How can we/should we study purported changes in drug market supply?

Transcription

1 How can we/should we study purported changes in drug market supply? Dr Caitlin Hughes and Dr Jenny Chalmers 6 th International Study for the Society of Drug Policy Conference 30 May 2012, Canterbury DPMP is funded by the Colonial Foundation Trust

2 Introduction Meaningful advice about changes in illicit drug supply of obvious importance for policy makers Yet, the ability to monitor illicit drug supply is theoretically, methodologically and practically challenging. Indicators that can capture dimensions of supply are much more limited than indicators of demand (e.g. Kilmer & Hoorens, 2010). Available supply indicators are often more indicative of law enforcement activity (e.g. Hughes & James, 2012; Willis, Homel, & Gray, 2006). Huge uncertainties about the operation of illicit drug markets e.g. structure, adaptability, network specialiation/diversification etc (e.g. Bright, Hughes & Chalmers, 2012) This increases the potential for erroneous policy advice, including false alarms or the failure to identify an expanding market (Mounteney, Fry, McKeganey, & Haugland, 2010).

3 The Question What role can drug market analysts play in increasing the capacity for meaningful policy advice?

4 Overview Building on our recent examination of supply changes in the Australian cocaine market (Hughes et al 2012): 1. Approach taken and some key findings 2. Strengths and limitations of this approach 3. Implications for future analyses of purported changes in drug markets

5 The policy dilemma: A changing Australian cocaine market? : Increasing attention to the Australian cocaine market Unknowns 1. Was there an increase in cocaine supply or a shift in law enforcement activity? The market for cocaine is growing at an exponential rate, and if the price of the drug is staying the same, then this is the sign of a thriving market It is safe to say we are in a cocaine epidemic. (Don Weatherburn, BOCSAR. September 2010). We would expect to see an increase in arrests, otherwise I'd be questioning whether it (police work) was value for money. (NSW Police Commissioner Andrew Scipione, September 2010) 2. If cocaine supply did increase, what are the likely implications and ought this be of concern to Australian policy makers?

6 Cocaine in Australia No crack cocaine $300 gram (~ 185/$300USD) Street-level purity: 30% 1% of all drug arrests Market appears: to be concentrated in Sydney & Melbourne to occur amongst 2 pops: affluent users & IDU users (Shearer et al. 2005) BUT knowledge is scant Melbourne, (Victoria) Sydney, (New South Wales)

7 How to examine trends in the Australian cocaine supply? Challenges: Don t have purity-adjusted price series e.g. STRIDE Can t place strong emphasis upon public health indicators e.g. Heroin shortage Increased need to think outside the box Our approach: Examination of latest research on drug supply (e.g. Kilmer & Hoorens, 2010) Scan of all publicly available indicators in Australia: quant and qual Construction of proxy indicators of cocaine importation, distribution and use

8 Proxies of supply Indicators of importation Data source Indicators of use Data source Amount imported Scale of importation (low-, mid- or highlevel) Total and mean weight border seizures Proportion of seizures classified as <2kg or >2kg Relative scale and pattern of use Self reported use (across household and 2 sentinel surveys of drug users) Mode of importation Indicators of distribution Mode of detection (boat, sea cargo etc) Data source No. consumer arrests Supply routes (to Australia) Country of embarkation Supply routes (within Australia) Site of importation Scale and nature of distribution in Australia Number of trafficking (provider) arrests and location: state/territory

9 Number, total weight and mean weight of border seizures (Australian Customs) Total weight of detections (kg)/number of detections Period 1 Period 2 Period Mean weight per detection (kg) Year Weight detections (kg) No. of detections Mean weight per detection

10 Distribution of cocaine seizures by weight (Australian Customs) 100% Period 1 Period 2 Period 3 Proportion of all seized cocaine 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Commercial (> 2kg) Year Marketable/less than marketable (<2kg)

11 Weight of border seizures of cocaine by mode of attempted import (Australian Customs) 100% 90% Period 1 Period 2 Period 3 Proportion of border seizures 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Year Air passenger and crew Air/sea cargo and international postal Shipping and aircraft

12 Other trends diversification in points of departure to Australia: 22 embarkation countries in 1999/00 46 countries in 2008/09 diversification in points of entry into Australia Traditional: Seizures in Sydney Since : Seizures in Melbourne, Brisbane, Perth and Sydney evidence of trafficking across Australia 79% in NSW in period 1-55% in period 3 evidence of use across Australia albeit amongst predominantly non-injecting populations, and not accompanied by frequency of use

13 Implications The concurrence of trends in the indicators afforded considerable certitude to conclude that: Importation, distribution and use of cocaine in Australia did increase since 2006/07, when compared with period 2 (2002/ /06). BUT, the recent expansion has not reached the levels seen in 1999/ /02 AND, more significant shift is the nature of supply and use, which has evolved over the past decade: Expansion of supply routes More widespread distribution More widespread use (albeit equally importantly the use appears to be nonproblematic use) Policy implications: High risk for CJS. Minimal risk for health.

14 Limitations Heavy reliance upon seizure data Different forms but nevertheless all seizure data which may? skew findings Cannot address some questions that are potentially important for policy makers e.g. has there been a shift in the nature of whom is doing the trafficking? Or what (if anything) is being trafficked with cocaine? e.g. did law enforcement change their practices? Question is: 1. Are these limitations addressable? 2. If so how important is it to reduce these limitations? Need to know Like to know

15 Opportunities from here Add additional indicators to reduce some limitations e.g. Border and state purity Cocaine border and state purity: Victoria 80 Period 2 Period 3 2. Utilise LE key informants who can provide context about the data 3. Unanswered questions potentially answerable if gain access to unpublished data Ethnicity and nationality of traffickers Drug types seized together e.g. cocaine and heroin BUT is this essential? Cocaine purity Border police data (AFP) State police data

16 Opportunities from here - 2 Some apparent advantages to utilising purity at border and retail and LE informants to counter the most pressing limitations But extent to which ought seek access to additional unpublished indicators questionable Arguably, the biggest strength of this analysis is: Ability to access data rapidly Ability to utilise and report data without restrictions The question and opportunity: what may we learn when we start to apply this to other drugs, e.g. Heroin, for which we already have stronger sets of public health indicators?

17 Mean weight per detection (kg) Heroin: a new expansion? Period 1 Period 2 Period Total weight of detections (kg)/number of detections Weight of detections (kg) No. of detections Mean weight per detection

18 Conclusion Meaningful policy analysis of drug markets will clearly remain a challenge Yet, while we have more limited indicators, creative use of them may enable considerable certitude for policy analysis, particularly if there is use of: Multiple proxy indicators of supply to capture different dimensions Longitudinal analysis to contextualise changes Caution against assuming pre-existing assumptions or observations of markets will necessarily hold true

19 Thank you