Ecology and Criminology? Applying the tenets of procedural justice to environmental regulations
| DOI | 10.1177/1748895820922291 |
| Date | 01 April 2022 |
| Published date | 01 April 2022 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
https://doi.org/10.1177/1748895820922291
Criminology & Criminal Justice
2022, Vol. 22(2) 199 –216
© The Author(s) 2020
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/1748895820922291
journals.sagepub.com/home/crj
Ecology and Criminology?
Applying the tenets of
procedural justice to
environmental regulations
Sheila R Maxwell
and Christopher D Maxwell
Michigan State University, USA
Abstract
Criminologists are increasingly investigating the harmful intersections between humans and the
natural environment, largely under the green criminology banner. However, most discourses have
largely remained at the macro level and empirical tests are limited. The foci of research had been
industry, state/national actors or policy discourses and not individuals responding to mandated
environmental regulations. Individual actors are especially important in developing countries
where environmental regulations can substantially impact citizens’ livelihood opportunities.
This research uses the procedural justice framework to understand citizens’ responses to an
environmental regulatory body. A team of local researchers conducted face-to-face interviews
with citizens affected by environmental regulations in the Banahaw protected landscape in the
north-central Philippines to assess their trust and cooperation with the regulatory body. Results
demonstrated high reliability for the key procedural constructs of respect, impartiality, voice, and
trustworthiness. Path analysis showed that impartiality and voice were significantly related to
perceived trustworthiness of the regulatory body and impartiality is directly related to cooperation.
The results provide evidence that criminological perspectives are useful in organizing the complex
dynamics of laws, enforcement and behavior change that is inherent in environmental regulations.
Keywords
Banahaw, conservation criminology, environmental conservation, environmental management,
environmental regulations, green criminology, legitimacy, Philippine environment, Philippine
protected area management board, Philippines, procedural justice, trust and compliance
Corresponding author:
Sheila R Maxwell, Michigan State University, 650 Auditorium Road, East Lansing, MI 48824, USA.
Email: MAXWEL22@msu.edu
922291CRJ0010.1177/1748895820922291Criminology & Criminal JusticeMaxwell and Maxwell
research-article2020
Article
200 Criminology & Criminal Justice 22(2)
Introduction
A growing body of research in criminology has examined the intersections between
humans and the natural environment (flora, fauna, landscapes, seascapes, water).
Particularly, research has focused on the negligent, harmful or criminal use of natural
resources, often by corporate actors (Beirne et al., 2008; Lynch and Stretsky, 2003).
These discourses have come under many names, most prominently under green crimi-
nology (Ballif-Spanvill et al., 2008), but also under conservation criminology (Gibbs
et al., 2010) or environmental justice (Bullard, 2000; Zilney et al., 2006) among others
and have propelled the highly important global issue of environmental/ecological con-
servation into the criminological purview.
Notwithstanding, criminological research on conservation and ecology (to distinguish
this from environmental criminology—crime in space) has often employed macro-level
approaches and critiques and lacks empirical testing (Lynch et al., 2017; Zilney et al.,
2006). Lynch et al. (2017) has reasoned that the lack of empiricism in green criminology
is possibly the reason why it remains largely at the fringes of crime research and also
hinders the adaption of ecological/conservation related inquiries into mainstream crimi-
nology (Lynch et al., 2017). Yet, criminology is an inherently multidisciplinary field of
study. The theories and perspectives that have been used in criminology to advance
knowledge about law and human behavior, enforcement agents and citizen interactions,
sanctioning mechanisms and public policy interventions are potentially useful elements
that can be tapped to understand the complex dynamics that characterize the human–
environment intersections particularly within the environmental regulatory context.
This paper uses a commonly used framework in criminology, procedural justice, to
examine perceptions by affected citizens of an environmental enforcement body. Citizens’
actions in many protected land and marine areas in developing countries are significant
drivers of compliance behaviors as citizens’ social and livelihood needs are impacted,
sometimes significantly, by conservation laws (Catedrilla et al., 2012; Chaigneau and
Brown, 2016; Pietri et al., 2009). Striking an appropriate balance between conservation
and household needs poses a considerable challenge, as is the case in the Philippines, and
calls for individual-level analyses of eco-use behaviors. This individual-level analysis is
consistent with most works in criminology and many of its sub-fields and is also consist-
ent with disciplines outside of criminology that study uptake of environmental regula-
tions (Bartel and Barclay, 2011; Catedrilla et al., 2012; Chaigneau and Brown, 2016;
Christie et al., 2009; Jagers et al., 2012; Pietri et al., 2009; Valkeapaeae and Karppinen,
2013). This diverges, however, from much of current works in conservation and green
criminology where units of analysis used are often groups, organizations, or govern-
ments/states, or where studies have assessed policies or philosophical perspectives
around environmental harm (Gibbs et al., 2010; Heydon, 2018; White, 2018). While
industry compliance to environmental regulations remains a substantial concern in the
Philippines and in conservation generally (Gibbs et al., 2010; Hawkins, 1990; Simpson
and Piquero, 2002), this paper focuses only on individuals who are recipients of environ-
mental regulations.
This challenge of environmental enforcement and citizen compliance closely paral-
lels citizen-police interactions particularly in the police’s attempt to exact cooperation
To continue reading
Request your trial