By Marzia Giambertoni

lthough U.S. policymakers face a variety of complex challenges in addressing transnational terrorism, one underappreciated aspect is Hezbollah's evolving presence in Latin America. Academic literature and government reports almost universally indicate that Hezbollah's activities in the region pose potential threats to U.S. national security. However, there is a significant knowledge gap in existing assessments. In this paper, the author offers an initial exploration of Hezbollah's operational footprint in Latin America, focusing on illicit funding mechanisms, violent operations, and key operational hubs — particularly in the Tri-Border Area and Venezuela. The analysis situates these activities within the broader context of Iran's regional diplomatic, economic, and cultural activities, which partially facilitate conditions amenable to Hezbollah's operations.

The author draws from a variety of open-source materials and reviews publicly available information to provide a foundation for understanding how Hezbollah's networks in Latin America are characterized and discussed publicly. By analyzing the group's operational strategies and historical precedents, the author's framing identifies actionable considerations for U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) leadership while raising awareness of the organization's presence among a broader community of stakeholders. These findings are significant for both DHS and DoD, given the former's counterterrorism mandate in Latin America and the latter's strategic interests in the region. Hezbollah's evolving presence warrants careful consideration from defense planners to effectively address potential challenges to U.S. interests and regional stability.

Santa Monica, CA: RAND, 2025, 20p.

By Kateira Aryaeinejad and Thomas Leo Scherer

Over the years, the National Institute of Justice’s (NIJ) funding for research has provided important opportunities to advance our understanding of topics related to crime and justice within the United States. Drawing from this portfolio, this synthesis paper compares and contrasts the data and findings from NIJ-sponsored research projects on violent extremism, mass shootings, and bias crimes. This comparison focuses both on the content of the data and on the creation and coverage of the data, examining findings from four research projects: ■ The Profiles of Individual Radicalization in the United States (PIRUS) database of 2,226 individuals who demonstrated at least 1 of 5 extremist or radicalized behaviors. ■ The Bias Incidents and Actors Study (BIAS) database of 966 adults arrested or indicted for bias crimes. ■ The National Hate Crime Investigation Study (NHCIS) database of 1,230 hate crime cases. ■ The Violence Project dataset of 172 mass shootings. This synthesis first reviews the creation of each dataset and the types of information that are collected to better understand their generalizability and the ability to make comparisons across separate datasets. There are significant differences in the size, time span, and information of the four datasets, which limits the comparisons that can be made between the individuals described in each dataset and necessitates caution in drawing strong conclusions from such comparisons. With that caution in mind, the datasets suggest some similarities in the individuals who commit bias crimes and mass shootings and display violent extremist behavior. These individuals are primarily males in their 20s and 30s and unmarried at the time of their offenses. They may exhibit higher rates of unemployment than the general population and often have prior criminal histories. However, that is not to say that these characteristics should be used as a profile to determine who is at risk of or more likely to commit any of these types of offenses or behaviors. Rather, it calls into question what other factors may be impacting individuals with these characteristics who go on to commit these types of offenses. The datasets also suggest some differences in the individuals who commit each type of offense or behavior. Individuals associated with violent extremism tend to be more educated than those who commit mass shootings or bias crimes. Individuals who commit mass shootings exhibit higher rates of mental health issues than those who commit bias crimes or participate in violent extremism offenses. The comparison of individuals across categories also highlighted differences among individuals who committed the same type of offense. Among individuals who supported violent extremism, for example, those acting in support of far-right ideologies were more likely to have military experience than those following other ideologies. Comparing these datasets highlights their potential and their limitations, suggesting paths forward for future research. The different collection methods show the importance of precisely describing the data collection method, discussing which behaviors are missed by that method, and triangulating among data with different methods to understand what is missing. The differences in the types of information that each dataset collects about each individual and action suggest that future collections could have greater overlap and comparability. The establishment of potential similarities in demographics and life experiences also allows for more targeted data collection focusing on why most individuals who fit that profile do not commit an offense, while others do. In this way, these projects not only contribute to our current understanding of these types of offenses and behaviors but also allow future research and programming to be conducted more effectively.

Washington, DC : U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, National Institute of Justice, 2024. 43p.

By Yarelix Estrada, Jeffery Sauer, Leonardo Dominguez, Izza Zaidi, Andrew J. Trinidad, Hannah Helmy, Alex Harocopos

Background: Drug checking is a harm reduction strategy that provides people who use drugs (PWUD) information about the composition of a substance. Drug checking has been identified as a key public health response to the continually evolving overdose crisis.

Methods: The New York City Health Department of Health and Mental Hygiene (DOHMH) partnered with existing syringe programs to launch a drug-checking pilot study. The study offered multiple point-of-care drug-checking technologies including fentanyl test strips (FTS) and Fourier-transformed infrared (FTIR) spectrometry, as well as secondary laboratory testing. Fentanyl positivity in major drug types was assessed for each drug-checking technology.

Results: Between November 2021 and December 2023, a total of N = 397 unique participants and drop-off samples contributed a total of N = 1644 samples for drug checking. The majority of samples were sold as opioids (n = 908), with fewer sold as cocaine (n = 314) and methamphetamine (n = 62). 95.3 % (852/894) of opioid samples produced positive FTS. FTIR and secondary laboratory testing resulted in a similarly high prevalence of fentanyl in opioid samples at 84.7 % (769/908) and 89.3 % (519/581), respectively. We did not observe the unexplained presence of fentanyl in samples sold as cocaine or methamphetamine. Further, we describe instances where discussions between technicians and PWUD provided important context that explained the presence of fentanyl in non-opioid samples.

Conclusion: The majority of opioid samples submitted to DOHMH's drug-checking pilot study contained fentanyl. Comparatively, there was little evidence suggesting fentanyl in samples sold as cocaine and methamphetamine. The drug-checking pilot study's point-of-care service delivery model was effective in providing information to PWUD.

Drug Alcohol Depend 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2025.112578. Epub 2025 Jan 27, 47 p.

By  APRIL M. ZEOLI, ALEXANDER D. McCOURT, and JENNIFER K. PARUK 

We present the rationale behind four types of laws that restrict access to firearms for those who are deemed to be a high risk for future gun violence and two types of laws that implement firearm purchase prohibitions. We also present evidence on the effectiveness of these laws. Broadly, these are laws that restrict access for domestic violence abusers, individuals convicted of misdemeanor violence, and individuals at high risk of violence against themselves or others. We briefly discuss relinquishment of firearms by those who are newly restricted, but we focus mainly on how purchase restrictions are implemented by the federal government and across states. Extant research shows that well-implemented firearm policy that is based on evidence-based risk factors can be effective in reducing firearm injury 

  ANNALS, AAPSS, 704, November 2022  

By Noor Huda Ismail

The concept of asabiyya – group solidarity – originally articulated by Ibn Khaldun, has been hijacked by extremist groups in Southeast Asia to create division and promote radical ideologies. Reclaiming asabiya is crucial, redefining it as a tool for social cohesion and unity by drawing on cultural values that foster mutual respect and collective responsibility. Regional cooperation and digital counter-narratives are essential in countering extremism and fostering long-term peace in the region.

S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies, NTU Singapore, 2025. 4p.

By:Robin Joy and Monica Weeber

Domestic violence is a national and Vermont public health crisis. The Vermont Department of Health estimates that up to 16% of adult Vermonters have experienced either fear, control, or violence at the hands of an intimate partner. In Vermont, a victim may seek a Relief from Abuse Order (RFA) in the Family Division of Superior Court. As part of the process, the victim may also request that a defendant relinquish their firearms. This study examines general case processing statistics for RFAs, how often firearm relinquishment is requested, and if granted, who is the designated holder of the weapons. The report also documents the processes related to serving orders and storing and returning weapons. Methods Researchers worked with the Vermont Judiciary to create an extract of RFA cases to answer quantitative questions. They also conducted interviews with court personnel, police officers, and licensed firearms dealers. Findings • Bennington County has the highest rate of disposed RFA dockets per 1,000 of the population. Chittenden County has the lowest. • Seventy percent of denied temporary orders are not pursued to final orders. • Fifty-eight percent of all requested temporary orders are granted. • Most RFAs (59%) are between parties who are current or former household members. • Women are overrepresented as plaintiffs (74%) as compared to the general population. Men are overrepresented as defendants (75.8%). • The Judiciary does not record in the case management system whether a request to relinquish was made by the plaintiff. • The rate of relinquishment orders mirrors the estimated firearm ownership rates. • Essex and Orange Counties had the highest rate of firearm relinquishment orders. • Bennington and Rutland Counties has the lowest rate of firearm relinquishment orders. • Temporary RFAs with a relinquishment order are more likely to continue to a final hearing. Recommendations This is the first report on RFA and firearm relinquishment data in Vermont and the first report outlining the relinquishment and storage process. Based on the information CRG has developed suggestions for practice, policy, and further research 

Montpelier, VT: Crime Research Group, 2024. 22p.

By Alana Ford

An examination of the threat of disinformation and cognitive warfare in the Indo-Pacific, the brief unpacks how these tactics are reshaping national security and undermining democratic institutions. Drawing on global examples, it highlights the implications for regional stability and democratic resilience.

The briefing paper outlines Australia’s multipronged approach, including legislative reforms, international partnerships, and public education efforts, offering practical insights to counter these evolving security threats and safeguard democratic values across the Indo-Pacific.

Key messages

Disinformation and cognitive warfare are evolving security threats that undermine democratic institutions, polarise societies, and manipulate public trust at a global scale.

The digital revolution has amplified the speed, precision, and scale of disinformation campaigns.

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine demonstrates how cognitive warfare is deployed to legitimize unlawful acts of aggression and manipulate international narratives.

Democracies in the Indo-Pacific, including Australia, face heightened risks of disinformation and cognitive warfare due to their open information environments and the region’s complex geopolitical dynamics.

Effective countermeasures require coordinated domestic and international efforts, leveraging regulation and multilateral partnerships like AUKUS and the Quad.

Australia: Perth USAsia Centre, 2025.

By Mancuso Marina and Manzi Deborah

Project ECOFIT – Options for EnhanCing Operational instruments in the area of FIrearms Trafficking (www.transcrime. it/ecofit/) is a research project co-funded by the European Union’s Internal Security Fund – Police (ISFP-2018-AG-OCFIRE). Project ECOFIT aims to enhance operational cooperation between Law Enforcement Agencies (LEAs) in the fight against firearms trafficking across the 27 EU Member States (MSs) and seven non-EU SELEC MSs (Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Moldova, Montenegro, North Macedonia, Serbia and Turkey). It analyses five operational

instruments that have been selected as indicators of international cooperation, namely: mechanisms for data collection, mechanisms for data sharing, National Firearms Focal Points (NFPs), joint criminal investigations and controlled delivery procedures. Based on the findings of the Project, it provides recommendations for the EU and guidelines for LEAs concerning how to better put into action these instruments and how to more effectively reduce, prevent and tackle illicit trafficking of firearms offences. In order to achieve its objectives, Project ECOFIT conducts five impact assessments (one for each of the operational instruments included in the analysis). The methodology utilises the Better Regulation “Toolbox” of the European Commission (European Commission 2017). Besides the definition of the problem addressed by Project ECOFIT and the methodology.

mproving the intelligence picture (collection and exchange of systematic and harmonised information between LEAs, knowledge on modi operandi, tactics, new trends, etc.); • Intensifying the pressure on criminal markets (fully operational NFPs, joint actions, etc.). The five operational instruments are strongly interrelated, as also stressed by EMPACT Firearms: having fully staffed and operational NFPs will enhance both data collection and data sharing procedures as well as facilitating the standardisation of practices amongst countries.

Milano: Transcrime – Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore. 2021. 154p.

By Giovanna Maletta

Some European Union (EU) member states—as well as the EU, through Eurostat—collect and publish useful and gender-disaggregated information about violent crimes, intentional homicides, or domestic violence. In addition

to using different methodologies and definitions, however, available data does not always include information on the weapons used in the commission of such crimes, the relationship between victim and perpetrator, or the context in which the violence has occurred.

Available data collected at the international, regional, and national level does not allow for a comprehensive picture of the trends and dynamics of gender-based violence (GBV), including firearm violence, within the EU.

The EU is working to establish a common understanding of GBV at the EU level and among its member states, and to detail minimum standards for the criminalization of GBV against women and domestic violence—thus providing the opportunity to address the use of firearms to facilitate and commit GBV across the EU. These regulatory initiatives also have the potential to improve the availability of relevant information by promoting the collection of comparable data and the development of harmonized practices in collecting and reporting this information, which in turn will allow states to better monitor and adapt measures being taken to tackle GBV.

These EU initiatives could benefit from establishing linkages with the existing EU framework for the control of the production, trade, and possession of firearms.

KEY FINDINGS • Some European Union (EU) member states—as well as the EU, through Eurostat— collect and publish useful and gender-disaggregated information about violent crimes, intentional homicides, or domestic violence. In addition to using different methodologies and definitions, however, available data does not always include

information on the weapons used in the commission of such crimes, the relationship between victim and perpetrator, or the context in which the violence has occurred. • Available data collected at the international, regional, and national level does not allow for a comprehensive picture of the trends and dynamics of gender-based violence (GBV), including firearm violence, within the EU. • The EU is working to establish a common understanding of GBV at the EU level and among its member states, and to detail minimum standards for the criminalization of GBV against women and domestic violence—thus providing the opportunity to address the use of firearms to facilitate and commit GBV across the EU. These regulatory initiatives also have the potential to improve the availability of relevant information by promoting the collection of comparable data and the development of harmonized practices in collecting and reporting this information, which in turn will allow states to better monitor

and adapt measures being taken to tackle GBV. • These EU initiatives could benefit from establishing linkages with the existing EU framework for the control of the production, trade, and possession of firearms.

Brussels: Flemish Institute for Peace, 28p.

By Michael Wolfowicz, Yael Litmanovitz, David Weisburd, and Badi Hasisi

Abstract Background: Two of the most central questions in radicalization research are, (1)why do some individuals radicalize when most of those from the same groups or exposed to similar conditions do not? and (2) why do radicalized individuals turn to radical violence while the majority remain inert? It has been suggested that the answer to both questions lie in the cumulative and interactive effects of a range of risk factors. While risk assessment and counter‐radicalization take a risk‐protectivefactor approach, there is widespread debate as to what these factors are and which are most important.Objectives: This review has two primary objectives.1) To identify what the putative risk and protective factors for different radica-lization outcomes are, without any predeterminations.2) To synthesize the evidence and identify the relative magnitude of the effects of different factors.The review's secondary objectives are to:1) Identify consistencies in the estimates of factors across different radicalizationoutcomes.2) Identify whether any significant heterogeneity exists within factors between(a) geographic regions, and (b) strains of radicalizing ideologies.Search Methods: Over 20 databases were searched for both published and gray literature. In order to provide a more comprehensive review, supplementary sear-ches were conducted in two German and one Dutch database. Reference harvesting was conducted from previous reviews and contact was made with leading researchers to identify and acquire missing or unpublished studies.Selection Criteria: The review included observational studies assessing the out-comes of radical attitudes, intentions, and/or radical behaviors in OECD countries and which provided sufficient data to calculate effect sizes for individual‐level risk and protective factors.Data Collection and Analysis: One‐hundred and twenty‐seven studies, containing 206 samples met the inclusion criteria and provided 1302 effect sizes pertaining to over 100 different factors. Random effects meta‐analyses were carried out for each factor, and meta‐regression and moderator analysis were used to explore differ-ences across studies.Results: Studies were primarily cross‐sectional, with samples representing 20 OECD countries. Most studies examined no specific radicalizing ideology, while others focussed on specific ideologies (e.g., Islamist, right‐wing, and left‐wing ideologies). The studies generally demonstrated low risk of bias and utilized validated or widely acceptable measures for both indicators and outcomes.With some exceptions, sociodemographic factors tend to have the smallest estimates, with larger estimates for experiential and attitudinal factors, followed by traditional criminogenic and psychological factors.Authors' Conclusions: While sociodemographic factors are the most commonly examined factors (selective availability), they also tend to have the smallest es-timates. So too, attitudinal and even experiential factors, do not have effect sizes of the magnitude that could lead to significant reductions in risk through tar-geting by interventions. Conversely, traditional criminogenic factors, as well as psychological factors tend to display the largest estimates. These findings suggest the need to broaden the scope of factors considered in both risk assessment and intervention, and this review provides much needed evidence for guiding the selection of factors

Campbell Systematic Reviews: Volume 17, Issue 3 September 2021, 90 p.

By Timothy Cubitt and Anthony Morgan

Using a large, national survey of online Australians, we measured unintentional and intentional exposure to fringe or radical content and groups online.

Two in five respondents (40.6%) reported being exposed to material they described as fringe, unorthodox or radical. One-quarter of these respondents (23.2%) accessed the content intentionally. One-third (29.9%) said the content they had seen depicted violence.

Fringe or radical content was often accessed through messages, discussions and posts online. Mainstream social media and messaging platforms were the platforms most frequently used to share fringe or radical content. Being a member of a group promoting fringe or radical content was associated with increased sharing of that content with other internet users.

Efforts to restrict access to radical content and groups online, especially on mainstream platforms, may help reduce intentional and unintentional exposure to and sharing of that content.

Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology. 2024. 17p.

By Rachel Rein

This Note explores human trafficking in the United States through Disability Critical Race Studies (DisCrit). First, the Note offers background on trafficking and applicable federal law. The Note shows that not only does trafficking disable people, but that people with preexisting disabilities are especially at risk for trafficking. Next, the Note indicates that trafficking law follows a Law-and-Order framework that retraumatizes marginalized survivors. Then, the Note introduces DisCrit and justifies its use for anti-trafficking advocacy. Finally, the Note applies DisCrit. By looking at trafficking law through DisCrit, it becomes clear that trafficking law must work with—not against—survivors to end human suffering.

42 Colum. J. Gender & L. 183 (2022).

By Michele Ubaldi Matteo Picchio 

We study the effect of mass shooting exposure on individuals’ mental health by using the Panel Study of Income Dynamics. Our identification strategy relies on the quasi-randomness of mass shootings in a staggered difference-in-differences design. We compare changes in mental health outcomes of individuals living in affected cities with changes in matched individuals living in non-proximal and not-affected cities. We find that mass shootings have a substantial adverse impact on mental health, which persists for up to six years. This impact is not statistically significant for Black individuals, whereas it is slightly more pronounced among women and older cohorts

Bonn, Garmany:  IZA – Institute of Labor Economics  2024. 45p.

By Chelsa L. Kenney

Some Caribbean nations, such as Haiti, Jamaica, and Trinidad and Tobago, have high rates of violence, including homicide. In 2021, Caribbean countries accounted for six of the world’s 10 highest national murder rates, according to the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime. The United Nations and other organizations monitoring firearms trafficking have reported that a high percentage of the firearms used in these crimes have been trafficked from the U.S. GAO was asked to report on U.S. efforts to counter firearms trafficking to Caribbean nations. This report examines (1) what data and reporting show about the trafficking and use of firearms in Caribbean countries; (2) U.S. agencies’ efforts to disrupt firearms trafficking in these countries; and (3) agency efforts to track results of key efforts to combat firearms trafficking from the U.S. to the Caribbean. GAO reviewed federal firearms recovery and trace data, and other related U.S. agency data, analysis, and program information for fiscal years 2018 through 2022, the most recent available at the time of our review. GAO interviewed U.S. and Caribbean officials through in-person site visits in the Bahamas and Trinidad and Tobago, and through video conferences with Barbados, Dominican Republic, Haiti, and Jamaica. GAO selected these countries based on geographic diversity, the percentage of recovered firearms that were of U.S. origin, and U.S. agency efforts in country to combat firearms trafficking. What GAO Recommends GAO is recommending that State update the CBSI’s Results Framework to establish firearms trafficking specific indicators. State concurred.  

Washington, DC:  United States Government Accountability Office, 2024. 55p.

By Jennifer Carlson  

This review is about scholarly contributions to a hotly debated issue—gun policy. Teasing apart the politics of evidence within gun politics, it examines both how research agendas shape gun policy and politics as well as how gun policy and politics shape research agendas. To do so, the article maps out two waves of gun research, Gun Studies 1.0 and Gun Studies 2.0. Gun Studies 1.0 emphasizes scientific evidence as a foundation for generating consensus about public policy, and it includes criminological studies aimed at addressing guns as criminogenic tools, public health work aimed at addressing guns as public health problems, and jurisprudential scholarship aimed at adjudicating guns as legal objects. Reviewing how these approaches incited popular debates and public policies that, in turn, shaped subsequent conditions of gun scholarship, the article then turns to Gun Studies 2.0. Instead of taking evidence as self-evident, this body of scholarship tends to prioritize the meaning-making processes that make meaningful—or not— evidence surrounding gun policy. Accordingly, Gun Studies 2.0 unravels the political and cultural conditions of the contemporary US gun debate and broadens inquiries into gun harm and gun security. In addition to discussing areas for future study, this study concludes by encouraging gun researchers to attend to the politics of evidence as they mobilize scholarship not just to inform the gun debate but also to transform it

Annu. Rev. Law Soc. Sci. 2020. 16:183–202 

By Thomas R. Simon,  Heather B. Clayton,  Linda L. Dahlberg; Corinne David-Ferdon,  Greta Kilmer,  Colleen Barbero, 

Suicide and homicide are the second and third leading causes of death, respectively, among youths aged 14–17 years (1); nearly one half (46%) of youth suicides and most (93%) youth homicides result from firearm injuries (1). Understanding youth gun carrying and associated outcomes can guide prevention initiatives (2). This study used the updated measure of gun carrying in the 2017 and 2019 administrations of CDC’s Youth Risk Behavior Survey* (YRBS) to describe the national prevalence of gun carrying for reasons other than hunting or sport among high school students aged <18 years and to examine the associations between gun carrying and experiencing violence, suicidal ideation or attempts, or substance use. Gun carrying during the previous 12 months was reported by one in 15 males and one in 50 females. Gun carrying was significantly more likely among youths with violence-related experiences (adjusted prevalence ratio [aPR] range = 1.5–10.1), suicidal ideation or attempts (aPR range = 1.8–3.5), or substance use (aPR range = 4.2–5.6). These results underscore the importance of comprehensive approaches to preventing youth violence and suicide, including strategies that focus on preventing youth substance use and gun carrying (3). CDC’s YRBS uses an independent three-stage cluster sample design to achieve a nationally representative sample of students in grades 9–12 who attend public or private schools in the 50 states and the District of Columbia (4). The overall response rates for 2017 and 2019 were 60% (14,765) and 60.3% (13,677), respectively. After the removal of responses missing age (153; 0.5%), those indicating legal age to purchase a firearm (i.e., age ≥18 years) (3,412; 12%), and those missing sex (138; 0.5%) or gun carrying information (2,927; 10.3%), the final analytic sample included 21,812 students. Information on YRBS weighting, sampling, and psychometric properties has previously been reported (4,5). YRBS was reviewed and approved by CDC and ICF institutional review boards.

Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report Weekly / Vol. 71 / No. 30 July 29, 2022 

By Clément Evroux

Manufacturing and trade in firearms for civilian purposes employs around 150,000 people in the EU. In 2020, the Commission adopted a 2020-2025 action plan on firearms trafficking to help curb the illegal flows of firearms, and ammunition, while also strengthening the legal market. The adoption of Directive (EU) 2021/555 on control of the acquisition and possession of weapons in 2021 was the first legislative outcome of the plan. In October 2022, the Commission presented a proposal for a regulation on import, export and transit measures for firearms, their essential components and ammunition, another legislative commitment in its action plan. The proposed regulation would pursue three main objectives: a) neutralising the risks of trafficking at import and export; b) ensuring traceability in the firearms trade, based on systematic written information; and c) promoting efficient implementation of controls. Compared to the current rules, the proposal extends the material scope to exports, provides for consistent interpretation of rules across Member States, and allows for the flow of data at EU level. The Committee on International Trade (INTA) adopted its report on 27 October 2023. It strengthens the transparency and traceability provisions contained in the proposal, whilst ensuring alignment with the directive. Second edition. The 'EU Legislation in Progress' briefings are updated at key stages throughout the legislative procedure.

Brussels: EPRS | European Parliamentary Research Service, 2023. 10p.

By United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC)

Crimes that affect the environment cover a broad range of illegal activities that cause harm to the natural world, as a whole or in a particular geographical area.1 They include wildlife crime, illicit trafficking in timber and timber products, crimes in the fisheries sector, trafficking in waste, including hazardous substances, and the subject of the present guide: illegal mining and trafficking in metals and minerals. Some ramifications of these crimes are irreversible and can be severe enough to destroy entire ecosystems and communities, undercutting legal and ecologically viable operations and diminishing future resource alternatives. They can also deprive local communities of vital resources and limit their access to legitimate income through traditional production activity, thus perpetuating impoverishment and armed violence.2 The various negative consequences of crimes that affect the environment hinder the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals, including Goal 3 (healthy lives and well-being for all at all ages), Goal 6 (availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all), Goal 12 (sustainable consumption and production patterns), Goal 15 (sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, sustainable management of forests and combating of desertification, land degradation and biodiversity loss) and Goal 16 (peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, access to justice for all and effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels).3 There are many drivers of crimes that affect the environment. Among the most notable are attractive financial revenues and high demand for the goods and services generated through those crimes. Poverty situations are also regarded as a prominent enabler of crimes that affect the environment because economic hardship facilitates the recruitment of low-level offenders into organized criminal groups.4 People may be pushed into crimes that affect the environment by their income needs, especially in places where employment alternatives are not available. In its resolution 10/6, entitled “Preventing and combating crimes that affect the environment falling within the scope of the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime”, adopted in 2020, the Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime noted with concern that crimes that affect the environment had become some of the most lucrative transnational criminal activities and were closely interlinked with different forms of crime and corruption. Against that background, the Conference of the Parties reaffirmed that the Organized Crime Convention constitutes an effective tool and an essential part of the legal framework for preventing and combating transnational organized crimes that affect the environment and for strengthening international cooperation in this regard5 and asserted its resolve to protect the victims, expressing its deep concern about all those killed, injured, threatened or exploited by organized criminal groups involved in or benefiting from crimes that affect the environment and about those whose living environment, safety, health or livelihoods are endangered or put at risk by those crimes.6 The Conference of the Parties called upon States parties to the Organized Crime Convention to make crimes that affect the environment, in appropriate cases, serious crimes … as defined in article 2, paragraph (b), of the Convention, to ensure that, where the offense is transnational and involves an organized criminal group, effective international cooperation can be afforded under the Convention.7 and requested the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, subject to the availability of extrabudgetary resources, and within its mandate, to provide technical assistance and capacity-building to States parties, upon request, to support their efforts to effectively implement the Convention in preventing and combating transnational organized crimes that affect the environment.8 Those recommendations of the Conference of the Parties to the Organized Crime Convention are aligned with resolution 8/12 of the Conference of the States Parties to the United Nations Convention against Corruption, entitled “Preventing and combating corruption as it relates to crimes that have an impact on the environment”, in which the Conference of the States Parties noted with concern the role that corruption can play in crimes that have an impact on the environment and that money-laundering may be used to disguise and/or conceal the sources of illegally generated proceeds, as well as to facilitate crimes that have an impact on the environment. The Conference urged States parties to the Convention against Corruption to implement the Convention by their domestic legislation and to ensure respect for its provisions, to make best use of the Convention to prevent and combat corruption as it relates to crimes that have an impact on the environment and the recovery and return of proceeds of crimes that have an impact on the environment, by the Convention.9 In 2021, the Fourteenth United Nations Congress on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice adopted the Kyoto Declaration on Advancing Crime Prevention, Criminal Justice and the Rule of Law: Towards the Achievement of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.10 It underscores the commitment of Member States to the adoption of effective measures to prevent and combat crimes that affect the environment, such as illicit trafficking in wildlife, including, inter alia, flora, and fauna as protected by the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora, in timber and timber products, in hazardous wastes and other wastes and precious metals, stones and other minerals, as well as, inter alia, poaching, by making the best possible use of relevant international instruments and by strengthening legislation, international cooperation, capacity-building, criminal justice responses and law enforcement efforts aimed at, inter alia, dealing with transnational organized crime, corruption and money-laundering linked to such crimes, and illicit financial flows derived from such crimes, while acknowledging the need to deprive criminals of proceeds of crime.11 Most recently, in its resolution 76/185, adopted on 16 December 2021, the General Assembly called for a “balanced, integrated, comprehensive and multidisciplinary approach and response to address the complex and multifaceted challenges related to crimes that affect the environment”, acknowledging a need for long-term, comprehensive and sustainable development-oriented measures   

Vienna: UNODC, 2023. 135p.

By Melissa M. Labriola, Nastassia Reed, Anna White Hewitt

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary's directive on human trafficking and the agency's strategy for combating human trafficking outline ambitious goals to address the harms of this criminal activity on its victims and society. However, the logistics and tactics needed to properly implement a victim-centered approach in all facets of law enforcement can be complex. The first step in implementing a victim-centered approach to countering human trafficking is to understand what is already known, what policies may hinder or promote a victim-centered approach, and what training and programming can assist law enforcement. This knowledge can assist DHS's Center for Countering Human Trafficking in both recognizing the importance of a victim-centered approach and understanding how to factor it into day-to-day duties. To address the challenges and outcomes stated above, the authors conducted a review of academic and gray literature to build out a baseline of knowledge. The authors also summarize applicable practices (external to DHS) that implement a victim-centered approach in the following key areas: victim identification and screening, training, and law enforcement operations.

Key Findings

There is limited research in peer-reviewed articles and gray literature on how to improve victim identification and screening for human trafficking in a law enforcement setting

• Most victim identification screening tools are implemented in clinical settings by clinical providers or social workers.

• Understanding the risk factors, accepting how an individual's exposure to trauma affects cognition, and recognizing common symptoms of trauma can inform agents in their daily work.

Effective training programs can create a workplace with a common understanding of trauma

• Building a workforce capable of using trauma-informed and victim-centered approaches relies on effective training programs to build knowledge, capacity, and skills.

• Key skills to develop through training include avoiding retraumatization, building relationships with survivors, working with a diverse population, and conducting effective interviews with survivors.

• During training, alternatives to standard lectures can be valuable to encourage participation and skill retention.

Organizational change is needed to implement a victim-centered approach in law enforcement operations

• Implementation of a victim-centered approach requires organizational change and an overarching framework that affects every step and person within the system.

• A victim-centered approach is centered in a culture of continuous learning and collaboration.

• The depth of knowledge about human trafficking, including prevalence rates and successful intervention methods, points to the difficulties in operationalizing an evidence-based, victim-centered approach.

• According to the literature review, individual police agencies and service agencies are prioritizing some operations that can possibly be adopted and adapted to a federal law enforcement setting.

Recommendations

• DHS law enforcement's best course of action would be to take an informal approach to screening and prioritize identifying trauma symptoms during law enforcement’s brief interactions with potential victims.

• Law enforcement personnel should educate themselves on myths and stereotypes about victim behavior and the cultural backgrounds and unique challenges faced by trafficking victims from different communities, including cultural differences and language barriers.

• Cultural sensitivity; acknowledging cultural norms, beliefs, and languages; and rapport-building would support victims in sharing their stories.

Santa Monica, CA: RAND, 2024. 28p.

By Andrew R. Morral, Rosanna Smart, Terry L. Schell, Brian G. Vegetabile, Emma Thomas

Measures of the proportion of individuals living in households with a firearm (HFR), over time, across states, and by demographic groups are needed to evaluate disparities in firearm violence and the effects of firearm policies. OBJECTIVE To estimate HFR across states, years, and demographic groups in the US. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS In this survey study, substate HFR totals from 1990 to 2018 were estimated using Bayesian multilevel regression with poststratification to analyze survey data on HFR from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System and the General Social Survey. HFR was estimated for 16 substate demographic groups defined by gender, race, marital status, and urbanicity in each state and year. EXPOSURES Survey responses indicating household firearm ownership were analyzed and compared with a common proxy for firearm ownership, the fraction of suicides completed with a firearm (FSS). MAIN OUTCOME AND MEASURE HFR, FSS, and their correlations and differences. RESULTS Among US adults in 2018, HFR was significantly higher among married, nonurban, non-Hispanic White and American Indian male individuals (65.0%; 95% credible interval [CI], 61.5%- 68.7%) compared with their unmarried, urban, female counterparts from other racial and ethnic groups (7.3%; 95% CIs, 6.0%-9.2%). Marginal HFR rates for larger demographic groups also revealed important differences, with racial minority groups and urban dwellers having less than half the HFR of either White or American Indian (39.5%; 95% CI, 37.4%-42.9% vs 17.2%; 95% CI, 15.5%-19.9%) or nonurban populations (46.0%; 95% CI, 43.8%-49.5% vs 23.1%; 95% CI, 21.3%-26.2%). Population growth among groups less likely to own firearms, rather than changes in ownership within demographic groups, explains 30% of the 7 percentage point decline in HFR nationally from 1990 to 2018. Comparing HFR estimates with FSS revealed the expected high overall correlation across states (r = 0.84), but scaled FSS differed from HFR by as many as 20 percentage points for some states and demographic groups. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE This survey study of HFR providing detailed, publicly available HFR estimates highlights key disparities among individuals in households with firearms across states and demographic groups; it also identifies potential biases in the use of FSS as a proxy for firearm ownership rates. These findings are essential for researchers, policymakers, and public health experts looking to address geographic and demographic disparities in firearm violence.  

JAMA Open, 2024.