Uniting Green Criminology and Earth Jurisprudence

Jack Lampkin

• Editorial: Routledge
• Año: 2020
• ISBN:
  9781000214666
• Edición: 1
• Categoría: Droit
• Categoría: Droit de l'environnement

As planet Earth continues to absorb unprecedented levels of anthropogenically induced environmental and climatic change, two similar academic schools of thought have emerged in recent years, both making sustained efforts to explain how and why this state of affairs has evolved.

These two disciplines are known as green criminology and earth jurisprudence. Whilst these areas of study can be seen as sub-disciplines of their parent subjects, law and criminology, this book proposes that much can be achieved by authors uniting and collaborating on their academic work. By doing this, it is argued that green criminology stands to benefit from a discipline that places mother nature at the heart of lawmaking and therefore providing a solution to the environmental harms identified by green criminologists.

Furthermore, earth jurisprudence will profit from utilising the breadth of academic work produced within the green criminology academic arena. Therefore, this book seeks to unite green criminology and earth jurisprudence in an effort to find solutions to the extraordinary environmental problems that the world now faces.

1
Introduction to issues of global environmental harm

Extinction has always been a feature of life on Earth, but the domination of global ecosystems by people has caused a sharp rise in the rate of extinctions to far above prehuman levels. Loss of biodiversity affects the functioning of natural ecosystems and threatens human well-being.

(Johnson et al., 2017: 270)

1.1. Introduction

The earth is changing. Environmental destruction is now occurring at such an unprecedented and exponential rate that it is now widely acknowledged that we (as humans) have induced a shift from the Holocene to the Anthropocene geological epoch (Lewis and Maslin, 2015; South, 2015). This means that humans are having such a profound impact on planet Earth that some of the damage is now irreversible. Typical examples of this include widespread species loss (He et al., 2018; Román-Palacios and Wiens, 2020), melting of the polar ice caps causing sea levels to rise (Gross, 2019), and human and non-human climate migration (a state whereby organisms must re-locate as their habitat becomes increasingly inhospitable and uninhabitable; Brisman et al., 2018; Westra, 2009).

The motivation for this book therefore is twofold. This first factor lies in the failure of legal systems to prevent catastrophic environmental harm. Humans have long known about the impact of their systems and societies on the global climate and ecology yet have been unsuccessful in preventing ecological damage using legal systems. In fact, it is widely acknowledged that legal systems continue to facilitate (rather than prevent) environmentally destructive practices, particularly those integral to the successes of large corporations and big businesses (Kramer, 2013; Stretesky et al., 2014).

The second motivation for this book concerns the long-term failings of both law and criminology to not only recognise the significance of their (lack of) involvement with environmental issues but also subsequently to provide credible, holistic solutions to what has now been described as an environmental crisis (Buell, 2003). The emerging fields of green criminology and earth jurisprudence have started to tackle these issues since the turn of the millennium, but authors and researchers within these fields have not yet collaborated to share and utilise their skills across disciplines, beside both fields claiming to be inclusive and multi-disciplinary (Schillmoller and Pelizzon, 2013: 7; South et al., 2013).

Therefore, the principle aim of this book is to unite the disciplines of green criminology and earth jurisprudence. It is hoped that discussing both disciplines in unison will encourage and foster collaboration; instigate the sharing of ideas and resources; engage scholars in important critical debate about prudent environmental and socio-legal issues; and start a conversation and dialogue between scholars in both areas. The premise is that doing so will be beneficial for both green criminology and earth jurisprudence, respectively.

Section 1.3. will discuss the structure and layout of this book in greater detail. However, the purpose of this opening chapter is to highlight the importance of future work within green criminology and earth jurisprudence. This will be done by outlining the current state of environmental harm and degradation directly induced by humans in Section 1.2. The point of this is to demonstrate the current failings of national and international law to instigate and enforce effective measures to curb and prevent environmental harm. Doing so will set a foundation for Chapters 2 (green criminology) and 3 (earth jurisprudence) that offer particular insights and solutions into this state of affairs.

1.2. The magnitude of sustained environmental destruction across planet earth: academic and scientific evidence that the earth is changing

In 1964 the United States (US) Surgeon General produced a landmark report highlighting evidence that regularly smoking tobacco leads to a number of health problems, including lung cancers and chronic bronchitis (Alberg et al., 2014; Chassin et al., 1990). This was the result of sustained research into the effects of cigarette smoking on public health beginning in the 1940s. However, prior to World War II, there was very little concern about smoking cigarettes. In fact, smoking was (and arguably sometimes still is) advertised as a healthy lifestyle choice (see: Amos, 1996: 81). As a result, it is fair to say that the human health impacts of smoking were unknown for a considerable amount of time.

The same, however, cannot be said of human knowledge of environmental damage caused as a direct result of human acts and production processes. It is not possible to identify exactly when humans began to recognise the impact that their lifestyles were having on the natural environment. However, Samaan (2011: 261) uses the work of the early Roman author Tertullianus (writing at roughly the turn of the second century AD), who realises that:

All places are now accessible … cultivated fields have subdued forests; flocks and herds have expelled wild beasts. … Everywhere are houses, and inhabitants, and settled governments, and civilized life. What most frequently meets the view is our teeming population; our numbers are burdensome to the world … our wants grow more and more keen, and our complaints bitter in all mouths, whilst nature fails in affording us her usual sustenance.

This quote from Tertullianus shows us that the knowledge and understanding of human impacts on the environment are not necessarily a recent phenomenon. Foley and Lahr (2015: 1) also provide some important context on the sustained and long-standing human impact on the natural world when they denote that:

Humans have had a major impact on the environment. This has been particularly intense in the last millennium but has been noticeable since the development of food production and the associated higher population densities in the last 10,000 years. The use of fire and overexploitation of large mammals has also been recognized as having an effect on the world’s ecology, going back perhaps 100,000 years or more.

Despite this, it is now widely recognised that the environmental damage of the 21st century occurs at a much greater scale (in terms of the many types of environmental degradations, and the frequency and intensity of induced environmental harms) than at any point in previous human history. This state of affairs has been attributed to many things including (but not limited to) a considerable growth in the human population (Cohen, 2010); globalisation and significant advances in technology (Bu et al., 2016); the extraction and burning of natural resources (i.e. coal, oil, natural gas, timber, nuclear energy) contributing to increasing greenhouse gas emissions (Cohen, 2010); and the environmental degradation that is a necessary component to the capitalist political economy whereby mass consumption and the focus on economic growth are essential to capitalism’s success (Dauvergne and Lister, 2011; Stretesky et al., 2014).

There is a plethora of academic and scientific research dedicated to identifying anthropocentrically generated environmental harm. However, it is impossible to discuss all of this excellent work in this chapter. Instead, I will identify and discuss the significance of a few key studies that accurately depict the current state of human-induced environmental degradation. In order to do this, I will draw upon four key case study areas: the continued mass deforestation of the earth’s forests (Section 1.2.1.); the mass extinction of the earth’s ecology and non-human species (Section 1.2.2.); the use, abuse, and consumption of animals to satisfy the Western human diet (Section 1.2.3.); and the pollution of the earth’s oceans with plastics and other non-biodegradable matter (Section 1.2.4.). Doing this will enable us to see not just the extent of human impacts on the environment but the failings of governments and legal systems to adequately address these issues and protect the natural world. Doing this will highlight the importance of uniting green criminology and earth jurisprudence in the proceeding chapters of this book.

1.2.1 Mass and unrelenting global deforestation

Timber is big business. Essmann et al. (2007: 60) estimate that there are 5,000 commercial timber products ‘mainly (consisting of) construction timber, furniture, paper and firewood (that) contributes to some 2 percent of the world GDP.’ This demonstrates the extent of the connection between timber and human societies. Whilst timber is a renewable natural resource, it is slow growing. One of the fastest-growing tree species in the world (that can be used for timber extraction and production purposes) is eucalyptus (Zaiton et al., 2018). This can take just ten years to fully mature depending on the soil and climatic conditions where it is planted. As a result, there are many eucalyptus plantations in operation around the world, which account for c.1.5% of the total global forestry area (Binkley et al., 2017). Such plantations exist due to the inability of old-growth forests to fully meet the consumption needs of humans.

However, despite the implementation of domestic laws and regulations that are designed to protect old-growth forests, legal and illegal logging still exists due to its profitability (Dauvergne and Lister, 2011). This is often made easier due to the weak legal regimes and corrupt governments that exist in many parts of the world where old-growth forests reside, such as in the rainforests of the Amazon, Congo, and Southeast Asia. Within these areas, deforestation is rife.

Whilst it is important to state that humans have always had a significant impact upon forests (due to their ability to provide shelter, firewood, and other such sustenance), the rate of deforestation has increased dramatically since the mid-20th century, mirroring the rise of industrial capitalism that is visible in contemporary Western societies. According to Williams (2003: 421), ‘555 million hectares of global forestry vanished’ between 1950 and 2000, an area roughly 42 times the size of England. Similarly, Boekhout van Solinge and Kuijpers (2013: 199) denote that ‘since the 1960s, almost 20 percent of the Amazon has been deforested.’ But why is this important? If trees are renewable and can be replanted, does it matter if they are consumed from old-growth forests or new plantations?

The short answer is yes. From an ecological point of view, old-growth forests are tremendously important, as they are rich in biodiversity. The forests of the Congo basin (which constitute around 20% of the earth’s remaining tropical moist forests), for example, contain ‘70% of the total plants cover’ in the entirety of Africa, and 36% of over 1000 bird species that habitat in the Congo forests are native and endemic (Bele et al., 2014: 2). This means that if deforestation continues in the Congo, widespread species loss will ensue as the habitat that supports such an abundance of life is either abolished or fragmented. Therefore, whilst new plantations do still provide a habitat, they are significantly less rich in biodiversity. Furthermore, old-growth forests are quintessential carbon stores, sequestering carbon dioxide in return for oxygen (Raihan et al., 2019). Approximately 12% to 15% of global carbon dioxide emissions are attributed to the deforestation of old-growth forests (Van der Werf et al., 2009: 738). This is because when an old-growth tree is felled, it releases the carbon it has been storing for hundreds of years into the atmosphere.

The reasons for deforestation are many and complex but are almost always the result of human interference. For example, of the deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon, Boekhout van Solinge and Kuijpers (2013: 199) attribute more than 70% to land conversion for cattle farming and soy cultivation. Of this deforestation, 60% to 90% is illegal according to varying estimates, and while deforestation has slowed in the wake of recent environmental activism and media attention, the ‘Amazon rainforest still disappears with an average speed of more than one football pitch per minute’ (Boekhout van Solinge, 2016: 374).

1.2.2 The extinction of the earth’s ecology and non-human species

Whilst deforestation is one example of how species may become extinct as a direct consequence of human actions, there are several other reasons. These include (but are not limited to) climate change, poaching (for ivory or as a form of competition), pollution, urban development, and food consumption. In fact, rapid species extinction of the 21st century is of such concern to scientists that it has been described as the sixth mass extinction episode in the earth’s history (Ceballos et al., 2017).

However, whilst the cessation of several species of non-human animals is often envisaged as part of the current mass extinction, it also applies to plants, vegetation, and other ecologies that support fauna and humans alike. For example, Pimm and Raven (2017) suggest that 20% to 33% of known global plant species are currently at risk of extinction. The significance of the risk of extinction (and a general reduction in the availability) of plant life is of vital importance to the earth’s ability to feed and sustain non-human animals and, as such, is a vital part of the food chain. As Johnson et al. (2017: 270) reveal, ‘all species are connected to others through ecological interactions. Extinctions therefore reverberate through ecosystems, as do extirpations of local populations and declines in abundance, which are widespread even in species not close to extinction.’ As a result it is clear that species extinction of all kinds is detrimental to the earth’s ability to support life.

Another seminal example of biodiversity and species decline can be witnessed in the oceans of planet Earth. Species degeneration in such water systems again has many contributing factors including pollution; over-fishing or over-exploitation of sea animals; habitat destruction and fragmentation (either through climate change or direct human activity); and poaching (such as Japanese whale hunting or the notorious Faroese Grindadráp pilot whale poaching tradition). As a result of such human interference, the bio-diversity of the oceans is changing and becoming less organised. As Worm et al. (2006: 787) acknowledge:

Changes in marine biodiversity are directly caused by exploitation, pollution, and habitat destruction, or indirectly through climate change and related perturbations of ocean biogeochemistry. Although marine extinctions are only slowly uncovered at the global scale, regional ecosystems such as estuaries, coral reefs, and coastal and oceanic fish communities are rapidly losing populations, species, or entire functional groups.

However, whilst many factors contribute to biodiversity loss in the oceans, pollution is one major factor that is a direct consequence of human activity, symbolising anthropocentric dominance of the natural world.

1.2.3. The pollution of water systems with plastics and nonbiodegradable matter

The oceans are becoming more and more polluted with plastics and other non-biodegradable matter due to the increase in consumption of plastics globally. Western nations in particular have been criticised f...

Índice

• Cover
• Half Title
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Dedication Page
• Contents
• List of tables
• Foreword
• Acknowledgements
• List of abbreviations
• 1 Introduction to issues of global environmental harm
• 2 Historical and theoretical foundations of a ‘green’ criminology
• 3 Historical and theoretical foundations of an earth jurisprudence
• 4 Uniting green criminology and earth jurisprudence
• 5 Earth jurisprudence in practice: success stories
• 6 Concluding thoughts
• References
• Index