Rob White's book is an excellent introduction to and further analysis of the concept of ‘environmental harm’. It successfully achieves its aim to establish a moral basis for intervention and action to eradicate such harm. As the author points out, harm is ubiquitous and ingrained in structures; not always intentional, sometimes arising from omission and indifference; preventable; often lawful and/or perceived to be legitimate. For me, this is exemplified in the findings of a recent report by the Royal College of Physicians and the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health (2016) which found that outdoor air pollution causes at least 40,000 deaths a year in the UK, with a further death tally from indoor pollutants. Most of the practices that cause these deaths are legal, such as seemingly innocuous air fresheners, though their impact can be deadly. Yet, whilst social harm is generally framed in terms of human needs and rights, this book also applies to the non-human. It is structured around three interconnected approaches to harm – humans, eco-systems and non-human animals. This relates to three dimensions of justice – environmental justice, ecological justice and species justice.

The book highlights and discusses the different views within the field of green criminology and some of the key tensions around whose rights should be privileged; degrees and dimensions of harm; how to measure harm; and the dynamics of power and decision-making processes. The author is Professor of Criminology in the School of Social Sciences and the University of Tasmania, Australia. His previous work has explored key concepts in environmental criminology – providing a framework of analysis for ecological degradation. This background has enabled him to produce an extremely clear and thoughtful book on environmental harm. It clarifies many relevant concepts, such as ‘environment’, ‘environmental crime’, ‘harm’, ‘risk’, ‘justice’. The author draws attention to and explains the key issues at stake, such as the uncertainties about what constitutes ‘harm’; the contestations around concepts, such as the ‘precautionary principle’; and controversies about how harm can be measured. He points to a ‘moral fissure’ between green criminologists who view nature instrumentally and those who view the exploitation of nature as harmful. He also provides evidence in the form of numerous current issues such as land grabbing, the loss of global commons etc. and he uses examples and illustrations from many national contexts. For me, there are only two slight problems with the conceptualisations. Firstly, one of the sub-categories (ecological justice) is very similar in name to the main topic (eco-justice) which could cause confusion. Secondly, sometimes it is implied that environmental justice is solely focussed on humans. A number of environmental justice analysts and activists take a much wider approach, including myself, for example, when I include other species in my environmental justice framework (see Bell, Reference Bell2014). However, environmental justice complexities and other ways of considering the topic are acknowledged and discussed later in the book. In general, though, the book was extremely well organised; very easy to read, understand and engage with; and aided superficial grasping as well as deep understanding of some important philosophical debates. As such, it will be useful for a wide range of students and academics in the fields of criminology, sociology, law, geography, environmental studies, philosophy and social policy.

Rob White's conclusions are radical but, in my opinion, necessarily so. His book highlights the need to establish a moral and institutional basis for action. Acknowledging that we are not all equally responsible for environmental harm, he states ‘. . .action to prevent and remedy harm ultimately must be directed at dominant power arrangement and towards fundamental social change’ (p.145).

In the final chapter, he explicitly argues that environmental harms result from the way that societies are organised. He identifies capitalist pressures, with the necessity to accumulate profit, to cost-cut, to compete and to waste as the driving force behind environmental harms, stating that production and consumption within capitalism are subversive of human needs. Hence, the resulting patchwork regulatory and legislative measures do not fundamentally protect the environment because of ‘systemic imperatives and philosophical vision’ (p.160). At present, we tend to focus on mitigating impacts rather than prevention of harm, for example by reducing unnecessary consumption. His writing produces some very quotable extracts, for example:

And:

I particularly appreciated this book in that it fills a gap in the literature on environmental justice within the field of criminology. In Reference Zilney, McGurrin and Zahran2006, Zilney et al. noted that there was little two-way communication between the two fields with few green criminological studies addressing environmental justice issues and the environmental justice literature failing to penetrate into more traditional criminological research. This topic was recently revisited by Lynch et al. (Reference Lynch, Stretesky and Long2015) who found that criminologists have tended to ignore environmental justice.

This complaint can be widened to incorporate the exchange between environmental and social policy research and education more generally. It is of vital importance for social policy practitioners and academics, in particular, to think more about and engage more with ecological issues. The interests of people and the rest of nature are intertwined. Yet social and environmental policies are too often considered in separate silos. This book provides another cogent argument for considering social justice and environmental sustainability as aspects of an integrated system, rather than separate goals. It is important to understand that what benefits nature, also benefits humanity and ‘Environmental Harm: An eco-justice perspective’ is exemplary in doing so.