Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Prosecution and sentencing in relation to environmental crime: Recent socio-legal developments

  • Published:
Crime, Law and Social Change Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This article provides an overview of recent developments in prosecution and sentencing as these pertain to environmental crime. After a brief consideration of who does what in the area of environmental regulation, the article surveys existing and emerging types of sanctions in this area. The limitations and opportunities for concerted and effective social responses to environmental crime are explored and critically assessed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. See for example, Boyd [12]; and Burns and Lynch [13].

  2. see for example, Brunton [14].

  3. [15]. For general criteria.

  4. In preparation of this paper a review of the annual reports of state-based Environmental Protection Agencies was undertaken. There was relatively little information on prosecutions (and penalties) in any of the reports, and this usually consisted of a short list of significant cases. In at least one instance, the EPA did not have a prosecutorial role whatsoever.

  5. [17, p23]; see also Jackson [18].

  6. See also Faure and Heine [31].

  7. [34]. See also [35].

  8. Environmental Audit Committee [33]: 11, emphasis in original.

  9. [46]; see also [47].

  10. For critical discussion of this see Hinde [49].

References

  1. White, R. (2008). Crimes against nature: Environmental criminology & ecological justice. Devon: Willan Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  2. del Frate, A., & Norberry, J. (Eds.). (1993). Environmental crime: Sanctioning strategies and sustainable development. Rome: UNICRI /Sydney: Australian Institute of Criminology.

  3. Gunningham, N., Norberry, J., & McKillop, S. (Eds.). (1995). Environmental crime, conference proceedings. Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Heine, G., Prabhu, M., & del Frate, A. (Eds.). (1997). Environmental protection: Potentials and limits of criminal justice. Rome: UNICJRI.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Situ, Y., & Emmons, D. (2000). Environmental crime: The criminal justice system’s role in protecting the environment. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Ayres, I., & Braithwaite, J. (1992). Responsive regulation: Transcending the deregulation debate. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Braithwaite, J. (1993). Responsive business regulatory institutions. In C. Coady & C. Sampford (Eds.), Business ethics and the law. Sydney: Federation Press.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Gunningham, N., & Grabosky, P. (1998). Smart regulation: Designing environmental policy. Oxford: Clarendon.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Snider, L. (2000). The sociology of corporate crime: An obituary (or: Whose knowledge claims have legs?). Theoretical Criminology, 4(2), 169–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Chunn, D., Boyd, S., & Menzies, R. (2002). “We all live in Bhopal”: Criminology discovers environmental crime. In Boyd, Chunn, & Menzies (Eds.), Toxic criminology: Environment, law and the state in Canada. Halifax: Fernwood Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Lynch, M., & Stretesky, P. (2003). The meaning of green: Contrasting criminological perspectives. Theoretical Criminology, 7(2), 217–238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Boyd, D. (2003). Unnatural law: Rethinking Canadian environmental law and policy. Vancouver: UBC Press.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Burns, R., & Lynch, M. (2004). Environmental crime: A sourcebook. New York: LFB Scholarly.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Brunton, N. (1999). Environmental regulation: The challenge ahead. Alternative Law Journal, 24(3), 137–143.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Environment Australia (2007). Compliance and Enforcement Policy. Canberra: Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts (www.environment.gov.au/epbc/publications/compliance.html) [accessed 1.11.2004 and 12.12.2007].

  16. Commission for Environmental Cooperation. (2001). Special report on enforcement activities: Report prepared by the North American Working Group on Enforcement and Compliance Cooperation. Montreal: CEC.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Robinson, B. (2003). Review of the enforcement and prosecution guidelines of the Department of Environmental Protection of Western Australia (p. 3). Perth: Communication Edge.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Jackson, H. (2003). Prosecutions under the Environmental Protection Act 1970. National Environmental Law Review, 2(1), 22–30.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Preston, B. (2007). Principled sentencing for environmental offences—Part 2: Sentencing considerations and options. 31 Crim LJ 142.

  20. Martin, R. (2005). Trends in environmental prosecution. National Environmental Law Review, 4(1), 38–46.

    Google Scholar 

  21. National Environmental Law Association of Australia and Resource Management Law Association of New Zealand (2008). Report on Penalty Infringement Notices (PINS) for environmental offences: A step towards consensus on the law across Australia & New Zealand. Canberra: NELAA.

  22. Glasbeek, H. (2004). Wealth by stealth: Corporate crime, corporate law, and the perversion of democracy. Toronto: Between the Lines.

    Google Scholar 

  23. de Prez, P. (2000). Excuses, excuses: The ritual trivialisation of environmental prosecutions. Journal of Environmental Law, 12(1), 65–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Haines, F. (1997). Corporate regulation: Beyond ‘Punish or Persuade’. Oxford: Clarendon.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Deveille, A., & Harding, R. (1997). Applying the precautionary principle. Sydney: Federation Press.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Fisse, B., & Braithwaite, J. (1993). Corporations, crime and accountability. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  27. White, R. (1998). Environmental criminology and Sydney water. Current Issues in Criminal Justice, 10(2), 214–219.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Robinson, B. (1995). The nature of environmental crime. In N. Gunningham, J. Norberry, & S. McKillop (Eds.), environmental crime (p. 13). Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Hughes, S. D. (2004). The current status of environmental performance reporting. National Environmental Law Review, 4, 41–58.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Mahony, H. (2007). EU court delivers blow on environment sanctions. EUobserver.com, 23 October [accessed 25.10.2007].

  31. Faure, M., & Heine, G. (2000). Criminal enforcement of environmental law in the European Union. Copenhagen: Danish Environmental Protection Agency.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Fortney, D. (2003). Thinking outside the “black box”: Tailored enforcement in environmental criminal law. Texas Law Review, 81(6), 1620.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Environmental Audit Committee. (2004). Environmental crime and the courts. London: House of Commons.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Verry, J., Heffernan, F., & Fisher, R. (2005). Restorative justice approaches in the context of environmental prosecution. Paper presented at the Safety, Crime and Justice: from data to policy Conference, 6–7 June. Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology.

  35. Trenorden, C. (2007). Senior Judge, Environment, Resources & Development Court, SA, ‘Trusting the Courts: Rethinking Sentencing Approaches to Environmental Crime’, AELERT Conference.

  36. EPA Victoria (2008). Discussion paper—Enforceable undertakings draft guidelines. August 2008.

  37. Cole, D. (2007). Creative sentencing for environmental offences in Australia. AELERT Conference 2007.

  38. Akella, A., & Cannon, J. (2004). Strengthening the weakest links: Strategies for improving the enforcement of environmental laws globally (p. 19). Washington: Center for Conservation and Government.

  39. Australian Law Reform Commission (2005). Sentencing of federal offenders. Discussion Paper 70. Sydney: ALRC.

  40. Hayman, G., & Brack, D. (2002). International environmental crime: The nature and control of environmental black markets (p. 24). London: Sustainable Development Programme, Royal Institute of International Affairs.

  41. Putt, J., & Anderson, K. (2007). A National study of crime in the Australian fishing industry, research and public policy series, no.76. Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Bartel, R. (2008). Sentencing for environmental offences: An Australian exploration. Presented at the Sentencing Conference, National Judicial College of Australia/ANU College of Law, Canberra, 8–10 February 2008.

  43. Burns, R., Lynch, M., & Stretesky, P. (2008). Environmental law, crime, and justice. New York: LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Interpol Pollution Crime Working Group (2007). Arguments for prosecutors of environmental crimes. Advocacy Memorandum, 5 June 2007.

  45. Association, M. (2002). Costing the earth: Guidance for sentencers. London: Environmental Law Foundation and the Magistrates Association.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Preston, J., & Donnelly, H. (2008). The establishment of an environmental crime sentencing database in New South Wales. 32 Crim LJ 214.

  47. Preston, B., & Donnelly, H. (2008). Achieving consistency and transparency in sentencing for environmental offences. Monograph 32, June 2008. Sydney: Judicial Commission of New South Wales.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Braithwaite, J., & Drahos, P. (2000). Global business regulation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Hinde, S. (2003). The international environmental court: Its broad jurisdiction as a possible fatal flaw. 32 Hofstra Law Review.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia

    Rob White

Authors
  1. Rob White
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rob White.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

White, R. Prosecution and sentencing in relation to environmental crime: Recent socio-legal developments. Crime Law Soc Change 53, 365–381 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10611-010-9233-x

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10611-010-9233-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation