Beyond ‘Criminology vs. Zemiology’: Reconciling Crime with Social Harm

Abstract

For guidance on citations see FAQs.

Fast Fashion: A Case of Social Harm and State‐Corporate Crime

“…While I do see the urgency for the creation of a new discipline with a new discourse of social harm and perceive the usage of the social harm concept in a society that relies on the language of crime to establish what is acceptable and what is not as a necessary political act (Tombs 2018 p.19), the goal of this article is not to weigh in on the debate as to whether the concept of social harm should be further developed within critical criminology or within zemiology. Both zemiology and criminology are interested in attributing responsibility for, and addressing the causes of harm (Copson 2018), such as those that occur as a consequence of fast fashion, and the tension between the two disciplines must not obscure this common goal. After the introduction of the state‐corporate crime concept in the next section, the following sections will thus shed light onto this common goal by exposing the harms of the fast fashion industry from a social harm and a state‐corporate crime perspective that, together, can help advance accountability and prevention.…”

States of exception, human rights, and social harm: Towards a border zemiology

“…However, while convincingly advocating for the usefulness of a zemiological approach in the study of border control, Canning refrains from suggesting what a zemiological methodology should look like, or upon which ontological and epistemological grounding it should be based. Indeed, there is still no agreement over how social harm ought to be defined and studied, and even zemiology’s relationship to criminology remains an object of debate (Copson, 2018). The conceptual challenges provided by migration control represent an opportunity to develop a zemiological methodology that is empirically useful, creating a constructive approach that goes beyond a simple critique of crime and crimmigration control.…”

The Shadow Pandemic: The Exacerbation of Social Harm During The Covid-19 Crisis

“…As academics continue to explore the potential of the social harm approach, some have argued that social harm lies beyond the field of criminology and should be studied through a new discipline (labelled 'zemiology'), one that does not have a history of relying on individual positivist theories past of individual positivist theories. Copson (2018) states that zemiology has emerged as a critique to criminology and has raised questions about criminology's historical relationship to power. Proponents of placing social harm within zemiology rather than criminology have argued that focusing on harm instead of crime is a more effective way of identifying social structures that deliberately disadvantage and oppress certain groups in society (Copson, 2018).…”

“…Copson (2018) states that zemiology has emerged as a critique to criminology and has raised questions about criminology's historical relationship to power. Proponents of placing social harm within zemiology rather than criminology have argued that focusing on harm instead of crime is a more effective way of identifying social structures that deliberately disadvantage and oppress certain groups in society (Copson, 2018). However, others believe that the social harm approach can sit within the theories of critical and radical criminology as, like social harm, these perspectives focus on challenging the existing power structures in society (Copson, 2018).…”

“…Proponents of placing social harm within zemiology rather than criminology have argued that focusing on harm instead of crime is a more effective way of identifying social structures that deliberately disadvantage and oppress certain groups in society (Copson, 2018). However, others believe that the social harm approach can sit within the theories of critical and radical criminology as, like social harm, these perspectives focus on challenging the existing power structures in society (Copson, 2018). Regardless of the debate around where the social harm approach sits in a theoretical sense, the definition of what constitutes harm has become clearer.…”