respective of the challenges; as the cost of production is far lower than the product itself. Despite the risks associated with the production of illicit drugs, the traffickers will pay the farmers to move to another location to continue their farming as the farmers has no alternative means of livelihood; however the profit margin of the drug will drop, but will not affect the dealers as they will still be able to get their supply. The only result of that effect is that it will create scarcity, leading to a price increase. The price elasticity of illicit drug is vital, irrespective of the economic consequences of illicit drug and also in accessing the consequence to the consumers who abuse the drug, as it is the assumption is that, higher prices will reduce the level of drug consumption.
According to the United Nation report, after the plant disease that wiped out almost half of Afghanistan’s opium crop yields in 2010, the yield increased from 3600 tonnes in 2010, to 5800 tonnes in 2011, which brought price increase, as a result of the crop destruction, and in 2011, the opium global production rose to about 7000 tones, however; during the corresponding year the shift of illicit drug consumption reduced in Europe and North America, showing that the price of drugs could be determined by containment policy and risk but not by consumption level.
Increased seizures of illicit drugs in international and national borders are risk contributing factors. The European Monitoring Centre for Drug and Drug Addictions Reitex Surveillance network, statistics indicates that between 1995 and 2009, it is estimated that illicit drug including cannabis seized was lower than in previous year. Heroin seizure increased by 380% from as low as 5000, tones to 24000, tones in 2009, Cocaine from 2100kg, up to 121000kg, in 2006. The report stated that despite the increased seizures of illicit drug, the output either remain stable or increased. These did not show that the global supply of illicit drugs has not seen any level of reduction, indicating that the product supply has risen sharply contributing to price stability.
Punitive measures adopted to tackle illicit drug market have negative unintended consequences, such as opening other distributing networks, from the previously known ones, and consumers are quite willing to purchase at any given price. The United Nations drug policy in mid 1980’s moved away from drug use to fighting the growing trend of international trafficking of psychotropic substances, which as a result of the enforcement and high risk associated with the trade course prices to increase, as the drug market is not regulated by authority rather it is determined by the supply and demand. However, the effort by local and international law enforcement agents to tackle or reduce the output of illicit drugs, did not brought about any shift in the quantity of output as the amount of drugs seized in previous years are doubled in the next cropping season, meaning that, Law enforcement is not the best approach for drug control (Antonio Maria Costa, Executive Director of UNODC, 2007). Also the enforcement to eradicate the production of cocoa crops, will not stop the farmers, farming which is only the main source of their income, rather, the measures will displace the farmers to other areas, causing the farmers to shift their attention to other areas, which are seen as safe place, the “Balloon effect”, the traffickers, small sellers and farmers will move to continue their business. The farmers who need little or no technology and cost to start farming will use the opportunity created by law enforcement personnel to cultivate new crops in their new location, while the traffickers will look for new routes to transit their drugs, and the petty sellers to change the location of operation. However, the containment programme like interdiction and illicit drug enforcement laws will create artificial scarcity while the price of heroin, cocaine and marijuana