White collar crime, consumers and victimization

Abstract

Consumers have long been recognized as one of the major groups of victims of white collar and corporate crime, although many of the activities which harm them are not widely regarded as 'crime'. They tend to attract less publicity, and have been subject to less academic research, particularly in comparison with major financial frauds or cases involving mass harms. Moreover, there has been a tendency to view consumers as a relatively undifferentiated group, all of whom are likely to be victimized. This article identifies a wide range of crimes which affect consumers and explores some of the characteristics of victims and offenders, arguing that while all consumers are at risk, the impact of consumer crime, like other forms of crime, reflects wider patterns of structural inequality and falls most severely on the most disadvantaged.Consumers are generally regarded as one of the main groups victimized by white collar and corporate crime and all consumers are subject to fraud, safety and health threats and deception from the production and sale of consumer goods and services. Serious as these harms are, many are not widely regarded as "crime." While all consumers, irrespective of gender, age or socio economic status, are affected, it can be argued that victimization reflects wider social inequalities [20][21][22]. This paper will start by identifying what kinds of crimes consumers are victims of before briefly looking at the characteristics of offences, offenders and victims. It will then outline the impact of selected forms of crime before exploring in more depth the way in which victimization is related to structural inequalities.

Critiquing the Inter-Disciplinary Literature on Food Fraud

“…Unethical, and illegal, business behaviour in the UK and abroad is increasing. The works of Hazel Croall on food-crime as a type of economic crime and as a particular form of crime suggest that such crimes are less visible and receive less public or academic attention than other areas of white-collar and corporate crime (Croall 1989;2009b;2009c).…”

Exploring green criminology: toward a green criminological revolution

“…it is now two decades later, and in the terms of generational language, an entirely new generation of criminologists has entered the world and has done little to transform the nature of criminology. To be sure, over the past generation, some advances have certainly been made in the area of green criminological research by a handful of pioneers in the field (Agnew, 2012;Beirne, 1999;Beirne and South, 2007;Benton, 2007;Bisschop, 2012;Croall, 2009;Eman, Meško and Fields, 2009;Gibbs et al, 2010;Groombridge, 1998;Hall, 2013;Hauck, 2008;Jarrell and Ozymy, 2012;Katz, 2010;Kramer and Michalowski, 2012;Lane, 1998;Lynch and Stretesky, 2003;Nurse, 2013;Ruggiero and South, 2010;Sollund, 2008;South and Brisman, 2013;Takemura, 2007;van Solinge 2010;Walters, 2006;White, 2008a;Wyatt, 2012).…”

“…as a general description of this victim focus, Carribine et al (2008: 316) identify four primary types of green crimes that generate victimization: crimes of air pollution, crimes of deforestation, crimes of species decline and animal rights, and crimes of water pollution. This list is not exhaustive and excludes other issues that have been the focus of green criminology such as toxic and hazardous waste crimes that impact the land and water (lynch and , distributive justice or environmental justice issues and their differential impacts across populations with unique characteristics (Stretesky and lynch, 1999;2003;White, 2007), and inequities in the enforcement of environmental regulations (lynch, Stretesky, andBurns, 2004a, 2004b), food crimes (Croall, 2007b), and bio-piracy (South, 2007). regardless of the issue examined, as White (2008a: 14) notes, there is no specific theory of green criminology.…”

“…a similar theme is found within green criminological research. Within green criminology, however, the focus has not been entirely on technological issues (for examples see, Croall, 2007a;Lynch and Stretesky, 2001;South, 2007), nor on voluntary compliance with environmental regulation (Stretesky, 2006;Stretesky and lynch, 2009b) but extends to legal, economic, and social policy as well (White, 2008a) and to examinations of the effectiveness of formal social control processes for controlling environmental harm Burns, 2004a, 2004b;Stretesky and lynch, 2003). Thus, while green criminologists are more likely to focus on formal social control responses and the coercive effects of law and regulation, and green chemistry selects an incentive-laden, economically based voluntary compliance model, each view shares a focus on examining the kinds of policies that may be effective in controlling environmental harm.…”

“…kauzlarich, matthews, and miller (2002), for example, have proposed a victimology of state crime. Szockyj and Fox's book (1996) examines corporate victimization of women, while Stitt and giacopassi (1995) and Croall (2007aCroall ( , 2009) have examined corporate victimization in broader terms.…”