NCJ Number
193473
Date Published
2000
Length
14 pages
Annotation
This chapter provides a spatial view of environmental crime.
Abstract
Environmental crimes are considered mala prohibita (prohibited by statute because they infringe the rights of others) and mala in se (immorally or intrinsically wrong) by environmentalists. Environmental crime in the United States centers on a series of laws passed since the first Earth Day in 1970. Under the National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA), all Federal agencies must assess the environmental consequences of proposed projects by filing impact statements describing the environmental effects of building such technological features as highways, bridges, airports, dams, and nuclear power plants. The spatial distributions of technological hazards often indicate the potential for environmental crime. Point sources of pollution of land (Love Canal), air (smog and black lung disease), and water (Exxon oil spill) provide the clues for determining liability in many environmental cases. The preservation of endangered species and the wetlands are other issues. Scientific uncertainty and controversial views characterize many of the most perplexing, large-scale environmental situations, such as acid rain and the ozone depletion. The human species is the perpetrator of these crimes by its need for and acceptance of technology. Some of the most contentious environmental cases involve technological hazards in which the public is unwittingly affected by the negative consequences of the use of a technology. Clues to an environmental crime are revealed by working through a causal chain in reverse order. A cancer cluster is a higher incidence of cancer cases in a geographically small area than would be the normal, expected rate of cancer in the general population. Compliance with environmental laws for the maintenance of a healthy environment is the goal of enforcement efforts. The annual cost of environmental crime reaches as much as $20 billion. 11 figures, 14 references