The Emerald Handbook of Crime, Justice and Sustainable Development

This chapter introduces the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and considers how criminological research, policy and practice can advance this global agenda. It critically accounts for the complex geopolitical, institutional and ideological landscapes that gave rise to this agenda and the challenges this poses for implementing the SDGs today. The chapter also raises important questions about the viability and consequentiality of global efforts to govern the nexus between crime, justice and sustainable development on account of the gravest threat to humanity, climate change. We conclude that all of these issues highlight the need for scholars and practitioners with expertise on crime and justice to approach this agenda from a critical standpoint. At the same time, we acknowledge that the SDGs remain the best global framework that we have for promoting safer and more equitable societies.

This chapter traces the history of global crime governance from the final decades of the nineteenth century to today, with particular attention paid to the United Nations and its crime programme after World War II. It highlights significant changes to the structure and mandate of the UN crime programme over the last 70 years and how UN agencies have helped shape the international crime policy agenda and its focus on development. The chapter then illustrates how vestiges of prevailing beliefs about development and crime and the global political economy that gave rise to them continue to influence the work of the UN system and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) today. In this regard, our analysis highlights some institutional and structural challenges inherent to containing the ‘dark side of globalisation’ together with the ways in which the UN's efforts to do so privilege the interests and understandings of Northern countries. We conclude that these power asymmetries represent an obstacle to the UN's custodianship of criminological targets that feature in the SDGs, but stop short of suggesting that the governance of the crime–development nexus should be viewed as a coherent, neo-colonial project given the institutional weaknesses within the UN system, the ‘Rise of the South’ and the potential for civil society to contest its priorities and agendas.

Slowly, and driven by a growing recognition of the impact of organised crime on developing countries, as well as the allure developing countries represent to criminal groups, development agencies have begun to engage with the problem of criminality. As a new actor in this area though, the linkage between development actors and other stakeholders – particularly those at the security end of the spectrum – is mired by a series of tensions. The explicit connection between crime and development in the Sustainable Development Goals increases the incentive, and urgency, for development actors to work through these tensions. However, the response often replicates the focus of security actors, such as building the capacity of law enforcement agencies to arrest criminals and seize illicit goods. This approach neglects the specific value that development offers in the response to organised crime. This chapter will map out the tensions that exist between security and development actors, and their impact on the response to organised crime. It will then consider what development can contribute to the response, drawing on examples from Libya and Mexico.

This chapter examines the theoretical contributions of Marx and Engels as a framework for analysing the historical evolution of the idea of inequality within the domestic and international legal frameworks in capitalist societies. It discusses what can be referred to as a triple inequality in the legal frameworks that emerged at the end of the eighteenth century in a historical context dominated by bourgeois revolutions. The new ruling class relied on a legal-philosophical discourse to promote a drastic legal transformation: the equal treatment for all citizens under the law. This marked the beginning of a period of ‘idyllic justice’ grounded in consensual social values that gave the appearance, at least formally, of non-selectivity. Despite these promises, the emergent formal treatment under the law contrasted with the inequality of the law in practice. The continuity of the vulnerable sectors' dispossession – an inherent element of the development of capitalism – was then masked behind three modes of inequality: the denial of unequal material conditions through the imposition of an ahistorical and abstract characterisation of the law; inequality of the formal law; and inequality in the application of the law. Today, in an age of global governance, this chapter proposes that a similar process of global triple inequality is taking place through the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Reflections on possible paths to overcome this trend can be found at the end of the chapter.

A central focus of Sustainable Development Goal 16 is to ‘Significantly reduce all forms of violence and related death rates everywhere’. This chapter explores the magnitude of this task, focussing on the persistence – and in some cases intensification – of stark differences both within and between societies around the world in the level of suffering and death imposed by ‘ordinary’ violence in the streets and homes. These differences dramatically shape the lived experience of people on different sides of what I call the ‘violence divide’. At the extreme, they produce rates of violent death that are over 200 times higher in the most dangerous countries than in the least. These disparities are both a consequence and a cause of failures of sustainable and equitable development. They are sharpest and most consequential between parts of the global South and most of the advanced industrial societies, but they also appear in stark relief within some advanced societies, most notably the United States, reflecting broader, enduring inequities that are only weakly challenged, if at all, in the current political climate. Reducing these fundamental disparities in life and death will require moving well beyond the relatively minor criminal justice reforms and limited prevention efforts that often dominate national and international dialogue, to grapple seriously with the structural forces that breed them.

Goal 16 of the SDGs concerns ‘Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions’. Specifically, Goal 16 states ‘Promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, provide access to justice for all and build effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels’. Among the targets of this goal (Target 16.5) is to ‘Substantially reduce corruption and bribery in all their forms’. Undoubtedly, the recognition and inclusion of corruption and bribery among other relevant governance aspects is laudable and necessary. This chapter examines and analyses the relationship between corruption and sustainable development, assesses regional performance through the indicators for achieving Target 16.5 of the Sustainable Development Goals and proposes other indicators and policy frameworks for improved performance toward substantially reducing corruption and bribery in all their forms.

Despite a global consensus that rule of law is desirable, there are important debates about what this entails and how it can be achieved or supported in developing and transitional countries of the Global South. Accordingly, this chapter considers the importance and contextual suitability of rule of law as a building block for ‘peaceful and inclusive societies’ in the context of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG). We begin by examining key definitional debates and consider the challenges inherent to monitoring progress towards SDG target 16.3 which seeks to ‘promote the rule of law at the national and international levels, and ensure equal access to justice for all’. We proceed to illustrate some of these definitional and methodological limitations by considering how favourable rankings of model Western democracies mask rule of law deficits that relate to access to justice and the protection of human rights for marginalised populations. This critique highlights an important point that is repeatedly emphasised throughout the rule of law literature: rule of law is not an end state but rather an ideal that all countries must continuously work to realise and sustain. The remainder of the chapter considers the challenges of promoting a Western rule of law agenda in a failed and titular democracy (the Solomon Islands) and a peaceful and prosperous country (Singapore) which adheres to a ‘thin’ definition of the rule of law that does not conform with liberal ideals.

Policing in much of the developing world has always been, in many respects, both dominated by the nonstate and pluralised. Yet, plurality and the nonstate are predominantly conceptualised, by scholars and practitioners alike, as problematic, noninclusive and/or undemocratic. Yet the reality is far more complex than this. In this chapter, we turn the tables on conventional wisdom by looking to the positive features of plural or polycentric forms of security governance by asking how these features might be utilised to provide for more inclusive forms of security governance in the Global South. Drawing on empirical research in South Africa on plural policing arrangements, this chapter considers how Sustainable Development Goal 16 which seeks to ‘promote peaceful and inclusive societies’ might be realised within plural governance systems. This chapter seeks to demonstrate that certain conditions need to be in place for plural or polycentric systems of security governance to coprovide effective and inclusive security for the collective good and, furthermore, that the positive features of the nonstate can be harnessed to give effect to the SDGs.

Some of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) adopted by the United Nations (UN) General Assembly are related to violence, crime and crime control issues. In what seems to be an innovative approach, the so-called ‘international community’ has seemed to reach the commonsensical agreement that, in order to enjoy sustainable development and strengthen the capabilities, well-being and freedom of the citizens of the global south, their governments must reduce violence and crime (SDG 16.1). The SDGs also seem to provide the response to tackle crime and violence in the global south. SDG 16.3 aims at ‘promoting the rule of Law at the national and international level and ensuring equal access to justice for all’. Thus, the promotion of the rule of law has commonly been understood as the strengthening of the criminal justice system and State security forces to reduce crime and impunity in the global south. Focussing on Latin America, this article will critically discuss the problematic presuppositions and implications of such a paradigm, which tends to impose, reproduce and legitimise the particular worldviews of global north countries and institutions. This approach is counterproductive, for it does not acknowledge the particularities and historical trajectories of Latin American countries, while naturalising specific global north political, economic and truth regimes.

Global mobility remains one of the most pressing challenges of our times. Countries in the north are turning to major ‘sending’ countries in the south to secure their cooperation in controlling their borders and in repatriation processes. By explicitly linking migration to global security threats and weak governance, these migration control initiatives are justified by development goals and sometimes financed by official development assistance (ODA). By connecting criminology with international development scholarship, this chapter seeks to advance our understanding of the novel intersections between criminal justice, security and development to govern mass migration. Focusing on UK policies and the analysis of specific programmes, it interrogates what does the sustainable development goal (10.7) of facilitating ‘orderly, safe, regular and responsible migration’ concretely entail? And to what extent does the language of ‘managed migration’ legitimise restrictive border controls policies and even conflict with other global development goals?

Cities have long been of interest to international development as well as to criminology. Historically, criminology as a social science emerged as a response to urbanisation and the new opportunities created by cities for criminal activity and victimisation. Thus, Sustainable Development Goal 11 (SDG 11), which ‘aims to make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable’, is ripe for criminological input and analysis. SDG 11 tackles housing and basic services, transport systems, urban planning, cultural and natural heritage, disaster prevention, environmental impact, and safe, inclusive, and accessible green and public spaces. There has been ample criminological research on crime and victimisation in various types of human settlements, on transport systems, on the looting and trafficking of cultural heritage, on crimes associated with natural disasters and on the importance of public leisure areas for crime prevention. Yet many of the above goals, as well as the recommendations emerging from these bodies of research, conflict with each other, and must be problematised in their aim to be inclusive of all. Women and children, the elderly and persons with disabilities are usually the reference groups for inclusion, but globally, there are many other groups, including racial and ethnic minorities, indigenous communities, and LGBTQI individuals that are commonly excluded. The chapter will analyse SDG 11 against the evidence base of urban criminology as well as the challenges for inclusion, given diversity both within-country as well as globally.

Target 16.7 of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) refers to the need for ‘responsive, inclusive, participatory and representative decision-making’ to facilitate just, peaceful and inclusive societies. This chapter discusses why it is important that security and justice institutions, and decision-making therein, are responsive, inclusive, participatory and representative; how to develop such institutions; and how to measure success in this regard. It is argued that the limited scope of the official SDG indicators used to measure progress risks action being taken on less tangible and less measurable but often more meaningful aspects of building just, peaceful and inclusive societies. The chapter argues that facilitating more inclusive decision-making, especially in the security and justice sector (redistributing power), and evaluating progress in this regard (determining what success looks like) are both highly political undertakings. These undertakings are thus, fraught with practical difficulties and likely to generate resistance from those who have a vested interest in retaining the status quo. Retaining focus on the Target and overarching Goal, however, can help avoid implementation being derailed by being distracted by a huge data gathering exercise to respond to a narrow set of quantifiable indicators. It can also ultimately help facilitate transformational change towards just, peaceful and inclusive societies.

Children are often side-lined in both national and international provisions. Whilst the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development mentions children, it does so not as World citizens but rather as subjects; this replicates their position in most state constitutions. The chapter considers the use of Amartya Sen's justice theory to deliver the 2030 Agenda to children who offend. For Sen, justice requires the identification and removal of sociostructural barriers which limit the life chances and impede the ability of many children to pursue legitimate and meaningful goals. He prioritises choice for all, including children. This chapter uses these ideals to consider the delivery of justice whilst respecting human agency. It takes as its example Wales, where children are central to a sustainable future and embraced as citizens with full human and fundamental rights. In particular, the Welsh Government's emphasis on ‘universal’ entitlements places a moral and political imperative on agencies to promote the well-being of all children, including those in conflict with the law; it seeks to deliver well-being to all children. The Welsh example is suggested as a just solution that might be replicated elsewhere and so result in a true delivery of the 2030 Sustainable Development Agenda.

Goal 5 of the United Nations (UN) Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) prioritises gender equality and empowerment of all women and girls. Key to achieving this is addressing violence against women (VAW; see SDG target 5.2) and, we believe, understanding the role of technology in both enacting and combating VAW. In this chapter, we outline how technology-facilitated VAW threatens women's use of technology and discuss policies and practices of support workers and practitioners that aid safe use of digital media. We consider features of technology-facilitated VAW advocacy which differ from traditional VAW advocacy, using examples from the Global North and South. Information communication technologies (ICTs) are used by VAW advocates in a range of ways; to provide information and education about domestic violence, safe use of technology and negotiating the legal and criminal justice systems; collect evidence about abuse; provide support; and pursue social change. As the capabilities and prevalence of ICT and devices increase and access costs decrease, these channels offer new and innovative opportunities capitalising on the spacelessness, cost-effectiveness and timelessness of media. Nonetheless, technological initiatives are not perfect or failsafe. Throughout the pages that follow, we acknowledge the limitations and challenges of technology-facilitated advocacy, which could hinder application of the SDG.

The 1993 UN Declaration on Violence Against Women prepared the grounds for the elimination of violence against women and girls (VAWG) as a key ambition of the UN Sustainable Development Goal 5 with Target 5.2 specifically turning attention towards the elimination of all forms of VAWG in the public and private spheres. In this chapter, we take as given the pressing need to reduce VAWG globally. We also acknowledge that measuring VAW is fraught with difficulties, even where criminal justice system responses exist, and that these difficulties can be magnified in countries which have no domestic laws that criminalise common forms of male VAW, including domestic violence. Thus the realisation of Target 5.2 is faced with specific problems of measurement when what constitutes ‘violence against women’ is contested and when there may be no commonly agreed legal indicators between different jurisdictions to act as a proxy for goal achievement. In light of these challenges, we consider how indicators can be best mobilised to provide useful measurements of progress and success for different communities, and for different types of violence(s) against women in the light of Target 5.2.

This chapter considers the impetus for the inclusion of labour rights and secure work rights, with a particular focus on countering human trafficking and what is now widely known as ‘modern slavery’ in the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The SDGs comprise 17 goals and 169 targets set to assist nation states in achieving sustainable development in the ‘five P’ areas: People, Planet, Prosperity, Peace and Partnership. In this chapter we analyse goals and targets that focus on modern slavery and adult human trafficking (in particular sex trafficking and trafficking for forced labour), and review the SDGs in the context of existing international counter-trafficking and slavery mechanisms. We consider what this novel framework has to offer when it comes to addressing these forms of exploitation. In so doing, the chapter considers the likely impact of the SDGs to preventing and countering these exploitative practices, and its potential usefulness within the broader spectrum of counter-trafficking/slavery mechanisms. We suggest that the SDGs are yet another international instrument that makes strong rhetorical commitments to the intersections of labour, migration and exploitation, but lacks clarity and operational strength it needs to lead the path in reduction, if not elimination of such exploitative practices. Finally, we analyse the extent to which this instrument continues to ignore the factors that contribute to or sustain the conditions for exploitation, namely the impact of migration policies and the gendered nature of the issue.

Sustainable development and the enhancement of justice and security globally are predicated on the existence of sufficient and appropriately deployed assets. Mindful of this, and of the misuse of both public and private wealth, UN Sustainable Development Goal 16.4 (SDG 16.4) seeks to ‘…significantly reduce illicit financial … flows’. This chapter critiques how this aim of SDG 16.4 has been operationalised. We argue that the choice and placement of the term ‘illicit’ is crucial: it can relate to the finances, the flows, or both, as well as to the people involved, as facilitators or protagonists, and is expansive enough to encompass criminal, unlawful and ostensibly legal but illegitimate or harmful assets, acts and actors. Moreover, this chapter explores why the movement of assets is significant, within and between jurisdictions, and how these transfers and transactions impact on sustainable development and can worsen inequalities. Our attention is on the conceptualisation, measurement and operationalisation of illicit financial flows (IFFs) in particular and the corresponding implications for available policy responses in the form of situational interventions as a more plausible route to understanding and reducing IFFs in the context of promoting SDG 16.4.

This chapter explores the relationship between the global drug policy agenda and the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Development is one of the key pillars of the UN's charter; however, sustainable development and drug policy have existed in separate policy spaces for decades. During 2015 and 2016, two parallel processes took place at the UN – the adoption of the 2015 SDGs, superseding the Millennium Development Goals, and the 2016 UN Special Session on the world drug problem (UNGASS), a global convening of countries to create a way forward to address illicit drugs. This chapter explores how a group of reform-oriented countries, UN agencies and civil society stakeholders used the UNGASS to advocate for better policy alignment with development principles. While some headway was made, tensions remain about allowing a development approach into the drug policy realm. This chapter argues that given strong pushback to maintain a law enforcement-driven agenda by many countries, better alignment will not happen without more clarity on what sustainable development–driven drug policy is and without champions to push these ideas in the drug policy arena.

The 2006 General Assembly adoption of the United Nations (UN) Global Counter-terrorism strategy marked the first time all member states ratified a collective counter-terrorism (CT) agenda. Building on the 2000 Millennium Development Goals, the strategy incorporated Amartya Sen's capability-based approach to development. This promised human-oriented and holistic methods for countering terrorism and violent extremism, in contrast to the post-2001 ‘hard security’ context of the United States–led Global War on Terror (GWOT). Although the first pillar of the strategy emphasised human rights and social progress over isolated economic growth, poverty, violence and retrogression in conflict zones since 2006 have led to the deaths of millions. Combined with resource scarcity and environmental devastation, insurgency-related conflicts have resulted in 70 million people displaced worldwide in 2019, while the politically violent phenomena of extreme right-wing nationalism and neo-jihadism remain prevalent. Reflecting on the social and economic outcomes of the GWOT, this chapter evaluates development-related discourses and activity in UN-led initiatives to counter and prevent violent extremism and terrorism. In doing so, it accounts for the impacts of UN CT measures on contemporary patterns ‘in phenomena described in policy arenas as ‘violent extremism’ and ‘terrorism’, including ‘neo-jihadism’ and right-wing extremism, in Global North and Global South contexts.

In this chapter, we first argue for a green criminological perspective on culture as well as nature, as those concepts are framed in the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. Second, from within this green criminological perspective we discern a neocolonial hegemony in the resource extraction from developing countries that is represented by international trafficking markets in looted cultural heritage and poached wildlife. In other words, developed nations benefit from these trades while developing nations suffer, and governance regimes attempting to control these global criminal trades prioritise the rational interests and cultural norms of the more powerful market nations over the local interests and cultural histories of communities at the source of the chain of supply. Finally, our third argument is that the emerging intellectual framework of sustainable development, as represented in the UN's goals, may provide a perspective on the issue of trafficking culture and nature that can push back against the neocolonial hegemony of international criminal markets such as these.

This chapter discusses the role of energy production in the global capitalist economy and its relationship to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), with particular focus on SDG 8 – ‘Promote sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment and decent work for all’ – and SDG 12 – ‘Ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns’. It achieves this by first introducing the Club of Rome report the Limits to Growth which utilised a system dynamics computer model to simulate the interactions of five global economic subsystems (population, food production, industrial production, pollution and consumption of nonrenewable natural resources) (Meadows, Meadows, Randers, & Behrens III, 1972), the results of which posed serious challenges for global sustainability, to better understand and contextualise unconventional (also referred to as ‘extreme’) and ‘renewable’ energy production as examples of the paradoxical nature of sustainable development in the global capitalist economy. Demonstrating that unconventional energy production methods are much less efficient, more carbon intensive, more environmentally destructive and just as unsustainable, and that renewable energy relies on the extraction of nonrenewable natural resources such as lithium that result in similar environmental and social issues, this chapter will interrogate this and ask the question – is the capitalist system in its current form capable of making ‘sustainable development something more than the oxymoron it appears?’.

Although more than 71 per cent of the Earth is covered by water, 97 per cent of that volume is saltwater held in the oceans. Of the remaining water, 2 per cent is freshwater locked away in snow and ice, leaving less than 1 per cent available for human requirements (Williams, 2016). Yet, water is crucial for human survival. Therefore, access to water must be recognised as a fundamental human right. In 2010, the United Nations adopted Resolution 64/292 which explicitly recognises the human right to water and sanitation, acknowledges that clean drinking water and sanitation are essential for the realisation of all human rights, and seeks to protect water as a national resource and the people that need it the most. Despite the adoption of the aforementioned Resolution, water remains a hugely pertinent issue across the world, particularly in areas where water is considered predominantly as a tradeable commodity. Hence, Water and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) adopted by the 2015 UN-Water Annual International Zaragoza Conference are extremely important in terms of water protection, preservation and sustainable development. This chapter discusses access to water as a fundamental precondition of life, noting that the Republic of Slovenia became one of the first countries in the world to include the human right to water in its Constitution in 2017. The authors believe that this is an excellent example for other countries to change their legislation in favour of protecting the fundamental human right to access to water. It also presents further possibilities for achieving SDG 6.1 (and other SDGs related to water) in practice.

Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated (IUU) fishing is one of the most complex and serious environmental crimes affecting marine ecosystems around the globe and depriving coastal communities of vital subsistence resources. Many strategies have been developed to deal with the problem in hopes to eventually eradicate it. This chapter will review a total of 163 approaches implemented around the world, and classify these interventions according to the 25 techniques of situational crime prevention (SCP), one of the most effective crime reduction measures frequently used to deal with a variety of crime problems. This chapter will analyse what types of techniques are most and least frequently used and why; note similarities and differences among these intervention strategies; as well as examine whether there is a distinct difference between developed and developing countries in their use of particular SCP measures to combat IUU fishing. This chapter will also present examples of particularly interesting initiatives, and propose new ways forward.

Unsustainable logging and illegal logging for domestic and international trade and trafficking continue to lead to deforestation. It is crucial that Sustainable Development Goal 15 ‘Sustainably manage forests, combat desertification, halt and reverse land degradation, halt biodiversity loss’ is achieved to maintain the livelihoods of people and protect the planet. This is the case in Vietnam as well, where many people, including indigenous groups, rely on the forest for their survival. Drawing on semistructured interviews in Vietnam and a literature review, we investigate how the abuse of forest policies leads to human insecurity. From this, we propose solutions to (1) end unsustainable harvesting and illegal logging (SDG 15.7), (2) integrate the value of forests (culturally and economically) into national and local planning, the development process and poverty elimination strategies (SDG 15.9) and (3) improve the use of forest protection funding provided by international donors.

In 2018, the World Health Organization released its latest report on air pollution identifying that seven million people die annually as a result of poor air quality. Moreover, it is estimated that 90% of the world's population is exposed to ‘dangerous levels’ of air pollution (WHO, 2018a). This is an alarming news, given the United Nations Sustainable Development Goal number three seeks to ‘substantially reduce the number of deaths and illnesses from hazardous chemical and air, water and soil pollution and contamination’ (WHO, 2016). In addition, the WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus has publicly stated that ‘…air pollution threatens us all, but the poorest and most marginalised people bear the brunt of the burden… If we don't take urgent action on air pollution, we will never come close to achieving sustainable development’ (WHO, 2018b). This chapter explores the political economy of global air pollution including an analysis of international trade that perpetuates and exacerbates emissions and the environmental injustices associated with global warming and air quality ill health. It also draws on discourses of power, harm and violence to analyse air pollution and climate change within frameworks of green criminology and atmospheric justice.

This chapter examines SDG 13 which deals with efforts to combat climate change. The chapter begins by outlining the targets related to this goal, the trend towards increased heating of the planet and failures to curtail carbon emissions. This is framed using criminological concepts such as state-corporate crime and carbon criminality. The major concern of the rest of the chapter is to outline a climate action plan. As part of this, it discusses a range of initiatives currently underway intended to pressure governments to take more concerted action around climate change. These include activist interventions and climate litigation. The chapter concludes by exploring the possibilities and obligations of global community action to address the most important issue of our era.