Drug Trafficking
The readings (some classic and contemporary ones) will provide the background for limited data and methodologies in researching drug trafficking. Primary data gathered through interviews with drug traffickers are only handful studies to date. Over the years, scholars have started taping secondary data sources for studying DT organizations. Natarajan (2000, 2006) showed how court data can assist in identifying varied types of organizations and paved the way of using wiretap data for studying the networks of DT organizations. Subsequently scholars in Italy started using court data in analyzing Mafia operations. Now one of the major sources of data for understanding DT organizations actions is court records.
Please select one of the following questions and provide a thoughtful and critical answer. Your answers should be informed and approximately 300 words in length. Make references to the assigned readings and videos and feel free to cite additional literature.
1. After reading the articles, what other data sources you can think of that will might be useful in studying DT organizations. Provide a minimum of 2 and maximum of 4 with explanations of why they are useful. Cite studies/examples where appropriate.
2. Based on the mapping study ( Benitez, 2019) of partnerships, discuss the ways in which heroin trafficking can be mapped in Golden triangle and Golden Crescent area. What data will be needed and how the transit route data should be mapped in that region?
3. Read Natarajan (2006) and Jones (2020) case studies of drug trafficking organizations and discuss the improvements in data and methods in studying the networks.
4. Research has provided impetus for us to think about the emergence of poly-drug networks and multiple trafficking types of networks (terrorist networks, human trafficking networks, etc). Discuss the data and analytical needs to understand these multiple networks forging business partnerships. What would be your advice for intelligence analysis?
5. Peter Andreas argues that the ambiguity of the numbers and potential for misleading interpretations is evident in the case of seizing and interdicting drugs at and beyond U.S. borders. The argument has been that larger and more frequent drug seizures are often presented as evidence of policy success, and lauded as a testament to more vigorous enforcement. But he claims that measuring interdiction “success” is politically tricky and can be very misleading and inaccurate. Why? Elaborate on the challenges he has identified, and include some examples.