Agnew, Robert (2011) A Dire Forecast: A theoretical model of the impact of climate change on crime, in Theoretical Criminology, Vol 16 (1): 21-42
In the mood for something outside our academic comfort zones
this month, the DA gathered to discuss the implications and ideas put forward
in Robert Agnew’s recent article in Theoretical Criminology:
Dire Forecast. Agnew sets himself a bold
task, pointedly stating his belief that climate change will become one the
most significant driving forces behind increases in crime over the coming century. And who better to critically appraise the detrimental impact of the
weather than the Irish, a nation of people who feel particularly maligned by
our inclement climate!
Of course we are all familiar with images of weather-related
disasters, as Agnew rightly points out, in the last 10 years many countries
have been subject to catastrophic heat-waves, droughts, hurricanes and floods. Playing
with the idea of the long-term implications of an increasingly volatile climate has
provided fodder for many a Hollywood blockbuster – and leaving aside the
‘is it or isn’t it’ argument going on in America – the popularity of the topic suggests
that climate change is very much at the front of our conscience.
The breadth of his argument sees Agnew cross disciplinary
thresholds; bringing together disparate areas of literature, such as sociology,
geography, social psychology and ecology, which he frames using strain theory,
giving it a familiar criminological feel.
Agnew lays out the whole gamut of climate change and weather-related disasters: rising temperatures; changing patterns of precipitation;
increased sea levels; hurricanes; floods; droughts. The ripple effect from
these changes makes for sombre reading; water shortages will see crop
production decline, resulting in food-shortages. And that is only the beginning;
then there is the impact on health from malnutrition, cardio-respiratory
diseases from increased air pollution, the spread of infectious diseases such as malaria, as
well as the loss of livelihood, particularly in farming and fishing; and that is to say nothing of the deeply felt trauma
of weather-related catastrophes. All of which will be occurring at a time of
increasing population, which will induce mass migration and see mega-cities
mushroom.
He links this staggering list of climate-related changes to
crime by describing them as a source of strain. These strains, or stressors, will
increase poverty, erode social cohesion, weaken social support, and heightened
social conflict. This paves the way for increased criminality as people’s
values become less stringent and they start to see crime as a legitimate way to act out
against the source of their strain. The forced migration will result in cramped
and sub-par living conditions and work and resources will become increasingly
scarce, all of which will provide fertile soil for increased criminality. And it is not just the change in social structure
that results in climate-related strains; Agnew cites research linking increased
temperature to aggressive behaviour and heightened irritability.
He also tries to link low intelligence to climate-related crime, albeit
briefly, by linking it to malnutrition in pregnant women.
So did Agnew manage to convince us that the impact of
climate change will do as much to crime rates as it will to sea levels? While
we all admitted approaching the article with sceptical eyes, our thoughts on
his paper were not as straight forward as we initially expected. Certainly, a cursory exploration reveals that Agnew is
not alone in his view that climate change presents the greatest security threat of the 21st century.
The bad news is that we felt overall the article had a distractingly
dystopian tone, with the entire plant appearing to edge closer to a
Hobbesian state of nature, in which society comes undone due to dramatic climate change, and life
becomes a violent, brutish and poverty stricken cycle. This dire state of
affairs seemed to override a very important factor in this argument: even if
climate change does proceed at catastrophic levels, the detrimental impacts
will occur discreetly rather than uniformly. As such, how different societies
and governments respond to the challenges of climate change will be highly
diverse. The issue is a knottier one then Agnew presents here; one that is as
much about government resources and developed democracies as it is about
climate change. Evidence of this massively uneven impact can be seen around us
with the current international recession; with the influence of austerity playing
out very differently across national borders. And unlike the recession, climate
change will generally occur at a far more incremental pace, giving states and societies
longer to make sense of these changes. And what about the social cohesion that
develops after unexpected disasters, such as earthquakes, floods and hurricanes;
where people pull together in a sense of shared survival and solidarity? Even in
places where the state is weakened, people’s shared social values are not
instantly dismantled. Despite the planet-wide crisis, climate change will be
experienced differently by each nation state and society; a point which should
be taken more seriously if climate related criminology is to avoid the ‘dangers
of dystopias’, to borrow a phrase from Lucia Zedner.
Some people felt that the arguments around urbanisation
could have been teased out more, it being a far more developed area of
research; and certainly would have provided a firmer
scaffolding on which to hang his argument. However, this is probably a result
of Agnew’s bold ambition to sketch a broad overview of this nascent research
topic in the limited space provided. As he puts it, his aim in this article is
to scan the environmental horizon. Other issues which pose intriguing 21st century problems were mentioned briefly, for example that of corporate crime perpetrated in the avoidance of climate change-related legislation, an area which presents a significant area in itself.
The speculative framework he does present is incredibly rudimentary.
However, he concedes this point throughout the article; emphasising that his
model is better viewed as a template for further work rather than an already
developed thesis.
However, no matter what your intuitive stance on this topic,
it would be almost impossible to outright reject it. And despite our
criticisms, at the heart of this article there is something very interesting
that is worth engaging with. It is well known that people are responsive to the
weather, Seasonal Affective Disorder and vitamin D deficiencies being among
more popular weather-related ailments. Between the assembled DA members we had
an arm length list of anecdotal evidence of weather related changes in
behaviour; though, all of these came loaded with provisos and caveats. However,
what really piqued our interest was one DA member’s recent research which
exposed a clear link between certain offences and the time of year. Obviously
this raises more questions than it answers, but it is hard to observe such a
persistent annual pattern and not wonder about the environmental factors at
play. We felt that much more quantitative and qualitative research of this type
will need to be completed before Agnew’s argument can really get off the
ground.
So, the question remains: is there a need to develop a
distinctly ‘climate criminology’? This article is bursting with possibilities,
ideas and theories, no doubt an indication of Agnew’s own passion for this
topic, perhaps if he wants to move this area forward a more singular focus should
be adopted; allowing the credibility of the various facets of his argument to
be excavated. What this article presents is a whistle-stop introduction to a
potential new-line of inquiry, and it certainly ignited debate among the
assembled DA members, we will eagerly watch to see how Agnew seeks to evolve
this topic and the consequences it may have for criminology more broadly.
To listen to Robert Agnew discuss his article click
here.
This month's blog was written by Louise Brangan.
The views expressed in this blog are the author's alone.
