U.S. Department of Justice 

Office of Community Oriented Policing Services 

www.cops.usdoj.gov 

D r u g D e a l i n g i n 

O p e n -A i r M a r k e t s 

by Alex Harocopos 

Mike Hough 

Problem-Oriented Guides for Police 

Problem-Specific Guides Series 

No. 31 
www.PopCenter.org 

Center for Problem-Oriented Policing 

Got a Problem? We’ve got answers! 

Log onto the Center for Problem-Oriented Policing web site 

at www.popcenter.org for a wealth of information to help 

you deal more effectively with crime and disorder in your 

community, including: 

• Web-enhanced versions of all currently available Guides 

• Interactive training exercises 

• Online access to research and police practices 

• Online problem analysis module. 

Designed for police and those who work with them to 

address community problems, www.popcenter.org is a great 

resource in problem-oriented policing. 

Supported by the Office of Community Oriented Policing 

Services, U.S. Department of Justice. 
Problem-Oriented Guides for Police 

Problem-Specific Guides Series 

Guide No. 31 

Drug Dealing in Open-Air 

Markets 

Alex Harocopos 

Mike Hough 

This project was supported by cooperative agreement 

#2002CKWX0003 by the Office of Community Oriented Policing 

Services, U.S. Department of Justice. The opinions contained herein 

are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent the 

official position of the U.S. Department of Justice. References to 

specific companies, products, or services should not be considered an 

endorsement of the product by the author or the U.S. Department 

of Justice. Rather, the references are illustrations to supplement 

discussion of the issues. 

www.cops.usdoj.gov 

ISBN: 1-932582-45-2 

January 2005 

About the Problem-Specific Guides Series i 

About the Problem-Specific Guides Series 

The Problem-Specific Guides summarize knowledge about 

how police can reduce the harm caused by specific crime 

and disorder problems. They are guides to prevention 

and to improving the overall response to incidents, not to 

investigating offenses or handling specific incidents. Neither 

do they cover all of the technical details about how to 

implement specific responses. The guides are written for 

police—of whatever rank or assignment—who must address 

the specific problem the guides cover. The guides will be 

most useful to officers who: 

• Understand basic problem-oriented policing principles 

and methods. The guides are not primers in problemoriented policing. They deal only briefly with the initial 

decision to focus on a particular problem, methods to 

analyze the problem, and means to assess the results of a 

problem-oriented policing project. They are designed to help 

police decide how best to analyze and address a problem 

they have already identified. (A companion series of ProblemSolving Tools guides has been produced to aid in various 

aspects of problem analysis and assessment.) 

• Can look at a problem in depth. Depending on the 

complexity of the problem, you should be prepared to spend 

perhaps weeks, or even months, analyzing and responding to 

it. Carefully studying a problem before responding helps you 

design the right strategy, one that is most likely to work in 

your community. You should not blindly adopt the responses 

others have used; you must decide whether they are 

appropriate to your local situation. What is true in one place 

may not be true elsewhere; what works in one place may not 

work everywhere. 
ii Drug Dealing in Open-Air Markets 

• Are willing to consider new ways of doing police 

business. The guides describe responses that other police 

departments have used or that researchers have tested. 

While not all of these responses will be appropriate to 

your particular problem, they should help give a broader 

view of the kinds of things you could do. You may think 

you cannot implement some of these responses in your 

jurisdiction, but perhaps you can. In many places, when 

police have discovered a more effective response, they have 

succeeded in having laws and policies changed, improving 

the response to the problem. (A companion series of 

Response Guides has been produced to help you understand 

how commonly-used police responses work on a variety of 

problems.) 

• Understand the value and the limits of research 

knowledge. For some types of problems, a lot of useful 

research is available to the police; for other problems, 

little is available. Accordingly, some guides in this series 

summarize existing research whereas other guides illustrate 

the need for more research on that particular problem. 

Regardless, research has not provided definitive answers to 

all the questions you might have about the problem. The 

research may help get you started in designing your own 

responses, but it cannot tell you exactly what to do. This 

will depend greatly on the particular nature of your local 

problem. In the interest of keeping the guides readable, 

not every piece of relevant research has been cited, nor has 

every point been attributed to its sources. To have done so 

would have overwhelmed and distracted the reader. The 

references listed at the end of each guide are those drawn 

on most heavily; they are not a complete bibliography of 

research on the subject. 
About the Problem-Specific Guides Series iii 

• Are willing to work with others to find effective 

solutions to the problem. The police alone cannot 

implement many of the responses discussed in the guides. 

They must frequently implement them in partnership with 

other responsible private and public bodies including other 

government agencies, non-governmental organizations, 

private businesses, public utilities, community groups, 

and individual citizens. An effective problem-solver must 

know how to forge genuine partnerships with others 

and be prepared to invest considerable effort in making 

these partnerships work. Each guide identifies particular 

individuals or groups in the community with whom police 

might work to improve the overall response to that problem. 

Thorough analysis of problems often reveals that individuals 

and groups other than the police are in a stronger position 

to address problems and that police ought to shift some 

greater responsibility to them to do so. Response Guide No. 

3, Shifting and Sharing Responsibility for Public Safety Problems, 

provides further discussion of this topic. 

The COPS Office defines community policing as “a policing 

philosophy that promotes and supports organizational 

strategies to address the causes and reduce the fear of crime 

and social disorder through problem-solving tactics and 

police-community partnerships.” These guides emphasize 

problem-solving and police-community partnerships in 

the context of addressing specific public safety problems. 

For the most part, the organizational strategies that can 

facilitate problem-solving and police-community partnerships vary 

considerably and discussion of them is beyond the scope of 

these guides. 

These guides have drawn on research findings and police 

practices in the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, 

Australia, New Zealand, the Netherlands, and Scandinavia. 
iv Drug Dealing in Open-Air Markets 

Even though laws, customs and police practices vary 

from country to country, it is apparent that the police 

everywhere experience common problems. In a world that 

is becoming increasingly interconnected, it is important 

that police be aware of research and successful practices 

beyond the borders of their own countries. 

Each guide is informed by a thorough review of the 

research literature and reported police practice and is 

anonymously peer-reviewed by line police officers, police 

executives and researchers prior to publication. 

The COPS Office and the authors encourage you to 

provide feedback on this guide and to report on your 

own agency’s experiences dealing with a similar problem. 

Your agency may have effectively addressed a problem 

using responses not considered in these guides and your 

experiences and knowledge could benefit others. This 

information will be used to update the guides. If you wish 

to provide feedback and share your experiences it should 

be sent via e-mail to cops_pubs@usdoj.gov. 

For more information about problem-oriented policing, 

visit the Center for Problem-Oriented Policing online at 

www.popcenter.org. This web site offers free online access 

to: 

• the Problem-Specific Guides series 

• the companion Response Guides and Problem-Solving Tools series 

• instructional information about problem-oriented policing 

and related topics 

• an interactive problem-oriented policing training exercise 

• an interactive Problem Analysis Module 

• a manual for crime analysts 

• online access to important police research and practices 

• information about problem-oriented policing conferences 

and award programs. 
Acknowledgments v 

Acknowledgments 

The Problem-Oriented Guides for Police are produced by the 

Center for Problem-Oriented Policing, whose officers are 

Michael S. Scott (Director), Ronald V. Clarke (Associate 

Director) and Graeme R. Newman (Associate Director). 

While each guide has a primary author, other project 

team members, COPS Office staff and anonymous peer 

reviewers contributed to each guide by proposing text, 

recommending research and offering suggestions on 

matters of format and style. 

The project team that developed the guide series 

comprised Herman Goldstein (University of Wisconsin 

Law School), Ronald V. Clarke (Rutgers University), 

John E. Eck (University of Cincinnati), Michael S. Scott 

(University of Wisconsin Law School), Rana Sampson 

(Police Consultant), and Deborah Lamm Weisel (North 

Carolina State University.) 

Members of the San Diego; National City, California; and 

Savannah, Georgia police departments provided feedback 

on the guides’ format and style in the early stages of the 

project. 

Cynthia E. Pappas oversaw the project for the COPS 

Office. Research for the guide was conducted at the 

Criminal Justice Library at Rutgers University under the 

direction of Phyllis Schultze. Suzanne Fregly edited this 

guide. 

Contents vii 

Contents 

About the Problem-Specific Guides Series . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .i 

Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .v 

The Problem of Drug Dealing in Open-Air Markets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 

Related Problems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4 

Factors Contributing to Drug Dealing in Open-Air Markets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4 

When and Where Open-Air Drug Markets Operate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5 

The Structure of Open-Air Drug Markets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8 

Supply and Demand . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9 

Street-Level Enforcement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11 

Understanding Your Local Problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13 

Asking the Right Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14 

Nature of the Drug Market . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14 

Market Participants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15 

Current Responses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16 

The Effect of the Drug Market on the Local Community . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16 

Drug Treatment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17 

Measuring Your Effectiveness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17 

Displacement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18 

Responses to the Problem of Drug Dealing in Open-Air Markets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .21 

General Considerations for an Effective Strategy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .21 

Drug Enforcement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .22 

Community Responses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .28 

Civil Remedies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .30 

Modifying the Physical Environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .33 

Demand Reduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .35 

Appendix: Summary of Responses to Drug Dealing in Open-Air Markets . . . . . . . . . .37 
viii Drug Dealing in Open-Air Markets 

Endnotes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .43 

References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .47 

About the Authors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .55 

Recommended Readings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .57 

Other Problem-Oriented Guides for Police . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .61 
The Problem of Drug Dealing in Open-Air Markets 1 

The Problem of Drug Dealing in Open-Air 

Markets 

Open-air markets represent the lowest level of the drug 

distribution network. Low-level markets need to be tackled 

effectively not only because of the risks posed to market 

participants, but also to reduce the harms that illicit drug 

use can inflict on the local community. This guide begins 

by describing the problem and reviewing factors that 

increase the risks of drug dealing in open-air markets. The 

guide then identifies a series of questions that might assist 

you in analyzing your local open-air drug market problem. 

Finally, the guide reviews responses to the problem and 

what is known about these from evaluative research and 

police practice. 

As with any other type of commodity, illicit drugs are 

traded in a market where buyer and seller have to locate 

one another in order to conduct a transaction.

1 There are 

two types of retail market systems: those that are personspecific, relying on social networks to communicate 

information about vendors, potential customers, their 

location and prices; and those that are place-specific.

2 

Open-air drug markets operate in geographically welldefined areas at identifiable times so buyers and sellers can 

locate one another with ease. A variety of drugs may be 

sold, most commonly to include: heroin, crack, cocaine, 

and marijuana. 

Open-air markets are also likely to be open markets. This 

means that there will be few barriers to access, and anyone 

who looks like a plausible buyer will be able to purchase 

drugs.

3 An open market has advantages for both buyers 

and sellers. Buyers know where to go in order to find 

the drugs that they want and can weigh quality against 

price, and sellers are able to maximize customer access. 
2 Drug Dealing in Open-Air Markets 

However, the nature of open markets means that market 

participants are vulnerable both to police enforcement, 

and the dangers of buying from strangers–which may 

include rip-offs and robbery. Furthermore, if a buyer is 

dissatisfied with the transaction, there can rarely be any 

recompense as participants in illegal markets lack the usual 

means for resolving business conflicts. Especially in high 

value markets, this can lead to systemic violence–whereby 

force is the normal means by which disagreements are 

resolved.

4 

In response to the risks of law enforcement, open markets 

tend to transform into closed markets where sellers will 

only do business with buyers they know or with buyers 

for whom another trusted person will vouch. The degree 

to which markets are closed–the barriers of access put 

in the way of new buyers–will depend largely on the 

level of threat posed by the police. Intensive policing 

can quickly transform open markets into closed ones.

5 

Mobile communication technologies such as pagers 

and cell phones also aid this process.

6 Although closed 

markets may exist alongside open markets, their method 

of operation is different and requires its own analysis and 

response, which will not be addressed in this guide. 

Dealing with open-air drug markets presents a 

considerable challenge for the police. Simply arresting 

market participants will have little impact in reducing the 

size of the market or the amount of drugs consumed.

7 

This is especially true of low-level markets where if one 

dealer is arrested, there are, more than likely, several 

others to take their place. Moreover, drug markets can be 

highly responsive to enforcement efforts but the form 

of that response is sometimes an adaptation that leads 

to unintended consequences, including displacement or 

increased revenue for dealers with fewer competitors.

8 
The Problem of Drug Dealing in Open-Air Markets 3 

Drug dealing in open-air markets generates or contributes 

to a wide range of social disorder and drug-related crime 

in the surrounding community that can have a marked 

effect on the local residents' quality of life.

9 Residents may 

feel a diminished sense of public safety as drug-related 

activity becomes more blatant

10 

and there is evidence that 

communal areas such as parks are often taken over by 

drug sellers and their customers, rendering them unusable 

to the local population.

11 Spin-off problems associated 

with drug dealing in open-air markets include: 

• traffic congestion 

• noise (from traffic and people) 

• disorderly conduct 

• begging§ 

• loitering 

• vandalism 

• drug use and littering (discarded drug paraphernalia) 

• criminal damage to property 

• prostitution§§ 

• robbery 

• residential and commercial burglary 

• theft from motor vehicles

§§§ 

• fencing stolen goods 

• weapons offenses, and 

• assaults and homicides.

§§§§ 

§ See the POP Guide on Panhandling. 

§§ The links between sex and drug 

markets have been well-documented. 

May et al. (1999) found that the 

majority of the sex-workers they 

interviewed were drug-dependent. 

See also the POP Guide on Street 

Prostitution. 

§§§ See the POP Guide on Thefts of 

and from Cars in Parking Facilities. 

§§§§ See the POP Guide on Gun 

Violence Among Serious Young Offenders. 
4 Drug Dealing in Open-Air Markets 

Related Problems 

§ See the POP Guide on Drug 

Dealing in Privately Owned Apartment 

Complexes. 

§§ See the POP Guides on Burglary 

of Single-family Houses and Burglary of 

Retail Establishments. 

§§§ See the POP Guide on Robbery at 

Automated Teller Machines. 

§§§§ See the POP Guide on 

Clandestine Drug Labs. 

§§§§§ See the POP Guide on 

Prescription Fraud. 

Drug dealing in open-air markets is only one drug-related 

problem that police must address. Associated problems 

not directly addressed in this guide include: 

• drug dealing in apartment complexes

§ 

• closed drug markets 

• mobile drug markets (i.e., markets in which buyers and 

sellers by phone agree to transactions and establish a 

location to complete the transaction) 

• street prostitution 

• burglary

§§ 

• street robbery

§§§ 

• clandestine drug labs

§§§§ 

• wholesale drug production and trafficking 

• fortified drug houses 

• prescription fraud.

§§§§§ 

Factors Contributing to Drug Dealing in Open-Air 

Markets 

Understanding the factors that contribute to your problem 

will help you frame your own local analysis questions, 

determine good measures of effectiveness, recognize key 

intervention points, and select appropriate responses. 
The Problem of Drug Dealing in Open-Air Markets 5 

When and Where Open-Air Drug Markets Operate 

The characteristics of a drug market are often dependent 

on the type of drug being sold. In some areas, markets 

for different drugs exist alongside one another although 

their methods of operation vary. It is probable that most 

illicit drug buying takes place in private or semi-public 

locations.

12 Given the choice, most users would buy from 

sellers they know and trust rather than run the risk of 

being ripped off or apprehended by the police. However, 

it may be that a need for regular supplies of drugs 

obtained in the shortest time possible locks problem users 

into street-based open markets. This may also be true for 

novice or casual users who have not yet established an 

alternative reliable source. 

Open-air drug markets are often located in inner city or 

urban areas. There are four geographical features common 

to this type of drug market: firstly, they are likely to 

be located in economically depressed neighborhoods; 

secondly, dealers will sell from static sites so customers 

know where to find them; thirdly, the market will 

probably be located around a transport hub, or along a 

main arterial route where there is a level of legitimate 

activity and proximity to through routes to allow buyers 

easy access to the market area; and finally, markets that 

have a reputation for selling drugs can grow large in size, 

and the concentration of activity in a small area will be 

hard to hide.

13 The compulsive nature of drugs such 

as crack cocaine or the physical dependency which can 

occur from prolonged heroin use means that the market 

in which these drugs are sold could be open twenty-four 

hours a day, seven days a week. The operational times of 

markets for other drugs including cannabis and ecstasy are 

probably more restricted. 
6 Drug Dealing in Open-Air Markets 

Urban areas with poorly-maintained, high-density low-income 

housing are often the site of open-air drug markets. 

The location of an open-air drug market can also be 

influenced by situational factors. The local environment 

can facilitate drug dealing in a number of different ways. 

Thick or overgrown foliage offers a shield for exchanges 

of money or drugs. Poor street lighting may intensify 

residents' fear of crime and may exacerbate incidences of 

robbery. Street layout determines suitable places to stand 

so sellers can watch for the police as well as providing 

easy escape routes in case of enforcement activity. Road 

systems and parking may also influence customers driving 

in from other areas; and vacant buildings can serve as a 

14 

discrete place to use drugs after purchase.
The Problem of Drug Dealing in Open-Air Markets 7 

Baltimore Police Department www.ci.baltimore. 

md.us/government/police/oadm 

Identifying the exact locations of open-air drug markets is the first 

step towards targeting and subsequently eliminating them. 

Key figures in the function of open-air drug markets are 

"place managers" such as landlords, housing authorities, 

local business residents and tenants associations. Those 

who diligently control their apartment buildings or the 

business premises forecourt will reduce the chance of an 

illicit market becoming established in their neighborhood, 

and drug sellers will often operate from locations where 

place managers do not attempt to exert any control over 

15 

illicit activity. Open-air drug markets are therefore more 

likely to become established in areas where there is a high 

rate of rental properties and/or public housing rather 

than in owner-occupied neighborhoods. 
8 Drug Dealing in Open-Air Markets 

§ The social organization of drug 

markets will determine on what level 

displacement will occur. Research 

conducted by Curtis and Sviridoff 

(1994) found that where the market 

was a monopoly run by a few 

business owners, street-level dealing 

was shut-down for a few months 

thereby displacing the market to 

new locations. In a second market 

operated by "freelancers," the market 

was barely displaced due to the fact 

that sellers felt unable to move to 

new territories because of their lack 

of support. 

The Structure of Open-Air Drug Markets 

In order to understand the effect of police activities on 

open-air drug markets, it is important to consider the 

structure of their social organization. Some open-air drug 

markets are operated by groups with clear hierarchies 

and well-defined job functions.

16 Other drug distribution 

networks consist of fragmented and fluid systems 

populated by small groups of opportunistic entrepreneurs 

from a variety of backgrounds.

17 

At least four different types of organization for open-air 

drug markets exist: 

1. Markets dominated by "freelance" sellers, 

characterized by a lack of formal hierarchy and 

alliances conducted on an ad hoc basis. 

2. Markets dominated by family-based businesses 

that may have evolved out of freelance markets 

when groups of relatives begin to dominate their 

local area and drive out competition. 

3. Markets dominated by culture-based organizations 

–family-based organizations may grow into 

businesses with a shared common culture. 

4. Market places dominated by corporations, which 

represent the highest level of organizational 

structure.

18 

It is important to try to identify which type of 

organization is operating in your area in order to try to 

predict the effect that efforts to close the market will 

have.

§ 
The Problem of Drug Dealing in Open-Air Markets 9 

Dealers operating in open markets represent the lowest 

level of the distribution network and often will be selling 

in order to finance their own use. Selling drugs provides 

those who are socially excluded and unemployed with a 

means of earning money that can be highly profitable, 

does not require education or training, and presents 

relatively low risk in terms of enforcement.

19 Those 

operating in this type of market are unlikely to sell a 

substantial quantity of drugs to one customer because 

firstly, they may not have a sufficient supply and secondly, 

they will be reluctant to carry a large quantity on them 

at one time for fear of arrest. However, in a busy market 

the number of daily transactions can be high. Within the 

community, sellers may attempt to buy the cooperation 

of local residents or employ them in various roles, for 

example, a mother with a baby could be a "look-out" or 

"holder." Other roles include the following: 

• "Steerers" who refer customers to a particular dealer 

• "Touts" who are employed to find customers 

• "Middle-men" who transport money and drugs between 

buyer and seller, who do not meet.

20 

Supply and Demand 

Popular debate about drugs tends to take for granted that 

illicit drug use is supply-led, and that illicit drug use is best 

controlled by stopping drugs getting into the country and 

onto the streets. On the other hand, it has been suggested 

that supply follows demand and is a response to it.

21 In 

reality, there is a dynamic and interactive relationship 

between the two: if there were no supply of illicit drugs, 

no demand would ever evolve: and, of course, unless 

drugs offered users some immediate attraction, there 

would be no demand.

22 
10 Drug Dealing in Open-Air Markets 

A distinction is often made between supply reduction 

strategies and demand reduction strategies. However, 

this becomes hard to maintain because one will very 

likely affect the other. Reductions in the supply of drugs 

will eventually affect prices, which in turn should affect 

demand, especially of new and occasional users. Despite 

this, little is known about the impact that supply reduction 

has on prices, or the relationship between price and 

demand. Enforcement could lead to price increases in 

two ways. Firstly, removing drugs from the supply chain 

should result in limited availability and thus an increase in 

price. Secondly, the increased risks for market participants 

concomitant with enforcement should translate into higher 

prices. 

It is difficult to untangle the effect that supply reduction 

strategies have on the price of drugs. In actuality, drug 

prices in several cities have declined in recent years

23 

although without enforcement, prices may have fallen 

even further. However, it is also likely that supply 

reduction strategies have been insufficient in maintaining 

or increasing prices. In addition, drug markets are capable 

of adapting quickly to enforcement efforts and effective 

enforcement can sometimes bring about perverse effects.

24 

According to this argument, enforcement leads to 

sustained or increased risks of criminal sanctions; these 

risks are translated into maintained or increased prices; 

but the net result is to attract more people into the highly 

lucrative–if risky–drug business. 

It is also important to consider how drug prices will 

affect levels of consumption. If most illicit drug use is 

controlled, an increase in price should lead to a decrease 

in demand. However, problem drug users will be more 
The Problem of Drug Dealing in Open-Air Markets 11 

inflexible in their ability to stop using than other users 

and are likely to simply spend more. In this case, it is 

important to find strategies that provide other nonfinancial deterrents to discourage use. 

Street-level Enforcement 

A factor contributing to the emergence of open-air 

drug markets was the low priority given to street-level 

drug enforcement. Until the mid-1980s, traditional 

narcotics enforcement in the United States concentrated 

resources on wholesale drug activity. This was partly 

due to the Knapp Commission Report (1972), which 

lambasted the New York City Police Department for 

widespread corruption related to local drug enforcement. 

The consequence of this report was that street-level 

enforcement across the country was effectively halted; 

neighborhood patrol officers were replaced by reactive 

units whose mission was to respond to, rather than 

prevent crime

§ and open-air markets began to thrive.25 

The emergence of crack cocaine in the early 1980s fueled 

already buoyant drug markets and forced the police to 

reexamine street-level enforcement. Police authorities 

responded to the idea that enforcement tactics had been 

targeted at the wrong level of distribution and aimed to 

disrupt street-level markets, making them unpredictable 

for both buyer and seller. A principle of this method 

was "inconvenience policing," which aimed to increase 

the drug search time or to otherwise place obstacles 

in the way of the buying process. The idea was that 

although such measures would probably not deter serious 

§ Zimmer (1990) noted: "Removed 

from daily contact with specific 

neighborhoods, patrol officers 

thus lost both the opportunity and 

motivation to enforce standards 

of conduct critical to order 

maintenance." 
12 Drug Dealing in Open-Air Markets 

and addicted users, casual and novice users would be 

discouraged from buying and therefore the market would 

be constricted.

26 Enforcement strategies aimed at this level 

included: high visibility policing, test purchase operations 

and reverse stings, the efficacy of which are discussed in 

the responses section. In addition, it became clear that 

police enforcement alone was ineffective at reducing 

drug-related activity and latterly there has been an 

increased focus on multi-agency cooperation to implement 

innovative approaches such as civil enforcement 

procedures. 
Understanding Your Local Problem 13 

UnderstandingYour Local Problem 

The information provided in the previous section is 

only a generalized description of drug dealing in openair markets. In order to understand the potential effect 

that any preventative strategies will have, we recommend 

that you combine the basic facts with a more specific 

understanding of your local problem. A detailed analysis 

of the problem in your area will help you design a more 

effective response and allow you to better predict the 

outcome of any action taken against the drug market. 

The nature of an open-air drug market makes it likely 

that its location will already be known. However, other 

key characteristics of the market should be examined. 

A community survey can serve to identify residents' 

concerns as well as trouble hot spots in the neighborhood. 

In addition conducting a survey is a demonstration of 

police commitment and can help build relations between 

the police and local residents. A dedicated telephone 

hotline for local residents is also useful for gathering 

intelligence; and provided that information is acted upon 

promptly, can help build confidence in the community. 

Systematic and well-recorded observations by an officer 

can help define the nature of the drug market and identify 

some of the characteristics that allow drug-related sales to 

thrive in that area. Other data sources that may be useful 

to identify discrete drug markets include: 

• narcotics sales arrests 

• citizen observations 

• emergency calls for service.

27 
14 Drug Dealing in Open-Air Markets 

Because open-air drug markets vary in terms of size, 

drug type and clientele, it is important to understand the 

conditions of each particular market to best focus your 

response strategies. 

It is also important to identify the reasons why drug 

markets exist in the area. These are likely to be a 

complicated mix of situational and social factors.

28 

Some open-air markets–especially those that are centrally 

located–owe their development and their persistence to 

the amenities that the area offers to buyers and sellers 

drawn from a wide geographic catchment area. Others 

may serve the needs largely of local users. The balance 

between supply reduction strategies and demand reduction 

strategies is likely to vary according to such factors. 

Asking the Right Questions 

The following are some key questions we suggest you 

ask in analyzing your particular problem of drug dealing 

in open-air markets, even if the answers are not always 

readily available. Your answers to these and other 

questions will help you choose the most appropriate set of 

responses later on. 

Nature of the Drug Market 

• Where is the drug market situated? Are there any 

clear geographical boundaries? Is it located near a 

transport hub or arterial route? Are there any physical 

or environmental characteristics that could encourage 

drug-related activity (e.g., vacant buildings, vacant lots, 

overgrown foliage, pay phones)? Are there suitable 

places for sellers to hide their drugs? 
Understanding Your Local Problem 15 

• What are the times of operation? Are there any 

particular days that are noticeably busier, for example, 

weekends or days when people receive their welfare 

checks? 

• What types of drugs are being sold? If several types 

of drug are being sold, do sellers specialize in one 

particular drug or is there an overlap between markets? 

• Is the market well-known as somewhere that drugs can 

be bought easily? How is the market advertised? 

• Does the market have a reputation for violence? Is 

the market in fact violent? (Bear in mind that not all 

market-related violence will be reported to police.) 

• Where are drug transactions completed? On the street, 

in vehicles, elsewhere? 

• Are there places for people to use drugs once they have 

purchased them? 

• How many open-air drug markets are operating in your 

jurisdiction? 

• For how long has this particular drug market been 

operating? 

Market Participants: Buyers and Sellers 

• How many sellers are operating in the area? 

• Are sellers who are incarcerated or killed replaced easily 

and quickly by new sellers? 

• Do sellers operate alone or use ancillary staff such as 

runners or lookouts? 

• What is the structural organization of the market (e.g., 

is it fragmented–made up of freelance sellers with any 

alliance being on an ad hoc basis; or hierarchical–where 

organizations of sellers may dominate their local area 

and drive out competition)? 
16 Drug Dealing in Open-Air Markets 

• What role do firearms play in the market? 

• What proportion of customers is local to the area? 

• If buyers travel to the market, how do they travel? 

• Are buyers' mainly serious or casual users? 

• How is the market advertised? 

Current Responses 

• Have there previously been any preventative strategies 

used against drug markets in the area? 

• What were the consequences of any previous 

enforcement? How was the market disrupted? How did 

the market adapt to enforcement? Did police activity 

lead to displacement? 

• Aside from enforcement, what other actions have been 

taken by the police or other partnership agencies to try 

to control the drug market? 

The Effect of the Drug Market on the Local Community 

• Does the local community consider the drug market to 

be a problem? (This could affect the level of support 

that can expected from residents.) 

• What activities and conditions specifically are of 

concern to citizens in the area (e.g., loitering, noise, 

traffic congestion, harassment, litter)? 

• Have some areas become "no go" areas due to drugrelated activity? 

• Do local residents feel intimidated by drug sellers and 

their customers? 

• Do local businesses feel that trade is being affected 

by drug-market activity? If so, how, specifically has 

it been affected? Are some local businesses profiting 

from the drug trade (e.g., by selling products or services 

necessary to support the drug market)? 
Understanding Your Local Problem 17 

Drug Treatment 

• Are there any provisions for drug treatment in the 

community? Is there a local drug treatment agency or 

are there any needle exchange schemes operating in the 

area? 

• Do the police have any contact with local drug 

treatment providers? 

Measuring Your Effectiveness 

Measurement allows you to determine to what degree 

your efforts have succeeded and suggests how you might 

modify your responses if they are not producing the 

intended results. We suggest you take measures of your 

problem before you implement responses to determine 

how serious the problem is, and after you implement 

them to determine whether they have been effective. All 

measures should be taken in both the target area and 

the surrounding area. (For more detailed guidance on 

measuring effectiveness, see the companion guide to this 

series, Assessing Responses to Problems: An Introductory Guide 

for Police Problem-Solvers.) 

The following are potentially useful measures of the 

effectiveness of responses to drug dealing in open-air 

markets: 

• Reduced visibility of drug-related activity in public 

places. 

• Reduced calls for service related to drug dealing and 

using. 

• Reduced calls for service related to crime and disorder. 

• Diminishing arrest rates for drug selling or drug 

possession with similar levels of enforcement. 
18 Drug Dealing in Open-Air Markets 

• Increased price of drugs or increased search time to 

purchase drugs. 

• Increased feeling of community safety. (This may entail 

conducting a survey of local residents.) 

• Renewed legitimate use of public spaces such as parks 

or recreation areas. 

• Reduced vehicle traffic and loitering. 

• Reduced evidence of drug-related paraphernalia. 

• Reduced levels of crimes in the vicinity of the drug 

market that are plausibly related to drug dealing (e.g., 

thefts, burglaries, robberies). 

Displacement 

The most frequent effect of preventative strategies 

against drug markets is displacement. Displacement takes 

place when action against a drug market causes market 

participants to alter their patterns of behavior, whether by 

moving from one place to another, changing their times of 

operation, changing their mode of operation or replacing 

drug dealing with other forms of criminal activity. The 

effects of displacement are difficult to measure–especially 

in cases where the market is dispersed over a large area. 

Enforcement aimed at the Lower East Side of New 

York was successful at reducing drug-related activity in 

the local neighborhood; however, because of the size 

of area involved, it was difficult to ascertain whether 

the market was displaced to other areas of the city.

29 

However, it has been argued that even if displacement 

occurs, it may be preferable for crime to be diffused over 

30 

a wider area. There is also an argument to be made for 

displacing open-market methods of transactions into less 

visible closed-market ones, if community concerns about 
Understanding Your Local Problem 19 

open drug dealing are high. In summary, the fact that 

displacement may take place does not in itself undermine 

the benefits of strategies employed against the drug 

markets. It is essential to try to anticipate both the form 

of any displacement and its extent. In some circumstances 

displacing the market either to other geographical areas or 

to indoor locations may be regarded as a partial success. 

Responses to the Problem of Drug Dealing in Open-Air Markets 21 

Responses to the Problem of Drug 

Dealing in Open-Air Markets 

Your analysis of your local problem should give you 

a better understanding of the factors contributing to 

it. Once you have analyzed your local problem and 

established a baseline for measuring effectiveness, we 

suggest you consider possible responses to address the 

problem. 

When devising a strategy to tackle your local market, it 

is important to think not simply in terms of arresting 

offenders, but to also consider how best to disrupt 

the mechanism of the market. The following response 

strategies provide a foundation of ideas for addressing 

your particular problem. These strategies are drawn 

from a variety of research studies and police reports. 

Several of these strategies may apply to your community's 

problem. It is critical that you tailor responses to local 

circumstances, and that you can justify each response 

based on reliable analysis. In most cases, an effective 

strategy will involve implementing several different 

responses. Law enforcement alone is seldom effective in 

reducing or solving the problem. Do not limit yourself to 

considering what police can do. Give careful consideration 

to who else in your community shares responsibility for 

the problem and can help police better respond to it. 

General Considerations for an Effective Strategy 

Local crime managers have difficult decisions to make 

about containment or dispersal of open-air markets. The 

case is often argued that the best way of handling illicit 

markets where either drugs or sexual services are sold–is 

to tolerate a low level of buying and selling in a single site, 

provided that this remains within limits and falls within 
22 Drug Dealing in Open-Air Markets 

implicit rules. The rationale for this is that dispersing a 

single site to several new "satellite sites" might lead to a 

more rapid growth of the illicit market than a strategy 

of single-site containment. Although popular, there is no 

research evidence in support of this approach. There are 

also ethical questions about the legitimacy of requiring 

one community to shoulder the burden of hosting a 

drug market in the long term, simply to protect other 

communities from similar harms. 

Whichever approach you choose, it is unlikely that you 

will be able to eradicate the drug market completely. 

Preventative strategies will most likely transform open 

markets into closed markets. However, suppressing an 

open drug market could lead to a reduction in related 

illegal activities in the locality and is likely to improve the 

quality of life for residents living in the neighborhood. 

The most effective interventions are those that have 

been tailored to a specific area. There is also the growing 

recognition that enforcement alone will have a limited 

effect and that a collaborative multi-agency approach can 

achieve more substantial change.

31 

Drug Enforcement 

Police enforcement activity, especially a crackdown or 

sweep, is likely to result in an increased arrest rate. It 

is important that police coordinate their approach with 

other criminal justice agencies in order to lessen the 

potential impact that this could have on the resources of 

the criminal justice system. Arrest is only a deterrent if 

the end result is appropriate sentencing and it has been 

suggested that although large enforcement operations 

are intended to send the message that dealing will be 
Responses to the Problem of Drug Dealing in Open-Air Markets 23 

dealt with harshly, the reality is that in many cases, those 

32 

apprehended will serve little or no time in jail. In the 

mid-1980s Washington Square Park in New York City 

was targeted by police officers and arrest rates rose 

dramatically–up 300 percent from 1984 to 1986. In 1985, 

70 percent of the 1,490 drug-related cases that went to 

trial resulted in convictions. However, only 100 defendants 

received jail time of 15 days or more, and the drug market 

continued to thrive.

33 

1. Policing the area in a highly visible fashion. The 

desired effect of high visibility policing is to disrupt the 

drug market by increasing the risk of arrest and making 

it inconvenient for sellers and buyers to exchange drugs 

and money. Police in New York employed this tactic to 

destabilize a rampant drug market on the Lower East Side 

of Manhattan. Police officers, patrolling mostly on foot, 

flooded the area and established an imposing presence 

in the community thereby increasing the risk of arrest 

for buyer and seller.

34 The effect of this initiative was a 

reduced volume of drug traffic and decreased property 

crime. In South Carolina, police found that the presence 

of a uniformed officer–especially one who looked to be 

taking copious notes and detailing the scene–acted to 

stifle the drug market.

35 A visible police presence within 

the neighborhood can also serve to assuage the fear of 

crime for local residents. Community officers often act 

36 

as a bridge between the police and the local population

and can help strengthen support for enforcement 

initiatives. Obviously, high visibility policing is expensive 

and therefore difficult to sustain for long periods. It can 

interrupt well-entrenched drug markets, giving other 

responses designed to change the underlying conditions of 

the market a greater likelihood of success. 
24 Drug Dealing in Open-Air Markets 

§ 

See the POP Guide on The 

Benefits and Consequences of Police 

Crackdowns for further information. 

2. Enforcing the law intensively. Research provides a 

mixed response to this type of enforcement strategy. In 

some cases, police crackdowns or "sweeps" have been 

shown to be effective in disrupting and dispersing the 

drug market leading to an increase in the number of 

arrests made, as well as a reduction in calls for service 

to the local area.

37,§ The effect a crackdown will have is 

largely dependent on the drug market that is targeted and 

the amount of resources available. A task force in Lynn, 

Massachusetts achieved a dramatic decrease in the blatancy 

and volume of drug sales, and a reduction in property 

crime through a combination of street surveillance 

and intelligence gathering, which included a telephone 

"hotline" for local residents. In addition, there was an 

increase in demand for drug treatment services and no 

reports of displacement to surrounding neighborhoods.

38 

However, police in Melbourne, Australia found that 

although the crackdown had some success in reducing 

the visible aspects of drug dealing, the market quickly 

adapted, resulting in only a temporary improvement. 

Negative outcomes were also observed such as partial 

displacement, public health dangers and an increase in 

39 violence. It is also important to consider the response 

of the local community to enforcement efforts. Tactical 

Narcotics Teams employed in Brooklyn, New York found 

that police crackdowns were not likely to achieve any 

lasting improvement unless the community became more 

involved in the process.

40 In some cases, this type of 

enforcement strategy may even exacerbate the situation. 

Minneapolis police found that an infamous crack market 

in the city proved resistant to police tactics. Buy-busts and 

executing warrants were unsuccessful and improvement 

only occurred after police encouraged landlords to evict 

those selling drugs.

41 Police crackdowns may even have 

a detrimental effect on police-community relations. 
Responses to the Problem of Drug Dealing in Open-Air Markets 25 

Enforcement may be perceived as being disproportionately 

aimed at people from communities of color or to be 

overly aggressive and infringe on the civil liberties of the 

local population in general.

42 

The success of a police crackdown will rarely be achieved 

or sustained in isolation and whatever enforcement 

strategy is employed should be followed by a revitalization 

initiative.

43 

3. Arresting drug sellers in "buy and bust" 

operations. Buy-busts (or test purchase operations) are 

used to gather evidence against specific dealers leading 

to their arrest. Police in Oakland found that as the 

operation progressed and flagrant dealing diminished, 

it became more difficult to make buys. Sellers adapted 

to enforcement by changing location and stashing their 

drugs in nearby hideouts rather than keeping it on 

their person.

44 In addition, dealers began to recognize 

individual officers by sight. Dealers who become wary 

of buy-bust operations may require that unknown buyers 

prove their legitimacy by either showing injection marks 

or by using drugs while being observed.

45 Buy-busts may 

also be complicated by the organization of a market in 

which a variety of roles are performed by several people, 

making it difficult for the police to arrest the actual seller 

rather than his or her ancillary staff. Because dealers 

associated with open-air drug markets tend to represent 

the lowest level of the dealing network, it is unlikely that 

buy-bust operations aimed specifically at street dealers 

will significantly disrupt the distribution system. Sellers 

operating at this level are easily replaced and while buybust operations may result in a large number of arrests, 

convictions rarely lead to lengthy sentences.

46 
26 Drug Dealing in Open-Air Markets 

If buy-busts are part of your chosen strategy for tackling 

drug markets, it is important to protect the identity of 

the officers involved–a challenge when resources are 

limited. In response to this concern, the Virginia State 

Police developed an undercover interagency exchange 

program allowing police agencies from around the state 

to link personnel, investigative techniques and intelligence 

information about drug dealers.

47 

4. Intelligence-led investigative work. Information 

from drug hotlines and local residents can advance a 

police officer's ability to identify and analyze a problem. 

In addition, arrestees can prove to be a useful source of 

intelligence. Police in Brooklyn, New York suggest that 

any arrest can produce information if officers debrief the 

offender. For example, a drug buyer may facilitate access 

to a location for an undercover officer, greatly reducing 48 

the time and expense of other forms of surveillance.

5. Confiscating stashed drugs. Without regard for 

arresting dealers, if police can get good intelligence from 

the community about the location of stashed drugs in 

hidden, but public, locations in and around the market, 

they can confiscate the drugs. A sufficient level of 

confiscation can create a financial hardship for dealers 

and may compel them to move the market, hold the drugs 

(and make themselves more vulnerable to arrest), or raise 

prices. 
Responses to the Problem of Drug Dealing in Open-Air Markets 27 

Monroe County Sheriff's Office at 

www.keysso.net 

Seizing drugs that have been stashed in public places near 

a market can help drive out dealers and eventually close 

the market. 

6. Arresting drug buyers. Arresting drug buyers in 

operations commonly referred to as "reverse stings" 

are a controversial form of enforcement and serve to 

impact the demand side of the market. They are most 

successfully employed against novice or occasional users 

who lack experience and tend to buy from strangers.

§ 

Police in Alabama used reverse stings to target users after 

a change of legislation made soliciting for the purpose of 

purchasing drugs a felony rather than a misdemeanor. In 

Miami, Florida police found that although the penalties 

imposed by the courts were light, the process of being 

arrested, charged, and required to appear in court as 

well as the possibility of having a vehicle impounded, 

acted as a deterrent for buyers. They found that of 

the 1,725 people that were arrested during 18 reverse 

sting operations, only seven were repeat offenders. 

The continued use of this type of operation led to two 

significant changes: the first was a lower arrest rate. The 

second was that those getting arrested were predominantly 

problem users implying that the number of the casual and 

49 

novice users had decreased.

§ Several critical legal issues arise 

in reverse stings. If officers sell 

simulated drugs, they should be clear 

about what offense they can charge 

the buyer with; if they are selling 

real drugs, then care must be taken 

to safeguard those drugs so that they 

don’t enter the user market. The 

second issue is entrapment. Reverse 

stings have been heavily criticized 

by criminal lawyers in the past and 

entrapment can be used as a defense 

in court. To safeguard against this, 

officers should receive thorough 

training in the legal aspects of the 

operation and be advised how to 

react in any given situation. 
28 Drug Dealing in Open-Air Markets 

7. Warning potential buyers. Police in Fort Lauderdale, 

Florida implemented a scheme designed to discourage 

buyers in vehicles from entering the drug market area. 

Police monitored vehicles seen in the vicinity of the 

market, traced the registered owners of the vehicles, and 

mailed them a postcard warning that the vehicle had been 

spotted in a high-crime area. The effect of this strategy 

was a decrease in the number of drug-related arrests 

within the targeted neighborhood coupled with a decrease 

in overall traffic volume.

50 

Community Responses 

8. Encouraging community action. Community-led 

anti-drug initiatives can be an important component 

in combating open-air drug markets. Where grassroots organizations already exist, their success is often 

dependent upon establishing a good working relationship 

with the police. It is imperative that officers overcome 

any skepticism they may have about the efficacy of such 

groups and provide them with adequate support. Where 

no such groups exist, police can galvanize local residents 

by arranging meetings, posting fliers and coordinating 

other forms of community activity. Research shows 

that being taken seriously by the police and other public 

officials increases citizen morale and their willingness 

to participate and there have been many examples of 

successful community-led action against drug markets.

51 

In Kansas City, a volunteer association known as Ad Hoc 

initiated anti-drug marches and drug-house "blitzes." 

Members of the group also coordinated with police 

and the district attorney to threaten landlords with civil 

forfeiture if they failed to evict drug-dealing tenants.

52 

Police in Vancouver, British Columbia found that local 
Responses to the Problem of Drug Dealing in Open-Air Markets 29 

residents willingly opened their homes for officers to use 

as surveillance points as well as organizing a Park Watch 

volunteer foot patrol to collect information on drug 

dealers operating in the area.

53 

9. Operating a telephone hotline. A dedicated 

telephone hotline for local residents is useful for gathering 

intelligence and can help to build confidence in the 

community. Schemes that are widely advertised are likely 

to elicit the greatest response and might also serve to 

deter buyers and sellers by reminding them that local 

residents can report criminal or nuisance behavior easily 

and anonymously. 

Metropolitan Nashville Police Department 

Toll-free community hotlines are a good way 

to gather information while protecting the 

anonymity of the informant. 
30 Drug Dealing in Open-Air Markets 

Civil Remedies 

Successful responses to drug markets are invariably 

multi-dimensional and no single response in isolation is 

likely to succeed. Research suggests that the use of civil 

remedies can result in a decrease in drug dealing and 

54 

signs of disorder. Properties surrounding an area where 

open drug dealing occurs often support the market and 

may also be liable for civil action. Police in Oakland, 

California worked with city agency representatives to 

improve the physical condition of areas used for drug 

dealing. Tactics included recommendations to landlords to 

evict troublesome tenants; inspections by housing, sewer, 

sidewalk and vector control inspectors; and warnings sent 

to building owners informing them that action would be 

taken if they did not deal with drug dealing and disorder 

55 

problems.

10. Encouraging place managers to be more proactive. 

It is likely that open drug markets will exist in areas where 

place managers (including landlords, housing authorities, 

local business residents and tenants associations) are 

inadequate or corrupted. Within targeted areas, it could 

be beneficial to offer assistance to those responsible for 

place management to help them achieve more control over 

56 

their properties. Levels of intervention may vary from 

distributing information pamphlets to providing financial 

57 

aid or training for landlords and businesses. Police 

can work with place managers to ensure that additional 

improvements are carried out, such as better street lighting 

and regular garbage collection. 
Responses to the Problem of Drug Dealing in Open-Air Markets 31 

11. Applying nuisance abatement laws. Nuisance 

abatement actions are an important tool in controlling 

drug dealing in open-air markets and can be used against 

properties that are shown to be fostering a drug market. 

These actions may include the packaging and storing of 

drugs, housing dealers, or providing a place for people to 

use. 

12. Issuing restraining orders or "stay-away" orders. 

County Prosecutors in Newark, New Jersey have begun 

asking judges to issue Drug Offender Restraining 

Orders (DOROs) against drug defendants. Similar to 

restraining orders in domestic violence cases, DOROs are 

designed to keep accused drug offenders out of specific 

neighborhoods or buildings and can be requested at a 

defendant's first court appearance. The order then lasts 

until the defendant has been convicted or acquitted. 

"Stay-away" orders can also be used in conjunction with 

probation to keep convicted dealers away from a specified 

area. 

13. Notifying mortgage holders of drug-related 

problems at their properties. Police can serve as a 

conduit of information to entities that have a financial 

stake in the proper maintenance of real property. This 

may lead to private actions to compel improvements in 

property management, and ultimately a reduction in drugrelated activity in and around that property.

58 
32 Drug Dealing in Open-Air Markets 

14. Enforcing regulatory codes. Police can instigate 

building and property inspections and liaise with absentee 

landlords about the condition of their properties and 

the activities taking place in them.

59 Where buildings are 

vacant, police can inform city officials and encourage 

them to take action. In St. Louis, Missouri, two officers 

took photographs of the exterior of a building that 

had been identified as problem location and submitted 

them to the City Building Division requesting that the 

buildings be inspected for code violations. In addition, 

they also contacted the landlord of the property to share 

information about the state of the building and the 

behavior of the tenants.

60 

15. Seizing and forfeiting assets related to drug 

dealing. Seizing a dealer's assets is likely to impede on 

their ability to conduct business as well as deprive them 

of profit accumulated through drug-related activity. 

In addition, seized assets provide additional revenue 

and resources to fund further enforcement efforts and 

community-based strategies against drugs. In addition to 

targeting dealers, civil forfeiture proceedings can be used 

to gain ownership of buyers' vehicles. Where transactions 

occurred in buyers' cars, police in Alabama were able to 

gain ownership of a number of vehicles.

61 Police in New 

York worked with the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) 

and passed on the registration information of cars they 

suspected belonged to dealers. The IRS would then run 

an income tax check on the owner and if no taxes had 

been paid or return filed, or if the income reported was 

disproportionate to the cost of the car, an investigation 

ensued, resulting in the seizure of more than 100 cars.

62 
Responses to the Problem of Drug Dealing in Open-Air Markets 33 

Modifying the Physical Environment 

This involves manipulating, designing or managing the 

physical environment with the intention of affecting the 

behavior of those who use it.

63 There are many physical 

features that may facilitate drug dealing in open-air 

markets including: thick or overgrown foliage, vacant 

buildings, poor street lighting, and access routes that can 

be modified to discourage drug dealing. 

16. Re-claiming public areas. Public areas that have 

been abandoned by members of the local community 

because they fear drug-related activity are at risk of 

further degradation. Where parks and other public spaces 

are used for drug dealing, police can negotiate with the 

relevant authority responsible for an area and assist in 

implementing working solutions. Police in Sweden found 

that re-designing a public park to improve visibility and 

encourage local residents' use helped eradicate drug 

activity and restore public order.

64 In Vancouver, British 

Columbia a significant increase in reports of drug dealing 

resulted in a community effort to reclaim a neighborhood 

park. In addition to enforcement against dealers, police 

coordinated with the Park Board requesting immediate 

action to control graffiti and litter; the landscaping in the 

park was altered to eliminate obstructed sightlines; and the 

dog pound stepped up its enforcement of unleashed dogs 

used by dealers to intimidate residents.

65 
34 Drug Dealing in Open-Air Markets 

§ See the POP Response Guide No. 

2 Closing Streets and Alleys to Reduce 

Crime for further information. 

17. Installing and monitoring surveillance cameras. 

There is little information about the efficacy of using 

surveillance cameras to disrupt open-air drug markets. 

The installation of surveillance cameras has been shown 

to reduce crime, although in some cases, criminal activity 

adapted to circumnavigate the increased risk of arrest.

66 

A study conducted in the UK asked offenders their views 

about CCTV and whether they thought it could be used 

to combat street drug dealing. Although respondents felt 

that redeployable cameras would be more effective than 

static cameras, 78 percent of the offenders interviewed 

did not think CCTV would make an impact.

67 Introducing 

surveillance cameras in an open drug market is likely to 

result in displacement or the transformation of an open 

market into a closed one; other possible benefits include 

an increased feeling of safety for local residents and a fall 

in street crime. 

18. Altering access routes and restricting parking. 

Limiting the access routes into a drug market, especially 

when a high number of buyers are not from the local 

neighborhood, may have the effect of dampening the 

market. Police in Charlotte, North Carolina blocked off 

two main routes into the neighborhood when analysis 

revealed that 60 percent of those arrested for buying or 

selling drugs in the area did not live in local vicinity–a 

factor that contributed to a 42 percent drop in arrest rates 

during the following 12 months.

§ As well as discouraging 

buyers, blocking off streets and alleys can make it more 

difficult for dealers to escape in the event of enforcement 

activity, which may render the area less appealing as a 

drug market. Implementing parking restrictions may also 

have an effect on the market. Buyers will have to walk to 

and from the drug market, increasing the risk of police 

surveillance or street crime. 
Responses to the Problem of Drug Dealing in Open-Air Markets 35 

19. Changing public pay phones. Removing pay phones 

or restricting them to outgoing calls can serve to hamper 

communication between buyers and sellers making it less 

convenient for them to conduct business. 

20. Securing vacant buildings. This can help improve 

the physical appearance of the neighborhood, and reduce 

the number of places suitable for selling or using drugs. 

With the support of the local community coalition, 

Houston police conducted a sweep of abandoned 

buildings in the Link Valley area to look for squatters and 

drug dealers. In addition, the coalition organized a clean 

up of the area and worked with city agencies to enforce 

health and housing ordinances–a combination of actions 

that greatly reduced the neighborhood drug trade.

68 

Demand Reduction 

21. Providing drug treatment. Reducing the availability 

of drugs cannot be done by enforcement alone, and it 

is important to combine supply and demand reduction 

strategies. In some cases, enforcement will lead to an 

increased demand for treatment services.

69 Disrupting 

a drug market may provide a window of opportunity in 

which individuals decide to seek assistance for their use. 

Providing adequate resources to treat problem drug use 

will ensure that this opportunity is used effectively. In 

some cases appropriately targeted treatment has been 

found to destabilize retail markets by stripping them of 

low-level staff.

70 

Appendix 37 

Appendix: Summary of Responses to 

Drug Dealing in Open-Air Markets 

The table below summarizes the responses to drug dealing 

in open-air markets, the mechanism by which they are 

intended to work, the conditions under which they ought 

to work best, and some factors you should consider before 

implementing a particular response. It is critical that you 

tailor responses to local circumstances and that you can 

justify each response based on reliable analysis. In most 

cases, an effective strategy will involve implementing 

several different responses. Law enforcement responses 

alone are seldom effective in reducing or solving the 

problem. 

1. 

2. 

23 

24 

Policing the 

area in a highly visible fashion 

Enforcing the 

law intensively 

Disrupts drugrelated activity and reduces the fear of crime among local residents; and 

helps build 

relationships 

with local 

residents 

Deters buyers 

and sellers 

by increasing 

the actual and 

perceived risk of

apprehension 

...efforts can be 

sustained over time 

...enforcement 

strategies 

are focused 

on a specific 

geographical 

location 

Officers should 

receive training about the characteristics of street drug markets so they can 

make accurate 

evaluations about 

situations as they 

occur 

Care should 

be taken not 

to alienate the 

local citizens 

by infringing 

on their civil 

liberties; effects 

tend to be short 

term and costly 

to sustain. 

Efforts should 

be coordinated 

with prosecutors 

to manage 

the impact on criminal justice 

system 

Response 

No. 

Page No. Response How It Works Works Best If... Considerations 

Drug Enforcement 
38 Drug Dealing in Open-Air Markets 

Response 

No. 

Page No. Response How It Works Works Best If... Considerations 

3. 25 Arresting drug 

sellers in "buy 

and bust" 

operations 

Deters drug 

dealers by 

incarceration 

and/or fines 

...officers 

and vehicles 

are regularly 

substituted to 

avoid detection; 

and arrests are 

followed up with 

responses that 

alter the market 

conditions 

Effects are 

typically short 

term if drug 

dealers are readily 

replaced or if

court sanctions 

are weak; officers 

face considerable 

physical risks 

4. 26 Intelligence-led 

investigative 

work 

Police use 

information 

from drug 

hotlines 

and police 

informants to 

target drug 

distribution 

networks 

...information 

is processed 

swiftly and the 

appropriate 

action is taken 

Safeguards should 

be put in place 

to ensure that 

sources are not 

able to manipulate 

a situation for 

their own gain 

5. 26 Confiscating 

stashed drugs 

Raises the 

costs of drug 

dealing by loss 

of merchandise, which may 

discourage dealing in that area or raise the 

price of drugs 

which, in turn, 

might reduce 

demand 

...police can get 

good intelligence 

from the 

community 

Response depends 

upon timely 

and reliable 

intelligence from the community; and requires an effective and efficient procedure 

for confiscating 

and inventorying 

seized drugs 

Officers should 

6. 27 Arresting drug 

buyers 

Deters buyers 

by increasing 

the actual and 

perceived risk of

apprehension 

...most buyers 

are novice or 

occasional 

users; arrest 

campaigns are 

widely publicized 

after the fact to deter potential 

customers 

receive extensive 

training to avoid 

legal entrapment 

defense; officers 

face considerable 

physical risks; 

effects will be 

limited if there 

is a large pool 

of new buyers 

coming to the 

market 

Care should 
Appendix 39 

Response 

No. 

Page No. Response How It Works Works Best If... Considerations 

7. 28 Warning 

potential buyers 

Discourages 

buyers from 

entering the 

market out 

of fear of 

apprehension or 

being publicly 

exposed for 

illicit conduct 

...the scheme is 

well advertised 

and used in 

conjunction with 

high-visibility 

policing 

be taken not to 

offend or accuse 

innocent persons 

seen in the area 

Community Responses 

8. 28 Encouraging 

community 

action 

Discourages 

sellers and 

buyers by 

conveying 

community 

intolerance for 

drug dealing; 

threatens buyers 

and sellers 

with loss of 

anonymity 

...efforts are 

sustained over 

time 

Communities may 

not always be 

receptive to police 

efforts; response 

may be difficult to 

sustain over time; 

citizens may be too 

fearful to become 

actively involved 

9. 29 Operating 

a telephone 

hotline 

Increases 

community 

reporting of

drug dealing, 

which should 

increase the 

risk that 

offenders will be 

apprehended 

...information 

is followed 

up promptly 

and used to 

target drug hot spots; reporting 

citizen's identity 

is anonymous or 

kept confidential 

Police need 

to respond 

quickly to the 

information they 

are given; response requires that 

the community 

generally has 

confidence in 

police to take 

action; the volume 

of complaints can 

overwhelm the 

police capacity to 

respond 
40 Drug Dealing in Open-Air Markets 

Response 

No. 

Page No. Response How It Works Works Best If... Considerations 

Civil Remedies 

10. 30 Encouraging 

place managers 

to be more 

proactive 

Discourages 

buyers and 

sellers by 

communicating 

that drug dealing 

in and around 

properties will 

not be tolerated 

...place 

managers have 

the incentives 

and resources to 

make necessary 

changes 

Threats or actual 

legal sanctions 

may be required 

to incentivize 

reluctant property 

owners; some 

segment of

community 

may object to 

compelling private 

property owners 

to change the ways 

they manage and 

maintain their 

properties 

11. 31 Applying 

nuisance 

abatement laws 

Compels 

property 

owners to take 

actions that can 

discourage drug 

dealing 

...jurisdiction 

has an efficient 

nuisance 

abatement 

process and 

effective 

sanctions for 

noncompliance 

This response is 

unlikely to be a 

quick solution, 

especially if 

owner contests 

proceedings; it 

requires diligent 

follow up to 

ensure compliance 

12. 31 Issuing restraining 

orders or "stayaway" orders 

Discourages defendants, or 

those convicted 

of drug dealing 

from returning 

to drug-dealing 

areas 

...utilized with effective 

sanctions for 

non-compliance 

Judges may be reluctant to issue 

an order if the 

defendant can 

prove that such an 

order would cause 

undue hardship 

13. 31 Notifying 

mortgage 

holders of 

drug-related 

problems at 

their properties 

Encourages 

responsible 

management of

properties that 

may be used 

in ways that 

support open-air 

drug markets 

...police have an 

efficient means 

of identifying 

mortgage 

holders; 

mortgage holders 

have a sufficient 

financial stake in 

the property to 

become involved 

Response is 

only relevant if

problem properties 

are being financed 

by a responsible 

entity 
Appendix 41 

Response 

No. 

Page No. Response How It Works Works Best If... Considerations 

14. 32 Enforcing 

regulatory 

codes 

Pressures owners of properties 

being used in 

support of

drug markets 

to improve the 

maintenance and 

management of

their properties 

to discourage 

drug dealing 

...police have a 

good working 

relationship 

with regulatory 

inspectors and 

enforcement 

mechanisms are 

effective 

Enforcement of 

code regulations 

may take time 

15. 32 Seizing and 

forfeiting assets 

related to drug 

dealing 

Reduces profits 

and/or increases 

cost to drug 

buyers, sellers, 

and those who 

allow their 

properties to be 

used in support 

of drug dealing 

...there exists an 

efficient system 

for processing 

asset seizures 

and forfeiture 

claims 

These actions must 

be authorized by 

law; there may be 

few valuable assets 

worth seizing 

Modifying the Physical Environment 

16. 33 Reclaiming 

public areas 

Promotes 

legitimate uses of space that can discourage drug dealing in that space 

...other 

agencies and organizations, and the community at large, support police initiative to promote other uses of the space 

Work carried out 

as part of these modifications may disrupt local residents; 

improvements to space may be costly; there may 

be objections to 

curtailing certain 

uses of the space 

that are legal, 

but somewhat 

disorderly 

17. 34 Installing 

surveillance cameras 

Increases 

the risk of 

identification 

and provides 

evidence that 

may be used in 

court 

...the scheme is 

well advertised, effectively 

monitored, 

and used in 

conjunction with 

high-visibility 

policing to 

respond to 

observed crimes 

and incidents 

Installation 

and operating costs must be 

considered; some 

geographical 

displacement will 

probably occur; 

the response 

requires diligent 

monitoring; the 

impact is not 

clearly understood 
42 Drug Dealing in Open-Air Markets 

Response 

No. 

Page No. Response How It Works Works Best If... Considerations 

18. 34 Altering access 

routes and 

restricting 

parking 

Discourages 

drug dealing 

by making it 

inconvenient 

for buyers 

and sellers to 

maneuver in 

and out of the 

market 

...residents 

and merchants 

affected by 

changes are 

consulted about 

and support 

proposed 

changes; changes 

are tailored to 

the specific 

mechanics of the 

market 

Redesign may be 

costly; may disrupt 

and inconvenience 

local legitimate 

residents and 

merchants; and 

may restrict 

access routes for 

emergency vehicles 

19. 35 Removing pay 

phones 

Hampers 

communication 

between sellers 

and buyers 

...drug dealers 

and buyers use 

pay phones to 

arrange deals 

Local residents 

may oppose the 

scheme 

20. 35 Securing vacant 

buildings 

Prevents their 

use as places 

where drugs can 

be used or sold 

...police 

coordinate 

efforts with 

housing services 

to ensure that 

once a problem 

has been identified, action is taken quickly 

Regular checks 

should be made to 

ensure buildings 

remain secure 

Demand Reduction 

21. 35 Providing drug treatment Reduces the demand for drugs; ensures 

that if a window 

of opportunity 

is created for 

users to seek 

treatment as a 

consequence 

of enforcement 

activity, services 

are able to 

respond 

... treatment resources are adequate to 

meet demand; 

individuals 

referred by 

police receive 

high treatment 

priority 

Police should 

inform treatment services of 

high volume 

enforcement 

activity so they 

can prepare for 

increased demand 

for treatment; 

treatment funding 

can be costly 
Endnotes 43 

Endnotes 

1. Caulkins and Reuter (1998). 2. Eck (1995). 3. Edmunds, Hough, and Urquia (1996) ; Lupton et al. 

(2002); Natarajan and Hough (2000). 4. Goldstein (1985). 5. Edmunds, Hough, and Urquia (1996) ; Maher and 

Dixon (1999). 6. Natarajan, Clarke, and Belanger (1996); May et al. 

(2000). 7. Kleiman and Smith (1990); Maher and Dixon (1999); 

Kennedy (1993). 8. Maher and Dixon (1999); Reuter and MacCoun (1993). 9. Weisburd and Mazerolle (2000). 10. Wilson and Kelling (1982); Hough and Edmunds 

(1999). 11. Knutsson (1997). 12. Ruggiero and South (1995). 13. Eck (1995). 14. Myhre (2000). 15. Eck (1995). 16. Natarajan and Hough (2000). 17. Dorn, Murji, and South (1992). 18. Curtis and Sviridoff (1994). 19. Davis and Lurigio (1996). 20. Johnson et al. (1990). 21. Parker, Aldridge, and Measham (1998). 22. May et al. (2000). 23. Office of National Drug Control Policy (2002). 24. Rasmussen and Benson (1994); Reuter (1992). 25. Curtis (1996). 26. Murji (1998). 27. Weisburd and Mazerolle (2000). 28. Lupton et al. (2002). 
44 Drug Dealing in Open-Air Markets 

29. Zimmer (1990). 30. Clarke (1997). 31. Weisel (1996). 32. Conner and Burns (1991). 33. Conner and Burns (1991). 34. Zimmer (1990). 35. Conner and Burns (1991). 36. May et al. (2000). 37. Zimmer (1990). 38. Kleiman, Holland, and Hayes (1984). 39. Aitken et al. (2002). 40. Curtis (1996). 41. Buerger (1992). 42. Jacobson (1999). 43. Baveja, Feichtinger, and Hartl (1999); Jacobson (1999). 44. Connors and Nugent (1990). 45. May et al. (2000). 46. Conner and Burns (1991). 47. Weisel (1996). 48. City of New York Police Department (1993). 49. Connors and Nugent (1990). 50. Cadwalader, Wickersham and Taft (1993). 51. Weingart, Hartmann, and Osborne (1993). 52. Weingart, Hartmann, and Osborne (1993). 53. Vancouver Police Department (2000). 54. Mazerolle and Roehl (1998); Buerger and Mazerolle 

(1998); Cadwalader, Wickersham and Taft (1993). 55. Mazerolle, Roehl, and Kadleck (1998). 56. Eck (1995). 57. Bureau of Justice Assistance (2000). 58. Hope (1994); Oakland Police Department (2003). 59. Eck and Wartell (1998). 60. Hope (1994). 61. Uchida, Forst, and Annan (1992). 62. Weingart, Hartmann, and Osborne(1993). 
E

ndnotes 45 

63. 

Tonry and Farrington (1995). 64. Knutsson (1997). 65. Vancouver Police Department 

(2000). 66. Sarno, Hough, and Bulos (1999). 67. Gill and Loveday (2003). 68. Weingart, Hartmann, and Osborne (19

93). 69. Kleiman, Holland, and Hayes (1984). 70. Killias and Aebi (2000). 

References 47 

References 

Aitken, C., D. Moore, P. Higgs, J. Kelsall, and M. Kerger 

(2002). "The Impact of a Police Crackdown on 

a Street Drug Scene: Evidence From the Street." 

International Journal of Drug Policy 13(3):189–198. 

Baveja, A., G. Feichtinger, and R. Hartl (1999). A ResourceConstrained Optimal Control Model for Crackdown on 

Illicit Drug Markets. Tilburg (Netherlands): Center for 

Economic Research, Tilburg University. 

Buerger, M. (1992). "Defensive Strategies of the StreetLevel Drug Trade." Journal of Crime and Justice 

15(2):31–51. 

Buerger, M., and L. Mazerolle (1998). "Third-Party 

Policing: A Theoretical Analysis of an Emerging 

Trend." Justice Quarterly 15(2):301–327. 

Bureau of Justice Assistance (2000). Keeping Illegal Activity 

Out of Rental Property: A Police Guide for Establishing 

Landlord Training Programs. Washington, D.C.: U.S. 

Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Assistance. 

Cadwalader, Wickersham, and Taft (1993). A Civil War: A 

Community Legal Guide to Fighting Street Drug Markets. 

New York: Author. 

Caulkins, J., and P. Reuter (1998). "What Price Data Tell 

Us About Drug Markets." Journal of Drug Issues 28, 

593–612. 

Clarke, R. (1997). Situational Crime Prevention: Successful Case 

Studies. Guilderland (New York): Harrow and Heston. 
48 Drug Dealing in Open-Air Markets 

Conner, R., and P. Burns (1991). The Winnable War: A 

Community Guide to Eradicating Street Drug Markets. 

Washington, D.C.: American Alliance for Rights & 

Responsibilities. 

Connors, E., and H. Nugent (1990). Street-Level Narcotics 

Enforcement. Washington, D.C.: U.S. National Institute 

of Justice. 

Curtis, R. (1996). The War on Drugs in Brooklyn, New York: 

Street-Level Drug Markets and the Tactical Narcotics 

Team. Dissertation, Columbia University. Ann Arbor 

(Michigan): University Microfilms International. 

Curtis, R., and M. Sviridoff (1994). "The Social 

Organization of Street-Level Drug Markets and Its 

Impact on the Displacement Effect." In R. McNamara 

(ed.), Crime Displacement: The Other Side of Prevention. 

East Rockaway (New York): Cummings and Hathaway. 

Davis, R., and A. Lurigio (1996). Fighting Back: Neighborhood 

Antidrug Strategies. Thousand Oaks (California): Sage. 

Dorn, N., K. Murji, and N. South (1992). Traffickers: Drug 

Markets and Law Enforcement. London: Routledge. 

Eck, J. (1994). Drug Markets and Drug Places: A Case-Control 

Study of the Spatial Structure of Illicit Drug Dealing. 

Dissertation, University of Maryland. Ann Arbor 

(Michigan): University Microfilms International. 

(1995). "A General Model of the Geography of 

Illicit Retail Marketplaces." In J. Eck and D. Weisburd 

(eds.), Crime and Place. Crime Prevention Studies, Vol. 

4. Monsey (New York): Criminal Justice Press. 
References 49 

Eck, J., and J. Wartell (1998). "Improving the Management 

of Rental Properties with Drug Problems." In L. 

Mazerolle and J. Roehl (eds.), Civil Remedies and Crime 

Prevention. Crime Prevention Studies, Vol. 9. Monsey 

(New York): Criminal Justice Press. 

Edmunds, M., M. Hough, and N. Urquia (1996). Tackling 

Local Drug Markets. Crime Detection and Prevention 

Series Paper, No. 80. London: Home Office. 

Gill, M. and Loveday, K. (2003). "What do Offenders 

Think About CCTV?" In M. Gill (ed.) CCTV. 

Perpetuity Press: Leicester. 

Goldstein, P. (1985). "The Drugs/Violence Nexus: A 

Tripartite Conceptual Framework." Journal of Drug 

Issues, Vol. 15. 4. 493–506. 

Hope, T. (1994). "Problem-Oriented Policing and Drug 

Market Locations: Three Case Studies." In R. Clarke 

(ed.), Crime Prevention Studies, Vol. 2. Monsey (New 

York): Criminal Justice Press. 

Hough, M., and M. Edmunds (1999). "Tackling Drug 

Markets: An Eclectic Approach." Studies on Crime and 

Crime Prevention 8(1):107–131. 

Jacobson, J. (1999). Policing Drug Hot-Spots. Police Research 

Series, Paper 109. London: Home Office. 

Johnson, B., T. Williams, K. Dei, and H. Sanabria (1990). 

"Drug Abuse in the Inner City: Impact on Hard-Drug 

Users and the Community." In M. Tonry and J.Q. 

Wilson (eds.), Drugs and Crime. Chicago: University of 

Chicago Press. 
50 Drug Dealing in Open-Air Markets 

Kennedy, D. (1993). Closing the Market: Controlling the 

Drug Trade in Tampa, Florida. NIJ Program Focus. 

Washington, D.C.: U.S. National Institute of Justice. 

Killias, M. and M. Aebi (2000). "The Impact of Heroin 

Prescription on Heroin Markets in Switzerland." In 

Natarajan, M. and M. Hough (eds.) Illegal Drug Markets: 

From Research to Policy. Crime Prevention Studies (series 

editor R.V. Clarke). Monsey (New York): Criminal 

Justice Press. 

Kleiman, M., W. Holland, and C. Hayes (1984). Report to 

the District Attorney for Essex County: Evaluation of the 

Lynn Drug Task Force. Cambridge (Massachusetts): 

Program in Criminal Justice Policy and Management, 

John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard 

University. 

Kleiman, M., and K. Smith (1990). "State and Local Drug 

Enforcement," In M. Tonry and J. Wilson (eds.), Drugs 

and Crime. Crime and Justice: An Annual Review of 

Research, Vol. 13. Chicago: University of Chicago 

Press. 

Knutsson, J. (1997). "Restoring Public Order in a City 

Park," in R. Homel (ed.), Policing for Prevention: Reducing 

Crime, Public Intoxication and Injury. Crime Prevention 

Studies, Vol. 7. Monsey (New York): Criminal Justice 

Press. 

Lauderhill Police Department (1996). Mission Lake Plaza: 

Combating an Open-Air Drug Market in a Shopping 

Complex. Submission for the Herman Goldstein Award 

for Excellence in Problem-Oriented Policing. 
References 51 

Lupton, R., A. Wilson, T. May, H, Warburton, and P. J. 

Turnbull (2002). A Rock and a Hard Place: Drug Markets 

in Deprived Neighbourhoods. Home Office Research 

Study No. 240. London: Home Office. 

Maher, L., and D. Dixon (1999). "Policing and Public 

Health: Law Enforcement and Harm Minimization 

in a Street-Level Drug Market." British Journal of 

Criminology 39(4):488–512. 

May, T., M. Edmunds, and M. Hough (1999). Street 

Business: The Links Between Sex and Drug Markets. Police 

Research Series, Paper 118. London: Home Office. 

May, T., A. Harocopos, P. Turnbull, and M. Hough (2000). 

Serving Up: The Impact of Low-Level Police Enforcement 

on Drug Markets. Police Research Series, Paper 133. 

London: Home Office, Policing and Reducing Crime 

Unit. 

Mazerolle, L.G., and J. Roehl (eds.) (1998). Civil Remedies 

and Crime Prevention. Crime Prevention Studies, Vol. 9. 

Monsey (New York): Criminal Justice Press. 

Mazerolle, L., J. Roehl, and C. Kadleck (1998). 

"Controlling Social Disorder Using Civil Remedies: 

Results from a Randomized Field Experiment in 

Oakland, California." In L. Mazerolle and J. Roehl 

(eds.), Civil Remedies and Crime Prevention. Crime 

Prevention Studies, Vol. 9. Monsey (New York): 

Criminal Justice Press. 

Murji, K. (1998). Policing Drugs. Aldershot (United 

Kingdom): Ashgate. 
52 Drug Dealing in Open-Air Markets 

Myhre, M. (2000). Drug Market Precipitators: Situational 

Dynamics of Open-Air Drug Markets in Public Housing. 

Dissertation, Rutgers University, Newark. Ann Arbor 

(Michigan): University Microfilms International. 

Natarajan, M., R. Clarke, and M. Belanger (1996). "Drug 

Dealing and Pay Phones: The Scope for Intervention." 

Security Journal 7(4):245–251. 

Natarajan, M., and M. Hough (2000). Illegal Drug Markets: 

From Research to Policy. Crime Prevention Studies (Series 

editor R.V. Clarke). Monsey (New York): Criminal 

Justice Press. 

New York City Police Department (1993). Drugs. ProblemSolving Annual for Community Police Officers and 

Supervisors. 

Oakland Police Department (2003). "The Oakland Airport 

Motel Program: Eliminating Criminal and Nuisance 

Behavior at a Motel." Submission to the Herman 

Goldstein Award for Excellence in Problem-Oriented 

Policing. 

Office of National Drug Control Policy (2002). Pulse 

Check: Trends in Drug Abuse. November 2002, 

Washington, D.C. 

Parker, H., J. Aldridge, and F. Measham (1998). Illegal 

Leisure: The Normalization of Adolescent Recreational Drug 

Use. London: Routledge. 

Rasmussen, D. and B. Benson (1994). The Economic 

Anatomy of the Drug War: Criminal Justice in the Commons. 

Rowan and Littlefield Publishers, Inc. 
References 53 

Reuter, P. (1992). "The Limits and Consequences of U.S. 

Foreign Drug Control Efforts," The Annals of the 

American Academy, 521: pp 151–62. 

Reuter, P. and R. MacCoun (1993). Street Drug Markets in 

Inner-City Neighborhoods. Santa Monica (California): 

Rand Corporation. 

Ruggiero, V. and N. South (1995). Eurodrugs: Drug Use, 

Markets and Trafficking in Europe. London: UCL Press. 

San Diego Police Department (1998). Operation Hot Pipe, 

Smoky Haze and Rehab: Disrupting an Illicit Drug Market. 

Submission for the Herman Goldstein Award for 

Excellence in Problem-Oriented Policing. 

Sarno, C., M. Hough, and M. Bulos (1999). Developing a 

Picture of CCTV in Southwark Town Centres. Report for 

London Borough of Southwark. 

Tonry, M., and D. Farrington (1995). Building a Safer 

Society: Strategic Approaches to Crime Prevention. Chicago: 

University of Chicago Press. 

Uchida, C., B. Forst, and S. Annan (1992). Modern Policing 

and the Control of Illegal Drugs: Testing New Strategies in 

Two American Cities. Washington, D.C.: U.S. National 

Institute of Justice. 

Vancouver Police Department (2000). Showdown at the 

Playground: A Community Confronts Its Drug and Disorder 

Problems in a Neighborhood Park. Submission for the 

Herman Goldstein Award for Excellence in ProblemOriented Policing. 
54 Drug Dealing in Open-Air Markets 

Wagstaff, A., and A. Maynard (1988). Economic Aspects of 

the Illicit Drug Market and Drug Enforcement Policies in the 

United Kingdom, Home Office Research Study No. 95. 

London: Home Office. 

Weingart, S., F. Hartmann, and D. Osborne (1993). Lessons 

Learned: Case Studies of the Initiation and Maintenance of 

the Community Response to Drugs. Working Paper 93-01-

21: 

Weisburd, D., and L. Green (1994). "Defining the StreetLevel Drug Market." In D. Mackenzie and C. Uchida 

(eds.), Drugs and Crime: Evaluating Public Policy Initiatives. 

Thousand Oaks (California): Sage. 

Weisburd, D., and L. Green Mazerolle (2000). "Crime and 

Disorder in Drug Hot Spots: Implications for Theory 

and Practice in Policing." Police Quarterly 3(3):331–349. 

Weisel, D. (1996). Police Antidrug Tactics: Approaches and 

Applications. Washington, D.C.: Police Executive 

Research Forum. 

Wilson, J.Q., and G. Kelling (1982). "Broken Windows." 

The Atlantic Monthly, 249, 29–38. 

Zimmer, L. (1990). "Proactive Policing Against StreetLevel Drug Trafficking." American Journal of Police 

9(1):43–74. 
About the Authors 55 

About the Authors 

Alex Harocopos 

Alex Harocopos is a senior research associate at the National 

Development and Research Institutes, Inc. She formerly worked 

at the Criminal Policy Research Unit at South Bank University in 

London where she was involved in several studies focusing on 

drug use and the impact of low-level police enforcement on drug 

markets. Her other work includes a follow-up study of crack users 

in London, a study of pimps and the management of sex work, 

and an evaluation of an arrest referral scheme for sex workers. 

She is currently working on a study of new drug injectors in New 

York City. 

Mike Hough 

Professor Mike Hough is professor of Criminal Policy at the 

School of Law, King's College London, and director of the 

Institute for Criminal Policy Research (ICPR). The institute is 

one of the largest of its sort in Britain. It has a staff of 15, 

carrying out policy research for central and local government 

and for independent funders. Hough has extensive experience 

in quantitative research methods, especially large-scale sample 

surveys such as the British Crime Survey and the Policing for 

London survey. He has published extensively on topics including 

crime prevention and community safety, policing, probation and 

drugs. (See www.kcl.ac.uk/icpr for publications.) 

Recommended Readings 57 

Recommended Readings 

• A Police Guide to Surveying Citizens and Their 

Environments, Bureau of Justice Assistance, 1993. This 

guide offers a practical introduction for police practitioners 

to two types of surveys that police find useful: surveying 

public opinion and surveying the physical environment. It 

provides guidance on whether and how to conduct costeffective surveys. 

• Assessing Responses to Problems: An 

Introductory Guide for Police Problem-Solvers, 

by John E. Eck (U.S. Department of Justice, Office of 

Community Oriented Policing Services, 2001). This guide 

is a companion to the Problem-Oriented Guides for Police series. 

It provides basic guidance to measuring and assessing 

problem-oriented policing efforts. 

• Conducting Community Surveys, by Deborah Weisel 

(Bureau of Justice Statistics and Office of Community 

Oriented Policing Services, 1999). This guide, along with 

accompanying computer software, provides practical, basic 

pointers for police in conducting community surveys. The 

document is also available at www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs. 

• Crime Prevention Studies, edited by Ronald V. Clarke 

(Criminal Justice Press, 1993, et seq.). This is a series of 

volumes of applied and theoretical research on reducing 

opportunities for crime. Many chapters are evaluations of 

initiatives to reduce specific crime and disorder problems. 
58 Drug Dealing in Open-Air Markets 

• Excellence in Problem-Oriented Policing:The 

1999 Herman Goldstein Award Winners. This 

document produced by the National Institute of Justice 

in collaboration with the Office of Community Oriented 

Policing Services and the Police Executive Research Forum 

provides detailed reports of the best submissions to the 

annual award program that recognizes exemplary problemoriented responses to various community problems. A 

similar publication is available for the award winners from 

subsequent years. The documents are also available at 

www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij. 

• Not Rocket Science? Problem-Solving and Crime 

Reduction, by Tim Read and Nick Tilley (Home Office 

Crime Reduction Research Series, 2000). Identifies and 

describes the factors that make problem-solving effective 

or ineffective as it is being practiced in police forces in 

England and Wales. 

• Opportunity Makes the Thief: Practical Theory 

for Crime Prevention, by Marcus Felson and Ronald V. 

Clarke (Home Office Police Research Series, Paper No. 98, 

1998). Explains how crime theories such as routine activity 

theory, rational choice theory and crime pattern theory 

have practical implications for the police in their efforts to 

prevent crime. 

• Problem Analysis in Policing, by Rachel Boba (Police 

Foundation, 2003). Introduces and defines problem 

analysis and provides guidance on how problem analysis 

can be integrated and institutionalized into modern 

policing practices. 
Recommended Readings 59 

• Problem-Oriented Policing, by Herman Goldstein 

(McGraw-Hill, 1990, and Temple University Press, 1990). 

Explains the principles and methods of problem-oriented 

policing, provides examples of it in practice, and discusses 

how a police agency can implement the concept. 

• Problem-Oriented Policing and Crime Prevention, 

by Anthony A. Braga (Criminal Justice Press, 2003). 

Provides a thorough review of significant policing research 

about problem places, high-activity offenders, and repeat 

victims, with a focus on the applicability of those findings 

to problem-oriented policing. Explains how police 

departments can facilitate problem-oriented policing by 

improving crime analysis, measuring performance, and 

securing productive partnerships. 

• Problem-Oriented Policing: Reflections on the 

First 20 Years, by Michael S. Scott (U.S. Department of 

Justice, Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, 

2000). Describes how the most critical elements of 

Herman Goldstein's problem-oriented policing model have 

developed in practice over its 20-year history, and proposes 

future directions for problem-oriented policing. The report 

is also available at www.cops.usdoj.gov. 

• Problem-Solving: Problem-Oriented Policing in 

Newport News, by John E. Eck and William Spelman 

(Police Executive Research Forum, 1987). Explains the 

rationale behind problem-oriented policing and the 

problem-solving process, and provides examples of 

effective problem-solving in one agency. 
60 Drug Dealing in Open-Air Markets 

• Problem-Solving Tips: A Guide to Reducing 

Crime and Disorder Through Problem-Solving 

Partnerships by Karin Schmerler, Matt Perkins, Scott 

Phillips, Tammy Rinehart and Meg Townsend. (U.S. 

Department of Justice, Office of Community Oriented 

Policing Services, 1998) (also available at www.cops.usdoj. 

gov). Provides a brief introduction to problem-solving, 

basic information on the SARA model and detailed 

suggestions about the problem-solving process. 

• Situational Crime Prevention: Successful Case 

Studies, Second Edition, edited by Ronald V. Clarke 

(Harrow and Heston, 1997). Explains the principles and 

methods of situational crime prevention, and presents over 

20 case studies of effective crime prevention initiatives. 

• Tackling Crime and Other Public-Safety 

Problems: Case Studies in Problem-Solving, by 

Rana Sampson and Michael S. Scott (U.S. Department of 

Justice, Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, 

2000) (also available at www.cops.usdoj.gov). Presents case 

studies of effective police problem-solving on 18 types of 

crime and disorder problems. 

• Using Analysis for Problem-Solving: A Guidebook 

for Law Enforcement, by Timothy S. Bynum (U.S. 

Department of Justice, Office of Community Oriented 

Policing Services, 2001). Provides an introduction for 

police to analyzing problems within the context of 

problem-oriented policing. 

• Using Research: A Primer for Law Enforcement 

Managers, Second Edition, by John E. Eck and Nancy G. 

LaVigne (Police Executive Research Forum, 1994). Explains 

many of the basics of research as it applies to police 

management and problem-solving. 
Other Problem-Oriented Guides for Police 61 

Other Problem-Oriented Guides for Police 

Problem-Specific Guides series: 

1. Assaults in and Around Bars. Michael S. Scott. 2001. 

ISBN: 1-932582-00-2 

2. Street Prostitution. Michael S. Scott. 2001. ISBN: 1-932582-01-0 

3. Speeding in Residential Areas. Michael S. Scott. 2001. 

ISBN: 1-932582-02-9 

4. Drug Dealing in Privately Owned Apartment Complexes. 

Rana Sampson. 2001. ISBN: 1-932582-03-7 

5. False Burglar Alarms. Rana Sampson. 2001. ISBN: 1-932582-04-5 

6. Disorderly Youth in Public Places. Michael S. Scott. 2001. 

ISBN: 1-932582-05-3 

7. Loud Car Stereos. Michael S. Scott. 2001. ISBN: 1-932582-06-1 

8. Robbery at Automated Teller Machines. Michael S. Scott. 2001. 

ISBN: 1-932582-07-X 

9. Graffiti. Deborah Lamm Weisel. 2002. ISBN: 1-932582-08-8 

10. Thefts of and From Cars in Parking Facilities. Ronald V. 

Clarke. 2002. ISBN: 1-932582-09-6 

11. Shoplifting. Ronald V. Clarke. 2002. ISBN: 1-932582-10-X 

12. Bullying in Schools. Rana Sampson. 2002. ISBN: 1-932582-11-8 

13. Panhandling. Michael S. Scott. 2002. ISBN: 1-932582-12-6 

14. Rave Parties. Michael S. Scott. 2002. ISBN: 1-932582-13-4 

15. Burglary of Retail Establishments. Ronald V. Clarke. 2002. 

ISBN: 1-932582-14-2 

16. Clandestine Drug Labs. Michael S. Scott. 2002. 

ISBN: 1-932582-15-0 

17. Acquaintance Rape of College Students. Rana Sampson. 2002. 

ISBN: 1-932582-16-9 

18. Burglary of Single-Family Houses. Deborah Lamm Weisel. 

2002. ISBN: 1-932582-17-7 

19. Misuse and Abuse of 911. Rana Sampson. 2002. 

ISBN: 1-932582-18-5 

20. Financial Crimes Against the Elderly. 

Kelly Dedel Johnson. 2003. ISBN: 1-932582-22-3 
62 Drug Dealing in Open-Air Markets 

21. Check and Card Fraud. Graeme R. Newman. 2003. 

ISBN: 1-932582-27-4 

22. Stalking. The National Center for Victims of Crime. 2004. 

ISBN: 1-932582-30-4 

23. Gun Violence Among Serious Young Offenders. Anthony A. 

Braga. 2004. ISBN: 1-932582-31-2 

24. Prescription Fraud. Julie Wartell and Nancy G. La Vigne. 2004. 

ISBN: 1-932582-33-9 

25. Identity Theft. Graeme R. Newman. 2004 ISBN: 1-932582-35-3 

26. Crimes Against Tourists. Ronald W. Glesnor and Kenneth J. Peak. 

2004 ISBN: 1-932582-36-3 

27. Underage Drinking. Kelly Dedel Johnson. 2004 ISBN: 1-932582-39-8 

28. Street Racing. Kenneth J. Peak and Ronald W. Glensor. 2004. 

ISBN: 1-932582-42-8 

29. Cruising. Kenneth J. Peak and Ronald W. Glensor. 2004. 

ISBN: 1-932582-43-6 

30. Disorder at Budget Motels. Karin Schmerler. 2005. 

ISBN: 1-932582-41-X 

31. Drug Dealing in Open-Air Markets. Alex Harocopos and Mike 

Hough. 2005. ISBN: 1-932582-45-2 

32. Bomb Threats in Schools. Graeme R. Newman. 2005. 

ISBN: 1-932582-46-0 

33. Illicit Sexual Activity in Public Places. Kelly Dedel Johnson. 2005. 

ISBN: 1-932582-47-9 

34. Robbery of Taxi Drivers. Martha J. Smith. 2005. ISBN: 1-932582-50-9 

35. School Vandalism and Break-Ins. Kelly Dedel Johnson. 2005. 

ISBN: 1-9325802-51-7 

36. Drunk Driving. Michael S. Scott, Nina J. Emerson, Louis B. 

Antonacci, and Joel B. Plant. 2005. ISBN: 1-932582-57-6 

37. Juvenile Runaways. Kelly Dedel. 2006. ISBN: 1932582-56-8 

38. The Exploitation of Trafficked Women. Graeme R. Newman. 

2006. ISBN: 1-932582-59-2 

39. Student Party Riots. Tamara D. Madensen and John E. Eck. 

2006. ISBN: 1-932582-60-6 

40. People with Mental Illness. Gary Cordner. 2006. 

ISBN: 1-932582-63-0 
Other Problem-Oriented Guides for Police 63 

41. Child Pornography on the Internet. Richard Wortley 

and Stephen Smallbone. 2006. ISBN: 1-932582-65-7 

42. Witness Intimidation. Kelly Dedel. 2006. 

ISBN: 1-932582-67-3 

Response Guides series: 

• The Benefits and Consequences of Police 

Crackdowns. Michael S. Scott. 2003. ISBN: 1-932582-24-X 

• Closing Streets and Alleys to Reduce Crime: Should 

You Go Down This Road? Ronald V. Clarke. 2004. 

ISBN: 1-932582-41-X 

• Crime Prevention Publicity Campaigns. 

Emmanuel Barthe. 2006 ISBN: 1-932582-66-5 

• Shifting and Sharing Responsibility for Public Safety 

Problems. Michael S. Scott and Herman Goldstein. 

2005. ISBN: 1-932582-55-X 

• Video Surveillance of Public Places. Jerry Ratcliffe. 

2006 ISBN: 1-932582-58-4 

Problem-Solving Tools series: 

• Assessing Responses to Problems: An Introductory 

Guide for Police Problem-Solvers. John E. Eck. 2002. 

ISBN: 1-932582-19-3 

• Researching a Problem. Ronald V. Clarke and Phyllis A. 

Schultz. 2005. ISBN: 1-932582-48-7 

• Using Offender Interviews to Inform Police Problem 

Solving. Scott H. Decker. 2005. ISBN: 1-932582-49-5 

• Analyzing Repeat Victimization. Deborah Lamm 

Weisel. 2005. ISBN: 1-932582-54-1 
64 Drug Dealing in Open-Air Markets 

Upcoming Problem-Oriented Guides for Police 

Problem-Specific Guides 

Domestic Violence 

Bank Robbery 

Drive-by Shootings 

Disorder at Day Laborer Sites 

Crowd Control at Stadiums and Other Entertainment Venues 

Traffic Congestion Around Schools 

Theft from Construction Sites of Single Family Houses 

Robbery of Convenience Stores 

Theft from Cars on Streets 

Problem-Solving Tools 

Risky Facilities 

Implementing Responses to Problems 

Designing a Problem Analysis System 

Response Guides 

Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design 

For more information about the Problem-Oriented Guides for 

Police series and other COPS Office publications, please call 

the COPS Office Response Center at 800.421.6770 or visit 

COPS Online at www.cops.usdoj.gov. 

For More InForMatIon: 

U.S. Department of Justice 

Office of Community Oriented Policing Services 

1100 Vermont Avenue, N.W. 

Washington, DC 20530 

To obtain details on COPS programs, call the 

COPS Office Response Center at 800.421.6770 

Visit COPS Online at the address listed below. 

e07063420 Updated: August 1, 2006 

ISBN: 1-932582-45-2