Buying Stolen Goods: The Ambiguity in Trading Consumer-to-Consumer, Studied through a Mixed Methods Analysis

Tobias Kammersgaard; Marie Bruvik Heinskou; Jakob Johan Demant

doi:10.1080/14043858.2017.1305039

Buying Stolen Goods: The Ambiguity in Trading Consumer-to-Consumer, Studied through a Mixed Methods Analysis

Tobias Kammersgaard, Marie Bruvik Heinskou, Jakob Johan Demant

Abstract

This study investigates the buying of stolen goods in Denmark. The study consists of a self-report survey based on a representative sample of the general Danish population (n = 2311) and six focus group interviews consisting of both informants experienced with buying stolen goods and of those with no experience (n = 37). The survey showed that 4.8% had bought stolen goods, while 15.7% were uncertain whether they had bought stolen goods. Young people, males, and unemployed were more likely to purchase stolen goods. No clear correlation between income and buying stolen goods was found. Focus groups suggest the buyers of stolen goods did not buy stolen goods because they could not afford legitimate products. We recommend targeting consumers not interested in buying stolen goods with information about how to avoid such activity.

Originalsprog	Dansk
Tidsskrift	Nordic Journal of Criminology
Vol/bind	18
Udgave nummer	1
Sider (fra-til)	93-100
ISSN	2578-983x
DOI	https://doi.org/10.1080/14043858.2017.1305039
Status	Udgivet - 2017

Emneord

Det Samfundsvidenskabelige Fakultet
Stolen goods
stolen goods market
buyers of stolen goods
SGM
focus groups

Adgang til dokumentet

10.1080/14043858.2017.1305039

Citationsformater

@article{f91e8d5869d940f49dc08fbed5a43e37,

title = "Buying Stolen Goods: The Ambiguity in Trading Consumer-to-Consumer, Studied through a Mixed Methods Analysis",

abstract = "This study investigates the buying of stolen goods in Denmark. The study consists of a self-report survey based on a representative sample of the general Danish population (n = 2311) and six focus group interviews consisting of both informants experienced with buying stolen goods and of those with no experience (n = 37). The survey showed that 4.8% had bought stolen goods, while 15.7% were uncertain whether they had bought stolen goods. Young people, males, and unemployed were more likely to purchase stolen goods. No clear correlation between income and buying stolen goods was found. Focus groups suggest the buyers of stolen goods did not buy stolen goods because they could not afford legitimate products. We recommend targeting consumers not interested in buying stolen goods with information about how to avoid such activity.",

keywords = "Det Samfundsvidenskabelige Fakultet, Stolen goods, stolen goods market, buyers of stolen goods, SGM, focus groups",

author = "Tobias Kammersgaard and Heinskou, {Marie Bruvik} and Demant, {Jakob Johan}",

year = "2017",

doi = "10.1080/14043858.2017.1305039",

language = "Dansk",

volume = "18",

pages = "93--100",

journal = "Nordic Journal of Criminology",

issn = "2578-983X",

publisher = "Taylor & Francis",

number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Buying Stolen Goods

T2 - The Ambiguity in Trading Consumer-to-Consumer, Studied through a Mixed Methods Analysis

AU - Kammersgaard, Tobias

AU - Heinskou, Marie Bruvik

AU - Demant, Jakob Johan

PY - 2017

Y1 - 2017

N2 - This study investigates the buying of stolen goods in Denmark. The study consists of a self-report survey based on a representative sample of the general Danish population (n = 2311) and six focus group interviews consisting of both informants experienced with buying stolen goods and of those with no experience (n = 37). The survey showed that 4.8% had bought stolen goods, while 15.7% were uncertain whether they had bought stolen goods. Young people, males, and unemployed were more likely to purchase stolen goods. No clear correlation between income and buying stolen goods was found. Focus groups suggest the buyers of stolen goods did not buy stolen goods because they could not afford legitimate products. We recommend targeting consumers not interested in buying stolen goods with information about how to avoid such activity.

AB - This study investigates the buying of stolen goods in Denmark. The study consists of a self-report survey based on a representative sample of the general Danish population (n = 2311) and six focus group interviews consisting of both informants experienced with buying stolen goods and of those with no experience (n = 37). The survey showed that 4.8% had bought stolen goods, while 15.7% were uncertain whether they had bought stolen goods. Young people, males, and unemployed were more likely to purchase stolen goods. No clear correlation between income and buying stolen goods was found. Focus groups suggest the buyers of stolen goods did not buy stolen goods because they could not afford legitimate products. We recommend targeting consumers not interested in buying stolen goods with information about how to avoid such activity.

KW - Det Samfundsvidenskabelige Fakultet

KW - Stolen goods

KW - stolen goods market

KW - buyers of stolen goods

KW - SGM

KW - focus groups

U2 - 10.1080/14043858.2017.1305039

DO - 10.1080/14043858.2017.1305039

M3 - Tidsskriftartikel

SN - 2578-983X

VL - 18

SP - 93

EP - 100

JO - Nordic Journal of Criminology

JF - Nordic Journal of Criminology

IS - 1

ER -