By Michael J. Lynch1, and Michael A. Long2

Green criminology has developed into a criminological subfield with a substantial literature. That literature is so vast that a single review cannot do it justice. This article examines the definition of green crime, the historical development of green criminology, some major areas of green criminological research, and potential future developments. Unlike traditional criminology with its focus on human victims, green criminology recognizes that various living entities can be victims of the ways in which humans harm ecosystems. Green research thus explores crime, victimization, and justice from several theoretical positions that acknowledge these unique victims. Although green criminology contains several approaches, this review primarily focuses on political economic green criminology. The section titled The Definition, Overview, and Historical Development of Green Criminology identifies, but does not review in depth, other forms of green criminology.

Annu. Rev. Criminol. 2022. 5:255–76  

By John Scott, Zoe Staines and James Morton

While there has been much research into Indigenous crime and justice, previous research draws largely on Aboriginal peoples, who are culturally distinct from Torres Strait Islanders. The Torres Strait region offers a unique opportunity to observe how justice is practised in remote contexts. Through statistical analysis and qualitative fieldwork, this study documents crime rates, community and customary justice practices and impediments to justice, to identify best practices unique to the Torres Strait region. Crime-report data indicate relatively low rates of crime in the Torres Strait region. While under-reporting and under-policing can partly explain these differences, strong levels of social capital, as well as unique justice practices, also play important roles in preventing crime in the region.

Trends & issues in crime and criminal justice no. 620. Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology. 2021. 13p.

By John Leverso, Cyrus Schleifer, David C. Pyrooz

During the last decade, health criminology—the study of health outcomes for justice-involved individuals and their families—has gained traction in the field. We extend health criminology to the study of street gangs by drawing on the stress process perspective. Gang membership is conceptualized as a primary stressor that leads to secondary stressors with direct and indirect adverse effects on mental health. Leaving a gang, we hypothesize, offers relief by shrinking the stress universe to improve mental health. We test the gang disengagement–mental health link using panel data from a sample of 510 active gang members in the Northwestern Juvenile Project, longitudinal entropy balancing models, and mental health outcomes related to both clinical diagnosis and functional impairment. The results indicate that gang disengagement leads to improvements in mental health and functioning. Compared with those who stayed in gangs, those who left experienced improvements in global functioning, overall mental health diagnosis, behavior toward others functioning, substance abuse functioning, and alcohol-related diagnoses. Secondary stressors partially, but not fully, mediated this association. Our findings extend the inventory of research on the benefits of disengagement from gangs to health outcomes and support interventions designed to promote gang disengagement.

Criminology Volume 62, Issue 3 Aug 2024 Pages 377-618

By Douglas Husak

The allegation that criminal justice systems (and that of the United States in particular) have become guilty of overcriminalization is widely accepted by academics and practitioners on nearly all points along the political spectrum (Dillon 2012). Many commentators respond by recommending that states decriminalize given kinds of conduct that supposedly exemplify the problem. I urge those who are theoretically minded to proceed cautiously and address several preliminary matters that must be resolved before genuine progress is possible. In the absence of a position on several controversial normative and conceptual issues, discussions of overcriminalization and decriminalization are bound to be oversimplified and superficial. My review is organized around six of these issues. I invite commentators to examine (a) what the criminal law is; (b) what overcriminalization means; (c) why overcriminalization is thought to be pernicious; (d) whether overcriminalization is a de jure or de facto phenomenon, i.e., whether it is a function of the law on the books or the law in action; (e) what normative criteria might be invoked to alleviate the predicament; and (f) whether and to what extent overcriminalization is a serious concern in our penal system. Even though these six issues are analytically distinct, positions about one invariably blur into commitments about the others. Although theorists rarely dissent from the claim that states are guilty of something called overcriminalization, uncertainties about the foregoing topics mar their treatments. I conclude that a deep understanding of the problem of overcriminalization depends on how these six issues are resolved.

Annual Review of Criminology, v. 6. 2023, 19pg

By Richard Rosenfeld, James Austin

Employing a small number of predictive variables, the authors of this report created statistical models to forecast violent and property crime rates in New York City. The models estimated yearly changes in New York City’s crime rates from the early 1960s through 2021, estimates that corresponded very closely to the actual rates. The authors then used these models to forecast annual changes in crime rates through 2026. The forecast for violent crime is a slight decrease each year through 2026, while the forecast for property crime shows slight yearly increases. Finally, the projected impact on New York City’s violent crime rate of reducing the state imprisonment rate by 25% would be minimal. No association was found between imprisonment rates and property crime.

New York: Harry Frank Guggenheim Foundation. 2023, 18pg