014). Committed activists of ecology and animal rights organizations likewise both express a moral concern that consideration should be extended beyond the boundaries of our own species, and that nonhuman beings should be recognized as having value in their own right.…”