Evaluating Actions against Local Drug Markets: A ‘Systematic’ Review of Research
| Author | Mark Mason,Tom Bucke |
| Published date | 01 March 2002 |
| Date | 01 March 2002 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/0032258X0207500103 |
| Subject Matter | Article |
MARK MASON1
Senior Research Officer, Drugs and Alcohol Research Unit,
Home Office, London
TOM BUCKE
Principal Research Officer, Drugs
and
Alcohol Research Unit,
Home Office, London
EVALUATING ACTIONS AGAINST
LOCAL DRUG MARKETS:
A'SYSTEMATIC' REVIEW
OF RESEARCH
There is a clear need and desire to develop policy based on evidence of
what works. However, evidence on what works in terms of disrupting
drugs supply remains unclear. In this article a 'systematic' review of
the research evidence that focuses on attempts to disrupt local retail
drug markets is undertaken. The search was conducted for studies in
English using electronic databases, citation indexes and journal
abstracts. Papers were reviewed for five methodological criteria which
15 studies met. These 15 studies fell into two distinct groups: evalu-
ations of interventions to disrupt drug-dealing from residential or
commercialproperties; and interventions which sought to disrupt drug-
dealing taking place in the open or on city streets.Studies were then
graded according to the effectiveness of the invention they evaluated.
Finally, areas of effectiveness along with implications for designing
interventions and evaluations are discussed.
1. Introduction
A key principle in the Government's IO-year anti-drugs strategy is the
need for drugs policy and practice to be evidence-based (President
of
the Council, 1999).2An examination
of
research evidence relating to
the main aspects
of
the anti-drug strategy highlights that one
of
the
areas where least is known is that
of
drug supply. Actions seeking to
stem the supply
of
illicit drugs range from crop eradication in source
countries and coordination
of
international anti-trafficking efforts,
through to the disruption
of
local retail drug markets.
Anumber
of
descriptive research studies are now beginning to
provide abetter insight into the different levels
of
the UK drugs supply
chain (May et al., 2000; Pearson and Hobbs, forthcoming). However,
evidence on what works in terms
of
disrupting drugs supply remains
unclear. This article seeks to address this lack
of
clarity by reviewing
the evidence from a series
of
research evaluations that focus on
attempts to disrupt local retail drug markets.
The Police Journal, Volume 75 (2002) 15
It is common for research evidence to be assessed through 'narra-
tive' reviews that tend to present the findings of evaluations irrespec-
tive of how methodologically robust the studies have been. The danger
of these reviews is that readers may be misled by commonly reported
but poorly designed studies that overstate their findings because they
lack methodological rigour. In this article a 'systematic' review of the
research evidence is undertaken, where evaluations are graded accord-
ing to their methodology and then the findings from the most robust
studies available are discussed. The aim here is to provide a clear
picture of what the best designed studies say about disrupting local
drug markets.
There is interest in the design of this group of evaluations for
another reason. As the drug strategy progresses there is likely to be a
growth in evaluations of initiatives that aim to disrupt local drug
markets. The task of developing robust evaluations of these initiatives
will be challenging. The consensual nature of drug buying and selling
presents evaluators with a series of problems not usually faced by those
evaluating the effectiveness of burglary prevention, drugs education or
treatment modalities. An additional objective of the review is therefore
to examine both the kinds of measures used inpast evaluations, and the
methodological standards possible when evaluating actions against par-
ticular forms of local drug market.
The next section of this article outlines how the review was con-
ducted and how the studies were graded. The studies fall into two
groups, according to the type of local drug market they address. In
section 3 the studies are rated on their methodological robustness,
outline the types of anti-drug market tactics applied and describe the
evaluation measures used. In section 4 those studies that had the most
robust methodologies and had positive outcomes of success in disrupt-
ing local drug markets are described. Finally, in section 5, the key
findings and implications of the review are discussed.
2. How the Review was Conducted
A literature search was made for evaluations of initiatives aimed at
disrupting local drug markets. Searches were conducted for studies
in English using electronic databases, citation indexes and journal
abstracts. Cross-referencing bibliographies and reference sections of
reports, journals and books produced further sources, while unpublished
sources were included when available. To be included in the review a
study had to:
• define the aims of the intervention seeking to disrupt a local drug
market;
• describe the intervention package;
• give a detailed description of the evaluation design;
• identify outcomes measures; and
• give a presentation of outcome measures.
16 The Police Journal, Volume 75 (2002)
To continue reading
Request your trial