Environmental Crimes Against Fauna: A bibliometric analysis

Abstract

Environmental crimes have significant impacts on various species, especially in the animal kingdom. Quantitative data highlights the severity of crimes against fauna and the urgency of preventive measures. The objective of this work was to conduct a bibliometric analysis of crimes against fauna worldwide. This study conducted a bibliometric analysis of environmental crimes against fauna using the Scopus database and the keywords "environmental crime" AND (animal OR fauna) in the title, abstract, and keywords. The research identified trends, publication patterns, and highlighted areas between 2004 and July 2024, resulting in 95 documents analyzed with the Vosviewer software. The analysis revealed a growing concern with environmental crimes, especially between 2014 and 2024, with 77 documents, representing 81.06% of the publications. White and Heckenberg (2014), Chapron and Treves (2016), and Miranda and Marques (2016) were the most relevant publications. The most prominent countries were the United States, Australia, and Brazil. The journal "Critical Criminological Perspectives" was the most cited. Frequent keywords included "Environmental crime" (33 occurrences), "Crime" (17 occurrences), "Animals" (11 occurrences), "Green criminology" (10 occurrences), "Animal" (9 occurrences), "Environmental crimes" (8 occurrences), "Environmental legislation" (8 occurrences), "Conservation" (7 occurrences), "Environmental protection" (7 occurrences), and "Animalia" (6 occurrences). Crimes against fauna remain prevalent, driving debates on illegal hunting, off-season fishing, animal mistreatment, biodiversity threats, pollution, and toxic waste. These discussions are crucial for developing effective alternatives to combat these harmful practices.

Keywords

References

  1. D. Van Uhm. Green Criminology and Biodiversity Loss: Crimes and Harms against Flora and Fauna. In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Criminology and Criminal Justice, (2024). https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190264079.013.763
  2. F.M.Stein, A.Troneci, J. Jesus, et al. Europe’s biggest wildlife crime: eight years of coordinated actions against eel trafficking. Trends Organ Crim (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12117-024-09540-6
  3. M. Roveda, F. I. Campos, & J. P. Pietrafesa. Reflexão ética sobre a problemática ambiental. Revista de Magistro de Filosofia, 3(4), 1-8, (2010).
  4. F. G. Magalhães. Sensibilização e conscientização da educação ambiental. Mundo Geo, (2017).
  5. T. H. C. Silva, & L. R. Jordão. Maus-tratos contra os animais: uma análise da efetividade punitiva em Goiás. Revista Brasileira de Direito Animal, 18, 1-24, (2023).
  6. M. D. M. Lopes. Breves considerações acerca dos crimes contra a fauna. Mostra científica do cesuca, 8. Cachoeirinha, RS: CESUCA, (2014).
  7. T. Agnelli. Importância da fauna para o equilíbrio ecológico. Artigo Legado das Águas, (2022).
  8. A. Magatão, D. A. Gonçalves, & F. R. Barros Filho. Crimes contra a fauna. Uni Santa Cruz, (2020).
  9. A. F. Hoth, et al. Vida animal: a impunidade gerando crueldades. Research, Society and Development, 11(14), e481111436576, (2022). https://doi.org/10.33448/rsd-v11i14.36576
  10. L. D. F. Souza. Crimes ambientais: princípios e evolução. Revista Eletrônica da Faculdade de Direito de Franca, 8(1), (2013).
  11. L. M. Monteiro. Panorama dos crimes contra a fauna na Região Metropolitana do Recife-PE, Brasil. Revista Brasileira de Criminalística, 12(5), 39-46, (2023).
  12. A. S. Costa, et al. Leis insuficientes e outros desafios na repressão a crimes ambientais complexos. Mins Read, (2023).
  13. A. J. R. Guimarães, et al. (2021). Modelos de Inovação: Análise bibliométrica da produção científica. Brazilian Journal of Information Science: Research Trends, 15, e02106. https://doi.org/10.36311/1981.1640.2001.v15.e02106
  14. N. Van Eck, & L. Waltman. (2010). Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics, 84(2), 523-538.
  15. R. White, & D. Heckenberg. Green criminology: An introduction to the study of environmental harm. Routledge, (2014).
  16. G. Chapron, & A. Treves. Blood does not buy goodwill: Allowing culling increases poaching of a large carnivore. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 283(1830), 20160553, (2016). https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2016.0553
  17. T. P. Miranda, & A. C. Marques. Hidden impacts of the Samarco mining waste dam collapse to Brazilian marine fauna: An example from the staurozoans (Cnidaria). Marine Pollution Bulletin, 110(1), 239-243, (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2016.06.013
  18. A. Brisman, & N. South. Green criminology and environmental crimes and harms. Springer, (2019).
  19. J. Navarro, et al. Feathered detectives: Real-time GPS tracking of scavenging gulls pinpoints illegal waste dumping. Environmental Pollution, 210, 264-272, (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2016.01.067
Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Copyright (c) 2025 Brazilian Journal of Criminalistics

Share

Download

pdf (Português (Brasil))

Author(s)