Criminal Organization and Transnational Crime

Kleemans, E.R.

doi:10.1007/978-1-4939-2471-4_8

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…• Rule of law: According to protection theory (see Kleemans 2015Kleemans , 2018, extortion is an outcome of "alternative governance" structures imposed by criminal groups absent strong legitimate governance (Kleemans 2018), whereby groups "tax" businesses operating in their territories in exchange for "protection" (Gambetta 1993;Paoli 2002;Kleemans 2014;Varese 2014). Thus, a potential predictor of extortion risk at the macro-level is the "strength" of legitimate governance structures across Mexican states (Sung 2004;Skaperdas 2001).…”

Section: Macro-level Influencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Are Repeatedly Extorted Businesses Different? A Multilevel Hurdle Model of Extortion Victimization

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives Research consistently shows that crime concentrates on a few repeatedly victimized places and targets. In this paper we examine whether the same is true for extortion against businesses. We then test whether the factors that explain the likelihood of becoming a victim of extortion also explain the number of incidents suffered by victimized businesses. The alternative is that extortion concentration is a function of event dependence. Methods Drawing on Mexico’s commercial victimization survey, we determine whether repeat victimization occurs by chance by comparing the observed distribution to that expected under a Poisson process. Next, we utilize a multilevel negative binomial-logit hurdle model to examine whether area- and business-level predictors of victimization are also associated with the number of repeat extortions suffered by businesses. Results Findings suggest that extortion is highly concentrated, and that the predictors of repeated extortion differ from those that predict the likelihood of becoming a victim of extortion. While area-level variables showed a modest association with the likelihood of extortion victimization, they were not significant predictors of repeat incidents. Similarly, most business-level variables significantly associated with victimization risk showed insignificant (and sometimes contrary) associations with victimization concentration. Overall, unexplained differences in extortion concentration at the business-level were unaffected by predictors of extortion prevalence. Conclusions The inconsistent associations of predictors across the hurdle components suggest that extortion prevalence and concentration are fueled by two distinct processes, an interpretation congruent with theoretical expectations regarding extortion that considers that repeats are likely fueled by a process of event dependence.

show abstract

Section: Macro-level Influencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Are Repeatedly Extorted Businesses Different? A Multilevel Hurdle Model of Extortion Victimization

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Before the emergence of the major transnational drug markets that are so salient for organized crime groups today, organized crime groups already made profits in peasant societies such as Sicily in the late nineteenth century, by controlling the territory and acting as an "alternative government." Other historical examples include the Hong Kong triads, the Russian mafia, and the Japanese yakuza (for a review, see Varese 2011;Kleemans 2015). Forms of "racketeering," illicit activities on legal markets, can also be distinguished by focusing on Italian-American Mafia families in New York, exploiting dominant positions in the building sector, the waste disposal industry, the Fulton fish market, the labor unions, the harbor, et cetera (e.g., Jacobs 1999).…”

Section: Racketeeringmentioning

confidence: 99%

Organized Crime and Places

Kleemans¹

2018

Oxford Handbooks Online

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This chapter begins by discussing the three types of organized crime—racketeering, transit crime, and the local provision of illegal goods and services—and the significance of place. It then considers the role of places and the (built) environment for organized crime. The main message is that place has a different meaning for these three types of organized crime and raises several theoretical challenges. As these types of organized crime often require a higher degree of social organization than opportunistic street-level crime, the chapter elaborates on two theoretical concepts that should be included in the study of organized crime and place: social opportunity structure and offender convergence settings.

show abstract