Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Confounding the process: forgotten actors and factors in the state-corporate crime paradigm

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

Abstract

The state-corporate crime paradigm, which has evolved from the foundational work of Edwin Sutherland and subsequent generations of corporate crime research, has contributed to a more satisfying structural account of the manner in which combinations of corporate malfeasance and government/regulatory policy can result in social harm. While this paradigm certainly enhances the understanding of the production of social harm at the nexus of state-corporate action, we argue that the analysis of specific case studies can and should be further enriched with attention to two particular points of focus. In the first instance, we argue, case studies should consider the utility of organizational frames and their variation in explaining both state and corporate behavior. In addition, state-corporate crime research is considerably aided by detailed examination of the social and cultural contexts of the risk calculations that inform critical decision-making.

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. The Indiana reckless homicide statute became effective on October 11, 1977. The constitutional prohibition against ex post facto laws prohibited any conduct by the Ford Motor Company before that date to be introduced at trial [39, 40].

  2. A $200,000 valuation of the price of a human life that had been attributed to the Ford Motor Company was actually developed by the NHTSA [40].

  3. The interviews were largely collected between 2005 and 2008, as part of the project, “History of a Public Science: Substance Abuse Research”; transcripts of the interviews are available at http://sitemaker.umich.edu/substance.abuse.history/oral_history_interviews [accessed July 6, 2015].

References

  1. Sutherland, E. H. (1940). White-collar criminality. American Sociological Review, 5, 1–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Sutherland, E. H. (1945). Is “white collar crime” crime? American Sociological Review, 10, 132–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Sutherland, E. H. (1983). White collar crime: The uncut version. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Kallet, A., & Schlink, F. J. (1933). 100,000,000 Guinea Pigs. New York: The Vanguard Press.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Tarbell, I. M. (1904). The history of the Standard Oil Company. New York: McClure, Phillips & Co..

    Google Scholar 

  6. Kolko, G. (1963). The Triumph of Conservatism: A Reinterpretation of American History, 1900–1916. New York: The Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Chambliss, W. J. (1989). State-organized crime. Criminology, 27, 183–208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Quinney, R. (1974). Critique of the legal order: Crime control in capitalist society. Boston: Little Brown.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Quinney, R. (1977). Class, state and crime: On the theory and practice of criminal justice. New York: Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Kramer, R., & Michalowski, R. (2006). The critique of power. In R. J. Michalowski & R. C. Kramer (Eds.), State-corporate crime: Wrongdoing at the intersection of business and government (pp. 1–17). New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Kramer, R. C., Michalowski, R. J., & Kauzlarich, D. (2002). The origins and development of the concept and theory of state-corporate crime. Crime & Delinquency, 48, 263–282.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Hutter, B. M., & Jones, C. J. (2007). From government to governance: external influences on business risk management. Regulation and Governance, 1(1), 27–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Quinney, R. (1964). The study of white collar crime: Toward a reorientation in theory and research. Journal of Criminal Law, Criminology and Police Science, 55, 208–214.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Clinard, M., & Quinney, R. (1973). Criminal behavior systems: A typology (2nd ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Kramer, R., & Michalowski, R. (1990). Toward an integrated theory of state-corporate crime. Paper presented at the American Society of Criminology. MD: Baltimore.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Kramer, R., & Michalowski, R. (1993). State-corporate crime: Case studies in organization deviance. Unpublished manuscript.

  17. Kramer, R. (2006). The space shuttle Challenger explosion. In R. J. Michalowski & R. C. Kramer (Eds.), State-corporate crime: Wrongdoing at the intersection of business and government (pp. 27–44). New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Aulette, J., & Michalowski, R. J. (1993). The imperial chicken fire: States, corporations, and public health. In K. D. Tunnell (Ed.), Political crime in contemporary America: A critical approach (pp. 171–206). New York: Garland Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Matthews, R. A., & Kauzlarich, D. (2000). The crash of ValueJet Flight 592: A case study in state-corporate crime. Sociological Forces, 3, 281–298.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Kauzlarich, D., & Kramer, R. C. (1998). Crimes of the nuclear state: Home and abroad. Boston: Northeastern University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Brown, K. (2013). Plutopia: Nuclear families, atomic cities, and the great Soviet and American plutonium disasters. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Mullins, Christopher, W. (2006). Bridgestone-Firestone, Ford, and the NHTSA. In R.J. Michalowski and R.C. Kramer (eds.), State-corporate crime: Wrongdoing at the intersection of business and government (pp. 134–148). New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.

  23. Cruciotti, T., & Matthews, R. A. (2006). The Exxon Valdez oil spill. In R. J. Michalowski & R. C. Kramer (Eds.), State-corporate crime: Wrongdoing at the intersection of business and government (pp. 149–171). New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Barrett, K. L. (2013). Bethlehem Steel at Lackawanna: The state-corporate crimes that continue to victimize the residents and environment of Western New York. Journal of Crime and Justice, 36(2), 263–282.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Tappan, P. W. (1947). Who is the criminal? American Sociological Review, 12, 96–102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Michalowski, R. J., & Kramer, R. C. (1987). The space between laws: The problem of corporate crime in a transnational context. Social Problems, 34(1), 34–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Michalowski, R. J., & Kramer, R. C. (2006). The critique of power. In R. J. Michalowski & R. C. Kramer (Eds.), State-corporate crime: Wrongdoing at the intersection of business & government. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Conklin, J. E. (1977). “Illegal but not criminal”: Business crime in America. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc..

    Google Scholar 

  29. Faust, K. L., & Kauzlarich, D. (2008). Hurricane Katrina victimization as a state crime of omission. Critical Criminology, 16(2), 85–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Harper, A., & Israel, M. (1999). The killing of the Fly: State-corporate victimization in Papua New Guinea. Resource management in Asia Pacific seminar series: The Australia National University.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Kauzlarich, D., & Matthews, R. A. (2006). Taking stock of theory and research. In R. J. Michalowski & R. C. Kramer (Eds.), State-corporate crime: Wrongdoing at the intersection of business and government (pp. 149–171). New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.

  32. Tombs, S. (2012). State-corporate crime symbiosis in the production of crime and harm. State Crime, 1(2), 170–195.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Whyte, D. (2014). Regimes of permission and state-corporate crime. State Crime, 3(2), 237–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Griffin III, O. H., & Miller, B. L. (2011). OxyContin and a regulation deficiency of the pharmaceutical industry: Rethinking state-corporate crime. Critical Criminology, 19(3), 213–226.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Eden, L. (2004). Whole World on Fire: Organizations, Knowledge, & Nuclear Weapons Devastation. Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Vaughan, D. (1996). The Challenger launch decision. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Perrow, C. (1999). Normal accidents: Living with high-risk technologies. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Dowie, M. (1977). September/October). Pinto madness. Mother Jones, 18–32.

  39. Cullen, F. T., Maakestad, W. J., & Cavender, G. (1984). The Ford Pinto case and beyond: Moral boundaries and the criminal sanction. In E. H. Ochstedler (Ed.), Corporations as criminals (pp. 107–130). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Schwartz, G. T. (1991). The myth of the Ford Pinto case. Rutgers Law Review, 43, 1013–1068.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Lee, M. T., & Ermann, M. D. (1999). Pinto “madness” as a flawed landmark narrative: An organizational and network analysis. Social Problems, 46(1), 30–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Ayres, I., & Braithwaite J. (1994). Responsive regulation: Transcending the deregulation debate. New York: Oxford University Press.

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

    Google Scholar 

  44. Spillane, J. F. (2004). Debating the Controlled Substances Act. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 76, 17–29.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Arfken, C. L., & Cicero, T. J. (2003). Postmarketing surveillance for drug abuse. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 70(3), S97–S105.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Hutter, B. M. (2001). Regulation and risk: Occupational health and safety on the railways. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  47. Kriesberg, S. M. (1976). Decisionmaking models and the control of corporate crime. Yale Law Journal, 85(8), 1091–1129.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Garland, D. (2004). The rise of risk. In V. Richard (Ed.), Ericson and Aaron Doyle, Risk and Morality (pp. 48–86). Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Spillane, Joseph F. (2010). Beyond angels and demons? The past, present, and future of drug abuse liability assessment. Amsterdam Law Forum 2(4). Retrieved on April 25, 2016 at: http://amsterdamlawforum.org/article/view/161/330.

  50. Maines, R. (2005). Asbestos and fire: Technological trade-offs and the body at risk. Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Breakwell, G. M. (2007). The psychology of risk. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  52. Mohun, A. P. (2013). Risk: Negotiating safety in American society. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  53. Herzberg, D. (2006). ‘The pill you love can turn on you’: Feminism, tranquilizers, and the Valium Panic of the 1970s. American Quarterly, 58(1), 79–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Rao, H., Yue, L. Q., & Ingram, P. (2011). Laws of attraction: Regulatory arbitrage in the face of activism in right-to-work states. American Sociological Review, 76(3), 365–385.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Wright, J. P., Cullen, F. T., & Blankenship, M. B. (1995). The social construction of corporate violence: Media coverage of the Imperial Food Products fire. Crime and Delinquency, 41(1), 20–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Justice Sciences, University of Alabama at Birmingham, 1720 2nd Avenue South, Birmingham, AL, 35294-4562, USA

    O. Hayden Griffin III

  2. Department of History, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Florida, P.O. Box 112015, Gainesville, FL, 32611, USA

    Joseph F. Spillane

Authors
  1. O. Hayden Griffin III
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Joseph F. Spillane
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to O. Hayden Griffin III.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare they have no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Griffin, O.H., Spillane, J.F. Confounding the process: forgotten actors and factors in the state-corporate crime paradigm. Crime Law Soc Change 66, 421–437 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10611-016-9634-6

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10611-016-9634-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation