The Relationship between Illegal Drugs and Violence: Is There a Cause and Effect?

Latin American Studie

The causes of illegal drug industry growth in the Andes, Anti-Drug Policies and their effectiveness

Illegal drugs have become a key and conflictive policy issue in the Andean countries. Anti-drug polices are today part of government policy agendas and the object of frequent debate. In 1961 the United Nations signed the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs. This was followed by the 1971 Convention on Psychotropic Drugs and the 1988 Convention against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances. In1972 President Nixon declared a “war on drugs” raising drug issues in the policy agenda of the United States and other countries. It is clear that governments’ have been attempting to control and regulate mind-altering drugs use for a long time. Their results, however, have been at best highly questionable. Today cocaine and heroin are widely available, new drugs have appeared in the market, new markets have developed and new criminal and subversive organizations entered the illegal drug business. Advocates of current policies would argue that without them things would be worse. Those who oppose them content that policies themselves are at fault and have contributed to increase the social costs of drug production, trafficking and consumption. The debate about anti-drug policy effectiveness most of the time is emotionally charged and does not advance the understanding of drug phenomena. This essay analyses the nature of the drug policy formulation problem, describes a theory of competitive advantage in illicit drugs, draws some policy implications from this theory, analyses the characteristics of the main drug producing countries that make them prone to develop the illicit drugs industry, surveys the evolution of anti-drug policies in the Andean countries, discuses some of the main challenges confronted by the policies currently used, summarizes the main effects that the illegal drug industry development have had on those countries, assesses the viability of drug policy reform and makes a few suggestions to marginally modify some policies and to improve policy dialogue as a pre-requisite to improve drug policy effectiveness

Ventajas competitivas ilegales, el desarrollo de la industria de drogas ilegales y el fracaso de las políticas contra las drogas en Afganistán y Colombia

En 1970 Colombia no era conocida por su producción de coca o drogas ilegales, y Afganistán era y había sido por mucho tiempo un productor menor de opio. De hecho, “en Afganistán el opio no había sido una cosecha ‘tradicional’ y antes de los años noventa solamente se había cultivado en pocos lugares de ese país. A diferencia de la mayoría de los países de la región, Afganistán tenía una ‘cultura de opio’ débil. Por consiguiente, el consumo de opio hasta hace poco ha sido relativamente bajo” (UNODC, 2002: 87-88). En esa época, ninguno de estos dos países era un productor importante de coca u opio, o un actor importante en los mercados internacionales de drogas ilícitas. Hoy, sin embargo, son los países dominantes en las dos ramas de origen vegetal más importantes de la industria ilegal: cocacocaína y amapola-opio-heroína. Así, Afganistán y Colombia producen respectivamente más del 70% de la heroína y la cocaína ilícitas en el mundo

Emeralds on the Equator: An Avoided Deforestation Carbon Markets Strategy Manual

This strategy for producing and marketing avoided deforestation carbon credits applies Thoumi’s Rational Convergence Model for effective communication, Thoumi’s Emeralds on the Equator “Zamrud Khatulistiwa” Model for environmental services, Afuah’s New Game business model, and Nordhielm’s Big Picture model. Using the value stream of raw materials, manufacturing, and marketing and sales, the avoided deforestation project developer can successfully create value through carbon credits manufacturing and sales for the project owner. The four criteria a developer must use to successfully bring about an avoided deforestation project are the following: the land dictates the rules, rural communities are the gatekeepers for a project, governments dispense rights, and businesses structure risks.Master of ScienceNatural Resources and EnvironmentUniversity of Michiganhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/61353/1/thoumi thesis 2008.pd

Vigilância Sanitária - Desvendando o enigma

Resenha Naciona

Antidrug policies and the need to confront the colombian vulnerabilities

None of the prevalent paradigms helps explain why the great majority of countries that can cultivate coca and corn poppy and produce cocaine and heroin do not make it, that is, why the illegal production of those drugs is so concentrated being so profitable; or why in the countries where traditional cultivations of coca were common, big dealing organizations did not occur. It is not either explained why illegal drug abuse has tended to be concentrated in few countries, or why in some countries stimulants are primarily abused while in others narcotics are mainly consumed; why antidrug policies show unsatisfactory results and which would be the effects of applying other policies; why, in spite of the fact that Bolivia and Peru previously had extensive and rooted cultivations of coca, the powerful traffickers did not appear there but in Colombia. This article proposes a new paradigm. In order to advance in that direction, the literature of criminology on the reasons for somebody to commit crimes is researched. Then some basic questions are sought to be answered: Which factors contribute to criminality? Are there enough causes or factors for the development of illegal industries or only some necessary factors and other simply contributive ones? Once the answers to these questions are obtained it would be possible to proceed to evaluate the effectiveness of antidrug policies. Some conclusions are summarized at the end.Ninguno de los paradigmas prevalentes permite explicar por qué la gran mayoría de países que pueden cultivar coca y amapola y producir cocaína y heroína no lo hacen, es decir, por qué la producción ilegal de esas drogas está tan concentrada si es tan rentable; o por qué en los países en donde los cultivos tradicionales de coca eran comunes, no surgieron grandes organizaciones traficantes. Tampoco explican por qué el consumo de drogas ilegales ha tendido a estar concentrado en pocos países, o por qué en algunos países se consumen primordialmente estimulantes mientras que en otros se consumen más que todo narcóticos; por qué las políticas contra las drogas tienen resultados poco satisfactorios y cuáles serían los efectos de otras políticas; por qué a pesar de que Bolivia y Perú tenían cultivos de coca extensos y arraigados, los grandes traficantes no surgieron en ellos sino en Colombia. En este artículo se propone un nuevo paradigma. Para avanzar en esa dirección, se investiga la literatura de la criminología sobre las razones por las que alguien comete crímenes. A continuación se busca responder preguntas básicas: ¿Qué factores contribuyen a la criminalidad? ¿Hay causas o factores suficientes para el desarrollo de las industrias ilegales o solamente algunos factores necesarios y otros que contribuyen a su desarrollo? Una vez obtenidas las respuestas a estas preguntas es posible proceder a evaluar la efectividad de las políticas contra las drogas. Al final se resumen algunas conclusiones