top of page

Animal Rights

Summaries and links to the publications


State-organized crime and the killing of wolves in Norway

While scholars of state crime and organized crime have frequently explored the intersection of these fields with green criminology, for the most part they have not brought the two together as organized state criminality as a means to explore environmental destruction. Of the few explorations of organized state green crime that do exist, most do not embrace a non-speciesist perspective. In this article, we develop a non-speciesist theory of organized state green crime to explain the Norwegian state-licensed killing of wolves, a phenomenon that we analyze through the use of the concept ideological inertia. Our main argument is that the underlying cultural, political and economic interests that were prioritized up to the 1970s in Norway continue to have a counteracting effect on the protection of large carnivores, which the country committed to as a signatory to the Bern Convention.


Animal abuse, biotechnology and species justice

Generally, in the modern, western world, conceptualizations of the natural environment are associated with what nature can offer us—an anthropocentric perspective whereby humans treat nature and all its biotic components as ‘natural resources’. When nature and the beings within it are regarded purely in utilitarian terms, humans lose sight of the fact that ecosystems and nonhuman animals have intrinsic value. Most biotechnological use of nonhuman animals is informed by an instrumental view of nature. In this article, we endeavour to broaden the field of animal abuse studies by including in it the exploration of biotechnological abuse of animals. We analyse the issue by discussing it in relation to differing philosophical starting points and, in particular, the rights and justice theory developed within green criminology.


Contesting and Contextualising CITES: Wildlife Trafficking in Colombia and Brazil

This article raises the question of whether recently implemented legislation in Colombia and Brazil (1) provides the necessary tools to prevent the harms of wildlife trafficking (WLT) and (2) influences humans’ practices concerning the use of nonhuman animals. These questions are investigated from the dual perspectives of green criminology and public policy. The analysis is based on a qualitative empirical study undertaken in Colombia and Brazil whereby we discuss the function of the legislation in Colombia and Brazil in preventing illegal WLT. We consider the legitimacy of different practices of WLT and evaluate them with respect to species justice and environmental justice.


Denying the Harms of Animal Abductions for Biomedical Research

When people are confronted with information that is deemed to be so disturbing that it is difficult to remain passive, acknowledgment responses are elicited. By becoming committed to the issue, an act of acknowledgment provides a psychologically and morally appropriate response to what the person knows. However, if a harmful situation exists but its occurrence, its meaning or its implications are effectively denied, then actions against it are avoided and the possibility is created for the situation to persist. Consequently, the practices in question are likely to keep on occurring if they are not recognized as harmful or if their harms are denied (Cohen, 2001).

bottom of page