Through the lens of ethical veganism this paper explores tensions within green criminology The increasing global demand for sustainable energy sources has led to growing interest in biofuels as alternatives to fossil fuels. Such fuels are sought as a major address of anthropogenic climate change. Biodiesel, the subject of this paper, can be produced from a variety of vegetable oil sources. This paper focuses on the utilisation of nonhuman animals’ body fats as another source for biodiesel production, which, it has been claimed, reduce the human reliance on fossil fuels while simultaneously addressing waste management issues in the food industries. This paper argues that this use of nonhuman animal bodies is anthropocentric and speciesist. The paper contests the commodity status of nonhuman animals and seeks to eliminate not escalate the human (ab)use of nonhuman animals. By proposing a broadening of the notion of environmental justice to include ethical veganism, this chapter argues for a non-anthropocentric and non-speciesist address of the human devastation of the planet.

Targeted for characteristics such as their colourful appearance, intelligence, and ability to recognize the human voice, parrots (order Psittaciformes) have become a coveted commodity. They are therefore a common victim of the illegal wildlife trade, which in turn has contributed to their overall decline. Many of the world’s most traded and therefore most threatened parrot species originate from Indonesia. Yet Indonesia is also a renowned transit and market country for (illegal) parrot trade. This paper will detail our findings from previous (2020-21) and current (2024) fieldwork on the online trade of all parrot species on one of Indonesia’s most popular social media platforms, Facebook, as pertaining to the trade within Indonesia. Over the period of 1 January 2020 until 31 August 2021, we analysed 283 posts, containing 861 identifiable parrots of 22 species across 38 Facebook user groups. Employing visual and textual analysis, we found clear trends for certain species that we highlight as a potential indicator for targeting. Overt indicators of illegality were common in visual references, despite textual references being coded to avoid detection. Finally, we found the online illegal trade of parrots increased during the global pandemic, despite the stricter approach taken by Facebook regarding trade in live animals on their platform. Overall, our analysis confirmed the importance of Facebook as a virtual marketplace for parrots. We recently revisited Facebook to reapply our snapshot approach, in order to see if even stricter regulations were indeed an effective deterrent for the sale of protected parrots on Facebook. This paper will compare current findings with those from previous fieldwork, while discussing the challenges and opportunities of using a snapshot methodology to capture online (illegal) trade. In addition, we will explore what it means to take an ethics of care approach in researching humans, other animals, and their ecosystems.

This paper presents findings from a project on raptor persecution in Scotland and examines their implications for the development of green zemiological theory. Raptor persecution, i.e. the systematic killing of birds of prey, is primarily associated with land management practices on driven grouse moors, whose profitability relies on maintaining a high population density of red grouse.
Raptor persecution is a key wildlife crime priority area in the UK, and offences can attract a maximum of 5 years imprisonment and/or an unlimited fine. Often perpetrated in remote locations, offences are usually detected by members of the public or specialist RSPB investigators working in partnership with statutory agencies. In recent years legislation has widened the net of criminalisation, introduced harsher penalties, and extended vicarious liability to landowners. Still, raptor killings often go undetected, while difficulties in proving criminal intent and culpability mean that prosecutions remain rare.
The criminalisation of individuals does little to tackle the powerful financial incentives that drive persecution and reinforces the legitimacy of legal but environmentally harmful land management practices, such as predator control or medicated grit, which keep grouse moors profitable. A zemiological (i.e. social harm-based) analysis of raptor persecution is key to exposing its complex structural causes and their relationship with other social harms such as land maldistribution and environmental degradation, in addition to the harms of criminalisation itself. However, it also exposes limitations in zemiology’s understanding of environmental harms. Firstly, raptor persecution causes little injury to humans; since definitions of social harm are anthropocentric, they can perpetuate the subordination of environmental concerns to financial, security, or other political concerns. In addition, while zemiology centres the harms of neoliberalism, raptor persecution is linked to a complex net of glocal interests and neofeudal economic practices. Green zemiology thus must recentre towards non-speciesist definitions of social harm and widen its focus to broader extractivist economic models.