Journal of Quantitative Criminology

, Volume 23, Issue 3, pp 221–241 | Cite as

A Capture–Recapture Model to Estimate the Size of Criminal Populations and the Risks of Detection in a Marijuana Cultivation Industry

Original Paper

Abstract

Originally developed in biology, capture-recapture methodologies have increasingly been integrated into the study of human populations to provide estimates of the size of “hidden populations.” This paper explores the validity of one capture-recapture model—Zelterman’s (1988) truncated Poisson estimator—used to estimate the size of the marijuana cultivation industry in Quebec, Canada. The capture–recapture analysis draws on arrest data to estimate the number of marijuana growers “at risk of being arrested” for a period of five years (1998–2002). Estimates are provided for growers involved in two different techniques: (1) soil-based growing, and (2) hydroponics. In addition, the study develops an original method to estimate the prevalence of cultivation sites “at risk of detection.” A first set of findings shows that the cultivation industry is substantial; the estimated prevalence of growers compares to estimates of marijuana dealers in the province. Capture–recapture estimates are also used to compare the risks of being arrested for different types of offenders. Results indicate that hydroponic growers—those involved in large scale and sophisticated sites—face lower enforcement-related risks than growers involved in smaller enterprises. The significance of these findings is discussed in the context of the widespread development, both in Europe and in North America, of a successful domestic production-driven, rather than importation-driven, marijuana trade.

Keywords

Marijuana cultivation Risks of arrest Risks of detection Size of criminal populations Capture–recapture methodologies 

Notes

Acknowlegements

I would like to thank Pierre Tremblay for his decisive comments on an earlier version of this paper. Peter Reuter, Therese Brown, Carlo Morselli, Maurice Cusson, Mathieu Charest, Julien Piednoir, Sue-Ming Yang and three anonymous reviewers also provided useful suggestions. Finally, I am grateful for the contributions of Marteen Cruijff, Paul Fugère, Chloé Leclerc, Maïa Leduc, and Barbara Wegrzycka in analyzing some of the data presented in the paper.

References

  1. Blumstein A, Cohen J, Roth JA, Visher CA (1986) Criminal careers and “Career Criminals”, vol 1. National Academy Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  2. Bohning D, Suppawattanabodee B, Kusolvisitkul W, Viwatwongkasem C (2004) Estimating the number of drug users in Bangkok 2001: a capture–recapture approach using repeated entries in one list. Eur J Epidemiol 19:1075–1083CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bouchard M, Tremblay P (2005) Risks of arrest across markets: a capture–recapture analysis of ‘hidden’ dealer and user populations. J Drug Issues 34:733–754Google Scholar
  4. Bouchard M (2007) Growers and facilitators: analyzing the development of the cannabis cultivation industry Unpublished working paper. Department of criminology and criminal justice, University of MarylandGoogle Scholar
  5. Brecht M-L, Wickens TD (1993) Application of multiple-capture methods for estimating drug use prevalence. J Drug Issues 23:229–250Google Scholar
  6. Breton P (2000) Les serres hydroponiques sont plus nombreuses. La Presse: E3Google Scholar
  7. Calkins RF, Atkan GB (2000) Estimation of heroin prevalence in Michigan using capture-recapture and heroin problem index methods. J Drug Issues 30:187–204Google Scholar
  8. Canadian Center for Justice Statistics (2001) Uniform Crime Report Program. Statistic Canada, OttawaGoogle Scholar
  9. Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse (2004) Canadian Addiction Survey. Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse, OttawaGoogle Scholar
  10. Caulkins JP, Behrens DA, Knoll C, Tragler G, Zuba D (2004) Markov chain modeling of initiation and demand: the case of the US cocaine epidemic. Health Care Manag Sci 7:319–329CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Caulkins JP, Reuter P (1998) What price data tell us about drug markets?. J Drug Issues 28:593–612Google Scholar
  12. Chalsma AL, Boyum D (1994) Marijuana situation assessment. Office of National Drug Control Policy, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  13. Chao A (1989) Estimating population size for sparse data in capture–recapture experiments. Biometrics 45:427–438CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Chin V, Dandurand Y, Plecas D, Segger T (2000) The criminal justice response to marihuana growing operations in BC. Department of Criminology and Criminal Justice, University College of the Fraser Valley, AbbotsfordGoogle Scholar
  15. Choi Y, Comiskey C (2003) Methods for providing the first prevalence estimates of opiate use in Western Australia. Int J Drug Policy 14:297–305CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Cohen PDA, Kaal HL (2001) The irrelevance of drug policy: patterns and careers of experienced marijuana use in the populations of Amsterdam, San Francisco and Bremen. Cedro/Uva, Dutch Ministry of Health, Welfare, and SportsGoogle Scholar
  17. Collins MF, Wilson RM (1990) Automobile theft: estimating the size of the criminal population. J Quant Criminol 6:395–409CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Coull BA, Agresti A (1999) The use of mixed logit models to reflect heterogeneity in capture–recapture studies. Biometrics 55:294–301CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Daveluy C, Pica L, Audet N, Courtemanche R, Lapointe F (2000) Enquête Sociale et de Santé 1998. Institut de la Statistique du Québec, QuébecGoogle Scholar
  20. Everingham SMS, Rydell PC, Caulkins JP, (1995) Cocaine consumption in the United States: estimating past trends and future scenarios. Socio-Econ Plan Sci 29:305–314CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Field A, Casswell S (1999) Drugs in New Zealand: a National Survey 1998. Alcohol and Public Health Research Unit, University of AucklandGoogle Scholar
  22. Greene MA, Stollmack S (1981) Estimating the number of criminals In Fox JA (ed), Models in quantitative criminology. Academic Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  23. Hafley SR, Tewksbury R (1995) The rural Kentucky marijuana industry: organization and community involvement. Deviant Behav 16:201–221 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hickman M, Cox S, Harvey J, Howes S, Farrell M, Frischer M, Stimson G, Taylor C, Tilling K (1999) Estimating the prevalence of problem drug use in inner London: a discussion of three capture–recapture studies. Addiction 94:1653–1662CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hough M, Warburton H, Few B, May T, Man L-H, Witton J, Turnbull P (2003) A growing market: the domestic cultivation of marijuana. Joseph Rowntree Foundation, YorkGoogle Scholar
  26. Hser Y (1993) Population estimation of illicit drug users in Los Angeles county. J Drug Issues 23:323–334Google Scholar
  27. Kendall LW (1999) Robustness of closed capture–recapture methods to violations of the closure assumption. Ecology 80:2517–2525Google Scholar
  28. Jansen ACM (2002) The economics of marijuana cultivation in Europe Paper presented at the 2nd European Conference on drug trafficking and law enforcement, Paris, September 2002Google Scholar
  29. Lacoste J, Tremblay P (2003) Crime and innovation: a procedural analysis of patterns in check forgery. In: Smith MJ, Cornish DB (eds) Theory for practice in situational crime Prevention. Criminal Justice Press, Monsey, NY, pp 169–196Google Scholar
  30. National Drug Intelligence Center (2004) National Drug Threat Assessment 2004, National Drug Intelligence Center, US Department of JusticeGoogle Scholar
  31. Plecas D, Dandurand Y, Chin V, Segger T (2002) Marihuana growing operations in British Columbia: an Empirical Survey (1997–2000). Department of Criminology and Criminal Justice, University of the Fraser Valley, AbbotsfordGoogle Scholar
  32. Potter G, Gaines L, Holbrook B (1990) Blowing smoke: an evaluation of marijuana eradication in Kentucky. Am J Police 9:97–116Google Scholar
  33. Pudney S, Badillo C, Bryan M, Burton J, Conti G, Iacovou M (2006) Estimating the size of the UK illicit drug market. In: Singleton N, Murray R, Tinsley L (eds) Measuring different aspects of problem use: methodological developments. Home office online report 16/06, pp 4—120, available at: http://wwwhomeofficegovuk/rds/pdfs06/rdsolr1606pdfGoogle Scholar
  34. Reuter P (1983) Disorganized crime: the economics of the visible hand. MIT Press, Cambridge, MassGoogle Scholar
  35. Reuter P (1985) The organization of illegal markets: an economic analysis. National Institute of Justice US Department of Justice, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  36. Reuter P, Crawford J, Cave J (1988) Sealing the borders: the effects of increased military participation in drug interdiction. Rand, Santa MonicaGoogle Scholar
  37. Reuter P, Kleinman MAR (1986) Risks and prices: an economic analysis of drug enforcement. In: Tonry M, Morris N (eds) Crime and justice: an annual review of research, vol 7. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  38. Rhodes W (1993) Synthetic estimation applied to the prevalence of drug use. J Drug Issues 23:297–321Google Scholar
  39. Rhodes W, Layne M, Johnston P, Hozik L (2000) What America’s users spend on illegal drugs 1988–1998. Office of National Drug Control Policy, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  40. Riccio LJ, Flinkestein R (1985) Using police arrest data to estimate the number of burglars operating in a suburban county. J Crim Just 13:65–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Roberts JM, Brewer DD (2006) Estimating the prevalence of male clients of prostitute women in Vancouver with a simple capture–recapture method. J Roy Stat Soc Seri A 169:1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Rossmo DK, Routledge R (1990) Estimating the size of criminal populations. J Quant Criminol 6:293–314Google Scholar
  43. Royal Canadian Mounted Police (2004) Drug Situation in Canada––2003. Criminal Intelligence Directorate. Royal Canadian Mounted Police, OttawaGoogle Scholar
  44. Schwarz CJ, Seber GAF (1999) Estimating animal abundance: Review III. Stat Sci 14:427–456CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Seber GAF (1973) The estimation of animal abundance. Griffin, LondonGoogle Scholar
  46. Smit F, Reinking D, Reijerse M (2002) Estimating the number of people eligible for health service use. Eval Prog Plan 25:101–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Smit F, Toet J, van der Heijden P (1997) Estimating the number of opiate users in Rotterdam using statistical models for incomplete count data In European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA), 1997 Methodological Pilot Study of Local Prevalence Estimates. EMCDDA, LisbonGoogle Scholar
  48. Spohn C, Holleran D (2002) The effect of imprisonment on recidivism rates of felony offenders; a focus on drug offenders. Criminology 40:329–357CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. van der Heijden P, Cruyff M, van Houwelingen H (2003) Estimating the size of a criminal population from police records using the truncated Poisson regression model. Stat Neerl 57:289–304CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Weisheit RA (1991) The intangible rewards from crime: the case of domestic marijuana cultivation. Crime Delinquen 37:506–527CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Weisheit RA (1992) Domestic marijuana: a neglected industry. Greenwood Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  52. Wilkins C, Battha K, Casswell S (2002a) A demand-side estimate of the financial turnover of the marijuana black market in New Zealand. Drug Alcohol Rev 21:145–151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Wilkins C, Battha K, Casswell S (2002b) The effectiveness of cannabis crop eradication operations in New Zealand. Drug Alcohol Rev 21:369–374CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Wilkins C, Casswell S (2003) Organized crime in marijuana cultivation in New Zealand: An economic analysis. Contemp Drug Prob 30:757–777Google Scholar
  55. Willmer MAP (1970) Crime and information theory. University Press, EdinburghGoogle Scholar
  56. Wilson RM, Collins MF (1992) Capture–recapture estimation with samples of size one using frequency data. Biometrika 79:543–554CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Zelterman D (1988) Robust estimation in truncated discrete distributions with applications to capture-recapture experiments. J Stat Plan Infer 18:225–237CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Criminology and Criminal JusticeUniversity of MarylandCollege ParkUSA

Personalised recommendations