European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research

, Volume 20, Issue 4, pp 503–515 | Cite as

Conditions for Guilt-Free Consumption in a Transnational Criminal Market

  • Simon MackenzieEmail author


It has been widely opined in discussions around a number of transnational criminal markets that where a global economic supply and demand relationship exists, demand reduction by way of consumer education and ‘awareness-raising’ may be an effective intervention in reducing illicit trade. It seems an obvious and sensible suggestion on the face of it, but just how amenable are consumers to being educated away from purchasing illicitly obtained and trafficked goods, and what are the barriers that stand in the way of that process of demand reduction through awareness-raising? This paper approaches these questions by asking what are the conditions for guilt-free consumption in the international trade in illicit cultural objects. The paper identifies seven such conditions, and concludes that in this global market we are witnessing the playing out of a common social story in which a powerful group of market capitalists and end-consumers employs a range of sociologically developed linguistic and performative strategies to obfuscate or legitimise their exploitation of a group of less powerful victims. If that is the context for the so-called debate about illicit antiquities, crime-reduction strategies involving consumer education seem considerably more difficult to achieve than has been widely recognised in policy discussions on transnational crime.


Awareness raising Consumer education Crime reduction Illicit antiquities International criminal markets Qualitative criminology Techniques of neutralisation Trafficking cultural property Transnational crime 



The research leading to these results has received funding from the European Research Council under the European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007-2013) / ERC Grant agreement n° 283873 GTICO.


  1. Alder, C., Chappell, D., & Polk, K. (2009). Perspectives on the Organisation and Control of the Illicit Traffic in Antiquities in South East Asia. In S. Manacorda (Ed.), Organised Crime in Art and Antiquities (pp. 119–144). Milan: International Scientific and Professional Advisory Council of the UN Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice Programme.Google Scholar
  2. Bakan, J. (2004). The Corporation: the Pathological Pursuit of Profit and Power. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  3. Becker, H. S. (1963). Outsiders: Studies in the Sociology of Deviance. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  4. Bourdieu, P. (1996). On Television and Journalism, tr. P. Parkhurst Ferguson. London: Pluto Press.Google Scholar
  5. Braithwaite, J. (1984). Corporate Crime in the Pharmaceutical Industry. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  6. Brodie, N. and Bowman Proulx, B. (forthcoming) ‘Museum Malpractice as Corporate Crime? The Case of the J. Paul Getty Museum’, Journal of Crime and Justice.Google Scholar
  7. Brodie, N., Doole, J., & Renfrew, C. (Eds.). (2001). Trade in Illicit Antiquities: the Destruction of the World’s Archaeological Heritage. Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research.Google Scholar
  8. Brodie, N., Doole, J., & Watson, P. (2000). Stealing History: the Illicit Trade in Cultural Material. Cambridge: The McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research.Google Scholar
  9. Coggins, C. (1969) ‘Illicit Traffic of Pre-Columbian Antiquities’, Art Journal, Fall: 94-8.Google Scholar
  10. Cohen, N. (2004). Pretty Straight Guys. London: Faber and Faber.Google Scholar
  11. Cohen, S. (2001). States of Denial: Knowing about Atrocities and Suffering. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
  12. Cuno, J. (2008). Who Owns Antiquity? Museums and the Battle Over Our Ancient Heritage. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Duster, T. (1971). Conditions for Guilt-Free Massacre. In N. Sanford & C. Comstock (Eds.), Sanctions for Evil. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, Inc.Google Scholar
  14. Ede, J. (1998). Ethics, the Antiquities Trade, and Archaeology. International Journal of Cultural Property, 7(1), 128–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Elia, R.J. (1994) ‘The World Cannot Afford Many More Collectors with a Passion for Antiquities’, The Art Newspaper, 41(October): 19.Google Scholar
  16. Felch, J., & Frammolino, R. (2011). Chasing Aphrodite: the Hunt for Looted Antiquities at the World’s Richest Museum. Boston/New York: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.Google Scholar
  17. Fitz Gibbon, K. (ed) (2005) Who Owns the Past? Cultural Policy, Cultural Property, and the Law. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Garfinkel, H. (1956). Conditions of Successful Status Degradation Ceremonies. American Journal of Sociology, 6, 420–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gerstenblith, P. (2002) ‘United States v. Schultz’, Culture Without Context: the Newsletter of the Illicit Antiquities Research Centre, University of Cambridge, 10(Spring).Google Scholar
  20. Gerstenblith, P. (2003) ‘The McClain/Schultz Doctrine: Another Step Against Trade in Stolen Antiquities’, Culture Without Context: the Newsletter of the Illicit Antiquities Research Centre, University of Cambridge, 13(Autumn).Google Scholar
  21. Gerstenblith, P. (2007). Controlling the International Market in Antiquities: Reducing the Harm, Preserving the Past. Chicago Journal of International Law, 8(1), 167–195.Google Scholar
  22. Gerstenblith, P. (2009) ‘Schultz and Barakat: Universal Recognition of National Ownership of Antiquities’, Art, Antiquity and Law, 14(1).Google Scholar
  23. Hawkins, A., Rothman, R. A., & Goldstein, D. B. (1995). A Tale of Two Innocents: Creating an Equitable Balance Between the Rights of Former Owners and Good Faith Purchasers of Stolen Art. Fordham Law Review, 64(1), 49–96.Google Scholar
  24. Home Office and Scottish Government. (2008). Update to the UK Action Plan on Tackling Human Trafficking. London: Home Office.Google Scholar
  25. Mackenzie, S. (2005). Going, Going, Gone: Regulating the Market in Illicit Antiquities. Leicester: Institute of Art and Law.Google Scholar
  26. Mackenzie, S. (2011). Illicit Deals in Cultural Objects as Crimes of the Powerful. Crime, Law and Social Change, 56, 133–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Mackenzie, S., & Green, P. (2009). Criminalising the Market in Illicit Antiquities: an Evaluation of the Dealing in Cultural Objects (Offences) Act 2003 in England and Wales. In S. Mackenzie & P. Green (Eds.), Criminology and Archaeology: Studies in Looted Antiquities. Oxford: Hart.Google Scholar
  28. Marks, P. (1998). The Ethics of Art Dealing. International Journal of Cultural Property, 7(1), 116–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. McSweeney, T., Turnbull, P., & Hough, M. (2008). Tackling Drug Markets and Distribution Networks in the UK: a Review of the Recent Literature. London: UK Drug Policy Commission.Google Scholar
  30. Merryman, J. H. (1986). Two Ways of Thinking about Cultural Property. American Journal of International Law, 80, 831.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Murphy, J. D. (1995). Plunder and Preservation: Cultural Property Law and Practice in the People’s Republic of China. Hong Kong: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  32. Ngoc, A. C., & Wyatt, T. (2013). A Green Criminological Exploration of Illegal Wildlife Trade in Vietnam. Asian Criminology, 8, 129–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Palmer, N., Addyman, P., Anderson, R., Browne, A., Somers Cocks, A., Davies, M., et al. (2000). ‘Ministerial Advisory Panel on Illicit Trade’, December 2000. London: Department for Culture, Media and Sport.Google Scholar
  34. Pearlstein, W. G. (1996). Claims for the Repatriation of Cultural Property: Prospects for a Managed Antiquities Market. Georgetown Journal of Law and Policy in International Business, 28(1), 123–150.Google Scholar
  35. Polk, K. (2000) ‘The Antiquities Trade Viewed as a Criminal Market’, Hong Kong Lawyer, September: 82-92.Google Scholar
  36. Redmond-Cooper, R. (2000). Limitation of Actions in Art and Antiquity Claims: Part II. Art Antiquity and Law, 5(2), 185–206.Google Scholar
  37. Renfrew, C. (1999). Loot, Legitimacy and Ownership: the Ethical Crisis in Archaeology. Amsterdam: Joh. Enschede.Google Scholar
  38. Schneider, J. L. (2008). Reducing the Illicit Trade in Endangered Wildlife: the Market Reduction Approach. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 24(3), 274–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Siegel, D. (2009). The Mazzel Ritual: Culture, Customs and Crime in the Diamond Trade. Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Sutherland, E. H., & Cressey, D. R. (1978). Criminology. Philadelphia: Lippincott.Google Scholar
  41. Tailby, R. (2002). ‘The Illicit Market in Diamonds’, Trends & Issues in Crime and Criminal Justice No 218, January 2002. Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology.Google Scholar
  42. Taussig, M. (1999). Defacement: Public Secrecy and the Labor of the Negative. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  43. Tijhuis, E. A. J. G. (2006). Transnational Crime and the Interface between Legal and Illegal Actors: the Case of the Illicit Art and Antiquities Trade. Nijmegen, Netherlands: Wolf Legal Publishers.Google Scholar
  44. True, M. (2011) ‘Neither Condemned Nor Vindicated’, The Art Newspaper, 220.Google Scholar
  45. Vaughan, D. (1996). The Challenger Launch Decision: Risky Technology, Culture, and Deviance at NASA. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  46. Vaughan, D. (1998). Rational Choice, Situated Action, and the Social Control of Organizations. Law and Society Review, 32(1), 23–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Vaughan, D. (1999). The Dark Side of Organizations: Mistake, Misconduct, and Disaster. Annual Review of Sociology, 25, 271–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Vaughan, D. (2004). Organizational Rituals of Risk and Error. In B. Hutter & M. Power (Eds.), Organizational Encounters with Risk. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  49. Watson, P., & Todeschini, C. (2006). The Medici Conspiracy: the Illicit Journey of Looted Antiquities - From Italy’s Tomb Raiders to the World’s Greatest Museums. New York: Public Affairs.Google Scholar
  50. Wilson, J. M., & Dalton, E. (2008). Human Trafficking in the Heartland: Variation in Law Enforcement Awareness and Response. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 24(6), 296–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Zerubavel, E. (2006). The Elephant in the Room: Silence and Denial in Everyday Life. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.SCCJR, University of Glasgow, School of Social and Political SciencesGlasgowUK

Personalised recommendations