The Natural Resource Crime Lexicon: Parlance, Proxies, and Polemic

Friedo Herbig

doi:doi:10.11648/j.ijls.20220502.21

| Peer-Reviewed

The Natural Resource Crime Lexicon: Parlance, Proxies, and Polemic

Friedo Herbig

Published in International Journal of Law and Society (Volume 5, Issue 2)

Received: 26 May 2022 Accepted: 22 June 2022 Published: 27 June 2022

Views: Downloads:

Download PDF

Share This Article

Twitter
Linked In
Facebook

Abstract

During the last two decades, much has been probed and recorded in the historically discounted realm of natural resource crime and criminality. By and large, it appears that criminological intellectuals acquiesce that crime in this sphere of activity necessitates robust research intervention, and that it be accorded a status equal to that of other more traditional and pejorative crimes, so prevalent in society today. Although accord in this respect may be viewed as accomplished, there remains a nuanced and yet unsettled friction amongst scholars regarding the most astute and ethical terminology to embody and develop this form of crime and its future trajectory. At its heart, lies the argument that poly-discursive rhetoric and lexes cannot be used to justify hegemony over already embedded terms and/or doctrine. Little purchase can be seen in referring to crime in the natural resource ambit by multivalent and/or overbreadth terms. Doing so, subsidizes the myth of an international tolerance thereof crafted purely by the whims of certain authors in the face of an ostensibly weakening role of erstwhile and/or more logical (historiographical) associations. As with many other disciplines, tethering points related to criminal justice are contingent on intelligent interpretation of earlier times for signboards and runes mapping the future. Terms, and by implication, research rigor, are profoundly reliant on the context and explanations provided by raconteurs and erstwhile interlocutors. This evaluation formulates an argument for the abrogation of factionized, ambiguous and confusing natural resource crime nomenclature and the ensconcing of a single fit-for-purpose lexicon, namely conservation crime/criminology, to address issues of natural resource trauma primarily, as well its interface with the social environment as an ancillary, but proportionately significant dimension.

Published in	International Journal of Law and Society (Volume 5, Issue 2)
DOI	10.11648/j.ijls.20220502.21
Page(s)	226-241
Creative Commons	This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright	Copyright © The Author(s), 2022. Published by Science Publishing Group

Keywords

Conservation Crime/Criminology, Environmental Crime/Criminology, Proxies, Lexicon, Natural Resources, Semantical/Sociolinguistic Drivers

References

[1]	Herbig, F. J. W. (2011). Informant application in South African conservation crime management: criminological affordances. Acta Criminologica Southern African Journal of Criminology, 24 (3): 98-113.
[2]	Moreto, W., & Pires, S. F. (2018). Wildlife Crime: An Environmental Criminology and Crime Science Perspective. Durham, Carolina Academic press.
[3]	Halsey, M. (2006). Deleuze and environmental damage. Violence of the text. England: Ashgate.
[4]	Herbig, F., & Joubert, S. (2006). Conservation crime semantics: Vision or vagary? Acta Criminologica: Southern African Journal of Criminology, 19 (3): 87–101.
[5]	Gibbs, C., & Boratto, R. (2017). Environmental Crime. Available at: https://oxfordre.com/criminology/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780190264079.001.0001/acrefore-9780190264079-e-269, accessed on 10 April, 2021.
[6]	White, R. D. (2008). Crimes against nature: Environmental criminology and ecological justice. Portland, OR: Willan Publishing.
[7]	Kripke, S. A. (2001). Naming and necessity. Twelfth printing. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
[8]	Burke, R. H. (2009). An introduction to criminological theory (Third edition). Portland Oregon: Willan.
[9]	Glass, D & Herbig, F. J. W. (2021). Mapping Matters: geoprofiling in South African serial rape investigation. Crime, Law & Social Change [Published online: 8 January 2021]. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10611-020-09926-x, accessed on 10 March, 2021.
[10]	South, N. (1998). A green field for criminology? A proposal for a perspective. Theoretical Criminology, 2 (2): 211-233.
[11]	Tabangin, D. R., Flores, J. C., & Emperador, N. F. (2008). Investigating Crime Hotspot Places and their Implication to Urban Environmental Design: A Geographic Visualization and Data Mining Approach. International Journal of Computer, Electrical, Automation, Control and Information Engineering, Volume 2: 154.
[12]	Wortley, R. K. & Mazerolle, L. G. (2011). Environmental criminology and crime analysis. Oxon: Routledge.
[13]	Verma, A. & Lodha, S. K. (2002). A typological representation of the criminal event. Western Criminology Review, 3 (2): 37-48.
[14]	Herbig, F. J. W. & Warchol, G. (2011). South African conservation crime and Routine Activities theory: A causal nexus? Acta Criminologica Southern African Journal of Criminology, 24 (2): 1-16.
[15]	Burke, R. H. (2014). An introduction to criminological theory (Fourth edition). Oxon: Routledge.
[16]	Wang, F. (2005). Geographic information systems and crime analysis. Hershey, PA: Idea Group Pub.
[17]	Cohen, L. & Felson, M. (1979). Social change and crime rate trends: a routine activities approach. American Sociological Review, 44: 588-608.
[18]	Rossmo, D. K. (1995). Place, space and police investigations: hunting serial violent criminals. In JE. Eck & DL. Weisburd (Eds). Crime and place: crime prevention studies, 4: 217-235.
[19]	Brantingham, P. J. & Brantingham, P. L. (1998). Environmental criminology: from theory to urban planning practice. Studies on crime and crime prevention, 7 (1): 31-60.
[20]	Wartell, J. & Gallagher, K. (2012). Translating environmental criminology theory into crime analysis practice. Policing, 6 (4): 377-387.
[21]	Wellsmith, M. (2011). Wildlife crime: the problems of enforcement. European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research, 17 (2): 125-148.
[22]	Bricknell, S. (2010), Environmental Crime in Australia, AIC Research and Public Policy Series 109, Australian Institute of Criminology.
[23]	Brisman, A. & South, N. (2013). A green-cultural criminology: An exploratory outline. Crime, Media, Culture: An International Journal, 9 (2): 115-135.
[24]	White, R. D. (2007). Green criminology and the pursuit of social and ecological justice. In P. Beirne & N. South (eds), Issues in green criminology. Cullompton, Devon, UK: Willan.
[25]	Herbig, F. J. W. (2008). Conservation crime: South African concerns and considerations from a criminological perspective. Acta Criminologica Southern African Journal of Criminology, 21 (3): 52-64.
[26]	Halsey, M. (2004). Against Green Criminology. British Journal of Criminology, 44 (6): 833-853.
[27]	South, N. (2014). Green Criminology: Reflections, Connections, Horizons. International Journal for Crime Justice and Social Democracy, 3 (2): 5-20.
[28]	Lynch, M. (2019). Green Criminology and Environmental Crime: Criminology That Matters in the Age of Global Ecological Collapse. Journal of White-Collar and Corporate Crime, 1 (1): 50-61.
[29]	Goyes, D. R. (2016). Green Activist Criminology and the Epistemologies of the South. Critical Criminology, 24 (3): 503-518.
[30]	Goyes, D. R. (2017). Green Criminology Before ‘Green Criminology’: Amnesia and Absences. Critical Criminology, 25 (1): 165-181.
[31]	Goyes, D. R. (2018). Green Criminology as Decolonial Tool: A Stereoscope of Environmental Harm. In: Carrington, K., Hogg, R., Scott, J. & Sozzo, M. The Palgrave Handbook of Criminology and the Global South. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
[32]	Goyes, D. R. (2019). Southern Green Criminology: A Science to End Ecological Discrimination. England, Emerald Publishing.
[33]	Sollund, R. (2015). ‘Introduction: Critical green criminology – An agenda for change’, In: R. Sollund (ed), Green Harms and Crime: Critical Criminology in a Changing World. London: Macmillan.
[34]	Sollund, R. (2016). Doing Green Critical Criminology with an Auto-Ethnographic, Feminist Approach. Critical Criminology, 25: 245-260.
[35]	Brisman, A. (2014). Of Theory and Meaning in Green Criminology. International Journal for Crime, Justice and Social Democracy, 3 (2): 21-34.
[36]	Lynch, M. J., & Stretesky, P. (2013). Green Criminology in the United States, In, Issues in Green Criminology. Cullompton: Willan Publishing: 270-291.
[37]	Stretesky, P. B., Long, M. A. & Lynch, M. J. (2013). The treadmill of crime: Political economy and green criminology. London: Routledge.
[38]	Lynch, M. (2013). Reflections on green criminology and its boundaries. In: South, N., & Brisman, A. (eds.). Routledge International Handbook of Green Criminology. Abingdon, Routledge, 43-47.
[39]	Lynch, M., & Stretesky, P. B. (2003). The Meaning of Green: Contrasting Criminological Perspectives. Theoretical Criminology, 7 (2): 217 - 238.
[40]	Barret, K. L., Lynch, M. J. & Stretesky, P. B. (2016). Green criminology and the reconceptualization of school violence: Comparing green school violence and traditional forms of school violence for school children. Critical Criminology, 24 (1): 19-37.
[41]	Lynch, M., & Stretesky, P. B. (2014). Exploring green criminology: Toward a green revolution in criminology. Surrey, Ashgate.
[42]	Beirne, P. & South, N. (2007). Issues in Green Criminology: Confronting Harms Against Environments, Humanity and Other Animals. Collumpton, Devon: Willan.
[43]	Beirne, P. & South, N. (2007). Approaching green criminology. In: Beirne, P. and South, N. (eds.). Issues in green criminology, (pp. xiii-xxii). Portland, OR: Willan.
[44]	Eman, K., Mesko, G. & Fields, C. B. (2009). Crimes against the environment: green criminology and research challenges in Slovenia. Journal of Criminal Justice and Security 11 (4): 574-592.
[45]	Anh, C. N. & Wyatt, T. (2013). A Green Criminological Exploration of Illegal Wildlife Trade in Vietnam. Asian journal of Criminology, 8 (2): 129-142.
[46]	White, R. (2014). Green Criminology. In: Bruinsma, G, and Weisburd, D. (eds.). Encyclopedia of Criminology and Criminal Justice. New York, NY: Springer.
[47]	Johnson, H., South, N. & Walters, R. (2016). The commodification and exploitation of fresh water: Property, human rights and green criminology. International Journal Law, Crime and Justice, 44 (2): 146-162.
[48]	Nurse, A. (2016). An Introduction to Green Criminology and Environmental Justice: London: Sage.
[49]	Lynch, M. J., Barrett, K. L., Stretesky, P. B., & Long, M. A. (2017), The neglect of quantitative research in green criminology and its consequences, Critical Criminology, 25, 183–198.
[50]	Boekhout van Solinge, T. (2020). The Amazon Rainforest: A green criminological perspective. London: Routledge.
[51]	Spapens, T., White, R. & Huisman, W (2018). Environmental crime in a transnational context: Global issues in green enforcement and criminology. Abingdon: Routledge.
[52]	Mol, H. (2016). Green Criminology and (Constructions of) Environmental Crime and Harm: A Review Essay. Critical Criminology 24: 145-150.
[53]	Spapens, T., White, R., Van Uhm, D., & Huisman, W. (2020). Green Crimes and Dirty Money. London: Routledge.
[54]	Heyes, A. & King, B. (2018). Understanding the Organization of Green Activism: Sociological and Economic Perspectives. Organization & Environment, 33 (1): 7-30.
[55]	White, R., & Heckenberg, D. (2014). An introduction to the study of environmental harm. New York: Routledge.
[56]	Eman, K., Mesko, G., Dobovsek, B. & Sotlar, A. (2013). Environmental crime and green criminology in South Eastern Europe - practice and research. Crime, Law and Social Change, 59 (1): 341-358.
[57]	Agnew, R. (1998). The causes of animal abuse: A Social-Psychological Analysis. Theoretical Criminology, 2 (2): 177-209.
[58]	Swanepoel, G. (1997). The illegal trade in rhino horn as an example of trade in an endangered species. Acta Criminologica: Southern African Journal of Criminology, 10 (2): 47-57.
[59]	Hessick, C. B. (2016). Vagueness Principles. Arizona State Law Journal, 48 (2): 1137-1168.
[60]	Boekhout van Solinge, T. (2008). Eco-Crime: The Tropical Timber Trade. In: Siegel, D. & Nelen, H. (eds.). Organized Crime: Culture, Markets and Policies. Studies in Organized Crime, Vol. 7. New York, NY: Springer.
[61]	Halsey, M. & White, R. (1998). Crime, Ecophilosophy and Environmental Harm. Theoretical Criminology, 2 (3): 345-371.
[62]	Walters, R. (2010). Eco-crime and air pollution. In: Brookman, F., Maguire, M., Pierpoint, H. & Bennett, T. (eds.). Handbook on Crime. London: Willan.
[63]	White, R. (2011). Transnational Environmental Crime: Toward an Eco-Global Criminology. London: Willan.
[64]	Brantingham, P. J. & Brantingham, P. L. (1981). Introduction: The Dimensions of Crime, in Environmental Criminology, Beverly Hills: Sage.
[65]	Van Heerden, T. J. (1988). Introduction to Police Science. Pretoria: UNISA.
[66]	Williams, F. & McShane, M. (2010). Criminological theory (5th edition). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
[67]	Aas, K. F. (2013). Globalization and crime (Second edition). Los Angeles: Sage.
[68]	Sollund, R. (2020). Wildlife Crime: A Crime of Hegemonic Masculinity? Social Sciences: 9 (6), 93.
[69]	Sollund, R. A. & Runhovde, S. R. (2020). Responses to Wildlife Crime in Post-Colonial Times: Who Fares Best? British Journal of Criminology, 60 (4): 1014-1032.
[70]	Burton, C., Devin, C. & Moreto, W. (2020). Wildlife Crime. In: Brisman, A. & South, N. (eds.). Routledge International handbook of Green Criminology. Abingdon: Routledge.
[71]	Nurse, A. (2015). Policing Wildlife. Perspectives on the Enforcement of Wildlife Legislation. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
[72]	Van Uhm, D. (2016). The Illegal Wildlife Trade. Inside the World of Poachers, Smugglers and Traders. New York, NY: Springer.
[73]	Stretesky, P. B. & McGarell, E. F. (2012). Wildlife crime and enforcement. International Journal of Comparative and Applied Criminal Justice, 36 (2): 81-82.
[74]	Wellsmith, M. (2010). The applicability of crime prevention to problems of environmental harm: a consideration of illicit trade in endangered species. In Global environmental harm. Criminological perspectives, edited by R D. White. Cullompton: Willan Publishing.
[75]	Mailley, J. & Clarke R. V. (2008). Environmental Criminology and Wildlife Crime. Environmental Criminology and Crime Analysis (ECCA) Symposium, Izmir, Turkey.
[76]	Zaitch, D., Boekhout van Solinge, T. & Muller, G. (2014). Harms, crimes and natural resource exploitation: A green criminological and human rights perspective on land-use change. In: Bavinck, M., Pellegrini, L. & Mostert, E. (eds.) Conflicts over Natural resources in the Global South. London: CRC Press.
[77]	South, N. (2007). The corporate colonization of nature: Bio-prospecting, biopiracy and the development of green criminology. In: Beirne, P. & South, N. (eds). Issues in Green Criminology: Confronting Harms against Environments, Humanity and Other Animals. Collumpton: Willan.
[78]	Wilson, L. & Boratto, R. (2020). Conservation, wildlife crime, and tough-on-crime policies: Lessons from the criminological literature. Biological Conservation, 25 (1): 87-103.
[79]	Van Uhm, D. & Zaitch, D. (2021). Defaunation, wildlife exploitation and zoonotic diseases – A green criminological perspective. Revue Internationale de Droit Pénal, 87 (1): 323-340.
[80]	Carrabine, E., Cox, P., Fussey, P., Hobbs, D., South, N., Thiel, D., & Turton, J. (2014). Criminology. A sociological introduction. (3^rd edition). New York, Routledge.
[81]	Duffy, R. (2010). Nature Crime: How We're Getting Conservation Wrong. Great Britain: TJ International Ltd.
[82]	Stanley, J. & Hylands, P. (2022). Hunting Crimes. Rurality, Crime and Society, 3 (1): 15-21.
[83]	United Nations Interregional Crime and Justice Research Institute (UNICRI). (2019). Available at: http://www.unicri.us/topics/environmental/, accessed 25 March 2021.
[84]	Gibbs, C., Gore, M. L., McGarell, E. F., & Rivers, L., III. (2009). Introducing conservation criminology: Towards interdisciplinary scholarship on environmental crimes and risks. British Journal of Criminology, 50 (1): 124–144.
[85]	Gore, M. L. (2017). Conservation Criminology. Sussex, Wiley Blackwell.
[86]	Eman, K., Mesko, G., Dobovsek, B., & Sotlar, A. (2013). Environmental crime and green criminology in South Eastern Europe—practice and research. Crime, Law and Social Change 95 (3).
[87]	Moeletsi, L. (2009). Conservation criminality and victimisation: a literature study. Acta Criminologica (Special conference edition), No. 2: 42-56.
[88]	Collins Concise Dictionary. (2001). Fifth edition. Glasgow: Harper Collins Publishers.
[89]	Sockness, B. W. (2003}. The Forgotten Moralist: Friedrich Schleiermacher and the Science of Spirit. The Harvard Theological Review, 96 (3): 317-348). Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/4151874, accessed on 12 March 2021.
[90]	Blum, S. D. (2007). Lies that Bind: Chinese Truth, Other Truths. New York: Rownan & Littlefield, p 159-172.
[91]	Deleuze, G. (1990). The logic of sense. New York: Columbia University Press.
[92]	Kahn, P. H., Weiss, T. (2017). The importance of children interacting with big nature. Children, Youth, and Environments, 27: 7–24.
[93]	Levin, P. S., Gray, S. A., Mollman, C. & Stier, A. C. (2021). Perception and Conflict in Conservation: The Rashomon Effect. BioScience, 71 (1): 64–72.
[94]	Barnett, J. (2000). Destabilizing the environment: Conflict thesis. Review of International Studies, 26: 271-288.
[95]	Redpath, S. M, Young, J., Evely, A., Adams, W. M., Sutherland, W. J., Whitehouse, S., Amar, A., Lambert, R. A., Linnell., D. C., Watt, A., & Gutierrez, R. J. (2013). Understanding and managing conservation conflicts. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 28: 100–109.
[96]	Zajonc, R. B. (1968). Attitudinal effects of mere exposure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology Monographs, 9 (2): 1-27.
[97]	Coutinho, M. V. C., Thomas, J., Alsuwaidi, A. S. M., & Couchman, J. J. (2021). Dunning-Kruger Effect: Intuitive Errors Predict Overconfidence on the Cognitive Reflection Test. Available at: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.603225/full, accessed on 20 February, 2022.
[98]	Berthet, V. (2022). The Impact of Cognitive Biases on Professionals’ Decision-Making: A Review of Four Occupational Areas, Available at: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.802439/full, accessed on 20 April, 2022).
[99]	Lieder, F., Griffiths, T. L., Huys, Q. J. M., & Goodman, N. D. (2018). The anchoring bias reflects rational use of cognitive resources. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 25: 322-349.
[100]	Nickerson, R. S. (1998). Confirmation Bias: A Ubiquitous Phenomenon in Many Guises. Review of General Psychology, 2 (2): 175-220, available at: https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2680.2.2.175, accessed on 17 November 2020.
[101]	Bacon, F. (1620). Novum Organum. Reprinted in Burtt, E. A. (ed). The English Philosophers from Bacon to Mill, New York, Random House, p 36.
[102]	Jahn, G. R. (1975). The Aesthetic Theory of Leo Tolstoy's What Is Art? The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 34 (1): 59-65, available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/428645, accessed on 18 March 2021.
[103]	Schopenhauer, A. (2011) [1844] Carus, D. & Aquilla, R. E. (eds). The World as Will and Presentation, 2, New York: Routledge, 246.
[104]	Lewandowsky, S., Ecker, U. K. H., Seifert, C. M., Schwarz, N., & Cook, J. (2012). Misinformation and Its Correction: Continued Influence and Successful Debiasing. Available at: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1529100612451018, accessed on 10 February, 2022.
[105]	The Backfire Effect: Why Facts Don’t Always Change Minds. (2020). Available at: https://effectiviology.com/backfire-effect-facts-dont-change-minds/, accessed on 22 February, 2021.
[106]	Roberts, W. R. (1924). Rhetoric, by Aristotle 350 B. C. E. Kindle e-Book. www.amazon.com/KindleeBooks/b?node=154606011, accessed on 12 December 2020.
[107]	Legal Information Institute (LII). (2019). Clarity in Criminal Statutes: The Void-for-Vagueness Doctrine. Available at: https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution-conan/amendment-14/section-1/clarity-in-criminal-statutes-the-void-for-vagueness-doctrine, accessed on 27 February 2021.
[108]	Strathern, P. (2012). Socrates. Philosophy in an hour. London: Harper Collins Press.

Cite This Article

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Friedo Herbig. (2022). The Natural Resource Crime Lexicon: Parlance, Proxies, and Polemic. International Journal of Law and Society, 5(2), 226-241. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijls.20220502.21

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Friedo Herbig. The Natural Resource Crime Lexicon: Parlance, Proxies, and Polemic. Int. J. Law Soc. 2022, 5(2), 226-241. doi: 10.11648/j.ijls.20220502.21

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Friedo Herbig. The Natural Resource Crime Lexicon: Parlance, Proxies, and Polemic. Int J Law Soc. 2022;5(2):226-241. doi: 10.11648/j.ijls.20220502.21

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.ijls.20220502.21,
  author = {Friedo Herbig},
  title = {The Natural Resource Crime Lexicon: Parlance, Proxies, and Polemic},
  journal = {International Journal of Law and Society},
  volume = {5},
  number = {2},
  pages = {226-241},
  doi = {10.11648/j.ijls.20220502.21},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijls.20220502.21},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ijls.20220502.21},
  abstract = {During the last two decades, much has been probed and recorded in the historically discounted realm of natural resource crime and criminality. By and large, it appears that criminological intellectuals acquiesce that crime in this sphere of activity necessitates robust research intervention, and that it be accorded a status equal to that of other more traditional and pejorative crimes, so prevalent in society today. Although accord in this respect may be viewed as accomplished, there remains a nuanced and yet unsettled friction amongst scholars regarding the most astute and ethical terminology to embody and develop this form of crime and its future trajectory. At its heart, lies the argument that poly-discursive rhetoric and lexes cannot be used to justify hegemony over already embedded terms and/or doctrine. Little purchase can be seen in referring to crime in the natural resource ambit by multivalent and/or overbreadth terms. Doing so, subsidizes the myth of an international tolerance thereof crafted purely by the whims of certain authors in the face of an ostensibly weakening role of erstwhile and/or more logical (historiographical) associations. As with many other disciplines, tethering points related to criminal justice are contingent on intelligent interpretation of earlier times for signboards and runes mapping the future. Terms, and by implication, research rigor, are profoundly reliant on the context and explanations provided by raconteurs and erstwhile interlocutors. This evaluation formulates an argument for the abrogation of factionized, ambiguous and confusing natural resource crime nomenclature and the ensconcing of a single fit-for-purpose lexicon, namely conservation crime/criminology, to address issues of natural resource trauma primarily, as well its interface with the social environment as an ancillary, but proportionately significant dimension.},
 year = {2022}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - The Natural Resource Crime Lexicon: Parlance, Proxies, and Polemic
AU  - Friedo Herbig
Y1  - 2022/06/27
PY  - 2022
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijls.20220502.21
DO  - 10.11648/j.ijls.20220502.21
T2  - International Journal of Law and Society
JF  - International Journal of Law and Society
JO  - International Journal of Law and Society
SP  - 226
EP  - 241
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2640-1908
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijls.20220502.21
AB  - During the last two decades, much has been probed and recorded in the historically discounted realm of natural resource crime and criminality. By and large, it appears that criminological intellectuals acquiesce that crime in this sphere of activity necessitates robust research intervention, and that it be accorded a status equal to that of other more traditional and pejorative crimes, so prevalent in society today. Although accord in this respect may be viewed as accomplished, there remains a nuanced and yet unsettled friction amongst scholars regarding the most astute and ethical terminology to embody and develop this form of crime and its future trajectory. At its heart, lies the argument that poly-discursive rhetoric and lexes cannot be used to justify hegemony over already embedded terms and/or doctrine. Little purchase can be seen in referring to crime in the natural resource ambit by multivalent and/or overbreadth terms. Doing so, subsidizes the myth of an international tolerance thereof crafted purely by the whims of certain authors in the face of an ostensibly weakening role of erstwhile and/or more logical (historiographical) associations. As with many other disciplines, tethering points related to criminal justice are contingent on intelligent interpretation of earlier times for signboards and runes mapping the future. Terms, and by implication, research rigor, are profoundly reliant on the context and explanations provided by raconteurs and erstwhile interlocutors. This evaluation formulates an argument for the abrogation of factionized, ambiguous and confusing natural resource crime nomenclature and the ensconcing of a single fit-for-purpose lexicon, namely conservation crime/criminology, to address issues of natural resource trauma primarily, as well its interface with the social environment as an ancillary, but proportionately significant dimension.
VL  - 5
IS  - 2
ER  -

Copy | Download

Author Information

Friedo Herbig

Department of Criminology & Security Science, School of Criminal Justice, College of Law, University of South Africa (UNISA), Pretoria, South Africa

Download PDF

Sections

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Friedo Herbig. (2022). The Natural Resource Crime Lexicon: Parlance, Proxies, and Polemic. International Journal of Law and Society, 5(2), 226-241. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijls.20220502.21

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Friedo Herbig. The Natural Resource Crime Lexicon: Parlance, Proxies, and Polemic. Int. J. Law Soc. 2022, 5(2), 226-241. doi: 10.11648/j.ijls.20220502.21

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Friedo Herbig. The Natural Resource Crime Lexicon: Parlance, Proxies, and Polemic. Int J Law Soc. 2022;5(2):226-241. doi: 10.11648/j.ijls.20220502.21

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.ijls.20220502.21,
  author = {Friedo Herbig},
  title = {The Natural Resource Crime Lexicon: Parlance, Proxies, and Polemic},
  journal = {International Journal of Law and Society},
  volume = {5},
  number = {2},
  pages = {226-241},
  doi = {10.11648/j.ijls.20220502.21},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijls.20220502.21},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ijls.20220502.21},
  abstract = {During the last two decades, much has been probed and recorded in the historically discounted realm of natural resource crime and criminality. By and large, it appears that criminological intellectuals acquiesce that crime in this sphere of activity necessitates robust research intervention, and that it be accorded a status equal to that of other more traditional and pejorative crimes, so prevalent in society today. Although accord in this respect may be viewed as accomplished, there remains a nuanced and yet unsettled friction amongst scholars regarding the most astute and ethical terminology to embody and develop this form of crime and its future trajectory. At its heart, lies the argument that poly-discursive rhetoric and lexes cannot be used to justify hegemony over already embedded terms and/or doctrine. Little purchase can be seen in referring to crime in the natural resource ambit by multivalent and/or overbreadth terms. Doing so, subsidizes the myth of an international tolerance thereof crafted purely by the whims of certain authors in the face of an ostensibly weakening role of erstwhile and/or more logical (historiographical) associations. As with many other disciplines, tethering points related to criminal justice are contingent on intelligent interpretation of earlier times for signboards and runes mapping the future. Terms, and by implication, research rigor, are profoundly reliant on the context and explanations provided by raconteurs and erstwhile interlocutors. This evaluation formulates an argument for the abrogation of factionized, ambiguous and confusing natural resource crime nomenclature and the ensconcing of a single fit-for-purpose lexicon, namely conservation crime/criminology, to address issues of natural resource trauma primarily, as well its interface with the social environment as an ancillary, but proportionately significant dimension.},
 year = {2022}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - The Natural Resource Crime Lexicon: Parlance, Proxies, and Polemic
AU  - Friedo Herbig
Y1  - 2022/06/27
PY  - 2022
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijls.20220502.21
DO  - 10.11648/j.ijls.20220502.21
T2  - International Journal of Law and Society
JF  - International Journal of Law and Society
JO  - International Journal of Law and Society
SP  - 226
EP  - 241
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2640-1908
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijls.20220502.21
AB  - During the last two decades, much has been probed and recorded in the historically discounted realm of natural resource crime and criminality. By and large, it appears that criminological intellectuals acquiesce that crime in this sphere of activity necessitates robust research intervention, and that it be accorded a status equal to that of other more traditional and pejorative crimes, so prevalent in society today. Although accord in this respect may be viewed as accomplished, there remains a nuanced and yet unsettled friction amongst scholars regarding the most astute and ethical terminology to embody and develop this form of crime and its future trajectory. At its heart, lies the argument that poly-discursive rhetoric and lexes cannot be used to justify hegemony over already embedded terms and/or doctrine. Little purchase can be seen in referring to crime in the natural resource ambit by multivalent and/or overbreadth terms. Doing so, subsidizes the myth of an international tolerance thereof crafted purely by the whims of certain authors in the face of an ostensibly weakening role of erstwhile and/or more logical (historiographical) associations. As with many other disciplines, tethering points related to criminal justice are contingent on intelligent interpretation of earlier times for signboards and runes mapping the future. Terms, and by implication, research rigor, are profoundly reliant on the context and explanations provided by raconteurs and erstwhile interlocutors. This evaluation formulates an argument for the abrogation of factionized, ambiguous and confusing natural resource crime nomenclature and the ensconcing of a single fit-for-purpose lexicon, namely conservation crime/criminology, to address issues of natural resource trauma primarily, as well its interface with the social environment as an ancillary, but proportionately significant dimension.
VL  - 5
IS  - 2
ER  -

Copy | Download