This paper is an exploratory study into the influence of socio-political factors on the control of potential invasive species via a case study of rhino beetles and Japanese law through a green criminological lens. Rhino beetles are currently not listed as an invasive species within Japan however are very popular with ongoing markets in both legal trade and trafficking for rhino beetle species into the country for purposes such as exotic pets and insect fighting. For example, in 2007 a Japanese citizen had 423 beetles seized in Quito airport Bolivia. With the importation of non-native species, it is difficult to ascertain the impact they could have on the environment, however, there does pose a risk of them becoming an invasive species and causing an array of environmental harm. Despite this in 2020 a member of the Japanese environmental cooperation office in the Ministry of Environment was quoted in National Geographic declaring that Hercules and Satana rhino beetles were exempt from being an invasive species due to them being expensive and “Japanese people want to keep them as pets and not release them into the wild”. This paper explores whether there is a risk of them becoming invasive, in addition to the socio-political challenges to moving species of rhino beetle onto Japan’s invasive alien species act including the economic value, cultural relevance, and potential criminalisation of citizens under parts of the legislation. Considering this through a green criminological lens indicates the potential anthropocentric and reactive nature of invasive species management.

Since at least the late Victorian green utopians and eco-socialists , the environmental (or green) movement has been associated with, and animated by, left- and progressive-leaning politics. Socialism and broader progressivism long drove western environmentalism, given their mutual, well-articulated concern for the colonising injustices of state/corporate capitalism and colonialism. Yet there is a parallel and somewhat different politics that has also articulated its own vision of what would be desirable in a utopian society and landscape. There are examples of the expression of such thinking throughout the 20th century but it is particularly in the past thirty years or so that there has been a clear appropriation of green causes by the far right. It is the ideology and political strategies of this eco-fascism with which this paper is concerned. The paper first contextualises the popular green movement’s left- and progressive-leaning politics, warning against recent inaccurate characterisations of groups like Extinction Rebellion as ‘fascist’. Second, a definition of eco-fascism is presented. Third, historical and contemporary examples are provided to substantiate this definition. The paper closes by discussing the theoretical and policy implications of contemporary ecofascism

The litany of harms which heritage crime causes are indisputable (Poyser, 2020). The impact and severity of the crime are clearly observed in victim testimony (Poyser et al, 2023). Last year, this was evidenced most clearly in the burning down of the Crooked House Pub. The Crooked House was not Grade listed by Historic England, and therefore not officially designated a protected heritage asset; but the outpourings of devastation over the loss of this building demonstrate how strongly people feel about sites which represent heritage and memory to them. Despite this, the CJS response fails time and time again to recognise crimes against heritage sites and assets as important, or even worth responding to (Poyser, 2020). Indeed, in the Crooked House case, the importance of heritage is unlikely to be considered, despite heritage and memory being the nexus of this building to so many people. In the absence of any legal definition, heritage crime slips through the gaps in the CJS, despite the clear harm which it causes. Through the story of the Crooked House Pub, this presentation will explore how harms against heritage, whether officially designated by heritage bodies or not, and officially recognised by the CJS or not, are responded to. The voices of these victims, and the continuing legal gaps in the area of heritage crime, are also highlighted.

The UK’s current approach to environmental protests raises questions concerning the extent to which environmental activism is actively being criminalised. The UK Government has introduced new police powers to deal with protests with measure specifically designed to crack down on certain types of environmental activism. But extensive public order powers already exist that would allow police to take action to prevent a breach of the peace or other forms of disorder. Potentially police interferences with the right of freedom of assembly and the right of free speech contained in the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and the Human Rights Act 1998 would seem to be excessive and contrary to the UK's notion of civil liberties and the right to protest. But these are rights that can be interfered with as long as any interference is legitimate (e.g. lawfully carried out to prevent crime or in the interests of national security, etc.) is considered necessary and is proportionate.


The right of freedom of assembly is a right of peaceful protest and any interference with such rights should be the minimum necessary and need to be justified as necessary. Courts have already dismissed some cases against activists identifying a potentially excessive use of powers to curb protest. But the concern for climate change protesters and other environmental activists will be that the right to protest is being subject to new more aggressive use of police powers and a concerted policy environment that seeks to limit the rights of freedom of assembly and free speech and that arguably aims to suppress legitimate protest and criticism of business practices and policy that marginalises environmental concerns..

This paper identifies that under the European Convention on Human Rights the police and other public enforcers have an obligation to uphold and facilitate human rights. This sets up a potential conflict between human rights obligations and the public policy approach which seeks to curb environmental activism. Accordingly, a wider question exists around how, when and in what circumstances policing of protests and policy approaches take a more interventionist approach