Penal extractivism: A qualitative study on punishment and extractive industries in Peru
Saved in:
| Title: | Penal extractivism: A qualitative study on punishment and extractive industries in Peru |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Diego Tuesta, Maritza Paredes |
| Source: | Punishment & Society. 27:147-171 |
| Publisher Information: | SAGE Publications, 2024. |
| Publication Year: | 2024 |
| Subject Terms: | FOS: Political science, Legislation, Social Sciences, Sustainable Development in Mining and Minerals Industry, FOS: Law, Criminology, Illegal Trade and Conservation of Parrots, Social psychology, 12. Responsible consumption, Engineering, Context (archaeology), Sociology, State (computer science), 11. Sustainability, Conservation Criminology, Psychology, Punishment (psychology), Political science, 0505 law, Nature and Landscape Conservation, 2. Zero hunger, Geography, 05 social sciences, Politics, The Political Economy of Resource Curse Hypothesis, Building and Construction, 16. Peace & justice, Criminalization, Computer science, FOS: Sociology, Unrest, FOS: Psychology, Algorithm, Economics, Econometrics and Finance, Archaeology, Political economy, Physical Sciences, Environmental Science, 8. Economic growth, 0509 other social sciences, General Economics, Econometrics and Finance, Punitive damages, Law |
| Description: | This article introduces the concept of penal extractivism in the punishment and society literature. We define penal extractivism as the punitive strategies that a state implements to safeguard extractive industries from citizens’ contention. This concept addresses the limitations of categories like criminalization, protest policing, social control, and labour discipline while bridging the gap between punishment studies and research on extractive industries. Additionally, we draw upon evidence of the Espinar mining conflict in Peru to explain five punitive strategies the state uses to handle protests: (1) off-duty policing and critical assets legislation, (2) state of emergency declarations, (3) police or prosecutorial notes against environmental defenders, (4) criminal indictments, and (5) the transferring of criminal cases to distant jurisdictions. Based on our findings, we argue that penal extractivism is a dynamic and ambivalent project that targets marginalized rural populations. The state partially deters mobilizations but fails to address the underlying social unrest, reinforcing the conditions that perpetuate mining conflicts. This in-depth within-case analysis examines the relationship between punishment and extractivism in the global context of contemporary social mobilizations. |
| Document Type: | Article Other literature type |
| Language: | English |
| ISSN: | 1741-3095 1462-4745 |
| DOI: | 10.1177/14624745241258894 |
| DOI: | 10.60692/p7s4t-40r20 |
| DOI: | 10.60692/arbjt-ds415 |
| Rights: | CC BY |
| Accession Number: | edsair.doi.dedup.....9e815d860777e69dbfd7f75da484e5c5 |
| Database: | OpenAIRE |
Nájsť tento článok vo Web of Science | Abstract: | This article introduces the concept of penal extractivism in the punishment and society literature. We define penal extractivism as the punitive strategies that a state implements to safeguard extractive industries from citizens’ contention. This concept addresses the limitations of categories like criminalization, protest policing, social control, and labour discipline while bridging the gap between punishment studies and research on extractive industries. Additionally, we draw upon evidence of the Espinar mining conflict in Peru to explain five punitive strategies the state uses to handle protests: (1) off-duty policing and critical assets legislation, (2) state of emergency declarations, (3) police or prosecutorial notes against environmental defenders, (4) criminal indictments, and (5) the transferring of criminal cases to distant jurisdictions. Based on our findings, we argue that penal extractivism is a dynamic and ambivalent project that targets marginalized rural populations. The state partially deters mobilizations but fails to address the underlying social unrest, reinforcing the conditions that perpetuate mining conflicts. This in-depth within-case analysis examines the relationship between punishment and extractivism in the global context of contemporary social mobilizations. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 17413095 14624745 |
| DOI: | 10.1177/14624745241258894 |