19.10.2014 Views

The Price of Illicit Drugs: 1981 through the - The White House

The Price of Illicit Drugs: 1981 through the - The White House

The Price of Illicit Drugs: 1981 through the - The White House

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

overstate drug prices at <strong>the</strong> U.S. border. Because imports are usually seized, not purchased, price<br />

information is seldom available for <strong>the</strong>m. That is, prices at <strong>the</strong> border are almost certainly lower than <strong>the</strong><br />

lowest prices shown in <strong>the</strong>se figures.<br />

As mentioned, illicit drugs <strong>of</strong>ten are transacted at fixed prices that remain constant over time. For example,<br />

crack cocaine is <strong>of</strong>ten sold as a $10 rock and heroin is <strong>of</strong>ten sold in a $20 bag, regardless <strong>of</strong> purity or<br />

volume. <strong>The</strong> size <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> rock and <strong>the</strong> purity <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> bag change over time, however, which means that <strong>the</strong><br />

standardized price, or <strong>the</strong> price per pure gram, changes significantly over time. <strong>The</strong> figures reported here<br />

are intended to capture trends in standardized prices and are expressed in terms <strong>of</strong> price per pure gram.<br />

In addition to <strong>the</strong> above, <strong>the</strong> report introduces an alternative way to estimate retail prices for cocaine and<br />

heroin (Statistical Appendix, section 4). At retail, cocaine and heroin are typically transacted at fixed<br />

prices <strong>of</strong> $10, $20, $40 and so on up to about $100. Using <strong>the</strong> STRIDE data, we estimated <strong>the</strong> amount <strong>of</strong><br />

pure cocaine/heroin for each purchase conditional on <strong>the</strong> amount paid for that purchase. <strong>The</strong>n we used<br />

results from a special addendum to <strong>the</strong> Drug Use Forecasting survey to weight each dollar category by <strong>the</strong><br />

distribution <strong>of</strong> prices that users actually pay on <strong>the</strong> street. This weighted average is a measure <strong>of</strong> pure<br />

cocaine/heroin actually purchased per dollar spent. We use <strong>the</strong> inverse <strong>of</strong> that estimate – <strong>the</strong> price per pure<br />

gram – as <strong>the</strong> estimate <strong>of</strong> retail prices.<br />

This alternative approach to estimating retail prices provides a transitional methodology that will take<br />

advantage <strong>of</strong> data emerging from NIJ’s Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring (ADAM) program and<br />

SAMHSA’s National <strong>House</strong>hold Survey on Drug Abuse (NHSDA). One problem with <strong>the</strong> current<br />

application is its reliance on purchase data from just six cities for only one year (Q3 1995 – Q2 1996).<br />

Ano<strong>the</strong>r problem is that <strong>the</strong> addendum data are limited to cocaine and heroin purchases. ADAM data will<br />

come from at least thirty-five cities, and <strong>the</strong>y will include all drugs <strong>of</strong> interest. New versions <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />

National <strong>House</strong>hold Survey on Drug Abuse will include questions about <strong>the</strong> purchase <strong>of</strong> marijuana. Thus,<br />

this alternative approach to estimating retail price-series will improve with <strong>the</strong> expansion <strong>of</strong> ADAM and <strong>the</strong><br />

NHSDA.<br />

Beyond <strong>the</strong> alternative model for retail cocaine and heroin prices, <strong>the</strong>re are several differences between <strong>the</strong><br />

methods used in <strong>the</strong> current <strong>1981</strong>-2000 report and those used in <strong>the</strong> previous <strong>1981</strong>-1998 report. Firstly, <strong>the</strong><br />

raw quarterly database (STRIDE 1 in Figure A1) for 2000 contained slightly different numbers <strong>of</strong><br />

transactions than <strong>the</strong> raw quarterly database for 1998. For example, <strong>the</strong> number <strong>of</strong> transactions in <strong>the</strong> first<br />

two quarters <strong>of</strong> 1998 was 162 and 202 in <strong>the</strong> 2000 database but only 153 and 170 in <strong>the</strong> 1998 database.<br />

5

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!