Is drawing from the state ‘state of the art’?: a review of organised crime research data collection and analysis, 2004–2018

Abstract

This paper presents a systematic review of organised crime data collection and analysis methods. It did this by reviewing all papers published in Trends in Organized Crime and Global Crime between 2004 and 2018 (N = 463). The review identified a number of key weaknesses. First, organised crime research is dominated by secondary data analysis of open-access documents, and documents are seldom subjected to the same principles guiding primary data collection methods. Second, data analysis lacked balance with a distinct lack of inferential statistical analysis. Third, there was a significant absence of victim or offender voices with an overreliance on data from state bodies and the media. The paper concludes that organised crime, as field of research, appears unbalanced by reliance upon a small number of methods and sources. Rebalancing the field requires more organised crime researchers to speak to offenders and victims, employ greater use of statistical analysis and tighten our methodologies.

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Change history

  • 20 December 2019

    The Publisher regrets an error on the cover date of the December 2019 issue. The cover date was incorrectly listed as December 15, 2000. The correct cover date should be: December 15, 2019.

Notes

  1. 1.

    Chambliss’s research into organised crime in Seattle was not risk free: he was threatened with law suits and violence (Inderbitzin and Boyd 2010) while his objectors tried unsuccessfully to engineer precarious situations with which to blackmail him (Chambliss 1978). Serious violence against researchers is rare, although the risk of harm, kidnap and extortion is higher in certain regions of the world, and a very small number of researchers have been murdered due to their research into, or stance against, organised crime, including Ken Pryce in Jamaica, Esmond Bradley Martin in Kenya and Dian Fossey in Rwanda. For advice on reducing risk in fieldwork in dangerous places see Felbab-Brown (2014).

  2. 2.

    While Crime, Law and Social Change has traditionally had a major focus on organised crime, it was felt that the journals focus has drifted away from organised crime in recent years to an extent that it may no longer be considered a specialised journal.

  3. 3.

    Primary data is here defined as defined as data collected ‘first hand for the specific purpose of addressing the’ research question, as opposed to secondary data which is collected ‘by other peoples or other agencies with other purposes in mind’ (Jupp 2001:33)

  4. 4.

    Schuurman (2018) used a very similar method for his review of terrorism research, although our data collection phases ran parallel and we had not discussed our methods.

  5. 5.

    Document here is defined as any written text (Scott 1990) and includes published quantitative data, such as official police data.

  6. 6.

    See Windle and colleagues (2018) for discussion on the paucity of historical research on organised crime.

  7. 7.

    For example, while writing the first draft of this article, a murder in one of the author’s home towns was linked to both the ‘Polish mafia’ and ‘Russian mafia’ by some newspapers, even though there was little justification and the notion was quickly rejected by the authorities.

  8. 8.

    See Densley (2018) for a discussion on the usefulness of investigative journalism in countering organised crime.

  9. 9.

    For example, Lisa Maher’s (1996) ethnography of Australian drug markets generated quantitative data on price and purity of drugs, while Sudhir Venkatesh was given access to data on a gangs illicit enterprise profits (Levitt and Venkatesh 2000).

  10. 10.

    Interviews with non-state actors included the public, non-governmental organisations, for profit organisations and academics. Non-governmental organisations were by far the most heavily represented.

  11. 11.

    We have chosen here to exclude single interviews with other researchers, of which there were eight. If these are included, then the median drops to 41.5.

  12. 12.

    The 15 chapters in Bernasco (2010) specifically deal with how to improve the validity of data generated by interviews and observations of offenders.

  13. 13.

    Either interviewer or interviewee may misunderstand technical terminology or unfamiliar and slang terms, cultural norms, jokes and irony. Misunderstandings common also to analysis of secondary sources.

  14. 14.

    For ease, state here includes intergovernmental organisations, such as UN bodies who are reliant upon data provided to them by member states.

  15. 15.

    In some respects, this challenges the critique that single case studies are not generalizable: the single case study may provide a foundation for comparison with future qualitative and/or qualitative studies on the same topic with different samples; and the more studies which are undertaken the more we are able to generalise findings.

  16. 16.

    Felbab-Brown (2014) suggests that interviewing government officials, NGO workers and journalists prior to conducting fieldwork not only creates a contextual foundation which informs interviews with offenders but can also be invaluable for preparing logistical and security arrangements, including knowing which areas to avoid.

References

  1. Anderson E (2000) Code of the street: decency, violence, and the moral life of the inner city. WW Norton & Company, London

    Google Scholar 

  2. Antonopoulos GA (2008) Interviewing retired cigarette smugglers. Trends in Organized Crime 11(1):70–81

    Google Scholar 

  3. Argomaniz J, Lynch O (2014) Victims of terrorism: A comparative and interdisciplinary study. Routledge, Abingdon

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bernasco W (2010) Offenders on offending: learning about crime from criminals. Willan, London

    Google Scholar 

  5. Bottoms A (2010) The relationship between theory and empirical observations in criminology. In: King RD, Wincup E (eds) Doing research on crime and justice. Oxford University Press, Oxford pp. 75–117

  6. Bottomley K, Pease K (1994) Crime and punishment: Interpreting the data. Open University Press, Milton Keynes

    Google Scholar 

  7. Burns R (2000) Introduction to research methods. Sage, London

    Google Scholar 

  8. Chambliss W (1975) On the paucity of original research on organized crime: a footnote to Galliher and Cain. Am Sociol 10(1):36–39

    Google Scholar 

  9. Chambliss W (1978) On the take: from petty crooks to presidents. Indiana University Press, Bloomington

    Google Scholar 

  10. Cressey DR (1967) Methodological problems in the study of organized crime as a social problem. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 374(1):101–112

    Google Scholar 

  11. Decker S, Kempf-Leonard K (1991) Constructing gangs: the social definition of youth activities. Crim Justice Policy Rev 5(4):271–291

    Google Scholar 

  12. Densley JA (2018) ‘A citadel of crime’: Saint Paul, Minnesota and the O’Connor system. In: Windle J, Morrison JF, Winter A, Silke A (eds) Historical perspectives on organised crime and terrorism. Routledge, Abingdon, pp 17–37

    Google Scholar 

  13. Elffers H (2010) Misinformation, misunderstanding and misleading as validity threats to offenders’ accounts of offending. In: Bernasco W (ed) Offenders on offending: learning about crime from criminals. Willan, London, pp 13–23

    Google Scholar 

  14. Erikson KT (1973) Sociology and the historical perspective. In: Drake M (ed) Applied historical studies: An introductory reader. Open University Press, Milton Keynes, pp 331–338

    Google Scholar 

  15. Felbab-Brown V (2014) Security considerations for conducting fieldwork in highly dangerous places or on highly dangerous subjects. Consulted June 2018 https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/06_security_considerations_fieldwork_felbab_brown_report.pdf

  16. Fijnaut C (1989) Researching organized crime. In: Morgan R (ed) policing organised crime and crime prevention. Bristol, Bristol and Bath Centre for. Criminal Justice:75–85

  17. Frankfort-Nachmias C, Nachmias D (1996) Study guide for research methods in the social sciences. Macmillan, London

    Google Scholar 

  18. Galliher JF, Cain JA (1974) Citation support for the mafia myth in criminology textbooks. Am Sociol 9(2):68–74

    Google Scholar 

  19. Hallsworth S, Young T (2008) Gang talk and gang talkers: a critique. Crime Media Cult 4(2):175–195

    Google Scholar 

  20. Hobbs D (2000) Researching serious crime. In: King RD, Wincup E (eds) Doing research on crime and justice. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  21. Hobbs D, Antonopoulos GA (2013) ‘Endemic to the species’: ordering the ‘other’ via organised crime. Global Crime 14(1):27–51

    Google Scholar 

  22. Hobbs D, Antonopoulos GA (2014) How to research organised crime. In: Paoli L (ed) The Oxford handbook of organised crime. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 96–121

    Google Scholar 

  23. Inderbitzin M, Boyd H (2010) William Chambliss. In: Hayward K, Maruna S, Mooney J (eds) Fifty key thinkers in Criminology. Routledge, Abingdon

    Google Scholar 

  24. Jewkes Y (2004) Media and crime. Sage, London

    Google Scholar 

  25. Jupp VR (2001) Methods of criminological research. Routledge, Abingdon

    Google Scholar 

  26. Kim E, Yun M, Park M, Williams H (2009) Cross border north Korean women trafficking and victimization between North Korea and China: an ethnographic case study. International Journal of Law, Crime and Justice 37(4):154–169

    Google Scholar 

  27. Landesco J (1929) Organized crime in Chicago. Illinois Association for Criminal Justice, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  28. Langlois CV, Seignobos C (Translated by Berry GG) (1904) An introduction to the study of History New York, Henry Holt and Company

  29. Levitt SD, Venkatesh SA (2000) An economic analysis of a drug-selling gang's finances. Q J Econ 115(3):755–789

    Google Scholar 

  30. Macdonald K, Tipton C (1993) Using documents. In: Gilbert N (ed) Researching social life. Sage, London, pp 187–200

    Google Scholar 

  31. Maher L (1996) Illicit drug reporting system trial: Ethnographic monitoring component. Sydney, NDARC

    Google Scholar 

  32. Rawlinson P (2008) Mission impossible? Researching organized crime. In: King RD, Wincup E (eds) Doing research on crime and justice. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 291–315

    Google Scholar 

  33. Reiner R (2000) The politics of the police. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  34. Ritter A (2006) Studying illicit drug markets: disciplinary contributions. Int J Drug Policy 17(6):453–463

    Google Scholar 

  35. Robson C (1993) Real world research. Blackwell, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  36. Schmid A, Jongman A (1988) Political terrorism: a new guide to actors, authors, concepts, databases, theories and literature. North Holland, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  37. Schuurman B (2018) Research on terrorism, 2007–2016: a review of data, methods, and authorship. Terrorism and political violence (online first):1–16

  38. Scott J (1990) A matter of record. Polity, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  39. Silke A (2001) The devil you know: continuing problems with research on terrorism. Terrorism and political violence 13(4):1–14

    Google Scholar 

  40. Silke A (2004) The road less travelled: Recent trends in terrorism research. In: Silke A (ed) Research on terrorism: trends, achievements and failures. Routledge, Abingdon

    Google Scholar 

  41. Silke A (2006) The impact of 9/11 on research on terrorism. In: Ranstorp M (ed) Mapping terrorism research. Routledge, Abingdon

    Google Scholar 

  42. Sutherland EH (1937 / 1988) The professional thief. Chicago, University of Chicago Press

  43. Thrasher FM (1927 / 2013) The gang: a study of 1,313 gangs in Chicago. Chicago, University of Chicago Press

  44. Tilley N, Hopkins M (2008) Organized crime and local businesses. Criminol Crim Just 8(4):443–459

    Google Scholar 

  45. Trachtenberg M (2007) The craft of international history: a guide to method. Princeton University press, Woodstock

    Google Scholar 

  46. Tsutsumi A, Izutsu T, Poudyal AK, Kato S, Marui E (2008) Mental health of female survivors of human trafficking in Nepal. Soc Sci Med 66(8):1841–1847

    Google Scholar 

  47. Varese F (2010) What is organized crime. In: Varese F (ed) Organized crime. Routledge, Abingdon, pp 27–56

    Google Scholar 

  48. Von Lampe K (2002) Organized crime research in perspective. In: van Duyne PC, von Lampe K, Passas N (eds) Upperworld and underworld in cross-border crime. Wolf Legal Publishers, Netherlands, pp 189–198

    Google Scholar 

  49. Von Lampe K (2012) Transnational organized crime challenges for future research. Crime Law Soc Chang 58(2):179–194

    Google Scholar 

  50. Von Lampe K (2016) Organized crime: Analysing illegal activities, criminal structures, and extra-legal governance. Sage, London

    Google Scholar 

  51. Windle J (2016) Suppressing illicit opium production: Successful intervention in Asia and the Middle East. IB Tauris, London

    Google Scholar 

  52. Windle J (2018) ‘He just wasn’t the bloke I used to know’: Social capital and the fragmentation of a British organized crime network. In: Windle J, Morrison JF, Winter A, Silke A (eds) Historical perspectives on organised crime and terrorism. Routledge, Abingdon

    Google Scholar 

  53. Windle J and Briggs D (2015) Going solo: the social organisation of drug dealing within a London street gang. Journal of Youth Studies, 18(9):1170–1185

  54. Windle J, Briggs D (2016) Going solo: the social organisation of drug dealing within a London street gang. J Youth Stud 18(9):1170–1185

    Google Scholar 

  55. Windle J, Morrison JF, Winter A, Silke A (2018) Historical perspectives on organised crime and terrorism. Routledge, Abingdon

    Google Scholar 

  56. Zhang SX (2010) Talking to snakeheads: methodological considerations for research on Chinese human smuggling. In: Bernasco W (ed) Offenders on offending: learning about crime from criminals. Willan, London, pp 184–205

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to James Windle.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

James Windle declares that he has no conflict of interest. Andrew Silke declares that he has no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

This article does not include any new studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Windle, J., Silke, A. Is drawing from the state ‘state of the art’?: a review of organised crime research data collection and analysis, 2004–2018. Trends Organ Crim 22, 394–413 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12117-018-9356-5

Download citation

Keywords

  • Organised crime
  • Research methods
  • Data analysis
  • Data collection
  • Interviews
  • Ethnography
  • Victims