Food Crime, Regulation and the Biotech Harvest
| Author | Reece Walters |
| DOI | 10.1177/1477370807074856 |
| Published date | 01 April 2007 |
| Date | 01 April 2007 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
Volume 4 (2): 217–235: 1477-3708
DOI: 10.1177/1477370807074856
Copyright © 2007 European Society of
Criminology and SAGE Publications
Los Angeles, London, New Delhi and Singapore
www.sagepublications.com
Food Crime, Regulation and the Biotech
Harvest
Reece Walters
The Open University, UK
ABSTRACT
This article focuses on the trade and regulatory practices of transgenic or
genetically modified (GM) food, or what Pringle (2003) refers to as the ‘biotech
harvest’. It explores issues of eco-crime and raises questions for environmental
and transnational justice when corporations and government are complicit in
acts of economic exploitation and illegality.
KEY WORDS
Crime / International Environmental Law / Regulation / Transgenic Food.
Introduction
Food crime is an emerging area of criminological scholarship (Croall 2006).
The sale of contaminated meat, the illegal use of chemicals, the exploitation
of farm workers, the use of fraudulent marketing practices, and the aggres-
sive trade policies of governments and corporations are some of the areas
involving unethical and illegal behaviour in the UK and abroad (see Lang
and Heasman 2004; Lawrence 2004). Such issues have found a voice in
discourses on food security and regulation but little has been written
within criminological narratives. Unlawful food trading practices have been
constructed within notions of risk and presented as food scandals and not
food crimes. This paper focuses on one area of the food crime debate,
namely the use of genetics in food production, or what is now commonly
referred to as genetically modified or GM food. It examines the political
economy of GM food within criminological contexts of state, corporate
217-236 EUC-074856.qxd 28/2/07 12:40 PM Page 217
and transnational crime (Green and Ward 2004; Ruggiero 2000; Tombs
and Whyte 2003) and within discourses of harm (Hillyard et al. 2004).
The use of genetics in food production has recently been explored within
criminological discourses and has examined the exploitation of hunger, the
monopolization of GM technologies and the aggressive trade policies of
western governments and corporations (see Walters 2004, 2006). This
article further explores the global dimensions of GM food through an
examination of ‘eco-crime’ and environmental justice.
Eco-crime and GM food
Eco-crime involves acts of ‘environmental harm and ecological degradation. It
is a term often used synonymously with “green crime” or “environmental
crime”’ (see Walters 2005: 146). Situ and Emmons (2000: 3) situate eco-crime
within domestic and international legal frameworks, arguing that it is ‘an
unauthorized act or omission that violates the law and is therefore subject to
criminal prosecution and criminal sanction’. Other definitions locate eco-
crime within acts of environmental harm not necessarily covered in legal
statute. As a result, environmental harm, constructed from various philosoph-
ical perspectives, extends the definition of eco-crime beyond legal codes
to licensed or lawful acts of ecological degradation committed by states and
corporations. For Westra (2004: 309), eco-crime is unprovoked aggression,
‘committed in the pursuit of other goals and “necessities” such as economic
advantage’. Westra’s work extends the definition of eco-crime beyond
ecological degradation to human health, global security and justice. She sug-
gests that eco-crimes committed by governments and corporations in pursuit
of free trade or progress are ‘attacks on the human person’ that deprive civil-
ians (notably the poor) of the social, cultural and economic benefits of their
environment. As a result, eco-crime is an act of violence and should be viewed
as a human rights violation because citizens are deprived of freedoms and lib-
erties. The diversity of subject matter covered under both international and
national environmental law, and within notions of environmental harm, has
necessitated the integration of diverse expertise and knowledges, including
criminology. Within criminological studies, debates about eco-crime have
emerged within discourses on state and corporate crime or ‘crimes of the power-
ful’ and within developing debates of ‘green and environmental criminology’
(Lynch and Stretsky 2003).
Within the socio-legal constructs defined above, eco-crimes in relation
to GM food have been widely reported. For example, in January 2005,
the US biotechnology and agrochemical giant Monsanto agreed to pay
218 European Journal of Criminology 4(2)
217-236 EUC-074856.qxd 28/2/07 12:40 PM Page 218
To continue reading
Request your trial