A Comprehensive Application of Rational Choice Theory: How Costs Imposed by, and Benefits Derived from, the U.S. Federal
- PDF / 741,057 Bytes
- 24 Pages / 439.37 x 666.142 pts Page_size
- 24 Downloads / 157 Views
A Comprehensive Application of Rational Choice Theory: How Costs Imposed by, and Benefits Derived from, the U.S. Federal Government Affect Incidents Perpetrated by the Radical Eco‑Movement Jennifer Varriale Carson1 · Laura Dugan2 · Sue‑Ming Yang3
© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019
Abstract Objectives In this study, we examine the effect of both the costs and benefits of perpetration, along with the rewards of abstention, on the behavior of a uniquely rational, yet frequent perpetrator of ideologically-motivated crime: the radical eco-movement. Methods We combine data on U.S. federal government actions and incidents perpetrated by the radical eco-movement to assess multiple components of rational choice theory. Our investigation employs Granger causality and autoregressive Poisson analyses. Results As a whole, we find that what the government does seems to influence the behavior of the radical eco-movement; namely, when government behaviors increase the costs of perpetration, eco-incidents decline. Further, we find partial evidence that raising the marginal benefit of perpetration is associated with more incidents. Conclusions Theorizing as to why such nuanced findings were discovered, we conclude that the decision-making process of the radical eco-movement is more complex than originally anticipated. Keywords Rational choice theory · Eco-movement · Counterterrorism · Terrorism
Introduction Scholars have oft contended that rational choice theory (RCT) is too constraining to human nature and inapplicable to broader, more criminogenic populations (DeHaan and Jaco 2003; Pratt et al. 2006). These criticisms are unsurprising, given that much of the The authorship is ordered alphabetically, as all authors have contributed equally to this work. * Jennifer Varriale Carson [email protected] 1
Department of Criminal Justice, University of Central Missouri, Warrensburg, MO, USA
2
Department of Criminology and Criminal Justice, University of Maryland, College Park, MD, USA
3
Department of Criminology, Law, and Society, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA, USA
13
Vol.:(0123456789)
Journal of Quantitative Criminology
scholarship in this area is almost exclusively limited to the cost side of the risk-reward calculation. Although much has been learned from this focused research (Chiricos and Waldo 1970; Cochran and Chamlin 2000; Pridemore and Freilich 2007; Sherman and Berk 1984; Tittle and Rowe 1974), more recent scholarship by Loughran et al. (2016) maintains that valid RCT tests must also consider the benefits gained from illicit behavior. This is an especially important consideration for the perpetrators of terrorism, defined here as “the threatened or actual use of illegal force and violence to attain a political, economic, religious, or social goal through fear, coercion, or intimidation” (LaFree and Dugan 2007:184), as their motives typically go well beyond personal gain. In fact, terrorists often justify their actions as part of the greater good, leading to politic
Data Loading...
