Organised crime and law enforcement
The concept of organised crime has captured the attention of novelists, screenwriters, and journalists as much as that of law enforcement agencies and governments. Organised crime tends to evoke dramatic images involving corruption, power, violence, and vast wealth. Yet, pinning down an actual definition of organised crime and, perhaps more so, the costs and harms of organised crime is a difficult and rare undertaking. Many definitions conflate serious and organised crime to involve groups of three or more individuals planning and carrying out an incredibly broad range of criminal activities. A result of such a loose definition is that attempts to assess the economic and social costs of organised crime, when they have been undertaken, have significantly differed in their approach and validity. The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (2012) estimated that global revenues generated from organised crime amounted to USD900 billion (United States dollars), or approximately 1.5 per cent of global gross domestic product (GDP). In Europe, a European Commission sponsored study of organised crime revenues produced an estimate of about 1 per cent of the European Unionâs GDP (Savona & Riccardi, 2015). Some commentators have suggested that both studies are likely to be generous in their estimates (Reuter & Tonry, 2020). In the United Kingdom, estimates have placed the annual impact of organised crime at GBP37 billion (British Pound Sterling) (Fell et al., 2019), while in Australia, studies have concluded that estimates can vary between AUD23.8 billion (Australian dollars) through to AUD47.4 billion, depending on how they are calculated (Smith, 2018). These higher costs include estimates of the costs to law enforcement, the criminal justice system, other government agencies, the private sector, and communities. Of course, these estimates are just that, estimates, because the very nature of organised crime is to keep their activities and finances hidden. Nonetheless, although definitions of the concept, the scope of activities, and the method of calculating costs and harms vary, there is growing evidence that organised crime is a significant economic, political, and social problem.
Recent trends in organised crime research have highlighted the complexity and diversity of organised crime. In particular, researchers have concentrated on the ways in which organised criminal groups mobilise across borders (e.g., Duijn, Kashirin, & Sloot, 2014; Hignett, 2012; Sergi, 2019; Varese, 2004, 2011, 2020; von Lampe, 2013; Williams, 2001b). Other research has focussed more on the multifaced nature of organised crime. For example, mafia-style organisations and outlaw motorcycle gangs can be reasonably expected to have many similarities in the ways in which they operate and behave, but they also have some significant differences (see e.g., von Lampe & Blokland, 2020). Research has also emphasised notable differences among criminal groups within established categories, including between the Italian mafias Cosa Nostra, Camorra, and âNdrangheta (e.g., Calandra, 2017; Catino, 2020; Europol, 2013; Peluso, 2013; Scaglione, 2016; Sergi, 2015; Varese, 2006), and outlaw motorcycle gangs (e.g., Barker, 2014; Harris, 2016; Klement, 2016; Lauchs, Bain, & Bell, 2015; Piano, 2018; von Lampe & Blokland, 2020). A number of useful studies have described various features of organised criminal groups (e.g., Adamoli et al., 1998; Gambetta, 2009; Kleemans & Soudijn, 2017; Pearson & Hobbs, 2003; von Lampe, 2015), while a few have conducted meaningful comparative studies (e.g., Paoli & Reuter, 2020; Smith, 2018; Varese, 2011). Research has also concentrated on the relationships between criminal organisations (including collaboration and conflict, e.g., Adamoli et al., 1998; Catino, 2014; Hofmann & Gallupe, 2015), the criminal careers of organised criminals (e.g., Blokland et al., 2019; Fuller, Morgan, & Brown, 2018; Kleemans & De Poot, 2008; Kleemans & Van Koppen, 2020; Van Koppen, de Poot, & Blokland, 2010), and disengagement from organised crime (e.g., Bovenkerk, 2011; Campbell & Hansen, 2012; Douglas & Smith, 2018; Smith, 2014). While research has undoubtedly grown, there remains relatively limited scholarly attention on organised crime compared to many other forms of crime (Reuter & Tonry, 2020). There are many reasons for this, but, at this point, it is sufficient to note that research on organised crime is challenging: its conceptualisation is contested, and reliable empirical data are hard to find.
One emerging area of research that we would like to call particular attention to is concerned with the âorganisation of organised crimeâ (e.g., Bouchard, 2020; Calderoni et al., 2020; Campana, 2011; Catino, 2020; Varese, 2012; von Lampe, 2012). Over the past two decades, a significant trend in the literature has noted a shift from more hierarchical modes of organising to what are loosely referred to as ânetworksâ (e.g., Calderoni, 2014; Morselli, 2009; Paoli, 2002). This has been in distinct contrast to conceptions of organised crime in popular culture, as portrayed in films and television series, such as The Godfather and The Sopranos. These images portray organised crime with a fairly clear organisational structure, with a boss or âgodfatherâ at the top, an underboss or counsellors immediately underneath, and several captains overseeing a crew of soldiers (âmade menâ) and associates (Abadinsky, 2012; Albini, 1971; Cressey, 1969; Jacobs, 2020). Many scholars have used the term ânetworkâ as a metaphor rather than as a method or approach to analysing organised crime to simply denote a shift away from this rigid structure. Others have used the term in relation to broader trends in globalisation and the accompanying technological and social changes that have, of course, impacted all aspects of society along with organised crime, as encapsulated in Castellsâ (2000) trilogy on âthe network societyâ. The network concept has thus been employed in many contexts of organised crime research, ranging from demonstrating the transnational features of organised crime through to the resilience of networked criminal organisations.
The challenges that ânetworkedâ criminal organisations pose for governments have attracted significant scholarly attention (e.g., Calderoni, 2014; Eilstrup-Sangiovanni & Jones, 2008; Kenney, 2007; Raab & Milward, 2003; Williams, 2001a). Networks, as loose associations of criminals collaborating in a cooperative venture, often have no obvious centre of gravity, making decisions about where to target resources a challenge. Given the branching and interconnecting nature of networks, law enforcement agencies have difficulties untangling such connections. Examples include tracing the transnational nature of organised crime, corruption, financial flows, and interconnections between legitimate and illegitimate business. In light of these challenges, numerous conventions and bilateral, regional, and international agreements have been established that seek to improve the capacities of countries to respond to organised crime. In general terms, these governmental responses increase the consistency of laws designed to prevent and prosecute organised crime, provide greater scope for police and law enforcement agencies to investigate and disrupt organised crime, and enhance information and intelligence sharing among agencies responsible for controlling organised crime. These responses can be seen within and between many developed countries in an effort to achieve enhanced coordination and collaboration across both organisational boundaries spanning professional disciplines and jurisdictions. That is, the response to organised crime involves the deliberate formation of law enforcement it may take networks to fight networks (p. 327) (e.g., Whelan & Dupont, 2017). In some discourses, these developments have been linked to the idea that âit takes networks to fight networksâ (Arquilla & Ronfeldt, 2001). However, as we shall see, there is much more involved in understanding and analysing networks than this perspective would imply.
The principal aim of this book is to take a network perspective to the study of organised crime and law enforcement responses to organised crime. It is not a comprehensive book about organised crime or law enforcement responses to organised crime. We aim to demonstrate how network theories and concepts can advance our knowledge of how criminal organisations form and function as well as operate and behave. We also aim to show how network perspectives can apply to law enforcement efforts to disrupt organised crime. To that end, we synthesise existing research and suggest directions for future research in the areas we believe will be most useful moving forward. We do not intend for our observations to be the final word on the topic; rather, we hope to provide a useful summary of the literature as well as relevant theories and concepts that will provide a helpful starting point for those new to the topic and to stimulate further inquiry in this field. The book adopts a broad interpretation of âlaw enforcementâ to include those actors that have some role in preventing, disrupting, or prosecuting organised crime, with our principal focus being on criminal intelligence and related agencies, which is again broadly defined in the context of the book. We include the activities of police, criminal intelligence, border, regulation, and revenue agencies, for example, as having a role in responding to organised crime. The focus of the book, however, is not on any single entity or a narrow conception of law enforcement strategies and approaches. In keeping with the principles of a network perspective, our focus is on the relational attributes of a wide range of law enforcement actors across the field of organised crime. We will elaborate on this overall aim as we turn to what we mean by a network perspective.
