Corporate Crime

This article addresses corporate environmental responsibility (CER) and aims to present a criminological analysis of it. We studied the opinion of a number of principle actors involved in CER in Europe in order to determine how they perceive it in terms of its definition, aetiology and approaches. For each of these dimensions we relate back to a criminological framework to ascertain how it is positioned in the green criminological debate. We start out by providing information on what corporate environmental responsibility is and how it relates to corporate social responsibility and sustainable development. Then we outline the theoretical framework in accordance with the three central themes for the criminological analysis of CER: definition, aetiology and approaches. We also explain the method that was used (semi-structured interviews). Next, we present the results according to the same threefold structure. Finally we discuss these results in a last part, which is divided in two. First, we look at the challenges that the criminological perspective poses for CER in terms of definition, aetiology and approaches. The second part of the discussion turns the question around and wonders how CER could contribute to greening criminology.

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Definition Of Corporate Environmental Responsibilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Corporate environmental responsibility and criminology

Bisschop

2009

“…Of course, the higher loyalty for corporate executives as set out in law is the fiduciary duty to shareholders to ensure the long-term success of the corporation. And often this fiduciary duty is invoked as a rationale for corporate crimes that sought to enhance the corporation's market position of profitability and so on [22]. Obeying the standards established by conventional business ethics generally, or in a particular sector might also be used to justifying not following legal standards.…”

Section: Corporate Techniques Of Neutralizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As The Atlantic noted, from "January 2010 through February 2010, as Toyota recalls mounted and as Congress held hearings, Toyota recall coverage ranked, in all but one week, among the top ten news stories across all media. This was an extraordinary amount of news coverage" ( [28], p. [21][22].…”

Section: Corporate Techniques Of Neutralizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

It’s common sense, stupid! Corporate crime and techniques of neutralization in the automobile industry

Whyte

2016

This paper evaluates the usefulness of 'techniques of neutralization' and 'denial' theory for understanding how corporations respond to accusations of wrongdoing and criminal behaviour. It does so with reference to three recent cases in the automobile industry that have each been the subject of extended public outrage and regulatory response (the case of the Fiat Chrysler exploding Jeeps, the Toyota recall following a series of 'uncontrollable acceleration' incidents and Volkswagen's emissions fraud). The paper shows how in each of those systematic cases, corporate strategies were based upon the systematic deception of the public and systematic attempts to resist any recall to safeguard consumers. It then uses those cases as a focus of analysis for reframing 'techniques of neutralization' theory in a form that takes account of the immense social, economic and political power held by corporations and foregrounding the hegemonic role played by corporations in shaping 'common sense' understandings of the world.

“…This article does not focus on the criminalisation of illegal transports of ewaste, but does analyse the motives and opportunities. In doing this, it pays attention to individual, organisational and societal levels of analysis because each might contribute to the emergence of illegal ewaste flows [35][36][37][38]. Characteristics of the sector or the product might be motives or opportunities for (organised) crime [39,40].…”

Section: Theoretical Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is it all going to waste? Illegal transports of e-waste in a European trade hub

Bisschop

2012

This article responds to the call for more empirical knowledge about transnational environmental crime. It does so by analysing the case of illegal transports of electronic waste (e-waste) in a European trade hub. Given the complexity and global nature of transnational environmental crime, it is difficult to determine which actors are involved. In this regard, a local research setting allows the actors involved in illegal transports of e-waste to be identified. This research tries to determine whether these actors and their roles can be considered legal or illegal and illustrates the legal-illegal interfaces in e-waste flows. Moreover, this case study analyses the push, pull and facilitating factors and therefore looks at what motivations and opportunities shape the flows of e-waste in locations of origin, transit and destination. The results show that the social organisation and emergence of transnational environmental crime is on a thin line between legal and illegal which needs to be contextualised within the global reality of the locations of origin, transit and destination.