【Abstract】In the modern world， nations divide the crimes into some laws， and the punishments for white-collar crime get harsher and harsher. In some countries， white-collar criminals can even be given the death penalty. Although， white-collar crime is a grave threat to today’s society， it becomes rather difficult to identify because it is financially motivated nonviolent crime committed by business or government professionals. White-collar criminals do not resort to physical violence or threats， but may lead to devastating consequences to a family， a company or a country.
　　【Key words】white-collar crime； environmental crime； differential association theory
　　1. Introduction
　　White-collar crime， normally associated with offences conducted by high status executives and influential corporations， is often considered to be more widespread and threatening to the public than conventional crimes. However， it is far from a clear pattern of crime， because its definition is controversial. This essay starts with Edwin Sutherland’s definition of white-collar crime. Then， it exposes white-collar crime from different perspectives， for the sake of gaining relatively thorough recognition. Afterwards， it introduces Sutherland’s differential association theory， and adopts it to explain the causation of white-collar crime. Finally， it connects Sutherland’s white-collar crime theory with his differential association theory， so as to get a better understanding of both of them.
　　2. White Collar Crime as a Contested Concept
　　Although white-collar crime has been very prevalent， its definition was rather controversial until 1939， when Sutherland proposed the view： white collar crime may be defined approximately as a crime committed by a person of respectability and high social status in the course of his occupation （Sutherland， 1949： 9）.
　　Actually， Sutherland’s definition was not precise enough. It is quite difficult to determine a ‘crime’ committed by ‘a person of respectability and high social status’， ‘in the course of’ his ‘occupation’. Simply through this definition， one cannot recognize which behaviors should be included. Apparently， it brought much confusion and debate. For example， Geis holds that white-collar crime is the abuse of power by persons in high places where they are provided with the opportunity for such abuse， while Edelhertz regards it as an illegal act committed by non-physical means， concealment or guile， to obtain money or property， to avoid the payment or loss of money or property， or to obtain business or personal advantage （Weisburd et al.， 2001： 8）. David Nelken poses， ‘if Sutherland merited a Nobel Prize for pioneering this field of study， he certainly did not deserve it for the clarity or serviceableness of his definition’ （Maguire et al， 1994： 361）. Overall， Sutherland’s definition of white-collar crime is still a contested concept. 　　3. Exposing White Collar Crime
　　Despite the short definition， white-collar crime encompasses various activities， such as theft at work， fraud， corruption， embezzlement， money laundering， environmental crimes， etc. Among these offences， theft at work and environmental crimes are relatively new concepts for many readers.
　　Theft at work is the dishonest appropriation by an employee of any money or property given to him on behalf of his employer （Croall， 2001： 25）. It is an illegal behavior that employees steal money， goods， information， customers， etc. from their employers. In fact， numerous employers experience this theft， but the manager has little idea about the actual losses or the existence of theft. Even if employers detect the theft， they will possibly dismiss the employees， rather than send them to the court， so as to avoid the embarrassment that revelations of widespread theft might cause.
　　As regard to environmental crime， it involves pollution of the atmosphere， water， beaches， as well as the illegal dumping of toxic waste. Without exaggeration， the list of white-collar crime would not be complete without mentioning the problem of pollution. The adverse effects of pollution are enormous： it threatens many sectors of the public， damages the environment， kills wildlife， etc. In the current world， toxic waste is usually moved from developed countries to less developed countries， and illegal waste dumping is globally prevalent. This is a severe phenomenon deserving more attention. Otherwise， it will not only deteriorate the world environment， but also worsen the relations between countries.
　　On the whole， there are many distinctive features of white-collar crime： low visibility， complexity， diffusion of responsibility， diffusion of victimization， low rate of detection and prosecution， lenient sanctions， ambiguous legal and criminal status， etc. Although not easily detected， white-collar crime is quite costly： its financial cost is probably several times as great as that of all the traditional crimes；it may violate the social trust system and produce social disorganization.
　　4. Explaining White Collar Crime： Sutherland’s Differential Association Theory
　　Sutherland explains the white-collar crime by taking a social-psychological view of crime causation and creating the differential association theory. The hypothesis of the theory is that criminal behavior is learned in association with those who define such behavior favorably and in isolation from those who define it unfavorably， and that a person in an appropriate situation engages in such criminal behavior if， and only if， the weight of the favorable definitions exceeds the weight of the unfavorable definitions （Sutherland， 1949： 234）. 　　Through this hypothesis， Sutherland regards criminal behavior as a consequence of conflicting values. His theory is established on the basis of these nine points： 1） Criminal behavior is learned. 2） Criminal behavior is learned in interaction with other persons in a process of communication. 3） The principal part of the learning of criminal behavior occurs within intimate personal groups. 4） When criminal behavior is learned， the learning includes： techniques of committing the crime and the specific direction of motives， drives， rationalizations， and attitudes. 5） The specific direction of motives and drives is learned from definitions of legal codes as favorable and unfavorable. 6） A person becomes delinquent because of an excess of definitions favorable to violation of law over definitions unfavorable to violation of law. 7） Differential associations may vary in frequency， duration， priority， and intensity. 8） The process of learning criminal behavior by association with criminal and anti-criminal patterns involves all of the mechanisms that are involved in any other learning. 9） Though criminal behavior is an expression of general needs and values， it is not explained by those general needs and values since non-criminal behavior is an expression of the same needs and values （Lanier