RESEARCH PROBLEMS WITH WHITE COLLAR CRIME
As previously discussed research surrounding white collar crime has been deserted to some extent. Very little research has been done in this area, one reason for this includes the fact there is very little known about white collar/ invisible crimes in general and what we do not know about can be found as very difficult when attempting to research it. Crime in general is very secretive and it is very difficult to find appropriate and reliable methods of measuring it. Croall (1997) states, white collar crime in terms of criminological study is still very much detached from the so-called “normative” crime discord which has provoked much government interest and therefore funding. When looking again at the complexness of white collar crime and the subjects that are related it is hear that it is recognised its major contrast from that of those subjects related to standard crime. Croall (1997) states that subjects as diverse as public health, consumer rights etc are all interwoven throughout white collar crime which most standard criminologists do not specialise in which often deters them from researching within the area. When researching white collar crime it can be noted the extent to which its preferred methodologies vary in comparison to other types of criminology for example street crime. Standard research methods for example, surveys, questionnaires are much less successful then the unconventional methods i.e. whistle blowing, moles etc, although the results from these methodologies are criticised for being bias and unreliable, Davis et al (1999). There are many difficulties in detecting white collar crime due to often some of its advanced techniques and effective cover ups many of the offences that occur are some what invisible. Croall (1997) goes onto state that very few white collar criminals are prosecuted. This does not mean to say little white collar deviance occurs.
When researching white collar crimes in relation the victim as a pose to the perpetrator often victimisation is of indirect form which deters hinders victim surveys
According to Coleman (2001) everybody has probably been a victim of white collar crime at some point in their life but it would seem that often victims don’t realise they have been victimized. This therefore means that the crime is unreported and it is extremely difficult to research or measure the extent to which the crime has had impact on peoples lives. White collar crime is researched more so in America then Britain. Coleman (2001) states that in America the National Crime Victimisation Survey doesn’t include most of the important questions associated with white collar crime. Other sources of white collar criminal statistics can be found in America’s department of justice; white collar crime statistics are rarely published here and include only the white collar crime that is reported to the police. Often these crimes are significantly trivia in comparison to Sutherland’s (1949) definition of White collar crime. Coleman (2001) goes on to explain that often government and corporate crimes are all excluded from these results. Much research on corporate crime in America has focused on the offenders reports on criminal activities. All these offenders have been convicted, there has never been a survey carried out on corporations asking for anonymously volunteered information surrounding crimes that have taken place in the work. This could be argued to be pointless as peoples vested interests would get in the way. In the long run if there was proof that white collar crime was as big a problem as many criminologists would argue, then the government may invest more money in to cracking down on white collar crime and the business’s would be more at risk of getting caught. The American National White Collar Crime Centre (N.W.C.C.C) carried out a house hold survey in 1999 and found that 36% of households claimed to be victims of some form of white collar crime in the previous year. The results of this are significantly high showing clear cause for concern especially as already stated many victims don’t know when they have been victimised indicating that the statistic should be much higher. It raises the question as to why street crime is feared so much more in comparison. Generally it would seem that the services that deal with white collar crime and its specifics are also very hard to access information through and often lack very little specific detail surrounding judicial processes and outcomes. Croall (1997) claims that as a result of the further recognition of white collar crime certain victim groups have been set up. Victim based research does provide important information to the researcher but can often be considered as bias and only gives one side of the story. It gives limited information surrounding the specific’s of the white collar crime committed.
Croall (1997) states, an example of this can be found in the use of official statistics in research. Due to the complexity and invisibility of white collar crime there are alternative agencies to the police that deal with this particular area, Official crime statistics are there for not inclusive of white collar crime offences. Official crime statistics according to Davies et al (1999) are a highly valued secondary research source for criminological research. It is very important for white collar crime to become more predominant in official statistics because the categories of people and crime used in the stats represents what is prioritised as problem areas and therefore affects policy making and theoretical approaches to problem solving. This could therefore imply that white collar crime as a criminological study is therefore further marginalised in research. On the other hand the validity of official statistics on a whole is questioned as they do not represent the large percentage of crime that is unreported.
There is little research in relation to interviews and ethnographic work when investigating white collar crime from the aspects of the perpetrators. One of the major issues of white collar crime is narrowing down the white collar crime offenders and figuring out who holds responsibility for the crime. Often there are a number of people that are held responsible and getting co-operation off these people and access to them can be of great difficulty. An example of this can be found when white collar deviance is investigated in multi national corporations. Slapper & Tombs (1999) claim that many research difficulties lie within the expression- ‘money equates to power’. This implies that the more money one has the easier it is to hide the truth and therefore resist relaying information to contribute to research. This therefore assumes that research is more successful if aimed at the lower archy of workers that have less financial incentive. One renowned white collar crime occurred in Bhopal in India in 1984. The Bhopal website (2005) claims that a poisonous chemical known as methyl isocyanate accidentally leaked out of a gas pipe in a Union Carbide Pesticide Plant causing thousands of deaths and disabilities. Court proceedings arose and the Indian government on behalf of the Bhopal victims were given $470 million in compensation from the plant. When researching the outcome of this crime several difficulties would arise. Out of the survivors how would you decipher between illness contracted as a result of the leek and illnesses that come with age. Who would be to blame? Would it be those at the top of the occupational arhcy i.e. the mangers, or would it be those that fitted the pipe, or those that made the metal to make the pipe. How can you interview the offender of such if the offence is of a company as a whole?
Sutherland carried out a research study on white collar crime in “70 largest manufacturing, mining and mercantile corporations” (1983:13). His study was extremely focused and centred around violations which related to “restraint of trade, advertising, infringements of patent, trademarks and copyrights, and labour practices, drawing upon a range of publicly available sources” Slapper & Tombs (1999:3). The data collected revealed that there were violations being made in all of the corporations between one and fifty with an average of fourteen. Sutherland (1983) goes on to claim that an individual with 4 or more criminal offences is seen as criminal. Although this study revealed the large extent to the problem there was no study of the same nature replicated in any way shape or form for another 30years after.
As previously mentioned one method of accessing sources information is through the use of insiders, whistle blowers and incentives, although this is effective this again raises ethical dilemmas throughout the research. The use of moles has also proven effective to researchers although this particular method is again raises questions of ethics and confidentiality. This means getting outsiders to gain access or get a job within the company with one main focus- to uncover white collar crime. Punch (1996:43) states that-
“even if one could get inside, then the practical dilemmas of researching these issues may be most intractable because managerial ‘deviants’ are likely to be clever, conspiratorial and secretive, their activities will be concealed behind walls or locked doors and they will not only be unwilling to co-operate… but will simply deny that any nefarious practices take place at all”.
Croall (1997) claims, that the answer to this would be the use of covert research. This is still not one hundred percent effective though due to the secretiveness of the criminal behaviour.
Invisible crimes almost always with hold the vested interest of one company/ organisation. Governmental and non-governmental reports and investigations have been documented surrounding white collar crime but the validity of these can be questioned when referring back to research hitches linking power and money. Often the incentives of the researchers can be swayed by that of the companies and results can again be bias and unreliable. Often companies are able to withhold information which would uncover crime. Information is rarely voluntarily submitted to the researcher and therefore is often negotiated between what are known as gate keepers and the researcher. Davis et al (1999: 16) defines gate keepers as “individuals or groups of individuals who have the power to control access to data required to accomplish research. This may involve controlling access” “or with holding permission for the conduct of primary research”. Gate keepers often work as information deterrents. Being granted access to one lot of research does not grant access to others and it is here were gate keepers can allow access to some research in attempt to create an obstacle. According to Davis et al (1999) often the withholding of information through the use of gate keepers can lead to research investigations to coming to an end or the use of what could be labelled devious research i.e. moles, whistle blowers etc.
Another informative source of research could be through the use of those involved in sentencing at the court proceedings of those offended although as some trials can take years to decide on a final verdict this can often limit research unless those researching have a life time commitment and have the flexibility of open deadlines. These types of research studies can often progress into longitudinal studies.
According to Davis et al (1999), there is much politics surrounding social research and the relationships between the people involved. Often the power relationships between these people can act as a tug of war in relation to individuals self/vested interests. This mix match of power has much effect on how the research is carried out and it’s out come.
CONCLUSION
The following paper has discussed the historic and changing definitive meanings of white collar crimes and critically discussed the practical and ethical difficulties that are involved when researching white collar crime. Both primary and secondary research methodologies have been investigated. It would seem that although secondary research based strategies are never the most effective methodology when looking at validity and reliability, ethical and practical research problems surrounding white collar crime often lead criminologists to study secondary research.
Although there would seem to be an immense amount of difficulty when looking at the ethical and practical problems of researching white collar crime, it could be argued that in today’s advanced society, the increasing intellect and understanding in the potential of advanced technologies and communications would be enough to enable a sufficient and more progressive stand against white collar crime then the present situation. The lack of effective research can therefore be blamed on the general lack of subject interest or understanding. One must hold knowledge and have access to resources to enable the preliminary ball to start rolling. Public awareness, ignorance and funding, all need to be approached to enable a more, innovative and creative approach towards researching the corporate offender.
REFERENCE LIST Croall, H. (1997) Understanding white collar crime: Crime and Justice. Buckingham, Open University Press.
O’Keefe, J. (1996) Law of Weights and Measures. London, Butterworth.
Sutherland, E. (1949) White collar crime. New York: Holt, Reinhart & Winston.
Weisburd, D., & Schlegel, K. (1992) Returning to the mainstream: reflections on past and future white collar crime study in Schlegel, K+ Weisburd, D (eds) White Collar Crime reconsidered. Boston, MA: Northerastern University Press.
Shapiro, S (1990) Collaring the crime, not the criminal: re-considering the concept of White Collar crime, American Sociological Review, 55:346-65.
Slapper, G., & Tombs, S. (1999) Corporate Crime. London, Longman.
Davies, P., Jupp, V. & Francis, P. (1999) (eds) Invisible Crimes: their victims and their regulation. London: Palgrave-Macmillan.
Coleman, J.W. (2001) (eds) The Criminal Elite: Understanding White Collar Crime. New York, Worth Publishers.
National White Collar Crime Centre, The National Survey on White Collar Crime (2000) Morgantown, WV: National White Collar Crime Centre.
(23/12/04) Bhopal: Incident Review
Slapper, S., & Tombs, S. (1999) Corporate Crime. London: Longman.
Sutherland, E. (1983) White Collar Crime: The uncut version. New Haven: Yale, University Press.
