Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: April 30, 2024 Tue
Time: 2:41 am
Time: 2:41 am
Results for methamphetamine (australia)
3 results foundAuthor: Welsh, Brandon C. Title: Effectiveness of Public Area Surveillance for Crime Prevention: Security Guards, Place Managers and Defensible Space Summary: This report presents a systematic review of the effects of surveillance of public spaces by security guards, place mangers and measures to stimulate so called defensible space. Studies were included in these systematic reviews if the surveillance measure in question (i.e., security guards, place managers, and defensible space) was the main focus of the intervention; if there was an outcome measure of crime; if the evaluation design was of high methodological quality, with the minimum design involving before-and-after measures of crime in experimental and comparable control areas; and if the total number of crimes in each area before the intervention was at least 20. The reviews revealed generally encouraging results across the three different types of public area surveillance. There is fairly strong and consistent evidence that the defensible space technique of street closures or barricades is effective in preventing crime in inner-city neighborhoods. Less conclusive statements can be made about the effectiveness of security guards and place managers. This has everything to do with the small number of high quality evaluations that have been carried out on these measures. In the case of security guards, the weight of the evidence suggests that it is a promising technique of formal surveillance when implemented in car parks and targeted at vehicle crimes. The surveillance technique of place managers appears to be of unknown effectiveness in preventing crime in public places. Implications for policy and research are explored. Details: Stockholm: Brottsforebyggande radet (Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention), 2010. 45p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 25, 2010 at: http://www.bra.se/extra/measurepoint/?module_instance=4&name=Effectiviness_of_Public_Area_Surveillance_for_Crime_Prevention.pdf&url=/dynamaster/file_archive/100309/0a3ceabb221375f51f9a82824942a662/Effectiviness%255fof%255fPublic%255fArea%255fSurveillance%255ffor%255fCrime%255fPrevention.pdf Year: 2010 Country: International URL: http://www.bra.se/extra/measurepoint/?module_instance=4&name=Effectiviness_of_Public_Area_Surveillance_for_Crime_Prevention.pdf&url=/dynamaster/file_archive/100309/0a3ceabb221375f51f9a82824942a662/Effectiviness%255fof%255fPub Shelf Number: 119684 Keywords: AggressionCrime PreventionCrime Prevention through Environmental DesignDrug Abuse and AddictionDrug Abuse and CrimeMethamphetamine (Australia)Private SecuritySurveillance |
Author: Ritter, Alison Title: Evaluating Drug Law Enforcement Interventions Directed Towards Methamphetamine in Australia Summary: Methamphetamine belongs in the class of stimulant drugs referred to as Amphetamine Type Stimulants (ATS). The category of ATS includes ecstasy, amphetamine and methamphetamine. This research project concerned itself with the amphetamine and methamphetamine class and excluded ecstasy (and henceforth we use the generic term methamphetamine). In Australia, methamphetamine is available in three forms—powder, base and crystal. Methamphetamine is associated with significant harms and is an important drug policy priority. The National Amphetamine-Type Stimulants Strategy (2008–2011) (Ministerial Council on Drug Strategy, 2008) articulates the following priority areas in relation to methamphetamine: • improve community awareness and understanding of amphetamine-type stimulant use and related problems; • reduce the supply of amphetamine-type stimulants; • develop specific strategies to prevent and reduce amphetamine type stimulant use; and • develop organisational and system capacity to prevent and respond to amphetamine-type stimulant problems This research concerns the second priority area—reducing the supply of methamphetamine. The specific aims of the research were twofold: • to provide a rich description of the Australian methamphetamine supply chains in order to inform drug law enforcement interventions; and • to conduct an initial economic evaluation comparing law enforcement interventions directed at the methamphetamine market. The work focused on the methamphetamine market(s) and supply chains in Australia above the retail level. Previous research (eg McKetin, McLaren, & Kelly, 2005) has examined retail methamphetamine markets in Australia. Governments and policymakers are interested in determining which interventions are more or less effective than others, such that the scarce funding resources can be allocated in the most efficient manner possible. There is scant research available to law enforcement to guide such decisions. The main impediments to such research are the fundamental methodological challenges inherent in such an undertaking. This project is an attempt to conduct a preliminary analysis comparing the costs and impacts of different types of law enforcement. It is a ground-breaking study as this has not been previously attempted and it should be seen as the initial development of a methodological approach that can be improved upon with subsequent research. The project aimed to determine the relative cost-to-impact ratios of different law enforcement strategies aimed at reducing methamphetamine production and distribution. In an environment focused on efficiency in resource allocation, it is hoped that this research will provide the impetus for further research on the effectiveness of drug law enforcement. As the results of such research accumulate, it is hoped that policymakers will be able to use the information to improve decision making on law enforcement investment. As with all research, this study has limitations, which we hope will be addressed in future research. The economic results should be read with these limitations in mind. • This study assessed the difference between four drug law enforcement interventions in terms of the impact (value of seized drugs) against expenditure (government costs). It is not a cost-effectiveness or a cost– benefit study. The results are reported in terms of the ranking of the interventions against each other. This study does not allow one to draw conclusions about the overall efficiency or value for money represented by drug law enforcement. Future research, which builds on this work, could include a cost-effectiveness analysis, between drug law enforcement interventions and across drug law enforcement and other interventions which reduce methamphetamine use (such as drug treatment). • In this evaluation, the measure of policing impact was the monetary value of seized methamphetamine (or precursor). This is an imperfect impact measure. Drug law enforcement that results in seized product can also impact on the overall capacity of a criminal network. • This study used the value of seized drugs as the measure to compare law enforcement interventions. However, drug law enforcement may change other financial aspects for drug criminals, such as increase the costs of manufacture and distribution (by seizing assets), increase the risks of arrest and imprisonment (opportunity costs) and increase the operational costs of running a business (costs of new avoidance strategies adopted against drug law enforcement). The aggregate costs are the losses to illicit drug enterprises due to drug law enforcement activities. A comprehensive analysis would include each of these aspects and calculate ‘total loss’ due to drug law enforcement. However, in this preliminary work, we were not able to cost each of these components and hence used only replacement costs (seizures) to represent the loss. • There are other important impacts of drug law enforcement interventions—deterrence, public safety and public amenity, and disruptions on other crimes that criminal networks are engaged in that have not been included in this study; future research could adopt the broader, taxpayer (societal) perspective, rather than policing agency perspective. • In this study, we evaluate the relative impact of discrete law enforcement interventions. However, in reality, law enforcement interventions are likely to exert synergistic effects such that the combined impact of a suite of interventions is likely to be greater than the sum of the impact of individual interventions. Thus, an important caveat to our results relates to the cumulative impact of law enforcement interventions. The current project did not examine the impact of cumulative or multi-pronged interventions. • There is a substantial lack of data across many areas of illicit drug markets. We had difficulty obtaining methamphetamine price data, information about market structure, police agency budgets and detailed seizure data. Some of these data, such as information about markets, involves ethnographic research. For quantitative data, consideration should be given to the development of data collection systems which would facilitate illicit drug market and law enforcement effectiveness research (eg collection of data which connects price and purity of seizures). • Our study did not include the relative impact of precursor regulations and the enforcement of these regulations, nor did it include source country interventions conducted by Australian law enforcement. There is currently very little empirical evidence to guide policy decisions about drug enforcement interventions directed to methamphetamine. In fact, the paucity of research on the effectiveness of law enforcement across all illicit drugs ‘continues to pose a major barrier to applying these policies effectively’ (Babor, et al., 2010 p. 258.) Decisions about which methamphetamine supply control policy to fund, which policies should receive increased funding, or how to derive the most effective balance of priorities, are currently uninformed by the results of research. There is a clear and pressing need for further research that examines the effectiveness of law enforcement interventions directed at methamphetamine. The current study aims to begin to fill this gap. Details: Canberra: National Drug Law Enforcement Research Fund, 2012. 133p. Source: Internet Resource: Monograph Series No. 44: Accessed November 24, 2012 at: http://www.ndlerf.gov.au/pub/Monograph_44.pdf Year: 2012 Country: Australia URL: http://www.ndlerf.gov.au/pub/Monograph_44.pdf Shelf Number: 126990 Keywords: AmphetaminesDrug Abuse and CrimeDrug EnforcementDrug MarketsDrug OffendersDrug TreatmentIllegal DrugsMethamphetamine (Australia) |
Author: Ransley, Janet Title: Reducing the Methamphetamine Problem in Australia: Evaluating Innovative Partnerships between Police, Pharmacies and other Third Parties Summary: The aim of this research was to explore the role of partnerships between the police and third parties in reducing methamphetamine problems in two different states in Australia. A variety of research methods and data sources were used to comprehensively assess the nature and impact (both intended and unintended) of these partnerships so as to contribute to the drug law enforcement evidence base and help police to better control drug problems in Australia. The overall research objectives, as set out in the original grant submission, were to: document the creation, nature and characteristics of partnerships between the police and third parties that seek to reduce sales of pseudoephedrine and control the methamphetamine problem in Queensland and Victoria; understand the wider impact of law enforcement efforts to reduce pseudoephedrine sales in terms of treatment, prevention and harm reduction across Queensland and Victoria; evaluate the impact of drug law enforcement partnerships with third parties (including Queensland's Project STOP) on the methamphetamine market in Queensland and Victoria; and assess any displacement (spatial, temporal, tactical, offence), diffusion of crime control benefits, or other unintended consequences of these partnerships (including Project STOP). The research has been jointly funded by the National Drug Law Enforcement Research Fund (NDLERF) and the Drug Policy Modelling Program (DPMP) at the University of New South Wales, a collaboration between the National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre (NDARC) and a number of other organisations. This report discusses findings and outcomes in relation to the aspects of the research funded by NDLERF. Research funded by DPMP is still in progress and will be separately reported at a later date. Together, these two arms of the research will represent a comprehensive evaluation of the Project STOP partnership. This report therefore focuses on the first and second objectives above, the documenting and analysis of police partnerships with third parties and understanding the wider impact of law enforcement efforts to reduce pseudoephedrine sales across Queensland and Victoria. In addition, it includes best practice guidelines for reducing problems in relation to pseudoephedrine diversion. The research yet to be completed will address the final two research objectives listed above, namely the impact if any of Project STOP on methamphetamine markets and crime outcomes. This arm of the research will be completed in 2011. Details: Canberra: National Drug Law Enforcement Research Fund, 2011. 59p. Source: Internet Resource: Monograph Series No. 39: Accessed February 14, 2013 at: http://www.ndlerf.gov.au/pub/Monograph_39.pdf Year: 2011 Country: Australia URL: http://www.ndlerf.gov.au/pub/Monograph_39.pdf Shelf Number: 127622 Keywords: Drug Abuse PreventionDrugs and CrimeMethamphetamine (Australia)PartnershipsPharmaciesThird-Parties |