Commentary
Disabusing cocaine: Pervasive myths and enduring realities of a globalised commodity

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugpo.2008.08.007Get rights and content

Abstract

For more than 30 years Colombia has waged an internal War on Drugs with the support of the international community. During this time, the illegal economy has evolved toward integrating cultivation with processing and trafficking, making Colombia the largest grower of coca in the world. The environmental impact of coca production and processing is vast, accounting for large quantities of toxic chemicals directly dumped onto the soil and watersheds, as well as most deforestation since the 1990s. The policies pursued to stem the coca economy, however, are based on unfounded assumptions about the behaviour of coca growers in the context of international markets. Despite their unfounded premises, these assumptions have acquired a mythical stature. In this article we review the most persistent myths about coca production with a view to understanding its links to environmental degradation. To this end, we present data on the economic and demographic background of coca growers, their impact on the environment, and their behaviour in the larger context of international markets and current eradication policies.

Section snippets

Planting coca improves the growers’ standard of living

A high-value crop has the potential to relieve environmental pressure, as growers would obtain higher income whilst using less land. Cocaine is expensive, so surely coca growers have a huge income, right? Yes, but the standard of living of growers is low, increasing the need to exploit local resources and decreasing the resilience of these communities. Both the environment and the market play roles in determining this outcome. The regions where most coca is grown are not the ones that produce

More coca means more forest, since other cash crops require greater area

If cattle ranching is the main alternative to coca cultivation, then coca might prevent forest clearing because it produces higher value in a smaller area (Álvarez, 2002, Álvarez, 2003, Kaimowitz, 1997). The reality, however, is that coca has hastened the pace of land transformation because productivity per unit area is not the only or the most important determinant of land use in forested lowlands (Plate 1). Deforestation rates associated with coca are alarming. In a single year (2005–2006)

Fumigation will make immigrants who produce illicit crops return to their area of origin

Part of the justification for focusing much of the aerial fumigation program in southern Colombia was the assumption that most growers were recent arrivals from regions in conflict, or seeking stable employment after trying their luck in the cities. If this were the case, fumigation would succeed in relieving pressure on the forest by pushing these immigrants away from the frontier and into the cities, or back to already heavily transformed Andean landscapes. The demographic survey of coca

Illicit crop eradication increases consumer price thereby reducing demand

This is one of the main stated goals of eradication (Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs, 2004; The White House, 2005), and since both cultivation and aerial fumigation have had profound consequences for forests and natural resources, we review it here. The current eradication strategy is driven by the assumption that limiting coca production will directly result in reduced availability of cocaine, thus increasing its street price, diminishing profits and discouraging

Illicit crop eradication through aerial fumigation is environmentally neutral and it works

Aerial fumigation has been the main strategy to eradicate illicit crops in Colombia over the last 20 years. The environmental effects of aerial fumigation have not been studied in detail, but some reports argue that fumigation is preferable to the large-scale deforestation and chemical use associated with illicit crops (Cavelier & Etter, 1995; Solomon et al., 2007). Fumigation could have the opposite effect. A recent study from Putumayo documented defoliation of more than 32,000 ha of vegetation

Conclusion

As with other lucrative activities, the production of illegal drugs is a powerful and far-reaching agent of environmental degradation that is only beginning to be studied. Unlike other productive endeavours, there are international agreements—however disputed—to suppress the production and flow of illegal drugs. Suppression thus far has been carried out through policies that ignore the environmental and economic context of illicit crops, as well as the demographic characteristics of growers.

References (32)

  • K. Deininger et al.

    Rural nonfarm employment and income diversification in Colombia

    World Development

    (2001)
  • A. Etter et al.

    Unplanned land clearing of Colombian rainforests: Spreading like disease?

    Landscape and Urban Planning

    (2006)
  • M.D. Álvarez

    Illicit crops and bird conservation priorities in Colombia

    Conservation Biology

    (2002)
  • M.D. Álvarez

    Forests in the time of violence: conservation implications of the Colombian war

    Journal of Sustainable Forestry

    (2003)
  • J.C. Barrientos et al.

    The decision of farmers from the tropical region of Cochabamba in Bolivia to cultivate coca instead of state-recommended alternative products

    Agronomía Colombiana

    (2006)
  • Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs. (2004). International narcotics control strategy report....
  • J. Cavelier et al.

    Deforestation of montane forests as a result of illegal plantations of opium (Papaver somniferum)

  • Center for International Policy. (2007). Colombia program: US government fact sheets and reports. Retrieved 14 January...
  • L.M. Dávalos

    The San Lucas mountain range in Colombia: How much conservation is owed to the violence?

    Biodiversity and Conservation

    (2001)
  • M.L. Dion et al.

    Eradication efforts, the state, displacement and poverty: Explaining coca cultivation in Colombia during Plan Colombia

    Journal of Latin American Studies

    (2008)
  • FAO

    State of the World’s forest

    (2007)
  • J. Fjeldså et al.

    Illicit crops and armed conflict as constraints on biodiversity conservation in the Andes region

    Ambio

    (2005)
  • J.C. Jones

    Alternative development in the South American Andes: Report of findings

    (2004)
  • D. Kaimowitz

    Factors determining low deforestation: The Bolivian Amazon

    Ambio

    (1997)
  • D. Mansfield et al.

    Evidence from the field: Understanding changing levels of opium poppy cultivation in Afghanistan

    (2007)
  • J.P. Messina et al.

    Defoliation and the war on drugs in Putumayo, Colombia

    International Journal of Remote Sensing

    (2006)
  • Cited by (0)

    The opinions and statements expressed in this publication are the sole responsibility of the authors, and do not necessarily reflect the views of the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC). The UNODC does not imply, endorse, recommend or favour the accuracy or reliability of any advice, opinion, statement or other information provided herein and no reference shall be made.

    1

    Current address: Department of Ecology and Evolution, 650 Life Sciences Building, Stony Brook, NY 11794-5245, USA.

    2

    Authors contributed equally to this paper.

    View full text