Corporate Crime is a form of the more readily studied white-collar crime, which was coined by Edwin Sutherland in 1939. While white-collar crime are offenses committed by corporate employees for personal gains, corporate crime are offenses committed by employees to benefit the corporation or the company as a whole. Due to corporate crime being a form of white-collar crime, much of the research on corporate crime has been subsumed under the concept of white-collar crime. Therefore, not much is known about the overall trends, prevalence, frequency, and impact of corporate crime over the decades.
Despite the literatures inability to establish an overall trend in corporate crime, efforts have been made to highlight the prevalence of corporate-crime. A plethora of studies in the late 1900s established the presence of corporate crime in the United States among Fortune 500 firms, and parent manufacturing corporations (Clinard, Yeager, Brissette, Petrashek, & Harries, 1979; Barnett, 1981; Etzioni, 1990; Baucus & Near, 1991, and Alexander, Arlen, & Cohen, 1999). Latest reports by the President Corporate Fraud Task Force in 2003 and 2004, highlighted the increase in prevalence of corporate fraud in the United States. In 2003, the Task Force reported 250 corporate fraud convictions, while in 2004, it reported over 500 convictions, a 250-case increase (President’s Corporate Fraud Task Force, 2003; 2004). Recent research in the prevalence and frequency of corporate crime is limited; However, there continues to be numerous corporate crime cases reported around the world, including the most recent crimes committed by Wells Fargo, Asia Pulp and Paper corporation, Johnson & Johnson, and Chevron, which highlights its continuous presence and contribution to today’s crime (Global Exchange, 2017; 2018).
The impact of corporate crime has been examined in the literature by looking at the different forms of corporate crime victimization. The overall impact, however, is unknown due to the fact that many victims of corporate crime are unaware of their victimization, which affects both official and self-reported measures. Despite the limited knowledge on the overall victimization rate, corporate crime has and continuous to affect consumers, workers, and the general public.
David Friedrichs (2010) highlights the primary targets of corporate crime, which include the public, consumers, workers, and competitor’s (Friedrich, 2010, p.64). Corporate violence against the general public is often the result of unsafe environmental practices. One of such practices includes the release of toxic waste into the environment resulting in birth defects, cancer, genetic mutations, behavioral abnormalities, and even death. Another unsafe practice is air pollution from mobile and stationary source emissions responsible for 6.4 million premature deaths annually, of which 600,000 are children (Environmental Defense Fund, 2019).
Conversely, corporate violence against consumers are a result of unsafe products produced by the food, pharmaceutical, and transportation industries. In 2008, the Center for Disease Control attributed the 2008-2009 salmonella outbreak that caused nine deaths, and 11,000 to 20,700 reported illnesses to the Peanut Corporation of America (Leighton, 2016). The Peanut Corporation of America had been operating under filthy conditions, with unregistered products, and were found to have been shipping products despite testing positive for salmonella. Pharmaceutical companies have also been found to distribute defective products such as hazardous birth control (Ortho-Evra Patch, Dalkon Shield IUD, and Copper-7 IUD), lethal hormones (DES, ERT, and HRT), and other harmful drugs and devices ( Thalidomide and Parlodel) (Melpolder, Widman, & Doroshow, 2008). The release of such products by pharmaceutical companies caused major health concerns among its users, including infertility, blood clots, heart attacks, strokes, miscarriages, and cancer (Melpolder, Widman, & Doroshow, 2008).
Lastly, corporate violence against workers is often a result of unsafe working conditions produced by corporations. Estimates by various studies state that approximately 100,000 annual work-related deaths are attributed to violations of OSHA by corporations (Whyte, 2007; Friedrich, 2010; Kramer, 1984). The immense physical costs attributed to corporate crime are not the only costs associated with this form of crime. The economic costs of corporate crime are immense. Cliff and Wall-Parker (2017) estimate corporate crime to cost the United States between $300 and $600 billion annually, far exceeding those of street crimes (Cliff & Wall-Parker, 2017). Such estimates of the physical and economic effects caused by large corporations highlight the importance of studying and collecting data on corporate crime.
Despite the literatures inability to establish an overall trend in corporate crime, efforts have been made to highlight the prevalence of corporate-crime. A plethora of studies in the late 1900s established the presence of corporate crime in the United States among Fortune 500 firms, and parent manufacturing corporations (Clinard, Yeager, Brissette, Petrashek, & Harries, 1979; Barnett, 1981; Etzioni, 1990; Baucus & Near, 1991, and Alexander, Arlen, & Cohen, 1999). Latest reports by the President Corporate Fraud Task Force in 2003 and 2004, highlighted the increase in prevalence of corporate fraud in the United States. In 2003, the Task Force reported 250 corporate fraud convictions, while in 2004, it reported over 500 convictions, a 250-case increase (President’s Corporate Fraud Task Force, 2003; 2004). Recent research in the prevalence and frequency of corporate crime is limited; However, there continues to be numerous corporate crime cases reported around the world, including the most recent crimes committed by Wells Fargo, Asia Pulp and Paper corporation, Johnson & Johnson, and Chevron, which highlights its continuous presence and contribution to today’s crime (Global Exchange, 2017; 2018).
The impact of corporate crime has been examined in the literature by looking at the different forms of corporate crime victimization. The overall impact, however, is unknown due to the fact that many victims of corporate crime are unaware of their victimization, which affects both official and self-reported measures. Despite the limited knowledge on the overall victimization rate, corporate crime has and continuous to affect consumers, workers, and the general public.
David Friedrichs (2010) highlights the primary targets of corporate crime, which include the public, consumers, workers, and competitor’s (Friedrich, 2010, p.64). Corporate violence against the general public is often the result of unsafe environmental practices. One of such practices includes the release of toxic waste into the environment resulting in birth defects, cancer, genetic mutations, behavioral abnormalities, and even death. Another unsafe practice is air pollution from mobile and stationary source emissions responsible for 6.4 million premature deaths annually, of which 600,000 are children (Environmental Defense Fund, 2019).
Conversely, corporate violence against consumers are a result of unsafe products produced by the food, pharmaceutical, and transportation industries. In 2008, the Center for Disease Control attributed the 2008-2009 salmonella outbreak that caused nine deaths, and 11,000 to 20,700 reported illnesses to the Peanut Corporation of America (Leighton, 2016). The Peanut Corporation of America had been operating under filthy conditions, with unregistered products, and were found to have been shipping products despite testing positive for salmonella. Pharmaceutical companies have also been found to distribute defective products such as hazardous birth control (Ortho-Evra Patch, Dalkon Shield IUD, and Copper-7 IUD), lethal hormones (DES, ERT, and HRT), and other harmful drugs and devices ( Thalidomide and Parlodel) (Melpolder, Widman, & Doroshow, 2008). The release of such products by pharmaceutical companies caused major health concerns among its users, including infertility, blood clots, heart attacks, strokes, miscarriages, and cancer (Melpolder, Widman, & Doroshow, 2008).
Lastly, corporate violence against workers is often a result of unsafe working conditions produced by corporations. Estimates by various studies state that approximately 100,000 annual work-related deaths are attributed to violations of OSHA by corporations (Whyte, 2007; Friedrich, 2010; Kramer, 1984). The immense physical costs attributed to corporate crime are not the only costs associated with this form of crime. The economic costs of corporate crime are immense. Cliff and Wall-Parker (2017) estimate corporate crime to cost the United States between $300 and $600 billion annually, far exceeding those of street crimes (Cliff & Wall-Parker, 2017). Such estimates of the physical and economic effects caused by large corporations highlight the importance of studying and collecting data on corporate crime.
References:
Alexander, C.R., Arlen, J., and Cohen, M.A. (1999). Regulating Corporate Criminal Sanctions:
Federal Guidelines and the Sentencing of Public Firms. Journal of Law and Economics
42(1), 393-422.
Barnett, H. C. (1981). Corporate Capitalism, Corporate Crime. Crime & Delinquency, 27(1), 4–23.
Baucus, M.S., and Near, J.P. (1991). Can Illegal Corporate Behavior be Predicted? An Event
History Analysis. The Academy of Management Journal 34(1), 9-36.
Cliff, G., and Wall-Parker, A. (2017). Statistical Analysis of White-Collar Crime. Oxford
Research Encyclopedia of Criminology. 1-24.
Clinard, M.B., Yeager, P.C., Brissette, J., Petrashek, D., and Harries, E. (1979). Illegal Corporate
Behavior. Washington D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Law
Enforcement and Criminal Justice.
Etzioni, A. (1990). Is Corporate Crime Worth the Time? Business and Society Review 73, 32-35.
Friedrichs, D. O. (2010). Trusted Criminals: White Collar Crime in Contemporary Society (4th
ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning.
Global Exchange. (2018). 2017 Ten Top Corporate Criminals – Global Exchange. Retrieved July
22, 2019, from https://globalexchange.org/campaigns/corporatecriminals2017/
Kramer, R.C. (1984). Is Corporate Crime Serious Crime? Criminal Justice and Corporate Crime
Control. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice 2(30), 7-10.
Leighton, P. (2016). Mass Salmonella Poisoning by the Peanut Corporation of America: State-
Corporate Crime Involving Food Safety. Critical Criminology 24(1), 75-91.
In The Essential Criminology Reader (pp. 191-202). New York, NY: Westview Press.
Melpolder, A., Widman, A., and Doroshow, J. (2008). The Bitterest Pill - How Drug Companies
Fail to Protect Women and How Lawsuits Save Their Lives. New York, NY: Center for
Justice & Democracy.
Office of the Deputy Attorney General. First Year Report to the President – Corporate Fraud
Task Force; 2003.
Office of the Deputy Attorney General. Second Year Report to the President – Corporate Fraud
Task Force; 2004.
Whyte, D. (2007). Victims of Corporate Crime. In A Handbook of Victims and Victimology (pp.
446-464). New York, NY: Willan Publishing.
Authors: Daniela Oramas Mora, Michael Lynch, Leo Genco, Julianna Kirschner, and Troy Cardwell
USF S.P.R.U.C.E. Lab. (2019, November 9th) Corporate Crime, Online, Source Book, 2000-2017. Retrieved from https://sprucecorporatecrime.weebly.com
All rights reserved © 2019, 2020 USF S.P.R.U.C.E. Lab.
Alexander, C.R., Arlen, J., and Cohen, M.A. (1999). Regulating Corporate Criminal Sanctions:
Federal Guidelines and the Sentencing of Public Firms. Journal of Law and Economics
42(1), 393-422.
Barnett, H. C. (1981). Corporate Capitalism, Corporate Crime. Crime & Delinquency, 27(1), 4–23.
Baucus, M.S., and Near, J.P. (1991). Can Illegal Corporate Behavior be Predicted? An Event
History Analysis. The Academy of Management Journal 34(1), 9-36.
Cliff, G., and Wall-Parker, A. (2017). Statistical Analysis of White-Collar Crime. Oxford
Research Encyclopedia of Criminology. 1-24.
Clinard, M.B., Yeager, P.C., Brissette, J., Petrashek, D., and Harries, E. (1979). Illegal Corporate
Behavior. Washington D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Law
Enforcement and Criminal Justice.
Etzioni, A. (1990). Is Corporate Crime Worth the Time? Business and Society Review 73, 32-35.
Friedrichs, D. O. (2010). Trusted Criminals: White Collar Crime in Contemporary Society (4th
ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning.
Global Exchange. (2018). 2017 Ten Top Corporate Criminals – Global Exchange. Retrieved July
22, 2019, from https://globalexchange.org/campaigns/corporatecriminals2017/
Kramer, R.C. (1984). Is Corporate Crime Serious Crime? Criminal Justice and Corporate Crime
Control. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice 2(30), 7-10.
Leighton, P. (2016). Mass Salmonella Poisoning by the Peanut Corporation of America: State-
Corporate Crime Involving Food Safety. Critical Criminology 24(1), 75-91.
In The Essential Criminology Reader (pp. 191-202). New York, NY: Westview Press.
Melpolder, A., Widman, A., and Doroshow, J. (2008). The Bitterest Pill - How Drug Companies
Fail to Protect Women and How Lawsuits Save Their Lives. New York, NY: Center for
Justice & Democracy.
Office of the Deputy Attorney General. First Year Report to the President – Corporate Fraud
Task Force; 2003.
Office of the Deputy Attorney General. Second Year Report to the President – Corporate Fraud
Task Force; 2004.
Whyte, D. (2007). Victims of Corporate Crime. In A Handbook of Victims and Victimology (pp.
446-464). New York, NY: Willan Publishing.
Authors: Daniela Oramas Mora, Michael Lynch, Leo Genco, Julianna Kirschner, and Troy Cardwell
USF S.P.R.U.C.E. Lab. (2019, November 9th) Corporate Crime, Online, Source Book, 2000-2017. Retrieved from https://sprucecorporatecrime.weebly.com
All rights reserved © 2019, 2020 USF S.P.R.U.C.E. Lab.