The Novelty of ‘Cybercrime’

Recent discussions of ‘cybercrime’ focus upon the apparent novelty or otherwise of the phenomenon. Some authors claim that such crime is not qualitatively different from ‘terrestrial crime’, and can be analysed and explained using established theories of crime causation. One such approach, oft cited, is the ‘routine activity theory’ developed by Marcus Felson and others. This article explores the extent to which the theory’s concepts and aetiological schema can be transposed to crimes committed in a ‘virtual’ environment. Substantively, the examination concludes that, although some of the theory’s core concepts can indeed be applied to cybercrime, there remain important differences between ‘virtual’ and ‘terrestrial’ worlds that limit the theory’s usefulness. These differences, it is claimed, give qualified support to the suggestion that ‘cybercrime’ does indeed represent the emergence of a new and distinctive form of crime.

[1]  D. Cressey,et al.  Principles of Criminology. , 1947 .

[2]  Lawrence E. Cohen,et al.  Social Change and Crime Rate Trends: A Routine Activity Approach , 1979 .

[3]  Y. Elkana.  OF CUNNING REASON , 1980 .

[4]  Kenneth C. Land,et al.  Property Crime Rates in the United States: A Macrodynamic Analysis, 1947-1977; With Ex Ante Forecasts for the Mid-1980s , 1980, American Journal of Sociology.

[5]  James R. Kluegel,et al.  Social Inequality and Predatory Criminal Victimization: An Exposition and Test of a Formal Theory , 1981 .

[6]  G. A. Avanesov,et al.  The Principles of Criminology , 1982 .

[7]  Sharon Zukin.  Loft Living: Culture and Capital in Urban Change , 1982 .

[8]  J. S. Long,et al.  Social Differentiation in Criminal Victimization: A Test of Routine Activities/Lifestyle Theories , 1987 .

[9]  James P. Lynch,et al.  Routine activity and victimization at work , 1987 .

[10]  C. Baldry.  Theories of The Information Society , 1988 .

[11]  D. Harvey,et al.  The Condition of Postmodernity , 2020, The New Social Theory Reader.

[12]  Marvin D. Krohn,et al.  Property Crime and the Routine Activities of Individuals , 1989 .

[13]  Terance D. Miethe,et al.  Opportunity, Choice, and Criminal Victimization: A Test of a Theoretical Model , 1990 .

[14]  Richard R. Bennett.  Routine Activities: A Cross-National Assessment of a Criminological Perspective , 1991 .

[15]  Bryan Clough,et al.  Approaching zero: Data crime and the computer underworld , 1992 .

[16]  Gary LaFree,et al.  The Situational Analysis of Crime and Deviance , 1993 .

[17]  M. Poster.  The Second Media Age , 1994 .

[18]  P. Brantingham,et al.  THE INFLUENCE OF STREET NETWORKS ON THE PATTERNING OF PROPERTY OFFENSES , 1994 .

[19]  R. Felson.  BIG PEOPLE HIT LITTLE PEOPLE: SEX DIFFERENCES IN PHYSICAL POWER AND INTERPERSONAL VIOLENCE* , 1996 .

[20]  Joe Podolsky,et al.  City of bits: space, place and the infobahn , 1995, CSOC.

[21]  Rob Shields,et al.  Cultures of Internet: Virtual Spaces, Real Histories, Living Bodies , 1996 .

[22]  S. Turkle.  Life on the Screen: Identity in the Age of the Internet , 1997 .

[23]  Christine B. Smith,et al.  Conduct Control on Usenet , 2006, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

[24]  F. Stalder.  The Logic of Networks: Social Landscapes vis-a-vis the Space of Flows , 1998 .

[25]  M. Felson,et al.  Crime and Everyday Life , 1998 .

[26]  Paul C. Adams,et al.  Network Topologies and Virtual Place , 1998 .

[27]  M. Felson.  The Routine Activity Approach as a General Crime Theory , 2000 .

[28]  B. Loader,et al.  Cybercrime : law enforcement, security and surveillance in the information age , 2000 .

[29]  M. Dodge,et al.  Mapping Cyberspace , 2000 .

[30]  M. Archer.  Being Human: The Problem of Agency , 2000 .

[31]  Sally S. Simpson,et al.  Of Crime and Criminality: The Use of Theory in Everyday Life , 2001 .

[32]  Peter Grabosky,et al.  Telecommunications Fraud in the Digital Age: The Convergence of Technologies , 2001 .

[33]  W. Capeller.  Not Such a Neat Net: Some Comments on Virtual Criminality , 2001 .

[34]  Manuel Castells,et al.  The Internet Galaxy: Reflections on the Internet, Business, and Society , 2001 .

[35]  K. Pease.  Crime futures and foresight: Challenging criminal behaviour in the information age , 2001 .

[36]  D. Wall.  Cybercrimes and the Internet , 2001 .

[37]  H. V. Jagadish,et al.  Information warfare and security , 1998, SGMD.

[38]  Jón Gunnar Bernburg,et al.  Routine activities in social context: A closer look at the role of opportunity in deviant behavior , 2001 .

[39]  David S. Wall,et al.  Crime and the Internet , 2001 .

[40]  P. Grabosky.  Virtual Criminality: Old Wine in New Bottles? , 2001 .

[41]  Sites of Criminality and Sites of Governance , 2001 .

[42]  Yvonne Jewkes,et al.  Dot.cons : crime, deviance and identity on the internet , 2002 .

[43]  R. Clarke,et al.  Etailing: New Opportunities for Crime, New Opportunities for Prevention , 2002 .

[44]  Steven Furnell,et al.  Cybercrime: Vandalizing the Information Society , 2003, ICWE.

[45]  Ronald V. Clarke,et al.  Superhighway Robbery: Preventing E-commerce Crime , 2003 .

[46]  K. Wittebrood,et al.  Burglary Victimization in England and Wales, the United States and the Netherlands: A Cross-National Comparative Test of Routine Activities and Lifestyle Theories , 2004 .

[47]  M. Felson,et al.  Routine activity and rational choice , 2004 .