---
title: "Zemiology"
chunk: 1/3
source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zemiology"
category: "reference"
tags: "science, encyclopedia"
date_saved: "2026-05-05T03:59:10.811479+00:00"
instance: "kb-cron"
---

Zemiology is the study of social harms. Zemiology gets its name from the Greek word ζημία zēmía, meaning "harm".
It originated as a critique of criminology and the notion of crime. In contrast with "individual-based harms" such as theft, the notion of social harm or social injury incorporates harms caused by nation states and corporations. These ideas have received increased attention from critical academics such as neo-Marxists and feminists who have sought to create an independent field of study, separate from criminology. Zemiology studies the harms that affect individuals' lives that are not considered to be criminal or are rarely criminalised, such as mortgage misselling, poverty and unemployment.

== Zemiological critique of criminology and crime ==
Hillyard and Tombs outline a number of criticisms of criminology and crime:

"Crime has no ontological reality" – Crime is a construct and is based on social judgements. However, there are no central properties that pertain to the notion of crime; therefore, what is a crime will vary across time and space.
"Criminology perpetuates the myth of crime" – Criminology is based upon the notion of crime, which fails to adequately address the social construction of the concept. Therefore, criminology's continued use of the notion within its frame of analysis perpetuates the myth that crimes are distinct acts that may be understood as separate social phenomena.
"Crime consists of many petty events" – In a large proportion of reported crimes, the harms endured by victims, if there are any, are minimal. Hence Hillyard and Tombs argue that "the definitions of crime in the criminal law do not reflect the only or the most dangerous of antisocial behaviours."
"Crime excludes many serious harms" – Many events and incidents which cause serious harm are either not part of the criminal law or, if they could be dealt with by it, are either ignored or handled without resort to it. The undue attention given to events which are defined as crimes distracts attention from more serious harm (such as pollution or poverty).
"'Crime control' is ineffective" – Hillyard and Tombs have argued that the methods and approach to crime control have patently failed. They believe the criminal justice system is unsuccessful in fulfilling its aims and in reforming criminal offenders. It appears that the criminal justice system sees there is only one solution to crime control, and that is a prison sentence; however, it is questionable whether this actually resolves certain crimes in society.
"'Crime' gives legitimacy to the expansion of crime control" – Since the early 1990s, governments have emphasised crime control as a key concern, and crime control has increased faster than any other area of public expenditure. Consequently, security firms have increasingly sought to provide services to the burgeoning penal state. It is argued that these private interests have played a key part in the expansion of prison, as means to deal with social problems.
"Contrasting 'crimes'" – The criminal law uses different tests to determine whether a crime has been committed. The principal test is the concept of mens rea – the guilty mind – which applies to the individual but not exclusively. However, these tests are not objective and often rely on subjective judgements about an individual's actions. Mens rea has to be judged by proxy, examining both a person's words and deeds. This becomes an even more complex task when applying the test an organisation, particularly as the harms caused by organisations result from the actions or inactions of a number of individuals and omission rather than intent. Therefore, harms caused by organisations are rarely criminalised.

== Harms of the criminal justice system ==
Hillyard and Tombs argue that the criminal justice system fails to protect people from criminal harms whilst inflicting serious harms on those people who travel through the system. These harms often outweigh the harm caused by the original crime. However, current criminal justice policy within countries like the UK continues to champion the use of prison as a means to deal with social problems. In 2002, the UK prison population was 80,144. The population rate, per hundred thousand of national population, for England and Wales was 139. These figures are high compared to the rest of Europe in terms of overall numbers; however, looking at prison population rate, they are similar to many other countries in Europe. Italy, Spain, France, Romania and Belarus each had prison populations of around 50,000 in 2001–2002. Only Poland and Ukraine had prison populations higher than that of the UK, at 82,173 and 198,885 respectively.
These rising prison numbers however do not necessarily reflect a rise in crime. Overall, since 1995 there has been a reduction in recorded crime. The British Crime Survey has shown that the overall crime experienced by households has declined by 42% which is the equivalent to eight million fewer crimes. More specifically, domestic burglary has fallen by 59%, vehicle theft has decreased by 61% and violent crimes have experienced a reduction of 41%. According to these figures it appears that the reason for the growth in the prison population is not due to a rise in crime.
In spite of the faith demonstrated by politicians in the criminal justice system, it would appear that the criminal justice system seems to fail in its own terms. The probability of a criminal re-offending is determined by external factors including having a stable family life, a home and a job. All of these are arguably weakened by a prison sentence. The Social Exclusion Unit has demonstrated that prison fails to rehabilitate on a dramatic scale with two thirds of prisoners re-offending within two years of release. However, a prison place costs £37,000 per annum.