This study examines a crucial question: What kind of effect do interdiction and other drug enforcement
activities have on drug smuggling? Do they actually deter smuggling, or is their effect more one of
disruption and displacement? The answer to this question is of considerable importance, owing to the
significance of drug abuse in the United States as well as the annual expenditure on drug enforcement and
treatment. More than fifty agencies of the federal government are involved in drug supply and demand
reduction strategies, and the annual budget for these agencies is approximately 17 billion dollars. It is
estimated that when federal, state and local expenditures are combined, the U.S. spends roughly 30 billion
dollars annually on drug control efforts.
While the Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP), the U.S. Customs Service, and the U.S.
Coast Guard have made great headway in the area of performance measurement, measuring the outcomes
of counterdrug operations remains a challenge. ONDCP, as part of their Performance Measures of
Effectiveness (PME) system, has sponsored development of improved measurements of drug flow as one
gage of interdiction effectiveness. However, questions regarding the existence and value of other
outcomes (such as displacement and increases in trafficker operating costs) and the impact of counterdrug
operations on drug prices in the U.S. remain unanswered. While billions of dollars are spent on
interdiction activity, only thousands are spent learning how those billion could be more effectively used.
Recognizing this lacuna in evaluation research, ONDCP, the U.S. Customs Service, and the U.S. Coast Guard jointly funded Abt Associates in a study that examines the relationship drug enforcement operations in the source3, transit4, and U.S. border entry regions5 and the corresponding deterrence effect
on cocaine smuggling. For the purposes of this study, a drug enforcement operation has a deterrent effect
if drug smugglers are displaced from a previously preferred route/method into a less desirable smuggling
route/method, thereby increasing their risk of being caught and other costs associated with smuggling
(e.g., transportation fees). The increased costs presumably will be passed on to consumers.
This study has three principal components. First, we interviewed convicted drug traffickers to learn their
perceptions about the risk of transporting cocaine into the United States. Second, we studied how cocaine
prices were affected by various drug enforcement operations and events. And third, we examined the best
available data about cocaine movements through the transit zone to see whether there is a correlation
between movements and interdiction activity. Results appear in the following sections of this report;
technical material appears in the appendices.
3 The source zone refers to countries that cultivate, produce and export cocaine, primarily the South American
countries of Colombia, Peru, Bolivia, Venezuela, and Ecuador.
4 The transit zone for cocaine refers to the area that includes the Caribbean Sea, the Gulf of Mexico, Central
American, the northern coast of South America, Mexico, the Eastern and the Western Pacific.
5 The arrival zone is any Port of Entry (POE) into the U.S., or any point between ports of entry.
Last Updated: March 4, 2002
