After the Borders are Sealed

Can Domestic Sources Substitute for Imported Drugs

by Peter Reuter

The principal illicit drugs consumed in the U.S. are produced outside its borders. While an increasing share of marijuana is provided domestically, most of that drug is still grown in Mexico, Colombia, and Jamaica. All of the cocaine and heroin for U.S consumption is supplied by other nations. The dominance of foreign production affects U.S. drug policy, which aims to prevent production overseas through eradication and crop substitution schemes, or to interdict smugglers of these drugs. This policy faces two criticisms: (1) Foreign production and smuggling cannot be controlled. The industry is too profitable for poor peasants to be kept from entering it, and the control of international commerce and traffic entering the U.S. is too difficult. (2) Even if the borders were sealed, the result would merely be a change in the nature of drugs consumed. Instead of foreign-source natural-based drugs, U.S. consumers would turn to domestically produced synthetics. This article examines this second claim, looking at three episodes in which drug imports have been seriously disrupted: the heroin drought of the mid-1970s; the elimination of methaqualone (Quaalude) imports in the early 1980s; and the substantial reduction in Colombian-source marijuana during the same period. In each case the author describes the evidence pointing to sharply reduced availability and then examines data concerning consumption of substitute (illicit) drugs and changes in rates of initiation into use of the drug now in restricted supply. The central conclusion is that total drug consumption would decline if the natural products were no longer available, but that the harms associated with drug use might increase because of the greater dangers caused by synthetics. The primary basis for the conclusion is that pharmacological notions of substitutability turn out not to be descriptive of actual behavior; there is instead (weak) evidence of enduring preferences for imported drugs. Three principal data systems were employed: the DAWN (Drug Abuse Warning Network), the High School Senior Survey (HSSS), and the Narcotics Intelligence Estimate.

Originally published in: Drug Policy in the Americas, 1992, pp. 163-177.

This report is part of the RAND Corporation Reprint series. The Reprint was a product of the RAND Corporation from 1992 to 2011 that represented previously published journal articles, book chapters, and reports with the permission of the publisher. RAND reprints were formally reviewed in accordance with the publisher's editorial policy and compliant with RAND's rigorous quality assurance standards for quality and objectivity. For select current RAND journal articles, see External Publications.

Our mission to help improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis is enabled through our core values of quality and objectivity and our unwavering commitment to the highest level of integrity and ethical behavior. To help ensure our research and analysis are rigorous, objective, and nonpartisan, we subject our research publications to a robust and exacting quality-assurance process; avoid both the appearance and reality of financial and other conflicts of interest through staff training, project screening, and a policy of mandatory disclosure; and pursue transparency in our research engagements through our commitment to the open publication of our research findings and recommendations, disclosure of the source of funding of published research, and policies to ensure intellectual independence. For more information, visit www.rand.org/about/principles.

The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.